MovieChat Forums > Zeitgeist (2007) Discussion > Programs like this shouldn't be called d...

Programs like this shouldn't be called documentaries ...

posted 15 years ago by atomicmutant-1
18 replies | jump to latest

Maybe they should be called editorials. It's a program of opinion and not of documentation.

(I'm not defending or attacking the actual content of this movie, that's not the point of this post ... My point is that calling this movie a documentary seems incorrect to me.)

It's been bugging me for years that so many shows get called "documentaries" because they do not fit into any other niche. They are not Dramas or comedies (or whatever) so they get lumped into the "documentary" catgeory.

It's fine and dandy that shows like this which are opinion are made, and they do have their place in the world, but it's not a documentary.

The industry really needs to come up with a new category for these types of productions. Maybe they need to classify these movies like they classify books, and call them something along the lines of "non-fiction" or something like that. (Although many would argue, that this is a work of fiction, but you get my drift)

I find it intersting how Reality programming is in some ways more like a documentary than these kinds of shows, but they are not considered documentaries, but opinion programs like this one are considered "documentaries".

I also find it really unfortunate that real documentaries seem to have been replaced in popular film these days with shows that are mostly opinion (Farenheit 911, Inconvenient truth, etc.) Again I am not disagreeing with the opinions in those movies (I agree with much of the conclusions of those) but I do not consider those to be documentarties.

It's sad to think that many people consider this to be somewhat of a golden age of "documentaries" but really, true documentaries have really been pushed to the side. It's a damned shame.

Time to come up with a new genre to describe these kind of films.

________________________________________

www.pegwarmers.tv

[–] ZAROVE 15 years ago

I agree, and the term "Editorial" works as its taken direclty form the media already. (Newspapers specifically, or Magazines.)

I think such material shoudl be called such.

[–] adamsmo 15 years ago

It's certainly nothing but opinion. But editorials don't tend to just make up facts and statistics... It's more in line with a blog. Or /b/.

[–] Can_a_bitch_get_a_donut 15 years ago

Which parts were more opinionated than documentary? How was it much different from any documentary?

One may not believe everything it states, and I'd certainly say there was plenty of speculation involved, but I don't recall many opinions being stated.

---
I hope the new Toy Story movie gives me a Buzz and a Woody.

[–] Bioweapon 15 years ago

whole movie was biased. No solid scientific evidence was presented. Moreover, it is filled with lies and invented facts (example:Horus wasn´t born on december 25 th).

[–] Can_a_bitch_get_a_donut 15 years ago

Hell, even that Ben Stein creationism movie was called a documentary. It doesn't have to have scientific evidence.

---
I hope the new Toy Story movie gives me a Buzz and a Woody.

[–] ZAROVE 15 years ago

Ben Steins movie "Expelld" had more backing in evidence than Zeitgeist. All Zeitgeist did was to repeat old Conspiracy theories which had already been discredited and which contradict evidence when looked at, lie tot he audience about evidence, and add scary music and an authoriative sounding voiceover.

[–] Can_a_bitch_get_a_donut 15 years ago

Okay, not everything in Zeitgeist was true, that's a given.

To insist that not a word of it is true is also a lie.

---
I hope the new Toy Story movie gives me a Buzz and a Woody.

[–] ZAROVE 15 years ago

I didnt say every word ws not true. But all the major points were. IE, Jesus the sun god, the WTC beign an inside Job, the crapabout global conspirators takign pver the world via banks...

Its like an extended Chick Tract only done by an Atheist.

[–] snoop1123 15 years ago

There are people who discredit the Holocaust. That's no longer a strong argument. The only way to argue is to list your own facts and cite sources then let people decide for themselves.

It's not enough that I should succeed -- others should fail. -David Merrick.

[–] adamsmo 14 years ago

....really? You're comparing a historical event with VAST swaths of evidence to a documentary purposely misleading people?

None of the claims have a factual basis. It's typical conspiracy theory fare - cast doubt on a topic with twisted facts and dubious questions, then assert something else in its place, however unsubstantiated or warranted. If you believe this movie, you might as well believe the whole Reptilian theory by David Icke.

[–] axl9871 14 years ago

How about Educational films?

:)

------------
"This is my life and it is ending one minute at a time..."

[–] ZAROVE 14 years ago

How is a film that lies form start to finish "Educational"?

Nothign the film states about Christianity, 9-11, or Bankign is true.

[–] DaFrea-k 14 years ago

I agree, this could get very confusing for people just looking for documentaries and then finding this. It's a nice alternative viewpoint that makes you think but it doesn't contain many facts. It has tons of opinion but I would classify a documentary as non disputable. You shouldn't be able to debate the validity of information presented in a proper documentary.

I have nothing against this movie cuz it was actually quite an experience to seeing it but they really need to come up with another term else it will mislead a lot of people.
_____________________________________________________
Go Go Technological Singularity ><

[–] marcusaurelius_00 14 years ago

So would this include such so called "documentaries" like, An Inconvenient Truth & the more recent Home? I wonder how much can be refuted for every documentary ever made for that matter. We the general public seem to rely heavily on the big networks graciousness to deliver much of what is presented to be unbiased and accurate these.

[–] trakripper-1 14 years ago

The correct term for "documentaries" like this is to call them a Polemic. Fahrenheit 9/11 is another example of a Polemic. Whilst very entertaining to watch the lack of balanced criticism undermines its messages. Perhaps the best things to be gained are the interest this must spur for people to do their own research into historical evidence and use of referencing.

[–] marcusaurelius_00 14 years ago

You should add, An inconvenient Truth and Home to that Polemic category then. I am sure there are many others too that can fit that description.

[–] All_Seeing_Fly 14 years ago

The makers of this film do not claim it to be a documentary. It appears that name grew out other peoples' discussions.

From their website:-
"
HOW DID "ZEITGEIST: THE MOVIE" COME TO BE?
The original Zeitgeist was actually not a "film", but a performance piece, which consisted of a vaudevillian style multi-media event using recorded music, live instruments and video. The event was given over a 6-night period in New York City and then, without any interest to professionally release or produce the work, was "tossed" up on the Internet arbitrarily. The work was never designed as a film or even a documentary in a traditional sense - it was designed as a creative, provoking, emotionally driven expression, full of artistic extremity and heavily stylized gestures.
However, once on-line, an unexpected flood of interest began to generate. Within 6 months over 50 Million views were recorded on Google Video counters (before they were reset for some reason). The current combined estimates put the number of Internet views at over 100 million as of 2009. Suddenly "Zeitgeist" the event, became "Zeitgeist: The Movie".
"

Make of that what you will.

[–] Chiffmonkey 14 years ago

The film opens the door to making you question things. That's pretty much the essence of science, so yes I'd call it a documentary.