What are your thoughts on the movie zeitgeist??

Question

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

be honest..

please dont bother responding if you arent gonna take the time or havent already take the time to actually watch it.

Answer 1

I consider it to be an intellectually dishonest documentary, not because of the filmmakers personal bias, but because of its disregard for the truth. There is so much questionable statements that can easily be refuted, or controversial points that have legitimate opposing views that should have been presented.

- Regarding part 1: Jesus

The "Mythology of Jesus" theory was an obscure and generally dismissed theory.

It has gained exposure due to author "Acharya S" and her collaboration with the Zeitgeist filmmaker. (She is also author of the films companion guide). But even the casual but astute viewer will find considerable silliness in the some of the conjectures where practically any numerical or astrological connection 'proves' mytholical derision. Son=sun? Three stars in Orions belt = three kings? Virgo = Mary because the astrological sign sort of looks like an M? Who buys this stuff?

Some other views:

" The idea of Jesus as a myth is rejected by the majority of biblical scholars and historians. In 2004, Richard Burridge and Graham Gould stated that they did not know of any "respectable" scholars that held the view today. Robert E. Van Voorst has stated that biblical scholars and historians regard the thesis as "effectively refuted"."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_...

For a point-by-point analysis, see http://www.conspiracyscience.com/article...

For more rebuttals, see http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

- Regarding Part II: 9/11

It should be noted upfront that being skeptical of the 'official version' of anything presented by the government or media, is a good thing for society. And it should also be noted that questioners of 9/11 'offical versions' range from genuine intellectual pursuits of greater truths, to bizarre interpretations specifically intended to support a unwavering point of view.

The Zeitgeist filmmaker is part of that spectrum that has bought into the theory that the government orchestrated the whole thing. Unfortunately the evidence they selected and presented was sloppy and much of it easily disproved, even by members of the Truth movement. (I've heard some speculate this may have been a red-herring to discredit the 'truth' movement).

For a point by point analysis, see http://www.conspiracyscience.com/article...



- Regarding Part III: Men behind the curtain

As a liberatarian, I found this part to have had the most potential in exposing abuses of government and men in power. Instead, it trots out tired long disproven conspiracy theories.

"Income Tax law Doesn't exist" theory - Very stale. Consistently disproven over-and-over again. No new information, just new victims going to jail that fall for these arguments. Very sad.

"Federal Reserve System is owned by international bankers" - Still a common conspiracy theory. Still wrong. The Federal Reserve System, is headed by the Board of Governors, a Government Agency (look it up - http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/ind... ). The Federal Reserve branches can definitely be considered tightly regulated corporations owned by their member banks, all of which must be American-owned by law. It is receives regular audits, and is overseen by congress.

For a point-by-point analysis, check out:

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

Other views:

"There is no shortage of information which refutes this viewpoint. But this type of conspiracy relies on two elements common to web surfers: First, they're only willing to check facts at the most superficial level, which usually means they'll read a message or watch a clip just once before forming an opinion and moving on. " Ref:

http://media.wildcat.arizona.edu/media/s...

"...(a) common problem in the film: presenting something in such a shallow manner without further corroboration or scholarly evidence." - Ref:

http://gauntlet.ucalgary.ca/story/12284

There are those who defend the film because they believe that agenda+motive is more important than truth. There is a certain irony here since the films overarching thesis is to be wary of those who would obfuscate the truth in an attempt to persuade others to their point of view. Even more bizarre are allegations that detractors of the film must be agents of some sort and part of the grand conspiracy.

Answer 2

I have seen this documentary, very accurate  regarding the undeniable similarities between different deities and historical/ religious figures  . also in pointing the  finger to the dark institutions that govern us with lies and conspiracy.

Answer 3

I had mixed feelings: irratated at first, then frustrated, annoyed, like my inteligence had been insulted, mildly interested, and a little suspicious, genuinely entertained, pissed at the greedy capitalist pigs, surprised, disappointed in the human race, like that guy in the tv studio yelling at the audience about how we watch too much tv is freaking hillarious, a bit skeptical, like id rather leave society behind and learn to be a hunter/gatherer in some remote location than be tracked by the gov with a micro chip, frustrated with people who are happy to let other people do all their thinking for them, actually quite impressed with those guys for being able to pull of such a ridiculously conveluted and overly elaborate plan for total world domination ..and then in the last five minutes.... i felt the entire collection of emotion, opinion, and point-of-view, simultaneously shift faster than it ever has before that i can ever remember. the message at the end of this movie is one of the most inspirtational, uplifting, profound, compassionate, and down right beautiful messages ive ever heard.

it started off so hateful and pompous, and ended so loving and down to earth, it was just so human. it was a good movie.