Audience Member
Badly edited, unrelevant, without proper research, crap. Too bad, as the movie had a couple of good ideas that were short lived
Rated 0.5/5 Stars •
Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars
01/31/23
Full Review
ian t
Kind of like a student film.
Rated 2.5/5 Stars •
Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
Audience Member
This is my first review in a history. This movie is so bad, that I needed to write how and why, I just needed to write something. It feels like a duty.
Also, I feel like I need to add a statement, that I am not against the movie because of the idea it represents, I was interested in it, in fact this is why I watched it, I wanted to see it.
So: it is a total senseless gibberish with nice images in the background. An insult to the viewer's intelligence - pretty images and pretty words spoken with a calm tone are trying to hide a fact, that topics are not connected and the movie does not make any sense. Some examples include:
The movie uses many "scientific" visualisations. But it never, except of some interviews, I'll write about them later, refer to anything "scientific". There are no experiments described, no results presented, nothing explained in a clear way. Some research that would show an effect of this lost intuition would be great! I'd love to know what they're talking about, to see when we would need and what and how we are ignoring it, bu no, just some brain images, no real stuff... I would love that.
Showing a funny glitch (an error) in the animation in a computer game as a rape scene. It was an examples of incompetence of the filmmakers. This is like showing an ink stain in a shape of roadkill as an example of a bestiality of pen factories... unbelievable. Even more, because many violence scenes from the game, intended to e there could be used instead, this is a disturbing game, so why to fake this?! Or spend few minutes on checking what their using..
It did not even explain what is this intuition that it is referring to. It just used very broad claims and statements, like something about many signals combined to one feeling, something bout detecting land from the sea etc. But no clear definition. This was misleading.
There are much more problems. Those are just examples, so You can have an idea of how bad this movie is. There is no reason for me to waste my time on listing all of them. I'll stop there.
Pros: Some interviews, with a man from Harvard for example, ware interesting and valuable. But, on the other hand, most of them ware not.
Pretty images (unrelated with words for a most of the movie) and calm voice will not fake it. It is a senseless gibberish that thinks, that the audience will just look at the random pretty images, hear a calm voice and be happy that they did watch something ". I do feel offended.
Rated 1/5 Stars •
Rated 1 out of 5 stars
01/15/23
Full Review
Audience Member
Absolute contrived and convoluted garbage, the celebration of pseudoscience at its finest..
Rated 0.5/5 Stars •
Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars
02/03/23
Full Review
Audience Member
Beautifully useful philosophies strongly rooted in cultural wisdom and neuroscience. The best part was how children use mindfulness practice to gain better inner (and by extension, out) perspectives. Fantastic imagery colors the wonderfully connected ideas that are all extremely applicable to everyone, regardless of background.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
02/17/23
Full Review
Audience Member
Beautifully useless tautologies and pseudo-wisdom. The only good part was the children benefiting from mindfulness practices. The rest is great photography and CGI, but rather disconnected ideas that don't really hold water.
Rated 2/5 Stars •
Rated 2 out of 5 stars
01/17/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
>
