Mi Amigo Hugo

The reason for the low score overall, is that viewers were told what to think about Hugo. It is unfortunate that people allow their brains to be rented, or worse annexed by "people in the know". This appears to be a man beloved by his people for the reason that he had always placed people first. Is he frail? Did he make mistakes? I don't know. However that is not the measure of a person. Cancer took him down in 2013, and Maduro assumed the presidency. But how do you watch an hour of edited video by a respected interviewer, and come up with a 4/10 score? This reflects the viewer, not the subject being viewed.

I am venezuelan, born and raised FYI

This documentary, which aims to paint a positive picture of Hugo Chavez, completely disregards the devastating impact his presidency had on Venezuela.

Stone's work is markedly one-sided, excluding the perspectives of many Venezuelans who lived through the economic and social ruin brought about by Chavez's policies. It's astounding that a film could so blatantly ignore the widespread hardship and turmoil that ensued during and after Chavez's tenure. The documentary's failure to address Chavez as a polarizing and manipulative figure is a glaring omission. It overlooks the profound discontent and struggles faced by countless Venezuelan families, including my own, under his rule.

In essence, 'Mi Amigo Hugo' is less a documentary and more a selective glorification of a controversial leader. It's a disservice to those of us who continue to grapple with the consequences of Chavez's presidency. Stone's film is not just a missed opportunity to tell the full story but an insensitive portrayal that fails to acknowledge the true state of affairs in post-Chavez Venezuela.