3 ms·

Adam Curtis is a prime example of what he is complaining about. Sure, he gives you things to think about, but he is fast and loose with said facts, and uses qui

• onebaddude 13y ago
  >Adam Curtis is a prime example of what he is complaining about. Adam Curtis has produced some of the best documentaries I've ever seen. It's like people in this thread can't appreciate art for what it is. Or that some of the topics here have been determined in absolute, and aren't open to interpretation, philosophizing or opinion. Malcolm Gladwell? Junk. Adam Curtis? Junk. Is nothing worth reading or watching unless it's an unstylized list of facts? I don't know about you, but all I ask from my personal entertainment are "things to think about".
• ArkyBeagle 13y ago
  He does so absolutely. But he is also careful to identify conclusions as opinion, and you get to decide for yourself. He leaves you the framework for his conclusions, and you can continue to work on it. If you use him, Chris Hedges and Noam Chomsky as sources, then draw your own conclusions, my experience is that you'll get more and better answers. I disagree strongly with all of them at the level of conclusion, but will continue to reuse all the legwork they did to get there. It's a force multiplier. History is not a restaurant where you just send the food back; it's more like doing your own cooking. And my experience with Adam Curtis' stuff is that pulling one or two conclusions out does not cause the whole to collapse in a heap. His metaphors and narratives are sound.