Interreflections

This is essentially a two hour and a half monologue in the voice of different actors intertwined with two different storylines. The first is some kind of sci-fi short story and the second consists of a series of expressionist metaphors intended to reinforce ideas conveyed by the monologue. Together the three components add up to the two hours and forty five minutes total duration of the footage.

The main issue with the monologue itself is that it is purely ideological, meaning non-factual and poorly documented.

The artistic insertions, on the other hand, happen to be hackneyed, predictable and poorly executed, whereas the short story end ups being a commercial pitch to raise funds for an "utopian" futuristic design project.

All in all, the whole thing is pretty boring. The only reason I gave it five starts is because, if soporifeous, this thing remains an attemp for refocusing the debate on crucial issues.

This is what the world needs to view. I have watched many a film/documentary & nothing comes closer to the sheer perfection of social commentary that this film exudes. Metaphor after metaphor of pure genius writing.

This movie is presented as a future documentary of our current society. It details extremely well the complex issues with our political and economic systems. It shows in detail how all our current systems are designed to perpetuate themselves with no regard to the welfare of human society they pretend to represent. This is shown in extremely factual, well researched and referenced presentations by renowned experts. One of the most modern thought provoking movies of our times.

This film is basically a regurgitated lecture of Peter Joseph's lectures. One character in the film is played as a professor and is quoted as saying "Some things were considered external to this contrived competitive game they called business" This clearly sounds way too much how Peter Joseph uniquely talks.

The script was indigestible and felt like a course instead of a movie. There was literally no plot. I guess you can say there was a tiny storyline, but it was clouded out by over used jargon. It was very hard to keep my eyes on it for nearly 3 hours.

The Good:

• The music was nice and fit the scenery of the film very well.
• I follow Peter Joseph's work, so I do find the topics in the film extremely important

The Bad:

• No plot. Not a documentary. My guess is you can call it a Mockumentary
• Acting is so bad. Like really bad. I can't knock the actors. Al Pacino himself wouldn't be able to give life to such a script.
• The special effects and color grading was bad and pretentious at best. Overblown soft tones and lumination was a bit nauseating.

Conclusion: I gave the rating of this film a 2 and not a 1 because I felt that the film's topic is important. Capitalism is an extremely inefficient system. Although we have no other system better to replace it, we have elitist fans who defend Capitalism which ultimately impedes on any progress to our social condition.

This film feels as though it's directed at Peter himself and those who agree heavily with the Zeitgeist Movement. If there was any attempt to bring further outreach to those outside this circle or provide an enjoyable movie, then this Film failed miserably. If there was no attempt to bring further outreach and it was created purely to provide a somewhat entertaining outlook of the movement for those WITHIN the circle, I think it did well.

What I loved about Zeitgeist Moving Forward is that there were many voices of people who brought their own way of speaking, their own perspective and insights and then there was a lot of time spent on a possible solution to many issues: The Venus Project. Over the last few years since, I've become disenfranchised by the allure of the naïve vision, though I still agree with developing an open source commons of resource sharing somehow.

Interreflections, by contrast, is just one voice: Peter Joseph for 2 hours and 45 minutes. This whole confused film feels like one badly structured essay spoken by a few random actors to give the illusion of diverse voices, covering that fact that this is clearly a single minded ego train of one man. There were moments I enjoyed - I liked it when he made references to real research, especially when talking about inequality. And I kind of enjoyed some moments in "the great debate". I must give credit to the incredible effort put into the special effects and obviously the huge amount of time and work put in to create this film. Overall, I didn't hate the film, but let's be clear, it was bad. It was jarring, slow and confusing. Almost the entire film was unstructured cynicism with the last 5 minutes for "the solution" - a city that magically appears out of nowhere and is loosely based on a resource based economy, though is incredibly shallow because there is literally only 5 minutes to briefly introduce a slice of utopia and even more naïve than the Venus Project because this wonderful city just literally gets plopped into the ocean by some group of futuristic activists. I mean seriously. I thought this would be like a development from Moving Forward, but it was a serious step back. If Peter Joseph wants to stay relevant he needs to connect with the real world, not retreat further into cynicism and hide behind a totally shallow veil of utopia.