stephane_decker

I am a basketball player of athletic built (work outs in the gym for 2 years now) and I personally am against the use of performance enhancing drugs or anabolic steroids (in sports).

I was pretty mixed up after finishing this movie because I was never really sure if it was deliberate to weaken both the shown pro and anti steroid arguments, or if the movie simply sucks. Third possibility, the director and writers give an insight of how weird the mind processing of a (ex-)steroid user is.

The reason why I ask myself this is because never ever a clear position on steroids in sports or in general seems to be taken and every time we have a point we are quickly served a counter argument.

So now what? Let everybody do what he thinks is right? Can we blame America's competitive society for the popularity of steroids among gym rats? Seriously? On the pro-steroid side, we are presented with a lot of (mislead but also some successful) steroid takers who all seem like they don't get their mindset right, but on the anti-steroid side we have a politician heavily involved in the fight of steroids who has no clue what he's talking about.

Does this mean that both sides are lead by unknowing amateurs that APPEAR to be great (bulky on one side, politician on the other) but that in REALITY they both pretty much lost track of who they are and what they initially wanted to achieve? Maybe so, that's at least what I thought, which would make the director great.

Why else would he let steroid users say that since everybody takes 'em, they want to they 'em too, to stay competitive. Are we to choose a position on that? Is the movie provoking us to decide first for ourselves whether the use of steroids is bad and then for others? After all, many points in the movie go that direction to let everybody decide for himself what he thinks about steroids.

For instance, we have the director explain to us that steroids are banned, illegal, ill received but that everybody condemning it did either take them (Governor Schwarzenegger) or support their use (in Sports, like ex-President G.W. Bush).

To prove a point, he creates his own supplement, deliberately showing off that most of the stuff must be total sh**. Same thing with the photo-shopping of ads.

The main supporters are supposed to be the fans that love and want more performance from their favorite athletes. So some are accused to play blind and others want it to be in order to ignore that, while we officially don't like cheating in sports, we, secretly, want it.

Is the use of steroids then simply the result of what happens if your inner dirt bag takes over? Then that is does not pay off, because 99.99% of the steroid addicted gym rats achieve NOTHING in life but side effects? Talking about side effects, Mikes wife claims to not witness any on her husband, but she could by lying.

Just as Barry Bonds says "You all lied". We all somewhere did. Maybe we should clean our closets first but truth be told, the no closet will ever get cleaned, they will all get dirtier.

So here we are: steroids are bad, they are cheats, but then again they do not replace talent, there are other more dangerous drugs, then some side effects are reversible, some are not (those remain of course unmentioned in this movie) etc. etc, We could go on with that mindset and go nowhere, but I dare to find one point in this whole movie: Everybody has dirt on his hands but prefers to wash someone else's first while hiding theirs behind their back.

There is also a letdown in this movie. That there IS a way to look like your role model or to at least feel to have achieved something great like your sports role model: work hard and earn it with honest effort. Unlike Johnson's stripped gold medal, that hard earned silver medal makes you an honest smiler.

And happy with no negative side effects.

I have been playing Video Games for more than 10 years. I have witnessed the evolution from Dos-Games, to Windows 98 compatible games, Windows 2000, XP, then switch to Xbox 360 and from 2D to 3D, from Mono Sound to 7.1 sound experiences, I have seen the whole evolution.

I have also seen games similar to this one, if we talk about graphics, sound effects, game-play scheme that is. However, never have I ever played a game that captured a targeted style and converted it so well to the video game screen.

I am very indulgent with video games in the aspect of their graphics, sounds, game-play, diversity, because what I am looking for is atmosphere so intense, you could cut if with a knife. Which is why I loved the first Assassins Creed, although I had to admit, it was actually a poorly finished game.

This game however cuts the atmosphere quite near to perfectly: never before has there been a game with that brilliant capture of wild western style and atmosphere! It helps the game that I am a fan of the classic Clint Eastwood westerns and John Marstons looks must've been inspired on the ones of outlaw Josey Wales, played by Clint Eastwood.

The music sometimes reveals tunes close to the good old Ennio Morricone tracks.

The guns, the dramatic imprecise shootings, the huge lands to discover, the outfits, the baddies and the goodies (and the uglies) and all of the above make for a knife sharp atmosphere.

I love it.

For me video games should be about being someone you can't be in real life (be that a soldier, a special secret agent, or, as in this case, a wild west outlaw), packed with brilliant atmosphere and this game delivers.

So much that I easily forgive it for the minor bugs and flaws it does contain. I guess no one and nothing is perfect, but this is damn close.

10/10

First of all I want to make up for some false information provided by other reviewers by making two things absolutely clear: - the movie is not an advert for anything. there is no book to buy. believe it or not, the so called "book" is a PDF File available on www.thezeitgeistmovement.com and is absolutely free, just as are the Zeitgeist Movies.

• Zeitgeist Addendum never suggests that technology replacing human labour (automation) would be a bad thing, the movie only points out that businesses use this progress to save costs and therefore increase profit. Remember: Revenues - (minus) Costs = Profit (roughly).

(I have no intention of reviewing it, it is not a movie like another, its purpose is not to entertain or to transpose messages through known cinematic patters.The movie is free, meant to be spread and the messages in it are clear, there are no metaphors, comparisons or anything alike) To the point then of my movie comment:

This movie clearly intents to reshape the thinking process of intelligent human beings. Instead of absorbing the education and the values we are given as real, trustworthy and natural, and then merely registering them we should start to question the education, question the values of society, doubt them, check on them and only then decide if information is trustworthy or not; reject what is in doubt until there is absolute certainty about the trustworthiness.

In my opinion this movie should also be questioned, doubted. This is exactly why I said that the movie is for intelligent people; after watching this movie they change their thinking process and immediately start to doubt the monetary system but also the movie and the Venus Project.

It takes intelligent people to understand what this movie wants and about what it is and it is crucial to understand first. With watching the movie, the job is still not done, one should start researching on their own with any tools given if things are really that bad in and with the monetary system. We need to ask ourselves a thing or two: were the obvious long term consequences of the monetary system intended? Is the Venus Project socially possible? Haven't we gone too far already? There is no correct answer to such questions, the answers are arbitrary, the solutions are created by everyone. This tears us apart.

I personally find the Venus Project very appealing but I see many problems already.

First of all, it is very idealistic since the values we're given from the monetary system are so strongly inherent in our nature. Could you possibly imagine a world without money? Doing work to live on a good standard that everyone has. Maybe so. Maybe not.

There would be no competition then, would there? The technologies presented in the movie to harvest clean energy from natural inexhaustible sources are brilliant but I don't think for any second that the one who comes up with it would not ask for money. For profit. To distinguish himself from the others. to compete.

This leads me to the second point: the Venus Project asks us to lay down competition. However, isn't it competition and the thrive for profit that makes us evolute? Are newer and better Computers really produced to make us evolute, or is evolution just a side effect of the rush for profit? The latter I would say.

It is competition that makes some of us study in the best universities, to get better jobs, to earn more money and the side effect might really be some evolution. I don't think humanity and its instinctual nature would ever be ready to work to evolute instead to compete. As long as the human being is instinctively driven by competition, there will never be a Venus Project.

Reason on the highest scale and depth is what could bring the Venus Project to life: refusing to compete, refusing to get profits at any cost, refusing a strong elite position; refusing to value money.

We would need to value life. Compassion. Solidarity. Impossible? No.

But it needs time and work, some processing, too. The human mind needs to be reshaped, education needs to change, societal values need dramatic change as well. Just as the movie points out, tradition values need to be flushed away but this cannot happen over days or years.

I am sure that it will be reality someday. I am also sure that this process of changing values will take a lot of time, I'm thinking about hundreds of years; or when we run out of oil. We need to be forced to changed, preferably by nature.

Until that happens, a world where there is no money, no unemployment, no competition, no differentiation between a Ferrari and a Ford, and technology for everybody, such a world will remain a kids fantasy. I had that fantasy, too, this "idea".

But what would be a world where everybody has everything for nothing? It would be a world where the new values are love, family, fun. Which raises new competition (who gets the better family, the prettier wife/husband...)... right now, as intelligent as I might be I say: We live in a vicious circle of competition. Money is not the problem, competition is. As a conclusion I think that a world without competition would free us all, and yet leave us with nothing. I hope that hundreds of years after me there will be a near perfect world.

Probably without us, we are not made for such a world.

Thanks if you read this to the end :-)

Yes they saw a lot of concrete. This comment is small and for people who have seen the movie. It is small because I will talk about the political contents of this movie.

Oliver Stone, who showed some courage with JFK, now shows us a completely politically neutral film about two men hoping to survive that fatal day.

Wrong. There is some statement in this. Towards the end, The catholic soldier dressed up in a military suit says something like "Someone will have to fight back".

Now, maybe on the one hand, Stone wants us to believe that the attack came from the outside and very soon U.S. Soldiers will pay the attackers a visit or on the other hand, someone is somehow (with whatever methods, guns, words,...) fighting back to the attacker, no matter who that one is (Arabs, the U.S. Government itself etc.) I wonder why Stone made a completely (politically) useless movie, just to shout out (discreetly) that last line in the end. Why wait 2 hours for doing so? Sure thing is, you have not really missed anything.

P.S. Besides that, the movie is... well enjoyable, but if this movie wasn't about the 9/11 WTC events as script background, it'd be a complete waste of time. With all due respect to the brave and respectable rescue teams and victims of that day: the movie is quite boring, because somehow you just know that they're going to survive, absolutely pointless.

I know its not correct to point that out because the movie is about the bravery of 9/11 civilians, but someone just had to do so. Sorry.

I would have preferred that the movie had put more emphasis on the voluntary helpers and how the state dropped them and their consequential health problems off. We should now know that 911 rescuers have many breathing illnesses but because they were not contractually employed by the government, they receive no health care whatsoever. They literally risked their lives to help. they got NOTHING back. That is absolutely cruel and disgusting.

The movie did not even question such cruelty. This movie does NOTHING, as if it was directed by the government. Sick...

...as MOST of the very very unjustified and critical reviews about Loose Change SE are from people who only wrote ONE comment on IMDb; to tell us that this movie is rubbish because it's facts are wrong.

Yeah, right.

I liked this movie because someone has to dare to produce such stuff. It is highly entertaining as well. And it will make us rethink about what we behold as true. Which is very important because most people are eating what the American Media is giving them to eat: Bu**Sh**

And no matter what the truth is, it is not the official report and that is a fact for sakes. We are the people and the government needs its people like it needs the government. But it is the people to be supposed to have the power, not the government. Go to some courses of constitutional law, you might learn something about the philosophical background of a State, its territory and its population.

Watching the directors cut of 3 hours length not only was extremely intense and amazing, sometimes too fast and hard to follow, but also made me realize how important this movie is for the people of America and the people of the World.

I could easily write tenths of pages about the politico-philosophical content of this movie (more specifically about the JFK Conspiracy) but I just don't have the strength now. Just like many others out there, I realize that seeking the truth and the huge answer to the "why does this madness still exist?" is exhausting. So nobody wants to really do it, instead we go on with our lives, not caring for the truth.

Furthermore, we would be insulted by the public: "What kind of a monster are you to doubt the credibility of the Government". We think it is better not to even think about what could be the truth behind the superficiality of assassinations and "terror strikes".

We need more movies like this one because since it's mass media which is deceiving our beliefs, it shall be mass media to enlighten the facts and doubt the official stories. In 2038 the national archives have to open the files of the JFK Assassination but until then the U.S.A has to be ready to discover the truth because if it is not, we even might never see those important proofs; they will go missing.

I admire Oliver Stone for his commitment to produce a film about what still is a "conspiracy". Doubting the official story with solid counter facts is the best wake up call to the people of the world, to stop thinking about our Governments as Guardians of social values, democracy and liberty. They are not, and realizing that fact is shocking and hard to believe, harder to prove.

I want somebody to produce a decent movie about 9/11, not in Michael Moore style, but in Oliver Stone JFK style, and if it has to be in the year 2039, so 20 years after the actual incident (JFK is released 28 Years after the events of the Kennedy Assassination). Someone has to dare.

Too bad it can't be Oliver Stone again, who has already made his early statement with his apparently neutral, but not so neutral "WTC" movie, which did not question any of the 9/11 facts. Watch "Loose change SE" for a start if you're interested in what the U.S Government is capable of. It will shock you just like this movie might have shocked you, too.

P.S. From a cinematic and rhetorical point of view this movie is very very enjoyable, really sucks you in, that's what I personally love about it.

P.P.S Many people do not agree with my opinion, review, which again proves that this topic is still up-to-date and debatable.

Dennis the menace, as the last word points it out right away, is a menacing movie.

It is supposed to be for kids, but I remember that I was pretty scared of the movie and I thought that Dennis was just an utter crazy boy, scary in his way. I know that he is kind of supposed to be scary for adults, but as a kid I couldn't really identify myself with anybody in the movie; you're not really involved.

Furthermore, a lot of the cuts are directed in a way to submit horror, but in a gentle way. That is like showing us a dangerous car accident but underlining it with cheery music. Something is awfully wrong, it does not feel right. Kids will be frightened by the villain, Mr. Wilson, the girl with the dolls and by the way the director Nick Castle brought the ideas to the screen (only Mrs Wilson is a charming, nice person). This movie simply is not for kids.

You might think then this is for adults, for moms and dads, to watch with their children... nnnnno. You see, the problem is that, while you actually are capable of feeling of how much Dennis is a menace for retired men, you never really think that he's an interesting kid; he's very naive, over the top naive which is basically it.

The movie then is not for children, nor their parents or anybody else. Especially not for teenagers, nowadays they watch films like Matrix at the age of thirteen. The result is that this movie is probably for no one.

4/10

I am really sorry, but adding "James Bond" as a prefix to the title of this movie did not make it better, it did only create publicity. As a Bond movie, this is, excuse me for language, horseshit at best.

Yes, it is nice action, lots of explosions, fictional gadgets like the disappearing Aston Martin... which by the way has a V12 engine but does not make any noise. What a disgrace.

So is the rest of this movie. Aggressive, provocative plot (not positively speaking) and basically just a lot of gun shooting an explosions. Oh I already mentioned those, but there isn't any deeper sense in this movie. At least not a clever or intelligent one.

It is not a bond. Casino Royale is the new kind of Bond. Classic, yet new. Watch Casino Royale if you want James Bond. Watch Die another day if you switched your brain off.

I am not at all a fan of the so called "horror"-movies because what most producers think they need to do is create a gore-feast with cheap and ridiculously bad actors. But this is different.

This is why I give that genre a chance to do its job right: suspense. Horror movies should not be about tons of gore and gallons of blood splattering but about gripping suspense. Important are the actors, since they need to act as if they were in the same fear in which we would be in their place. Liv Tyler definitely is. Great job on the acting, loads of suspense is delivered.

Then at some point, you want it to be all over, as fast as possible. Not because you don't like it! But because the victims want it to be over as well. They are scared.

So are you.

I recommend you to watch this "open ended" suspense-movie during a quiet, dark night.

Note: The movie keeps you away from thinking straight, I have to admit though, when it is all over you first try to understand the motivation of the criminals, then you think about the severe logical mistakes the character in the movie made. There are about 2 of those situations in which you may find the script ridiculously illogical, unnatural.

I will not write a constructive review about this movie, as I wasted enough time and money already by watching it in the theater.

Now Adam Sandler delivers a very solid work here, maybe his best, no doubt about it. As an American trying to imitate a primitive middle east immigrant, he reminds you of Borat. Trust me though, only that idea is what they have in common: where Borat delivers fun moments and unexpected hilarious moments, Zohan does not completely fail at that, but mostly does. Worse than being not funny, half of the "jokes" are very stupid and below bottom line. And I'm not talking stupid in a funny way.

I add to that the overstretched length of this movie and the fact the only fun moments of it are in the first 30-45 minutes. From there on, the quality drops at high rate.

I should have believed in the negative critics from other reviewers, as they are right. The jokes about the Isreali-Palestinian conflict are barely funny as well, plus someone said the movie was funnier if you speak Hebrew... now thats not too many of us.

5 stars (a lot for this silly rubbish) for the cool moments and Adam Sandler as Zohan.

This is probably THE most popular Manga-Anime on earth, not only Anime-Fans like it, but others as well. Why? Because even though it is not always a very credible or spectacular series, the detective series and the overall realism of the series make this Anime so comfy to watch, everybody just has to love it!!! For instance, there is no character with blue or green hear and unlike other series, the characters to not yell all the time in an annoying, exaggerated manner.

The big pro of the series are the usually very cool and clever plots, sometimes an episode gives you all the hints you need yourself to figure out who the culprit is. Mostly though, an episode does not, or sometimes it's luck which leads Conan to solving a case. Nevertheless, the series is gripping, gives you false leads, is funny and the English subtitles with references and explanations to Japanese culture are excellent.

The series earns at least a 9/10. Personally, I gave it a 10, but what I don't like is that throughout the 506 episodes, the real core story about Shinichi and the Black Gang is rarely progressed.

The Sandlot was my favorite kid movie when I was a kid myself.

I was about 8 when I saw it the first time on German TV, so a couple o' years after the movie's release and man, I loved this one. I saw it during summer and after watching it I felt the energy for new adventures! The best thing is, years after that I saw the movie again during another summer and it reminded me so hard on the good times one can have as a youngster outside... I went for adventures again.

As many other reviewers have noticed, this movie reminds us of what it was like to be a kid, and when dogs were dangerous monsters, and playing outside was just a huge adventure. Everybody of us felt like an Indiana Jones. It felt damn good.

This is one of the movies I will carefully hold on and keep it, lets say to watch it all couple of 6 years just to remind me how cool life can be. The movie captures all our youth so well and packs it in one huge summer so watch and love this one.

An absolute 10/10 for being THE kid movie of my life and guess what? I am an adult but I love watching this one. Your turn now.

I have to say that sometimes "looks" are all that matters, just like Jeremy Clarkson from BBC has pointed out (not about our earth though, but he is right anyway).

And when it comes to looks, this movie is such an unbelievably stunning beauty you will absolutely love what your eyes are about to see.

And then there's the personality of the movie as well, interesting, with a captivating narrator voice and narrator stories that will touch your soul as you watch those superbly filmed images.

The movie probably won't affect your lifestyle, ruining these beauties, but it will certainly remember you how precious our earth we live on truly is.

This movie deserves it's 10 stars as it is one of the few stylistic earth documentaries i truly enjoyed.

Note: I have not read the novel and basically I comment on the movie, not on the relation of the movie to its basic source, the novel.

This comment will not contain any spoiler as I will just point out what's good about it, and what is not.

+ His best show off or not, who cares, because Will Smith acts well and is very likely to make you sympathize with him and his actions. You will feel with him and for him. He has a steady desperate look in his face expression and eyes, which is very appropriate.

+ The directing is good. It is not considerably amazing, but at least it does not fail its job.

+ Sounds are accurate, too. i.e. Sometimes you can hear heartbeats, adding tension to the movie.

+ The Plot is very interesting, and the atmosphere feels right. The movie makes you like the light much more than you might imagine.

sounds brilliant so far. but there are a few issues: - I was missing more incidents, or character development and maybe a bit more on the disease spread. An additional flashback and incident would have done the job. Basically what I try to say is: the movie is too short.

• Since Neville is alone in NYC for already a VERY long time, Will Smith could act with a more hopeless, desperate face. more than he puts on.

• The basic idea of the plot ending is okay, but its American signature is a cliché that I personally don't want to see in any movie. Especially in the way it comes over in this one. (it is hard to literally say what I mean, without offending other people's beliefs, so I just stop it here, about the ending.)

Conclusion: Strong points of the movie overweight the weak one's, but not enough to make this movie a very, very good one. Although, I can easily recommend it to everyone, for me it was worth watching, even though the ending was, not bad, but, a weak one. The message the movie provides is nothing new either and does not make us think for a long time, or even regret anything we did or do, but it will remind you of going on, having hope and do good things in life.

So, go to the movies and enjoy this one. You can.