"Zeitgeist"--the Movie

[CNHT]

I know many people involved in the freedom movement have a natural bent toward skepticism, particularly toward government.  That's good.  However, this same skepticism needs to be applied to the sensational claims made by these filmmakers and others.  There's a great deal of information on the internet debunking various "9/11" myths, including those made in the film, and I've begun to dig up much to dispute the anti-Christian claims in Part I as well.  Shame on those who take this film at face value without reviewing the evidence for themselves.  As someone else has already pointed out, significant effort was put into this film to evoke an emotional response.  Don't be suckered by it.  Research the claims yourself!

This film has no credibility as far as I'm concerned, and I will be not be recommending it to anyone.

...besides being a sloppy amateurish mess that's tought to watch...

[KBCraig]

Don't waste my time on mood-setting, especially in a film which purports to be a documentary. A minute would have been too much; five minutes was absurd.

A minute would have been mood-setting; five minutes was hypnotic. And not by accident, I suspect.

Without having any idea what the film was about, by a couple of minutes in I was thinking that it felt like a rather bizarre religious cult piece.

[Insurgent]

The DVD, by the way is decent quality--it's a professionally pressed version, in a paper envelope. Not a DVD-R. I plan to send some backup copies around to some family and friends, who I care about.

[alohamonkey]

There's a great deal of information on the internet debunking various "9/11" myths, including those made in the film, and I've begun to dig up much to dispute the anti-Christian claims in Part I as well. 

I thought this movie was extremely well done and, for the record, I thought the intro was very artfully put together.  Without the intro, my girlfriend would never have sat through the whole movie.  If he would have just come out and started talking and rambling on, she would've been asleep within 20 minutes.

Ruger Mason, please post whatever info you find that contradicts this movie (from reliable sources).  I'm doing my own research too and I'm interested to read anything that proves this producer/director wrong.  I haven't found anything yet to make me not believe him.  I pretty much agree with everything in Parts I, II, and III of this movie.  I don't know about anyone else but I always try to read/listen to both sides of the stories.  There are many pieces of information out there "debunking" 9/11 myths but I suggest you look at those very carefully too.  I'm currently reading the book by the authors of the Popular Mechanics article "Debunking 9/11 Myths" (or something similar) and although it's answering a lot of my questions, it is still avoiding some of the biggest unanswered questions. 

[Ruger Mason]

Google is your friend!

[error]

I know many people involved in the freedom movement have a natural bent toward skepticism, particularly toward government.  That's good.  However, this same skepticism needs to be applied to the sensational claims made by these filmmakers and others.  There's a great deal of information on the internet debunking various "9/11" myths, including those made in the film, and I've begun to dig up much to dispute the anti-Christian claims in Part I as well.  Shame on those who take this film at face value without reviewing the evidence for themselves.  As someone else has already pointed out, significant effort was put into this film to evoke an emotional response.  Don't be suckered by it.  Research the claims yourself!

This film has no credibility as far as I'm concerned, and I will be not be recommending it to anyone.

Ah, someone gets it! +1

[dalebert]

There are many pieces of information out there "debunking" 9/11 myths but I suggest you look at those very carefully too.  I'm currently reading the book by the authors of the Popular Mechanics article "Debunking 9/11 Myths" (or something similar) and although it's answering a lot of my questions, it is still avoiding some of the biggest unanswered questions. 

I've always been EXTREMELY skeptical of the 9/11 Truther movement. At one point at porcfest, a guy started off on what I have always considered ridiculous conspiracy theories. I made a statement or two and then as usual, realized he was locked onto an irrational belief system that he desperately wanted to beleive and so it felt pointless arguing, and I just walked away. It was a bit rude even and I already regret that somewhat. I think there was probably a more tactful way.

That said, I didn't read much into what the movie presented. I know what I consider to be irrational theories about what happened. Still, I'm left feeling that the truth lies somewhere in the middle between what we've been told and the bizarre conspiracies that a few fringe people seem to be cooking up because they hate Bush so much. The hatred is understandable of couse.

It's always good advise to take information, particularly from a biased source, with a grain of salt and do your own research.

[dalebert]

I didn't say it!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QEQOvyGbBtY&mode=related&search=

Crash course on conspiracy thoeries:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-Fe-IwAPA8&NR=1

[Ruger Mason]

Penn & Teller (NOT ME!):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBQRTmL70DM

[jaqeboy]

Yeah, I used to like Penn & Teller. I have to wonder if someone has to resort to name-calling and profanity to punctuate their arguments. Is that something that Penn thinks will help him be convincing. Teller, as usual, doesn't have much to say  - I actually heard him talk once at a show in Boston! So he's not mute!

[lowen]

I actually heard him talk once at a show in Boston! So he's not mute!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgtgOs_OkTU

[Insurgent]

Google is your friend!

In this case, Google is not necessarily our friend. The opening statement on the web-page for the film http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/statement.htm
specifically states that some of the information presented in the film is not going to be easily verified by a point-and-click search on the internets. Some reading of real hard-copy books etc may be necessary to verify what is presented. 

[Wolfwood]

Google is your friend!

In this case, Google is not necessarily our friend. The opening statement on the web-page for the film http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/statement.htm
specifically states that some of the information presented in the film is not going to be easily verified by a point-and-click search on the internets. Some reading of real hard-copy books etc may be necessary to verify what is presented. 

   Hmmmm... From the Statement Page...
Encyclopedias often do not contain the information contained in Zeitgeist. However, if one takes
the time to read the sources provided, they will find that what is being presented is
based on documented evidence.

    My sources prove I'm right?   OK, not exactly what he was getting at, but why doesn't he defend his points instead of saying, check the work my sources did?

   There's a lot of dissenting views against the Jesus Myth he speaks of in the first part. Just because I read the articles on line rather than in an 'approved' book doesn't make them any less true(if, indeed, they are)

   Lastly, does it really matter whether the evil we face today is the result of a 4000 year plot that has evolved over time, or Freemasons, or Rothschilds, or simply because people with power tend to abuse that power? If I finish this movie(my computer conked out for the 5th time shortly after part one), will I be more able to defeat the conspiracy than I currently am?
 
   Maybe I've been co-opted by The Man, and am spreading doubt amongst the faithful Ones who 'get' this film. I deeply apologize.

[alohamonkey]

Google is your friend!

Yeah . . . I know.  I've done my research and I told you what I believe.  Prove me wrong.  Don't just tell me you're finding all this evidence that disputes the movie without actually sourcing your statements.

[alohamonkey]

   Lastly, does it really matter whether the evil we face today is the result of a 4000 year plot that has evolved over time, or Freemasons, or Rothschilds, or simply because people with power tend to abuse that power? If I finish this movie(my computer conked out for the 5th time shortly after part one), will I be more able to defeat the conspiracy than I currently am?

No, it probably doesn't matter too much but I find it extremely interesting that many of the problems in the world today are created, antagonized, and made possible by organized religion . . . It's pretty interesting showing people that most of their religions are astrology-based and have been around since the dawn of time.  Like I said before, I'm still doing research . . . concentrating on 9/11 more but I'm going to delve into the religion aspect soon.