What I loved about Zeitgeist Moving Forward is that there were many voices of people who brought their own way of speaking, their own perspective and insights and then there was a lot of time spent on a possible solution to many issues: The Venus Project. Over the last few years since, I've become disenfranchised by the allure of the naïve vision, though I still agree with developing an open source commons of resource sharing somehow.
Interreflections, by contrast, is just one voice: Peter Joseph for 2 hours and 45 minutes. This whole confused film feels like one badly structured essay spoken by a few random actors to give the illusion of diverse voices, covering that fact that this is clearly a single minded ego train of one man. There were moments I enjoyed - I liked it when he made references to real research, especially when talking about inequality. And I kind of enjoyed some moments in "the great debate". I must give credit to the incredible effort put into the special effects and obviously the huge amount of time and work put in to create this film. Overall, I didn't hate the film, but let's be clear, it was bad. It was jarring, slow and confusing. Almost the entire film was unstructured cynicism with the last 5 minutes for "the solution" - a city that magically appears out of nowhere and is loosely based on a resource based economy, though is incredibly shallow because there is literally only 5 minutes to briefly introduce a slice of utopia and even more naïve than the Venus Project because this wonderful city just literally gets plopped into the ocean by some group of futuristic activists. I mean seriously. I thought this would be like a development from Moving Forward, but it was a serious step back. If Peter Joseph wants to stay relevant he needs to connect with the real world, not retreat further into cynicism and hide behind a totally shallow veil of utopia.
