LouHomey From my favorite movies..

Manthast Absolutely amazing

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Scotty Burke It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

KineticSeoul This could have been a very thought provoking interview movie, but it didn't turn out so well. Mainly because of the questions and direction the director decided to go with. The43 main points Noam Chomsky really delves into is the human mind from child to adulthood, religion, existentialism and linguistics. Some subjects are delved into pretty well and I found it interesting, although some parts was a bit difficult to comprehend. Because of the director's accent and Noam Chomsky monotone and gruff voice. Noam Chomsky really didn't seem to care if he was in this movie or not. If the questions were more impactful and well thought-out it would have been a far more compelling and interesting movie. The movie also didn't seem to flow in a coherent manner. Even "About A Son" has been done better. Despite the animation when it came to the interview, it didn't seem like whole lot of effort was put into this. Even in the beginning of the movie, the director even admits to egotistical and that is probably what ruined this. This movie just didn't seem to need all that artsy stuff.3/10

ana-arist As deep as a saucer, Gondry take on the nature of human language is just a giant waste of time, both Chomsky's and ours. Gondry interviews one of the leading authorities on human language and he cannot think of better questions to ask him than "what makes you happy?" or "do you miss your dead wife?".If you're interested in Chomsky works, look somewhere else. If you happen to like Gondry - and want to maintain any respect for him - do yourself a favor and skip this movie.I understand some people appreciate Gondry lavish visual creativity (I usually do, too), but in this movie they cannot compensate for the fact the Gondry has no idea what his own movie is about (since he has no clue what Chomsky is talking about most of the time).

chijim70 I would have LOVED to hear a good film with some narration concerning Naom. Instead I got a constant annoying projector and misc sounds interrupting what was otherwise a potentially great film. The graphics were amateurish and often pointless. I felt it discounted from his responses more than enhancing them. I didn't see the point in the perpetual noise or randomly agitating the viewer with unnecessary sound. I'm not so schizophrenic I need perpetual noise in order to appreciate an otherwise potentially dry point. Not that I even think of Naom as dry! He's interesting and all that crud did was detract from his speaking or the ability to focus on it. You'd think you'd want to enhance what he is saying but this film does everything but. It just wasn't enjoyable . . . . . . . . . .

rzajac This is a fantastic, intelligent wedding of word and image. It's like a genuine synthesthetic experience, like the animator wanted us to have a cogent, dependable hallucination of Chomsky's brilliant, eloquent statements. From time to time I would sort of "forget" whether I was hearing Chomsky or seeing what he was saying; they sometimes switched places... or (perhaps more accurately) truly merged in my mind, like finally having the image of one of those 3D "art" images pop out at you when your eyes finally settle into the correct parallax and focus mix. I found that when I was relaxed and letting the flow of ideation wash over me, my experience was "of a piece"; almost psychedelically.What can I say? It's just a lovely way to mainline a genius' thinking; the filmmaker succeeds in his quest to enhance and tease out the intuitive aspects to technical/scientific thinking; and that's downright inspirational!Check it out.--------AddendumJust want to add one more point. As much as I find Chomsky's politics to be vital and morally attuned, it STILL strikes me as a great artistic decision on the part of Gondry to 1) minimize the politics, 2) put them off 'til (largely) the end, and 3) subsume them to the task of conveying warmth (not urgency). You get a measured, requisite dose of Chomsky's politics, *without* the overwhelming sense one often gets with Chomsky that, up against so much troglodytic inertia, the task truly daunts. Bravo.