Saturday8pm
A rejoint le sept. 2002
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges4
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Évaluations21
Note de Saturday8pm
Avis18
Note de Saturday8pm
I'm familiar with Greenwald's work and this is the second "documentary" of his I've seen. While it's been some time since I viewed, "Wal-Mart, The High Cost of Low Prices", this investigation of the elusive Koch brothers has little balance in presentation. Regardless of whatever the Kochs are accused of, there is no side of their argument presented whatsoever. Barring this, there is little historical evidence to base the Koch's alleged political motivations. What is presented, and clearly there's evidence there, is done so snarky that it is embarrassing. Hiring a voice actor to portray a Koch gives the film its sole comedic moment, but this hardly serves us and puts pressure on Scott Walker, not the Kochs. All we have to go on is the motivations of father Fred Koch, who in turn informs the brothers' industrial / political adventures, and even this evidence has an air of hearsay. Little is said of and by lesser-known and assumed estranged brother William, who could have shed much more light on his brothers' activities. Despite the obvious rift between the brothers as documented in the film, this Koch brother seems to have aspirations not far removed from his more noteworthy siblings. Attempts to get the Kochs themselves to defend themselves before the camera comes off as a dumb stunt relegated to the end credits.
Therefore, if you prefer one-sided character assassinations, go for this one. Me, I prefer a balanced approach that rewards the viewer with a richer understanding of whatever the subject is and how it seems to influence our lives. With much of the content existing in "... Exposed" intact and more of the Koch's side of the equation delved into we'd get a far more satisfying, true documentary. This video screams "shockumentary" that poisons the art and form of documentary filmmaking.
Pros: Short'n'Sweet; preaches to the choir, if you like this sort of thing; an investigation into the Kochs is warranted, but;
Cons: this ain't it. One-sided echo chamber it accuses the Koch machine of; asks us to follow the money - examples? Not enough historical reference or insiders to give us a fuller understanding of Koch motivations; too short and far incomplete
Net: Unconvincing argument to accuse the Kochs of being active democratic subversives
Disclaimer: Not a Koch follower or supporter, I simply wished to know about these guys, wanted a documentary and got a butter sandwich instead. There's plenty of Koch-type characters to go around today, who are they, what makes them tick?
Therefore, if you prefer one-sided character assassinations, go for this one. Me, I prefer a balanced approach that rewards the viewer with a richer understanding of whatever the subject is and how it seems to influence our lives. With much of the content existing in "... Exposed" intact and more of the Koch's side of the equation delved into we'd get a far more satisfying, true documentary. This video screams "shockumentary" that poisons the art and form of documentary filmmaking.
Pros: Short'n'Sweet; preaches to the choir, if you like this sort of thing; an investigation into the Kochs is warranted, but;
Cons: this ain't it. One-sided echo chamber it accuses the Koch machine of; asks us to follow the money - examples? Not enough historical reference or insiders to give us a fuller understanding of Koch motivations; too short and far incomplete
Net: Unconvincing argument to accuse the Kochs of being active democratic subversives
Disclaimer: Not a Koch follower or supporter, I simply wished to know about these guys, wanted a documentary and got a butter sandwich instead. There's plenty of Koch-type characters to go around today, who are they, what makes them tick?
This was a good show in between the "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" years that was supposed to be a reboot for the successful English "UFO" series of The Late '60s / Early '70s. The States got it in syndication about a year post-production and was heavily marketed initially for the 1975-76 season.
The show got a lot of stick for its questionable science and uneven writing, but it was a nice break from other action shows masquerading as sci-fi. Remember, it is science FICTION. Unresolved endings and dark story lines were the trademark of the first season while the second series succumbed to safer familiar territory. One can point to the unexplained changes in Season Two as show killers, but I think people who latched on to this simply wanted another "Star Trek" and were disappointed.
I wasn't disappointed ... I found the stories fresh, realistic, and full of literary references that fleshed out the scripts rather than purloined as borrowed lines uttered by the actors.
The main idea built around the premise of the moon forcibly ejected from the earth's orbit was a risky move, and I suppose many viewers thought this too ridiculous, therefore I wonder if an episode, a continuation of the pilot episode, that picks up the events befalling earth below simultaneously was in order. Perhaps that idea was kicked around but rejected because of similarities to Irwin Allen's disaster flicks of the time, budget constraints, the lack of a script, or the fact that the series was about space, not earth. Whatever, I think that would've been the link that might have clinched this series for a longer run.
Some of my favorites include "Dragon's Domain", "Force of Life", "Black Sun", "Earthbound", and "Death's Other Dominion". Good drama, good fun.
Cheers: Groundbreaking effects, fine acting, some good scripts, serious drama though fun. Stories are thoughtful.
Caveats: Year Two. Haven't we seen this sort of thing before? "Science" Fiction. Scripts at times uneven and lacked conclusions.
The show got a lot of stick for its questionable science and uneven writing, but it was a nice break from other action shows masquerading as sci-fi. Remember, it is science FICTION. Unresolved endings and dark story lines were the trademark of the first season while the second series succumbed to safer familiar territory. One can point to the unexplained changes in Season Two as show killers, but I think people who latched on to this simply wanted another "Star Trek" and were disappointed.
I wasn't disappointed ... I found the stories fresh, realistic, and full of literary references that fleshed out the scripts rather than purloined as borrowed lines uttered by the actors.
The main idea built around the premise of the moon forcibly ejected from the earth's orbit was a risky move, and I suppose many viewers thought this too ridiculous, therefore I wonder if an episode, a continuation of the pilot episode, that picks up the events befalling earth below simultaneously was in order. Perhaps that idea was kicked around but rejected because of similarities to Irwin Allen's disaster flicks of the time, budget constraints, the lack of a script, or the fact that the series was about space, not earth. Whatever, I think that would've been the link that might have clinched this series for a longer run.
Some of my favorites include "Dragon's Domain", "Force of Life", "Black Sun", "Earthbound", and "Death's Other Dominion". Good drama, good fun.
Cheers: Groundbreaking effects, fine acting, some good scripts, serious drama though fun. Stories are thoughtful.
Caveats: Year Two. Haven't we seen this sort of thing before? "Science" Fiction. Scripts at times uneven and lacked conclusions.
Having seen Chomsky in other documentaries stoked my desire to pick this one up. Unfortunately, it focuses a bit too much on the cult of personality rather than quickly summing up who this guy is and what he's about. I got trigger-finger after the first 20 minutes of this, but I was glad I didn't surf through the scenes, as I was paid off when it cites the examples the DVD card promised.
Of particular import are the scenes where Chomsky's views are challenged by heads of state and news commentators and clearly shows us why we haven't heard or seen more from this controversial man.
Eventually the viewer gets the full range of Chomsky's purpose, and for that I am glad, I feel the richer for it, I will continue to seek films that he's part of, but I hope those filmmakers, such as those responsible for "The Corporation", will spare me the longwindedness of this film and get to the meat in due time.
Cheers: Questions the integrity of state and corporate sponsored news; we discover how he gets his news.
Caveats: Longwinded ... needs to be edited down by some 20 minutes; bounces around a lot.
Of particular import are the scenes where Chomsky's views are challenged by heads of state and news commentators and clearly shows us why we haven't heard or seen more from this controversial man.
Eventually the viewer gets the full range of Chomsky's purpose, and for that I am glad, I feel the richer for it, I will continue to seek films that he's part of, but I hope those filmmakers, such as those responsible for "The Corporation", will spare me the longwindedness of this film and get to the meat in due time.
Cheers: Questions the integrity of state and corporate sponsored news; we discover how he gets his news.
Caveats: Longwinded ... needs to be edited down by some 20 minutes; bounces around a lot.