User reviews

This has shades of the BBC's "Horizon" programs - science, but hidden behind stupid graphics and dumbed down visuals that have almost nothing to do with the topic. At least this program didn't do the Horizon trick of using stupid camera angles and getting the interviewees to look through objects, mirrors or lenses or do stupid things.

Look, science is not boring and the audience is not dumb.

I'll give one example of the Horizon mentality that infected this program. When showing Sagittarius A* and the stars orbiting it, rather than showing a nice, accurate diagram like you can find on Wikipedia, we instead get some artist's crazy rendition that bares little resemblance to the real situation. Please! No more of this kind of garbage.

I also found there were long periods of padding that were totally unnecessary. Do we need to see artist's drawings of stick figures marching along the screen? Do we need lengthy sections of dialogue between scientists that is taken totally out of context and is pretty meaningless to any non-scientist?

Then there is the lack of a narrator. If you are going to dispense with one then at least get your interviewees to explain. On the one hand the producers wanted to dumb down things with stupid graphics and yet, on the other, they leave it to the audience to work things out for themselves. For example, the teams of people producing independent results from the same data. It almost presents the story as if the scientists are just making up stuff and the resulting image of the black hole was their collective fantasy effort.

Overall it was interesting, but the story could have been told in half the time and made much more interesting.

Six stars for the science content - you'd have got more if you'd corrected the above problems I've pointed out.

This show gave me an idea, for the first time, of what the process is like for scientists to bring forth new discoveries. It's not for the faint of heart, but definitely brings you into the world of some of the most intelligent people in the world. For that, I give it and 8 out of 10 stars. Anyone, that has curiosity in space and time should find something out of this production I'd think?

If you're as fascinated by the universe as I am, you'll like it, just because.. Well, it's about seeing a black hole for the first time. But it's a poorly produced film that's actually almost impressively boring in its form. The story here is mind blowing - too bad the movie producers couldn't encapsulate that in a better way.

I don't know about other reviewers, but for me the theoretical physicists seemed like a bunch of groupies, fawning over Hawkins and belittling their own work. Meanwhile, the lead project astronomer comes off looking a lot like a bully with some of his comments to his colleagues. Yeah, it's high-stakes, I get it, but the guy just didn't seem like he had leadership quality.

Is this a true depiction of science? Maybe it is. I have no idea.

But what's clear to me is that this documentary really dumbs it down, to the point that you have ask the question: why bother doing this kind of documentary if you're going to assume that your audience are idiots? Despite all this, I still give it a 7 overall just because there's a dearth of good documentaries about black holes.

Too bad this one wasn't a bit better.

I would imagine anyone who watches this does so as they too are intrigued by what are one of the greatest discoveries in the universe, Black Holes, and how they play a central role in the formation of galaxies... and more.

The documentary is a build up to the climatic moment when the theory for the existence of Black Holes, based on how they influence their surrounding environment, changes to the discovery of finally seeing a Black Hole! It's an incredible moment.

I enjoyed it.

On the very year the documentary was released, the Nobel Prize in physics was awarded to Roger Penrose "for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity".

Yet the name of Penrose is not to be heard once in that movie. And the director (Peter Galison) is not the type to be ill-informed.

On the other side, it also struck me that the Nobel committee waited until the death of Hawking to award a prize for black holes.

Anyone has an insider's view on that?

Greetings again from the darkness. When most of us need an item, we first check the Amazon website for price and availability. For Physicists and Astronomers, it's not always so easy. We are informed that photographing a Black Hole would require a telescope the size of planet Earth. Even with my limited science knowledge, I was able to understand the impossibility of fulfilling such a request. Of course, there is a reason they are Physicists and yours truly reviews movies. These folks are pretty darn smart and they find a way to solve problems. Harvard University Physics Professor and documentarian Peter Galison manages to make accessible the work of some of the world's brightest minds.

Thinking back to 2019, you likely recall seeing the Black Hole photograph. It was everywhere ... online sites, social media, TV newscasts, and magazine covers. We knew it was a breakthrough, but most of us had no idea what went on behind the scenes to capture that image. Galison's documentary fills us in. Going back to 2017, and starting in Mexico, the film explains the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT). With the goal of photographing a Black Hole, a network of observatories from around the globe will be coordinated to simultaneously capture data, and then that data will be compiled to determine if the image(s) is an accurate representation.

There are a couple of things we follow ... related by topic but differing in objectives. A group including Stephen Hawking, Harvard Theoretical Physicist Andrew Strominger, British scientist Malcolm Perry, and Cambridge scholar Sasha Haco are observed hard at work on solving the mysteries of Black Holes. Specifically what they are pursuing is the Information Paradox, which states the universe cannot be defined by physical laws. This pursuit of this group of geniuses is shown in symmetry with the work of the EHT teams, where mostly we follow Shep Doeleman and the challenges his team faces in holding up their end of photographing Messier 87, a supergiant elliptical galaxy.

The EHT teams are located around the globe, including Chile, Spain, the South Pole, Hawaii, and Arizona. Obviously the technical aspects of these projects are beyond my capacity, however, it should be noted that the film is easy enough to follow for us non-geniuses while also including some geeky detail for the advanced among us. What really stands out and makes the film fun to watch is the passion shown by these scientists. At the conference where the teams are gathered, these folks are giddy as they anticipate the results of their work and the compilation of data. Their excitement makes it clear what an enormous accomplishment the image is for all involved.

Sadly, Stephen Hawking passed away in 2018, so the clips we see are some of the last images of his final work. If you are curious as to how his work with Strominger, Perry, and Haco ended up, you may track down their final paper, "Black Hole Entropy and Soft Hair" ... but I'm sure most of you have already read it. To add a touch of entertainment value, director Galison includes beautiful music from YoYo Ma as well as "Over the Rainbow" by Israel Kamakawiwo'ole. Overall, this is the perfect blend for novices and scientists who are interested in the fascinating topic of Black Holes and how the experts go about chipping away at the mystique and limits of knowledge. Available VOD on March 2, 2021

Not sure what people were expecting to see. The basic concepts of how the image of the black hole was captured and the scientific process to produce the image (separate teams without any contact with each other, etc) are fairly easy to grasph without a strong scientific background. The secondary 'story', about the people working with Dr Hawking on the information paradox was indeed a bit harder to follow - the concept is understandable but their talk was far too advanced and based on mathematics for the viewer to easily follow. But I doubt this is something that can be accurately simplified for the average person. I have a (little-used, if at all) physics degree, and I couldn't understand almost anything apart from the broad concept. I saw this as a documentation of a grand effort for posterity - not something aimed at explaining this effort to everyone else.

And in the end, you don't need to understand everything. If you watch this and you are not even a little moved and carried away by the scientists' genuine enthusiasm and passion for the mysteries of the universe, then the problem is yours.

Good science combined with great animations makes this enjoyable, nonetheless the link between the two stories is kinda confusing, and although Stephen Hawking's appearance, pure physics storyline is plain, spontaneous and doesn't says a single things. Liked it, but skipped some parts of it.

It's uber frustrating because this kind of documentary, which I love to seek out, is rarely made well. The show suffers from what I call a "wedding slideshow" - it's meaningful only to those working in the inner circle.. those who get the inside jokes. But I believe one of the main reasons this show is made is to elucidate certain things to the public? Otherwise, there won't be interviews and feeble attempts at explaining?

It's horrible because 25% of the content is mindlessly repeated assertions of how terrifying/magnificent an object/phenomenon is, 25% is interviews in which the experts rehash the same terminologies with some self-gratifying anecdotes thrown in, 25% is showing - often without a context - the experts "in action" (for goodness sake, many of these are theoretical physicists, theoretically all they need is pencil and paper, some others are programmers/ engineers who build intricate things, so there's no point trying to portray them like astronauts walking on the moon, really), 20% is inane and literal graphics that not only fail to demonstrate anything, but also reinforce any misconception that people might have, and 5% or less is the much needed context to whatever people are talking about.

But it could've been so much better. For example, why should information always be conserved? What's the information paradox? Why is it a paradox? Why many papers have been written about it, and what's problematic with some of these? It doesn't need to explain anything in-depth, it's impossible to do so in a show anyway, it could be just a glimpse into the important questions/answers. See, when multiple telescopes can work as one is explained using the mirror shards analogy, it's super succinct and clear even to laymen. That's what we need more. Is the explanation in any way comprehensive? No, of course not, but it will suffice for the viewers to move on to the next terminology or discussion, and if they're interested in it, they can go on to devote their lives to getting a much more complete picture of it. I had some understanding of some of the concepts prior to watching this, but still it's not meant for either beginners or advanced learners or... anybody. I mean, you have some of the greatest scientists in the world at your disposal, and you spend time showing the first page of some papers? Does the director even care about the subject?

Some efforts are desperately needed to give a proper context to all the terms/remarks/concepts/stories/challenges thrown into the kitchen sink that is the show. Otherwise, it's just a wedding slideshow for the experts to pull up from time to time to enjoy over a glass of wine - which I doubt they'll do, and I think isn't the intention of the documentary.

I just saw this on Netflix and I regret not catching it earlier. It was produced in 2020 to take advantage of the huge publicity surrounding the first imaging of a black hole, but to get right to the point, it's excellent. It's one of the very best documentaries out there showing what the process of DOING science is actually like. (Full disclosure, I'm a scientist and I have tremendous respect for what director Peter Galison and the producers decided to show and emphasize in this film.) It's real. The Event Horizon Telescope wasn't the name for a 'thing' -- some single instrument sitting on a mountaintop -- it was the name for a team and its decade-long project involving an incredible path through data analysis pushed to the limit, computer programming, theoretical simulations, and pure thought.

There are a few principal scientists, like the various team leaders, who appear throughout the story and bookend things. But the more lasting impression -- and the correct one! -- is with all the team members and how they worked. The EHT wasn't the work of a single solitary Einstein. It was the combination of science and engineering project managers, sharp young programmers, sage leading scientists with the Big Picture in mind, blackboard theorists, and everything in between. Some of the most enjoyable bits are at the end when the various sub-teams finally get together to compare their results, debate about how to get the material out, and just hang out. Human beings are essentially tribal at a very deep level, and it's fun to see all of these folks with their tribe. I've been in meetings just like this. Science is social! It's people at work, and also at play.

Any young person excited by science and thinking about getting into it should see this film.

Such a beautiful story and an amazing subject.. such a shame it is told so boring.

Why is this? How is it even possible to make such an interesting topic so boring? "Here's a camera focus full on a scientist" WHY

Even the music is boring (how?!) ! Looks like a home made video overall.. and you want to show it enthusiastic to your friends, and they all felt asleep.

Please, this is history in the making, it's 2022. Give this attention, it will create more scientist. This is not marketing for the young generation.

Shame.

A disjointed documentary that used confusing graphics and failed to link the two storylines. The subject is interesting, but the science wasn't explained so it was hard to tell who is the intended audience. Overall, this doc felt aimless and without a point.

Why such disparate reviews and ratings? I think it's important to set your expectations correctly for this film.

Chances are you (prospective viewer of this documentary) already know much of the pop-science explanations of black holes from other documentaries, books, New Scientist magazine, etc. If so, don't expect to learn anything new about black holes here.

"If there's nothing to learn here, why bother?!" I hear you ask. Well, you will learn about humans and process, rather than facts.

This documentary takes more of a meta-perspective, looking at what, or perhaps more aptly put, how the scientists DO what they do to get the info that constitutes what you might see in other black hole documentaries. A montage of day-in-the-lives of the scientist.

The two main disciplines that feed into our current understanding are shown in stark contrast to each other, one a messy cross-institutional tangle, the other a calm dignified sort of family.

There's the experimental physicists and astronomers - a collaboration of 200 people hoping to directly observe and then model a black hole. And there's theoretic physicists - Stephen Hawking and 3 others, number crunching their way to a resolution of the Information Paradox.

I don't really understand the complaints of other reviews about the graphics. They're used sparingly, and are beautiful in their minimalism - a mix of hand-drawn and CGI modelling. Interspersed are some more artistic drawing, with the voice-overs of the more philosophical musings. Zoe Keating's layered cello was a great choice for the accompaniment.

If you only have time for depersonalised facts and data, you won't enjoy any of this.

In the end it's a humbling experience, about very human Earthlings exploring the edges of space with their minds and with technology.

If you've read A Brief History of Time and understood it, then this assemblage of two simultaneous, closely related, but very different projects by some of the finest minds on our planet may disappoint. If you've tried to read it and couldn't quite grasp the concepts, then you are probably going to enjoy this rather more. It's an outsiders view of a group of theoretical physicists, cosmologists and astrophysicists attempting to realise concrete conclusions involving some of the most difficult theoretical concepts and complex collaborative exercises ever. While ultimately it may fail to satisfy either audience entirely, it's well constructed and a generally entertaining peek at some very remarkable humans working at the very edge of all we know.

An interesting in depth study of black holes.

Although as expected in the end it's all theories and we know nothing for certain.

A bit boring over the top nerd babble at times but the lady was nice to look at.

Many of the reviews here are misguided. This is about scientific collaboration. Black holes present a staggeringly complex challenge to understand. People from all over the world putting aside their differences and working as a team to chip away at this great mystery is a beautiful thing and definitely not boring. When viewed in this context, the film is wonderful. That they have work-in-process and highly personal footage of both undertakings and their respective struggles running more or less in the same time period is incredible.

Many of the reviewers feel shortchanged by the lack of explanations, esp relating to the information paradox. The film succeeds precisely because it keeps things very simple. I have a degree in physics. The complexity of the information paradox is not linear. Going into a deeper explanation would have been a mistake, like opening a can of worm(holes).

Since nothing is perfect, my only wish -- and it's very minor -- is that the two narratives were a little more cohesive.

The closet one is Sagittarius A* and it is ONLY 25,600 light years ahead and the one which is 1000 times bigger is 54 m light years away from us... where nothing comes out... event horizon, it's a mysterious 'would eat it all' thing in universe... black holes ... as they say the end of it, there may be another universe ... where the laws of physics breaks down ... Or May be new physical laws ... information paradox...simple language and few irrelevant illustrations .. made for non-science as well as budding science enthusiasts..

Could have been so much better with such amazing scientists doing fascinating work. Soundtrack could have helped it along like cosmos, or with a narrator like that. Feels slipshod tv episode drawn out way too long.

I am a scientist, but a biologist. Thus, this film was practically incomprehensible to me.

The documentary shows the labor behind scientific discovery and I was engaged thanks to the excitement of the scientists portrayed.

Before I began watching, I was expecting to learn more about the mystery of black hole, maybe in a simplified language that ordinary people like me can understand, but what I found as I was watching it was a lot of people chatting, drinking coffee, looking at computers and chatting more.

I am not interested to learn about the people who are interested about the black hole, I want to know about the black hole! This is just absolutely boring, I agree with many reviews here. How do you expect the public to enjoy watching some scientists who are obsessed with a subject sitting in their office and talked the way they talked in daily life? What's the point of watching that?

There are few explanation of black hole done by computer graphic in this documentary, which I appreciate, but they were very few, comparing to those boring chatting moments.

By the way, after I finish watching it (fast forwarding a lot), I have a question in my mind. Yes, black hole is a true mystery of the universe. But...does learning and researching about it help humanity in anyway? Maybe learning about the core of teachings in some religions and practice deep meditation can help you more on that...without having to spend a huge amount of money just to satisfy your curiosity.

What can I say? 1 hour 39 minutes of my time crossed the event horizon, and that's time I am not gonna get back. This documentary is only for people who are researching black holes, everyone else won't get anything out of it. It just mentions pressing/hot issues on black holes but no one explains what they mean; information paradox, soft hair, etc. It is just all over the place. Don't waste your time watching this.

People who found this boring just aren't that into real science. I was hooked beyond belief.