Endgame -- Meine Bewertung
Ich habe sie noch nicht übersetzt; ich poste sie für diejenigen, die den Film schon gesehen haben und deshalb Englisch verstehen können.
------------
I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who thinks that Alex spent entirely too much time on Bilderberg footage.
He very obviously has a steep bias towards footage that he shot himself: marches, protests, shaky handheld shots of someone in a suit walking away while being yelled at. It's exciting when you're there, but while watching Endgame I literally skipped over it (I'm normally an extremely thorough person) because it was putting me to sleep. It's essentially dead air. (Also, too much TTC coverage; giving so much preference to local issues is just... death. I think two minutes or so would have sufficed.)
And maybe I missed it, but I don't think that Thimerosal was discussed at all! If that is the case, it is inexcusable. 25 seconds could have been spent on that microscope footage of what mercury does to brain cells.
It's a very frustrating situation because a long contiguous portion of the film is total dynamite; the cyclical aspects of tyranny, comparisons between the EU and the NAU, and so forth. That material was very valuable, and the treatment of it was also quite good.
Here's how this film could have been made stronger, aside from what I mentioned:
* Shorter length overall
Not because I have a short attention span, but because after a certain length, the documentary only fits on a DVD-R9, a dual layer DVD. Alex Jones says that dual-layer DVD-R's are only slightly more expensive; he is mistaken. They are several times more expensive, extremely slow to burn, and much more error-prone. This hinders reduplication greatly.[/li]
* More documentation
I've heard multiple people call in with the same idea I had: on the DVD, include all the most important .pdf files which were mentioned (or couldn't be mentioned, but should have been) in the film. This is not a major time commitment, because supposedly all of these documents have already been found, and many of them were briefly shown in the film. But Alex immediately dismissed the idea, citing the fact that he works 14 hours a day and doesn't have time to brush his teeth. Oh well.
Also, lots of claims which are radical to someone who doesn't yet know all the material (and that's who these films are for, right?) are not backed up very well, or at all, within the documentary. I'm not comfortable with that. After I watch the film a few more times, I'll post some examples if I think it would be helpful.
* More neutral language
Is it necessary to basically insult people in the narration? The first law of writing is show, don't tell. Don't just tell us that someone is a slimy vicious snake; if you can show it with documentation and facts, it won't be necessary. Ad hominem attacks don't make you look good.
* A different narrator
I don't think that Alex is a bad narrator, but I think that Paul Joseph Watson would do a much better job overall. I won't get into why, but just remember that Alex was originally going to have another narrator do Endgame, and I think that this is a decision he should have stuck with.[/li]
* Less repetitive music
I think only two or three songs were used in Endgame; hearing them over and over again over several hours gets old.
__________________
Niemand ist mehr Sklave, als der sich für frei hält, ohne es zu sein.
|