If you feel angry or confused after watching it, that's good. That's the point, IMHO. I would give it 15 out of 10 if it was possible.
I didn't know what it really was about. And I missed the first few minutes, so I don't even know if German ARTE channel put any comment to this documentary as they aired it for the first time. I was totally unprepared for the shock.
I've always thought I'm a skeptic and hard to impress. Even more, few days before I've had a look at one of those "Moonlanding-was-a-fake" discussions, and knowing enough about astronomy, physics and photography, I was able to discredit most of the arguments right away. But... jeez, they had Haig and Rumsfeld and Armstrong... saying things that made my whole world fall apart. Actually, my world fell apart twice this evening. First time as I started to believe in this incredible conspiracy, second time after the credits, as I realized how easily I threw away all my reason and knowledge because of EXPERTS saying I was wrong. I remember being so fooled, that for a while I refused to believe in what they were showing in the credit part!
Rewatching the documentary I just could't believe I've bought the whole story! If you know, you can clearly see how it is built, starting with innocent details.
Karel does a very smart thing at the beginning. He is not stating that the landing was fake but that it could not be filmed. By doing this he avoids the film's idea being negated right away by those who do "believe" in the moonlanding. Instead he breaks in through a back door, and once the viewer starts to ask himself if it COULD MAYBE make sense he swallows the hook. The rest is psychology. When the story is getting more and more obscure and ridiculous toward the end, the audience is brainwashed enough to believe everything.
In the truth all those experts' statements are nothing more than meaningless pieces cut out of context. Karel could talk about fox hunting with those people, what they really say contains not a single bit of information. Makes you wonder about history books and daily news... I couldn't watch ANYTHING in TV without suspicion for weeks after that.
I do agree with people saying the final message in the credits might not be clear enough. But I also can imagine it was done by purpose, and Karel is laughing his butt off while watching conspiracy theorists using his movie as an argument. If the film was meant as a sociological experiment it has fully succeeded.
I think it's a shame that Dark Side of The Moon was never released on DVD, together with comments and some additional information. I would like to know which parts are true (at least what Karel THINKS is true), without doing a huge research by myself. Kubrick getting that Zeiss lens from NASA seems to be true -> http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/interview.bl.html
IMHO watching this film should be obligatory in every school -- for me it was the most valuable lesson I ever learned from TV.
I have no doubts that media are using the same manipulation techniques every day. I know that Michael Moore did it at least once in "Bowling for Columbine", but without giving us any hint in the final credits. Which I think is sad, because many people are using Moore's movies as arguments too, and he is much more popular than Karel.
In a time of computer effects only our common sense and our knowledge about the world make us able to distinguish between fiction and reality. But what do we know about reality? Mostly we just rely on second hand information, taking things for true because we are told they are true. One could check the sources, research arguments, try to look under the surface... but in the end all we get is someone's statement that can be manipulated or pictures that can be fake... or did you ever see with your own eyes that the Earth is round? :P
Yes, Dark Side of the Moon IS scary, much more scary than Matrix.
I didn't know what it really was about. And I missed the first few minutes, so I don't even know if German ARTE channel put any comment to this documentary as they aired it for the first time. I was totally unprepared for the shock.
I've always thought I'm a skeptic and hard to impress. Even more, few days before I've had a look at one of those "Moonlanding-was-a-fake" discussions, and knowing enough about astronomy, physics and photography, I was able to discredit most of the arguments right away. But... jeez, they had Haig and Rumsfeld and Armstrong... saying things that made my whole world fall apart. Actually, my world fell apart twice this evening. First time as I started to believe in this incredible conspiracy, second time after the credits, as I realized how easily I threw away all my reason and knowledge because of EXPERTS saying I was wrong. I remember being so fooled, that for a while I refused to believe in what they were showing in the credit part!
Rewatching the documentary I just could't believe I've bought the whole story! If you know, you can clearly see how it is built, starting with innocent details.
Karel does a very smart thing at the beginning. He is not stating that the landing was fake but that it could not be filmed. By doing this he avoids the film's idea being negated right away by those who do "believe" in the moonlanding. Instead he breaks in through a back door, and once the viewer starts to ask himself if it COULD MAYBE make sense he swallows the hook. The rest is psychology. When the story is getting more and more obscure and ridiculous toward the end, the audience is brainwashed enough to believe everything.
In the truth all those experts' statements are nothing more than meaningless pieces cut out of context. Karel could talk about fox hunting with those people, what they really say contains not a single bit of information. Makes you wonder about history books and daily news... I couldn't watch ANYTHING in TV without suspicion for weeks after that.
I do agree with people saying the final message in the credits might not be clear enough. But I also can imagine it was done by purpose, and Karel is laughing his butt off while watching conspiracy theorists using his movie as an argument. If the film was meant as a sociological experiment it has fully succeeded.
I think it's a shame that Dark Side of The Moon was never released on DVD, together with comments and some additional information. I would like to know which parts are true (at least what Karel THINKS is true), without doing a huge research by myself. Kubrick getting that Zeiss lens from NASA seems to be true -> http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/interview.bl.html
IMHO watching this film should be obligatory in every school -- for me it was the most valuable lesson I ever learned from TV.
I have no doubts that media are using the same manipulation techniques every day. I know that Michael Moore did it at least once in "Bowling for Columbine", but without giving us any hint in the final credits. Which I think is sad, because many people are using Moore's movies as arguments too, and he is much more popular than Karel.
In a time of computer effects only our common sense and our knowledge about the world make us able to distinguish between fiction and reality. But what do we know about reality? Mostly we just rely on second hand information, taking things for true because we are told they are true. One could check the sources, research arguments, try to look under the surface... but in the end all we get is someone's statement that can be manipulated or pictures that can be fake... or did you ever see with your own eyes that the Earth is round? :P
Yes, Dark Side of the Moon IS scary, much more scary than Matrix.