Zeitgeist: The Movie, Zeitgeist: Addendum, Zeitgeist: Moving Forward (2007, 2008, 2011)

I could write an incredible diatribe against these three films, particularly the first but also the second and third. The first is a veritable maelstrom of misinformation, blind conjecture and outright lies. A ridiculous attempt to tie an inaccurate account of the origins of the Christian faith to demonstrably false conspiracy theories about the 9/11 atrocities, all in order to blame the faceless and omnipotent "corporate bankers" that seem to be the source of all the world's ills. Films two and three dial down the insanity and, while retaining the crackpot economic theories, focus on the Venus Project, the brainchild of "social engineer" Jacque Fresco. It's a Roddenberryian view of the future, and while it has alot of merits, not least its emphasis on throwing resources into scientific advancement and betterment, it a rosy-tinted view, throwing imaginary technology at the various problems facing the world, and, in my humble opinion, over-stating the viability of alternative energy sources. In particular, the second film lauds geothermal power as a complete solution to the energy crisis, while failing to mention it's tremendous output of greenhouse gases. There simply are no easy fixes in the world, there are only possibilities. It will take more than a factually dubious "documentary" film to make any difference, and I personally think that the Zeitgest Movement resulting from these productions is an idealistic, short-sighted, scientifically-uninformed and credulous waste of time which might be put to far better use.


9/11 conspiracy? Does this look like Lex Luthor to you?

Religulous (2008)

Later the selfsame year that Ben Stein released Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, stand-up comedian Bill Maher threw his own documentary into the arena. In the interest of fairness, this too is not a particularly intellectual piece, based almost entirely upon opinion and rhetoric. Indeed, Maher commits exactly the same intellectual crime as Stein in that he used a false title, A Spiritual Journey, to obtain interviews with some of the interviewees in the film. For true integrity, Maher should have openly asked these people to contribute their views to his project, and if they refused when openly and honestly offered, report that in his documentary and recognise it as a weakness that they are unwilling to throw their views into discussion. The cutting of the interviews also leads me to think that he may not necessarily be misrepresenting people's views, but certainly emphasising parts for comedic effect. This is not the right way to make an informative documentary. However, Maher's documentary is far and away the more enjoyable, mainly due to Maher's own charisma and proficiency as a comedian, not to mention his honesty about his own views (unlike Stein). His film is definitely funnier, despite its scientific or philosophical deficiency. Maher also manages to talk to the more radical aspects of the various faiths he treats with a friendly enough disposition to speak remarkably frankly (though his travelling monologues and cutaway slide shows are far more caustic). This frank and funny content is utterly at odds with the final section, in which Maher issues his call to wake up to the crises facing the world, and how we need to wake up from our religious infancy, accompanied by provocative (some might say exploitative) images of nuclear explosions and large-scale pollution, a technique as dubious as when Stein overlays his film with near-constant Communist or Holocaust imagery. Again, personal opinion plays a large role, but Maher's documentary is more competently constructed and simply more entertaining, though they share a similar intellectual content.


Not pictured: evidential backing.

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008)

Many movie fans will know Ben Stein as the world's most boring high school teacher, droning out his repetitions of "Bueller...? Bueller...?", but sadly there is another face to him. In fact, his most famous role as an educator seems profoundly inappropriate, given the intellectual vacuity of his "documentary". Obviously personal opinion will have a huge effect on the enjoyment of such a polarised film (and I am no creationist or advocate of Intelligent Design), but Stein's film can be torn to pieces without so much as a reference to its content. Merely its inception and construction speak to a film that is less interested in portraying information and more focussed on pushing a certain viewpoint. Its construction is the less odious of its flaws, so that's where to start. There is a slang term among documentary-makers for the incessant need to illustrate important words with a cut to a relevant image, known as a "Lord Privy Seal". This is a trap Stein falls into all too regularly, sexing up his talk of pro-I.D. scientists losing their jobs with ample shots of violence and repression from the midnight of the 20th century. But this is merely poor and condescending film-making; Stein's real crime is his intellectual dishonesty in putting together this project. A sizeable portion of the film is dedicated to building a connection between Darwinism and the "master race" ideology of National Socialism. Stein supports this idea with an extract from Darwin's The Descent of Man that is so mangled that Stein makes the quote say almost the precise opposite of Darwin's intent. Coupled with the fact that many of the interviewees (notably Richard Dawkins, P.Z. Meyers and Eugenie Scott) allege that they were told that the title of the documentary was Crossroads, unaware that they were involved in a project for advancing Intelligent Design. I was keen to see what kind of arguments that Intelligent Design handles better than the Theory of Evolution, but sadly Stein had missed out the part where a documentary needs to have something more than opinions. This film seems to manage to dishonour both the scientific endeavour, the very Intelligent Design theory that it wants to serve, and simple honesty itself.


Presenting my patronising Lord Privy Seal for Mr. Stein.

The Happening (2008)

Rarely have I seen a horror film with a more idiotic premise and pitiable execution than The Happening. M. Night Shyamalan, once a master of the brilliant twist ending has in recent years been reduced to plagiarising H.G. Wells and writing this kind of ill-informed... well, near-propaganda. Within this film, science is attacked as only being able to offer facile "theories" rather than any kind of real knowledge, nature is exalted as "not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose", and the environmental message is as subtle as a brick to the face. Myriad shots of plants are shown with what is practically the theme from Jaws playing in the background. But, that's not to say that the film is without any redeeming factors, however unintentional. Many of the "shocking" death scenes are laughable, and it's quite near the line of "so bad it's good"... but not close enough. However funny it is to see a group of people try to outrun the wind or Mark Wahlberg negotiating with a plant, it's just not good enough. Really, the premise is so painful that it ruins any possible enjoyment - a chemical has been released into the air that removes people's sense of self-preservation. Fair enough. And I can understand how this would result in people falling from tall buildings, simply through a lack of care and wandering dauntlessly over the edge. But how exactly does that translate to suicide by gun, garotte or hair-pin? There's a chasm of difference between "lacks self-preservation" and "lacks ability to not stab oneself in the neck", and this movie plummets as it tries to surmount this broad gap.


I will murder your family!

W. (2008)

I have to commend Oliver Stone on his third presidential biopic, he has kept the entire film tremendously fair and balanced, portraying one of the most recognisable figures of modern times in an unconventional light. For some, George W. Bush was just a "misunderestimated" guy in an impossible situation, for others, he ranks alongside Hitler and the same dictator he toppled, Saddam Hussein, in history's long list of monsters, guilty of waging a bloody war under false pretences. Stone doesn't take up either side, but rather presents us with a human being invested with the authority of the world's only superpower, a past of boozing and failure, a powerful religious belief and a pathological love of freedom. This is a Bush who is no fool, but isn't of the intellectual character to lead, often out-pointed and dazed by his advisers throwing numbers and impenetrable euphemisms his way and expecting a response. This is not to say that blame is removed from Bush, though both Richard Dreyfuss' Dick Cheney and Scott Glenn's Donald Rumsfeld are suitably slimy and diabolical. Josh Brolin's Bush, however, seems more like a man with intentions that outpace his ability, and his decisions are rarely motivated by anything inherently negative, the awful consequences stemming from misinformation or his incredible lack of foresight. Special mention to the lone voice of reason in the script, Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell, who serves to balance Bush's cabinet and avoid turning them into a real-life SPECTRE. If I had to criticise, I would note the somewhat excessive Jack Daniels and Dr Pepper product placement, and Thandie Newton's incredibly nasal Condoleezza Rice. A thoroughly fair and watchable charting of the Bush years, and probably the fairest hearing that George W. Bush will ever enjoy.


"I know that the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." - George W. Bush