IslandGuru Who payed the critics

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Whitech It is not only a funny movie, but it allows a great amount of joy for anyone who watches it.

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

javierlecuona The content is not bad, some assertions the author proposes are not quite well explained or lacks arguments but the documentary is impossible to watch. The music does not fit the documentary's content (alternative rock or whatever). Symbolic documentaries must have clear images that shows the symbols that are being explained, well do not expect clear images in this documentary. Mostly is a man walking and two more images that overlap.I'm not saying the content is bad, i'm just saying that is very difficult to watch, it is so badly produced that the content is affected. If the documentary was a black screen with some clear images it would be far more understandable and clear.

damiansir Sorry...but...despite a great script and a great hypothesis which we believe, both my wife and I found ourselves closing our eyes while watching this. It is sensory overload. On the auditory channel there is music and the author's voice. Much of the music is rock. Doesn't suit the documentary tone of the announcer's speaking.On the visual channel, there is a constant fading in and out of multiple scenes at the same time. It's hard to explain, but the entire documentary is at least two scenes, sometimes three at once. You know when a scene fades and another comes into view and for about a second you can see both scenes? Well the whole movie stays in this multiple scene overlay mode. Very irritating, as we wanted to enjoy the image of the art, for example, but his driving in a car, or walking in ruins was overlaid. He sabotaged his own documentary. He should re-edit and re-release the whole thing.