That lovely ideal runs headlong into human behavior, which has shown itself to be rather intransigent in the face of all the brilliant social engineering attempts over the millennia.
...I am not calling anything gospel here. You claim it is a "movie full of nonsense", yet you have only seen maybe 15 sporadic minutes out of nearly 7 total hours of footage. That's worse than your least favorite sports writer watching random clips from a years worth of Blazer games and writing an op-ed piece on the ins and outs of the team.
I don't, actually. I didn't have to wait until the end of "Showgirls" to come to the conclusion that it sucked and was a waste of my time. It was apparent within the first few minutes.
...Showgirls is not a documentary. Showgirls does not have multiple parts that make up the whole movie and the information contained in it. Imagine only reading part one of a text book, for instance, and somehow concluding that the rest of the information contained in that text book is nonsense and waste of your time...even though you have no idea what the rest of the text book entails. Or any other non-fiction text for that matter. Same applies for multi-part documentaries.
Apparently it is a very influential movie. http://spectator.org/archives/2011/01/17/jared-loughners-zeitgeist-obse
So, are you saying that the Oslers were lying about Loughner's fascination with Zeitgeist? What possible motivation would they have had to mention a movie that they had watched (on numerous occasions, apparently) with Loughner? Also, why didn't the author of your piece also mention Osler's comments about Zeitgeist? I'm not sure what point you were trying to prove in your post, other than the author of your cut/paste omitted the Zeitgeist info from his commentary, while quoting Osler on other things. I'm not saying at all that the movie caused him to be a mass murderer, but when people who know him well say he was fascinated by a conspiracy movie, I have no reason to not believe what they are saying. We know that Loughner was a heavy pothead who liked conspiracy theories. There is nothing wrong with that, IMO, and it certainly doesn't make a person a mass murderer. Just as 'targets' on a map doesn't either, but whatevs...
I've seen Zeitgeist 1&2 and I haven't went crazy. I'll probably watch the new one online at some point. The first 30-40 minutes of Zeitgeist where dude explains where the myth of Jesus comes from makes it worth watching. HAAK72 you should look up on youtube the interview Alex Jones did with Peter Joseph, it's freaking hilarious. They don't get along
...I've seen it. The third Zeitgeist really does a good job of breaking down the Nature Vs. Nurture debate in Part I. It uses both empirical and analytical study to explain the biological and psychological basis for many of the negative human behaviors we see today including many types of addiction, violence, distrust, lack of empathy, and greed. Part II is a devastating analysis of the monetary market system, which very clearly shows how the current system creates the perfect environment for nurturing the negative behaviors described in Part I. Part III presents the ideal case for how humans should conduct themselves on this planet, as if we suddenly arrived here and had the option to design our society such that it provides for everyone and eliminates the causes of negative human behaviors. It contrasts these ideas with the current system showing why the negative aspects of today's society would not occur and how we could have the benefits of a modern first-world luxury lifestyle on a global scale. Part IV re-assesses today's society in light for the first three parts, saying what will happen if we do nothing. This part also suggests that change will only occur after things get much worse...
