Strictly average movie

Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

I fully agree with other reviewers that the film looks more like propaganda for the main character's teachings, without direction, critique or any second opinions. And indeed, many of the ideas of this futurologist can be criticized. Still, it's nice to hear once again the things he says about science, belief and that we can change most things. The guy is smart. He will make you feel good and strengthen your belief in progress :) The film is pretty inspiring. It's a great watch for everyone related to science or engineering, though the viewer should resist the charm of the main character and take it all with a grain of salt. For everyone who liked this film I also recommend the book by a Polish futurologist of the 50s Stanislav Lem "Sum of technology" (Станислав Лем, "Сумма технологии") which is still pretty actual and presents another great set of retro-futuristic views by a very smart man.

It's impossible not to like Jacque Fresco or to not be charmed by his enthusiasm. There's no doubt that he's a gifted stylist, immensely hardworking and sincere, and that he has synthesized most of the "futuristic" notions of the 20th century. You can see the influences of Bucky Fuller's geodesic structures, the streamlined vehicles of Norman Bel Geddes, Oscar Niemeier's curvilinear architecture. He's assembled a world-view that's appealing and might well be an improvement over what we have now. For that, he's something of a treasure.Having said all of that in his favor, even his newest creations are dated and, almost without exception, simply replace existing problems with other problems he does not seem to see. Countless examples present themselves in this documentary.For example, he posits "cities of the future" which are saddled with the problems that have always plagued utopian city planning, from Le Corbusier's "Ville Radieuse" to Niemeier's Brasilia. First, the resources, energy, tools, etc., required to create these cities is vastly greater than creating an organically-grown city. This is a mistake that Fresco repeats again and again. He posits huge "prefabricated buildings, assembled by robots". Instead of actually being a step forward, all this does is to shift the labor and energy from where it is now (construction crews building on-site) to construction crews building prefab modules elsewhere, and then requiring the energy to move them to the site, AND to create (and provide materials and energy for) the robots to assemble them. There is no net savings; indeed, there's a net LOSS in efficiency, all for the sake of "futuristic" prefab buildings and robot assemblers. Every "automated system" he suggests comes at a huge cost in materials, energy, manpower, etc.Second, people simply don't like living in symmetrical cities; they're soul-crushing. Every city ever been built upon a symmetrical plan has been a failure. Most have become housing projects, slums or demolished just decades-on. And it's far more difficult to demolish and ethically dispose of "futuristic" buildings than ones made of say, brick and wood. (Monsanto's fiberglass "House of the Future" defied nearly all attempts at demolition and even after being chopped up, became toxic landfill.) It's unlikely that anyone a century from now will bemoan the loss of the "grid city", but people will always feel attracted to chaotic jumbles like Bruges, Carcassonne or Carmel-by-the-Sea. Humans are organic and they just naturally relate to organically-evolved settings.Third, the inflexibility of planned cities is antithetical to growth and change; two things that every city needs. Fresco says that the central hub of the city will house all of the shopping facilities. With that limitation of space, a finite number of businesses can be accommodated. Which ones will be allowed there? How can they grow as they succeed? Cities aren't closed systems; they need to be flexible.Two huge failings of Mr. Fresco's vision are those of energy demands and of materials. He speaks of aircraft that will operate by electrostatic power (something he explains by the wrong-headed analogy of squeezing a peach pit between your fingers to shoot the pit across the room. Sorry but the air cannot produce pressure against two opposite sides of an aircraft to squeeze it along). The fact is that, barring many magnitude-orders of technological advancement, "electrostatically-powered aircraft" are about as sensible as nuclear-powered autogyros. He touts a variation of the trusty "futuristic monorail", not acknowledging that monorail beamways are FAR more expensive and difficult to build and repair than traditional railway lines, and are extremely inflexible for growth or change.Likewise, he never mentions what "futuristic" material his ambitious building projects will use. To make a large building shaped like a potato chip requires a material that can be formed in complex curves. What to use? Fiber-reinforced resin? The Futuro houses of the '60s used that; they're a nightmare of maintenance and repair (or disposal). Ditto concrete sprayed over forms. And integrating doors and windows into complex-curved structures is problematic (ask anyone who has built a geodesic dome). Metal alloys are hugely expensive. The amount of aluminum required to build a million new homes would increase the unit cost many times, and there's not enough aluminum ore on the planet to build 100 million such homes.His "car of the future", with its "self-repairing body", covered with photovoltaic skin and equipped with radar and computer to prevent collisions, is a nightmare of complexity, materials and energy cost, and repair and disposal challenges. All of that technology just so drivers can pay less attention to driving? One could learn something from proponents of "appropriate technology" who might instead suggest building bicycles enveloped in bamboo and fabric streamlining. Of course, they're not "futuristic" looking, but in their favor, they can be built at home by most reasonably handy people out of cheap materials that can easily be repaired and recycled.It's not enough to come up with an appealing form that looks sleek and desirable; a designer must also understand materials and their limitations. Does Mr. Fresco? If so, he never touches on it; he just trots out one epically ambitious structure or vehicle after another, as if the shape will overcome the challenges of materials, construction, economy, repair or disposal.One thing I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Fresco about is an hour into the film where he very cogently explains why humans create superstitions, and how they hold us back. Bravo to him for that, and for challenging our species to do better than we have thus far. But all of the ambition in the world, unless coupled with a good understanding of what it takes to make dreams reality, is little more than window-dressing. Mr. Fresco dresses a window beautifully, but brings us no closer to the future. Still, the film is highly recommended for retro-futurists and dreamers. And in an ideal world, he would have every resource needed to build those dreams.

The ideas in this movie are controversial and so is the man who is the source of them: Is Jacque Fresco a genius or simply a delusional fantast? He's a little of both (although 'a little' doesn't to the man justice). Some of the technological revolutionary ideas he has are really non-realizable, although no one can predict the distant future. It's a pity the film didn't go deeper, talk about the designs them selves and the ideas and scientific principles behind them. We see a lot of fancy propositions but not a lot of concrete information is given. The idealogical ideas he has, the ones we get illustrated towards the end of the movie, are far more interesting and though I strongly disagree with him on several points, I still feel his vision is an interesting one to collide your own with. I'm not at all interested in engineering, (though I once made a science project about the transatlantic tunnel), but that's not what the whole movie is about. It's really an eye-opener, a wake-up call, someone is finally saying it's not okay that the world is messed up and most important of all: we can fix it!. Optimism will be our savior, and in this time of global warming, world hunger and massive war we badly need one ( and not a man with long hair and a white robe ;-)). The film's no holy grail but I would sure like to see some of the ideas implemented in the future world, and I strongly suspect Mr. Fresco will be remembered in the distant future as a man who wasn't appreciated enough in his own time.Certainly worth a watch, entertaining and even enlightening.

I don't understand why this extraordinary film has not received much attention it deserves. It came out just in time - in a time of great chaos around the globe where humans as a species are getting ready (hopefully) to embark on becoming "civilized" or to self exterminate.Jacque Fresco is certainly one of the very few true geniuses in human history who came to help elevate the primordial human consciousness. Unfortunately, he's about at least 50 years ahead of our time. This world is just starting to grasp some of his revolutionary visions from the latter part of the last century of the last millennium.This film is nicely illustrated, well done. High quality professional CGIs certainly added that magic touch. I was glue to my TV screen mesmerized, hungrily took in every word that so eloquently came out of Jacque's mouth - it was heavenly music to my ears. All my life, I have had all these scattered bits of similar ideas, concept, and visions that I was unable to organize, let alone materialize.Anyone who happened upon this, please go buy the DVD and watch it - you owe it to yourself that much and it will, with no doubt, change your life in more ways than you are conscious of.