अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंDirector Tom Shadyac speaks with intellectual and spiritual leaders about what's wrong with our world and how we can improve both it and the way we live in it.Director Tom Shadyac speaks with intellectual and spiritual leaders about what's wrong with our world and how we can improve both it and the way we live in it.Director Tom Shadyac speaks with intellectual and spiritual leaders about what's wrong with our world and how we can improve both it and the way we live in it.
- पुरस्कार
- कुल 2 जीत
फ़ोटो
- Self
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Putting together a lot of the best contemporary minds of science, politics, spirituality, philosophy, statesmen and poetry, as well as prominent authors of esoteric concepts blending "the physics of consciousness" and "the biology of love", Shadyac set out to answer two questions: What's wrong with our world? What can we do about it? The unequivocal agreement he ascertains is that we're (as a species) hard-wired for cooperation rather than competition, we should listen and behave more from our hearts (and less from our heads), that science and abstract mathematics do change over time, have manipulative appeal with long time consequences are often NOT the answer and with this- the fundamental nature of man is essentially benevolent and not cruel.
Though the answers to these two questions appear voluminous, complicated and opaque, the flow of this movie shows a glowing and simple answer. Yes, people are good, and this movie is a positive and expansive experience. The movie is open to the miraculous nature of existence and the potential for change rather than extinction and other untoward direction of decay and devastation.
PS:Happiness is living in a Malibu beach mobile home with 10 million in the bank and a career in Hollywood film directing.Does that compare to the the average struggling person in a mobile home park with no other options? Now I must stop myself.
Be the drop the in the sea and make a difference. Tom's work is spurring work that I've already begun. I highly recommend this movie to everyone, including our teenagers. If I had a chance to see this as a teen, I would've related. It took me 37 years of my life bouncing back and forth of seeking the truth on opposing sides of issues. I've found the answer is not in a position against anything.
It's not that I couldn't watch it; I didn't want to watch it. Because the beginning of this film was filled with so many errors in logic, I felt. I noticed that the interviewees were setting up false dichotomies and setting things in opposition that don't have to be viewed that way. Also, the approach seemed to be socialistic, based upon the opinion that the best way to be is cooperative. This approach, as stated, allows no room for treating individuals as special (or even as individuals) if carried to the logical conclusion.
Which brings me to my main objection. I had the feeling that if I voiced any dissent to the views presented based upon arguments of logic or reason, the answer would probably be "you need to escape the limitations of logic", in one form or another. This is something I am not willing to do. As a thinking animal, I function that way.
A less severe criticism I have is that some terms being used by the interviewees were being used very loosely--in a fuzzy way that promotes misunderstanding, not clarity. A certain amount of this is unavoidable, but I don't prefer conversations that "live" in the fuzzy regions of our existence.
I am not saying the film contains no ideas that are true or valuable. But I think I know those already.
It is one thing to condemn what we might call excessive competition (my success promulgated on, and designed for, your failure), but competition in general is a valuable (and inescapable) condition.
I think one can watch this film and pick up nuggets of truth, but this film seems to be couched in what I consider to be a dangerous approach to thinking and evaluating.
Since I did not watch the entire film, I have not given it a score. To those who choose to watch it and who gain benefit from it, I say "Good".
I appreciate that Shadyac decided to look beyond the world of comedy and try to find a deeper truth in the world. He is an intelligent man and it is good to be able to see this side of him, because "Ace Ventura" does not necessarily suggest a man craving wisdom.
I also like some of the folks he sought out. There is clearly a liberal bias with Chomsky, Hartman and Zinn being the models, but it was still good to hear from these thinkers. What would the right-wing think tank members say on what is wrong with the world?
In the end, though, I give it a moderate rating because it never really gets in any depth. The question is vague, and without looking for specific answers, you cannot get the best advice. We all know the world is better if we love one another and pass on a smile, but what is the fundamental problem?
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाTom Shadyac described making the documentary as "freeing", giving himself complete creative control along with his small crew.
- भाव
Tom Shadyac: An ocean, a rainforest, the human body, are all co-operatives. The redwood tree doesn't take all the soil and nutrients, just what it needs to grow. A lion doesn't kill every gazelle, just one. We have a term for something in the body when it takes more than its share, we call it: cancer.
- कनेक्शनFeatures वॉल स्ट्रीट (1987)
टॉप पसंद
- How long is I Am?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $15,91,034
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $10,092
- 20 फ़र॰ 2011
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $15,91,034
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 18 मि(78 min)
- रंग