Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Hot Potato So, so sorry, I can't tell you if I agree with the premise of this movie or not. I couldn't, I just could not continue, so I don't know if telling you that if the movie is pathetic is a spoiler or not, maybe that was the point.You can prove quite simply that negative equals positive or that up is down or whatever contradicting premise you wish, simple or complex. You can just bend it or you can turn 90 degrees or 180 degrees or you can go back to where you started. Rhetoric is rhetoric. I am afraid I could not bare to stick with this movie long enough to see what the double talk concluded. It was too much of an insult to even low intelligence.It seemed an attempt to say, If I generally agree with most of your points? Am I supposed to agree with your premise? or your conclusion? Don't think, just agree. I've been down that road far far to many times in my life. I don't care if I agree with them or I disagree with them, this is not to me a means of intelligent conversation, or even a one sided conversation.I remember when I was still very very young, I didn't care anyway, but John Birchers use to do this. I still don't know what they were proving, but it was so simple I had far more fun turning their logic around against them.Well watch this if you are part of a flock of sheep, if you must.

Christian First of all, for the low attention span audience (which is sadly high), here is the SOS (summary of summary): "We are sinking, not thinking; we can think and do better." How concise and clear is that? But really, let me elaborate, hopefully without boring you.The final and critical chapter in the Zeitgeist series, Zeitgeist: Moving Forward gets right down to the essentials. We are living in a system that does not help us: the monetary (and market) system. Peter Joseph was a stock broker (for 6 years) but left the financial sector realizing that it created no real value to society.This system of "free" market, competition and socioeconomic divide is the biggest problem. Before looking at the ideologies between capitalism or socialism, democracy or dictatorship, liberal or conservative, etc. we need to realize how this underlying reality of our world is affecting us now and in the near future in diverse and very fundamental ways. The rest is in fact almost irrelevant. As we changed from the barter system to the money system, we are on the verge of recognizing we need a newer system all together. Planned obsolescence of products, the continuous creation of debt and the exploitation of natural and human resources in a never-ending spiral of money-hungry economy is duplicity in drudgery. Inefficiency, waste and sickness are intrinsic part of the system. The proposed solution is a radical change to a resource-based economy and the use of science and technical advances, including automation, and a continuous survey of local and global resource with distribution and sharing without the current concept of ownership.To the detractors of the proposed system, there are many answers, based on scientific findings. For the constantly claimed unstable social elements potential problems, the idea of "victims of culture" is well explained and a culture shift, education and action without judgement are keys to the potent paradigm shift. When people have their needs met, the adaptation becomes easier.The film feature many interviews, some narration and a few animations and scenes. The longest film of the series (161 mins) is well written and edited even if the subject(s) actually can be much more explored in further details. After a musically & visually engaging intro and anecdote by 94-year-old Jacque Fresco, the movie starts rather slowly. The Part I & II (Human Nature & Social Pathology) discuss some concepts that will build the overall premise, but with limited intensity in the flow of ideas. The nature vs. nurture debate is slightly debunked and the idea of a strong environment component along with clear cultural conditioning in ultimately shaping human behaviour is put forward in Part I. We then see the details of the philosophy of ownership (theory of property) by John Locke in the late 17th century and the machination of the market system as the first part of Part II. Joseph then revisits the ideas of the monetary system we know and its failings which were discussed differently in the first two films.The crux of the film tries to fulfil its title of "Moving Forward" and proposes to first reset the planet and its people and try to build a better system from scratch with at its base, better goals, more appropriate ideas and superior tools. Project Earth (Part III) advances many of the ideas of Jacque Fresco's Project Venus and shows the use of computers and automation as the next logical step, even to create homes and reduce human labour construction work and related accidents. Same goes for car accident deaths and pollution, among many proposed benefits of the plan in progress. The good thing about science is that it needs to be tested and that its ideas are always open to better ideas that represent and acts upon reality better, we are told. Maybe that point could have been repeated, as I find it to be quintessential to the approach of this film and perhaps to humankind's advancement as a whole. "Part IV: Rise" is a peaceful, but determined call to action and also a call for creative people to get involved in thinking now about how we can better our derelict and detrimental ways or living. For someone who wrote a novel, "Paradise on Earth?", about a utopian society without money, while being 19 to 22-year-old, I can definitely relate and I am elated at the created sense of urgency, with thought-out open-minded, but basically feasible and achievable, aspirations for real world awakening in the midst of this mind-numbing masked mayhem we meander and marinate in, militantly or unconsciously.In a world where empathy and trust are often empty and lost, the Zeitgeist trilogy (and especially part 2 & 3) may well be the best thing since CouchSurfing...

fregattt The film which has changed my sights at all life "to" and "after". I urge all of you to watch this film, without putting off. Will watch please all this film and for you too much will clear up in this life! Our earth isn't infinite also global changes will occur only working together. Our financial system of settles all of us conducts to the world crash and war. Therefore yet late it is necessary to reconsider the sights at all round us an event and to take part in the project described in this film. Because only having realized essence of all problem and having gathered, we can improve health of the Earth and our society as a whole.

Sa Ahm Watched it few hours ago. followed all three parts of it. had a good bunch of great thought provoking stuffs, blended along with some severely argumentative illusions that i might not adopt. a ton of questions floating in my mind trying to reveal feasible answers coping with their arguments, remained inconclusive still. i remember i emailed a bunch of relevant and serious questions regarding earlier parts long time ago, still impounded with no logical answers till date. i hate current imperialistic monetary-market system as they do; still some part of me telling me to like the zeitgeist ideas and the other logically arguing not to. just few of my large chunk of new questions might be(some might say i am tripping...lol!): 1. the current imperialistic monetary-market system owners have history of demolishing every entity that might stand in their way. if some of you are threat enough to them, why they have not taken any strong action on or eliminated zeitgeist (or julian assange, or alex jones or few such more) yet?!?? with due respect, sorry to say that you guys haven't showed much about that the world doesn't already know. are you just alternative strategic deployed players of their potential single New World Order system?!? are they strategically implanting relevant key players in both sides of the game to ensure a win?! 2. how different are, 'a world with many countries' and 'a world with many cities'?! mirror reflection as it seems. 3. 'global resource management system'...who would be in control of that management system and what would be the management hierarchy?! we all know, all decisional opinions can not be singular, so someone has to decide; who would that be?! we also know, money has no intrinsic value of itself; don't you think the singular power and control on 'global resource management system' would have some significant intrinsic value?! how to decide who to lead when?! the 'democracy' again...:)?! wouldn't that be another scam of politics?! 4. who gets to eat caviar or only potatoes...hang luxury art piece or mere calendar on wall...watch entertaining movies on 100inch plasma TV or just able to watch boring news on 20inch crt TV...sail to world tour or only can view sunset from rooftop...who decides about the quality and quantity of final products each can consume?! inequality doesn't depend on only as monetary disparity, but also on consumption opportunities. 5. what if there is large permanent migrations between these modern so called 'cities' resulting in overcrowding and underpopulation among different cities!? how to decide who lives where!? 6. i could not find or rely on a number of statistical facts it's given. moreover, it talked about if a hypothetical similar new earth found...which is not available realistically; rather in this current world, enough damage is already done to create a significant natural imbalance among various regions. how to regain dynamic equilibrium in this already unbalanced natural world as 'Nature is a dictatorship' itself!?there could be many more to clarify...but no offence...i have been a major encouraging initiator for any positive change as always among my peers and students. however, i believe in the saying, "hope for the best, but plan for the worst." :) :)