Verified Videos

Over the past year the sporting world has witnessed an alarming increase in the number of professional athletes (and fans alike) suffering from cardiac arrest and other serious health complications. In this exclusive interview, Matt Le Tissier provides his view on what has been happening over the last year in sport. Le Tissier is a former professional footballer and television pundit. Renowned as a creative attacking midfielder with exceptional technical skills, Le Tissier is the second-highest ever goal scorer for Southampton; where he spent his entire professional club career. He was voted PFA Young Player of the Year in 1990 and was the first midfielder to score 100 goals in the Premier League. Following his retirement as a player, Le Tissier became a football pundit, and worked as a panellist on the Sky Sports show Soccer Saturday until August 2020. Share. Download. Reupload RESOURCE: https://www.oraclefilms.com/mattletissier?fbclid=IwAR0-xUmbKkcUgQNoYiFDssXSKXIOrsRa5DavVrxHeZ4NG6fd9nyn_ezpIs8

Dr Judy Wilyman will blow your mind about the truth about Covid. Share this with everyone. Dr. Wilyman has a Master of Science degree (Population Health) and a PhD in the History of the Control of Infectious Diseases in Australia. Judy was a science teacher for 20 years before completing her PhD in this public health issue. More info about Dr. Judy Wilyman you will find here: https://www.vaccinationdecisions.net/about-us/ The mentioned book by Dr. Judy Wilyman's title Vaccination: Australia's Loss of Health Freedom is available here: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/56483908-vaccination https://thesoundtemple.com.au/shop/vaccination-australias-loss-of-health-freedom/ Book description here: https://www.vaccinationdecisions.net/my-book-australias-loss-of-health-freedom-is-now-available/

One of the most iconic musicians of the century speaks about his experience during the past 18 months. (COVID Operation)

A very important message Before you decide to make up your mind about taking a vaccine that could change your life forever, I recommend that you watch these short presentations. After that, you may be able to break free of all-embracing propaganda and make your own independent decision to opt out of participating in the global medical experiment.

‘Aids and Abet: The Truth About AIDS’ is a lengthy documentary that unveils the crimes and frauds that were committed by the medical establishment, completely disproves the ‘HIV=AIDS’ model, and conveys the truth regarding the real reason why people developed the symptoms that are commonly associated with ‘AIDS.’ ‘Aids and Abet: The Truth About AIDS’ is part of our new series - The Real Cause Of Disease - RealEyesation Specials. Obscurations of modern vested interests have mislead the world into believing the lies that pertain to the causes of disease. The real causes however, do not relate to any foreign invaders, as the Germ Theory has postulated for a great many years. In this series we will go through each and every commonly known disease and we will unravel the truth that lies beneath the consensual narrative. Whereby you will be able to apply the principle of Ockham’s Razor, and understand the truth for yourself. Articles and resources mentioned in the video: • https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5710a2.htm • https://www.fda.gov/media/73256/download • http://www.theperthgroup.com/CONTINUUM/PapadopolousReallyAchieved1996.pdf • https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/194/10/1450/877382?login=false • https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/june_5.htm • https://archives.drugabuse.gov/sites/default/files/monograph83.pdf • https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198112103052402 • http://www.ummafrapp.de/skandal/haart/the_failure_of_haart.html • https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12799487/ • https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198707233170401 Recommended books: Virus Mania, by Torsten Engelbrecht & Claus Köhnlein: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2498755.Virus_Mania The Aids War, by John Lauritsen: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1399719.The_AIDS_War The Contagion Myth, by Dr. Tom Cowan & Sally Fallon Morell: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/54786062-the-contagion-myth?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=U8vnoLsstn&rank=1 Inventing The AIDS Virus, By Dr. Peter Duesberg: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/79375.Inventing_the_AIDS_Virus?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=wZYgnlKZqE&rank=1 And The Band Played On, by Randy Shilts: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28212.And_the_Band_Played_On?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=QyVEvKdAR7&rank=1 Good Intentions, by Bruce Nussbaum: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2421929.Good_Intentions?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=lr3aXbu5Gp&rank=2 More info on the blogs at: https://realeyesation.com/status-quo/ and discover more about the world of esoteric philosophy! Status Quo, What is Healthy Nutrition?: https://realeyesation.com/blog-en/what-is-healthy-nutrition/ Music I use:https://artlist.io/Alexander-2922097

In 2013 David Kennedy producedFluoridegate: An American Tragedy,a classic documentary that is exquisite in capturing the battle that raged over the downgrading of cancers in the fluoride study overseen by the National Toxicology Program and published in 1990. Below we reprint the comments made by William Marcus, the senior toxicologist at the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Drinking Water, on these downgrades. Also, we add the comments from Stephen Kohn of the National Whistleblowers Association who explained how the EPA went after Marcus with “a vengeance… like he was an enemy of the state.” In 1977 the US Congress mandated the National Toxicology Program to conduct animal studies to determine if fluoride causes cancer. Battelle Columbus Laboratories were contracted to perform the studies that began in 1985 and ran for 2 years. In 1988 Battelle submitted their final report that included the finding of a dose-dependent increase of a rareliver cancer(hepatocholangiocarcinoma) in male & female mice and a small but statistically significant dose-related increase in osteosarcomas in male rats but not in the female rats. For the rare liver cancer, the first scientist to describe this cancer said that Battelle made a correct diagnosis. However, this rare liver cancer was reclassified by a government review panel as a non-cancer and one of the osteosarcomas was downgraded leading to the classification of “equivocal evidence of cancer”. There were also increases in oral and thyroid cancers, but they were not considered statistically significant. RESOURCE: https://fluoridealert.org/content/bulletin_12-26-14/

Director Mark Levinson's documentary focuses on the most elaborate and costly science experiment ever conducted. A particularly timely work given the Nobel Prizes for Physics just announced for two of its central figures,Particle Feversucceeds on every level, but none more important than in making the normally intimidating and arcane world of genius-level physics at least conceptually comprehensible and even friendly to the lay viewer. This unexpected look at the long run-up to and successful completion of the most elaborate and costly science experiment ever conducted — the use of the Large Hadron Collider to attempt to find the Higgs boson — is not only fascinating, but also humanizes the field in a way that will inspire practitioners and provoke the curiosity of non-specialists. Set for theatrical release next March, this top-notch account of a major moment in the advance of human knowledge will have a long, full life in all documentary-friendly arenas worldwide. It’s crucial for starters that the subject is second nature to the filmmakers: directorMark Levinsonearned a doctoral degree in particle physics from Berkeley before veering into film, and producerDavid Kaplan, a professor of theoretical particle physics at Johns Hopkins, has also been active on History Channel and National Geographic science programs. They’re able to simplify and synthesize without dumbing down the material and put non-science-oriented viewers at ease by drawing a smart parallel between science and art: Both endeavors ultimately represent attempts to explain our existence and our place in the universe. It also doesn’t hurt that both the metaphysical and the (literally) physical backdrop for the film is enormous. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is the biggest machine ever built. Buried underground in Switzerland, it resembles but dwarfs any set ever built for a James Bond film, measuring seven stories tall and consisting of a 17-mile ring through which protons, powered by seven-ton super-conducting magnetos, will be sent to collide with each other at a speed aimed to reproduce conditions such as those just after the Big Bang. The Atlas Experiment, which was initiated in the 1980s, involves 10,000 people from 100 countries and the use of 100,000 computers to deal with all the data. An even bigger such machine was started in the United States but was canceled by Congress after a few years because there were no specific military or commercial applications for the experiment. Trying to convey the magnitude of the project, participants compare it to the building of the pyramids or the moon landings, only bigger. And what is its raison d’être? This is described in many ways: To try to understand the basic laws of nature, to discover the key particle that holds everything together (which is what the Higgs boson describes), to identify particles scientists know are out there but haven’t been seen and, in the simplest terms, to learn which group of theorists is correct — those who believe in the “super-symmetry” of one universe or the adherents of an ever-expanding “multi-verse” based on randomness and chaos. The LHC will be the vehicle to take physicists to and, they hope, beyond the outer edge of the scientific frontier as currently acknowledged; everyone in the field is keyed up by the certainty that a new threshold is about to be breached. “It’s going to change everything,” Kaplan predicts. With foresight, Kaplan and Levinson began production in 2008 and, while the center of action remains the European Center for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Switzerland, the net is cast wide to encompass the perspectives of scientists as they gather there, as well as those following events with computer links elsewhere. The project leader is an Italian woman,Fabiola Gianotti; an American woman,Monica Dunford, provides an emotionally excitable take; a veteran Greek physicist,Savas Dimopoulos, is concerned that he’s too old to be able to take part in what he’s sure will be the exciting next phase of research; whileNima Arkani-Hamed, whose family escaped from revolutionary Iran after 1979, has a great deal riding on the experiment, about which he says, “The hype is approximately accurate.” Official Website: http://particlefever.com REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/particle-fever-film-review-646439/

Ukraine. Across its eastern border is Russia and to its west-Europe. For centuries, it has been at the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its rich lands and access to the Black Sea. 2014's Maidan Massacre triggered a bloody uprising that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych and painted Russia as the perpetrator by Western media. But was it? "Ukraine on Fire" by Igor Lopatonok provides a historical perspective for the deep divisions in the region which lead to the 2004 Orange Revolution, 2014 uprisings, and the violent overthrow of democratically elected Yanukovych. Covered by Western media as a people's revolution, it was in fact a coup d'état scripted and staged by nationalist groups and the U.S. State Department. Investigative journalist Robert Parry reveals how U.S.-funded political NGOs and media companies have emerged since the 80s replacing the CIA in promoting America's geopolitical agenda abroad.

Anthony Summers, the author of the book Goddess (1985), explains he began researching Marilyn Monroe after he learned that the Los Angeles County District Attorney was reopening the case of her death. Summers subsequently spent three years collecting 650 tape-recorded interviews with people who either knew Monroe in her lifetime or had knowledge concerning her death. The audio of the interviews is original, but actors perform lip-synced reenactments. As Monroe began acting, she had affairs with multiple powerful men who helped advance her career. Fellow actor Jane Russell notes Monroe had a particularly strong work ethic. However, Monroe suffered from poor mental health stemming from a troubled childhood. Monroe's third husband, writer Arthur Miller, was affiliated with communism. Both he and Monroe were observed by the FBI, and the couple was known to socialize with communist American ex-pats while abroad. As their marriage deteriorated, Monroe abused prescription drugs and she became increasingly difficult to work with. In 1961, she and Miller divorced. In 1954, Arthur James, who knew Monroe from Charles Chaplin Jr. in the late 1940s, saw Kennedy with Monroe, walking on the shore, near the Malibu pier, and drinking at the hangout, Malibu Cottage. Monroe met the Kennedy family in the early 1950s, through Hollywood connections that likely evolved from the founding role of Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. at RKO Pictures during the 1920s. In the early 1960s, actor Peter Lawford and his wife, Patricia Kennedy Lawford, had a beach house in Malibu, California, where they hosted many social gatherings. Monroe had affairs with both President John F. Kennedy and United States Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, often meeting them at the beach house. Summers pieces together that Monroe was in a risky political position, as the Kennedy brothers would discuss with her current events including nuclear weapons testing. This was in 1962, during the height of the Cold War. Because of Monroe's leftist politics, the FBI worried she could pass along or make public anything the Kennedys told her. As a result, the Kennedy brothers eventually attempted to cut off all contact with her. Monroe died on August 4, 1962, and it was ruled a probable suicide. The official timeline reports Monroe's housekeeper, Eunice Murray, checked on Monroe around 3am and found the bedroom door locked. Murray called Monroe's psychiatrist, Dr. Ralph Greenson, who arrived around 3:30am, broke in through a window, and discovered Monroe was dead. Paramedics and police arrived at 4:25am. Her death was ruled a probable suicide due to a drug overdose. Summers discounts this timeline, as multiple interview subjects corroborate a rough sequence of events, although there are discrepancies. In this version, Monroe's medical emergency began earlier that night. Her public relations manager, Arthur Jacobs, arrived at Monroe's residence as early as 11pm. An ambulance was called, and Dr. Greenson rode with a comatose Monroe as she was transported to a hospital. She either died at the hospital or on the way. Her body was returned to her house, where she was placed in her bed and "discovered" in the early morning hours. Private investigator Fred Otash and surveillance expert Reed Wilson claim they were hired by Peter Lawford to clear Monroe's home of any evidence that connected her to the Kennedy family before police and reporters arrived. Despite Summers having accumulated information that was previously unknown about Monroe's death, he doesn't believe she was murdered. Rather, he maintains Monroe died by suicide or an accidental drug overdose. He suspects any type of cover-up was due to her connection with the Kennedy brothers. In 1982, the Los Angeles district attorney ended its review of the case and upheld the original recorded cause of death.

Award-winning journalist John Pilger investigates the discrepancies between American and British claims for the 'war on terror' and the facts on the ground as he finds them in Afghanistan and Washington, DC. In 2001, as the bombs began to drop, George W. Bush promised Afghanistan "the generosity of America and its allies". Now, the familiar old warlords are regaining power, religious fundamentalism is renewing its grip and military skirmishes continue routinely. In "liberated" Afghanistan, America has its military base and pipeline access, while the people have the warlords who are, says one woman, "in many ways worse than the Taliban". In Washington, Pilger conducts a series of remarkable interviews with William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, and leading Administration officials such as Douglas Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and John Bolton, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. These people, and the other architects of the Project for the New American Century, were dismissed as 'the crazies' by the first Bush Administration in the early 90s when they first presented their ideas for pre-emptive strikes and world domination. Pilger also interviews presidential candidate General Wesley Clark, and former intelligence officers, all the while raising searching questions about the real motives for the 'war on terror'. While President Bush refers to the US attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq as two 'great victories', Pilger asks the question - victories over whom, and for what purpose? Pilger describes Afghanistan as a country "more devastated than anything I have seen since Pol Pot's Cambodia". He finds that Al-Qaida has not been defeated and that the Taliban is re-emerging. And of the "victory" in Iraq, he asks: "Is this Bush's Vietnam?" REVIEW RESOURCE: http://www.bullfrogfilms.com/catalog/break.html

Tragicomedy is an overworked word. Yet nothing else will do.Werner Herzog, that connoisseur of extreme figures in far-off places, has made an inspired documentary about the gonzo naturalist Timothy Treadwell, who in 2003 ended up as lunch for the bears he lived with in the remote Alaskan wilderness. It is poignant, it is beautiful, and it is absolutely hilarious. Herzog didn't even have much work to do, what's more, because Treadwell - gifted, untrained film-maker that he was - had done almost everything himself, leaving behind hundreds of hours of videotape that he had shot at extreme and indeed fatal risk to himself. They contain sublime, dramatic shots of the bears and footage of his own mad and posturing rants to camera, wearing combats and a bandana - part surfer-dude, part drama-queen. Poor Mr Treadwell. He loved those bears. And they loved him. Yum, yum! Timothy Treadwell was a mixed-up kid from Long Island in the US who wanted to be an actor. He auditioned for Cheers, but the shock and disappointment of coming second to Woody Harrelson sent him over the edge into drink and drug crises. He came out the other side clean and sober, but with a new passion: the grizzly bears ofAlaska. Every summer, he went camping out there with his video camera and his attitude problem, regularly breaking the US park rangers' rule not to come within 100 yards of a bear. Timothy got up close and personal, giving them cute names like "Mr Chocolate" and "Sgt Brown", patting them on the nose, and becoming obsessed with gaining the bears' respect for his courage in doing so. His opening rant to camera is a comic classic, influenced, I very much suspect, by Dennis Hopper in Apocalypse Now: "I am a kind warrior! I will not die at their claws and paws! I will be a master!" Bizarrely, his macho extreme-sports persona often alternates with something screamingly camp. Treadwell yoo-hoos wildly like Robin Williams at the bears who lope up to him: "Oh hi! Hiya! Oh he's a big bear! He's a surly bear!" And Treadwell is often very funny - a reality TV natural who never got his own show. There are too many choice moments to describe here, but among the classics is his sudden zooming-in on an immobile bumble bee on a flower, which he tearfully describes: "Isn't this so sad? A bumble-bee expired while it was doing the pollen thing. It's beautiful . . . it's sad . . . it's tragic . . . it's . . . WAIT! The bee just MOVED! Is it . . . is it just SLEEPING?" Later, Treadwell films a full-on macho-bear fight between Micky and Sgt Brown over a female called Saturn, whom Treadwell describes as the "Michelle Pfeiffer of bears". His mission was to teach the world about these animals, and this he certainly did, according to his lights, touring schools and giving illustrated talks to kids without accepting a fee. But he also angrily claimed, in some of his looniest soliloquies, that he was "protecting" the bears from poachers or even the federal authorities. The awful truth was that he did not add anything to our knowledge of bears, and that any supposed danger these animals were in, living as they did in a protected national park, existed only in Treadwell's over-heated, self-dramatising imagination. Treadwell's over-the-top persona is in contrast to the cool, deadpan drone of Herzog himself, who pays tribute to his intuitive skills as a film-maker, but repudiates Treadwell's Disneyfied view of nature, seeing in it only colossal coldness and indifference. Herzog appears on camera just once, listening through headphones to Treadwell's final screams - and those of his luckless girlfriend - as they are both eaten. It is only audio, as Treadwell was attacked before he could remove the lens-cap; in a masterstroke of restraint, Herzog does not let us hear this sound, and sorrowfully advises Treadwell's former girlfriend, Jewel, to burn the tape. I wonder if she has. Was Timothy Treadwell an inspired radical operating outside the academic naturalist establishment - or a pain in the neck with personal issues? A little of both, of course. He was certainly a brilliant performer and director who, by crossing the taboo line (by as it were impaling himself on the taboo line's barbed wire) vividly demonstrated the alien-ness of nature, and therefore its strange and terrible beauty, more than anything I've ever seen by David Attenborough. It is a superb documentary, because Treadwell has not been coerced or set up; he was enough of an amateur to be relaxed and unselfconscious, yet enough of a professional to generate all this outstanding footage, and quite rightly Herzog declines to patronise or make fun of him. If we didn't already know Timothy Treadwell's awful fate, it would be enough to say: a star is born. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2006/feb/03/1

The first authorized documentary film exploring David Icke's work and life. He is the famed conspiracy theorist, known as the “mad man” who has been proved right time and time again. David Icke has been warning the public for almost three decades about the coming global Orwellian state in which a tiny few would enslave humanity through New World Order tactics. Methods such as control of finance, government, media, and a military-police Gestapo overseeing 24/7 surveillance of a microchipped population. He has said that “physical reality is an illusion" and that the "world" really is a holographic simulation created by a non-human force to lockdown human perception in ongoing servitude. He has been subjected to decades of ridicule and dismissal over his theories. However, now his books are read all over the globe and his speaking events are watched by thousands. Why? Because what he foretold is playing out in world events and even some mainstream scientists are concluding that reality is indeed a simulation or "Matrix." REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.gaia.com/video/renegade-life-story-david-icke

David Icke, is an English writer and public speaker, known since the 1990s as a professional conspiracy theorist, calling himself a “full-time investigator into WHO and WHAT is really controlling the world.” David is the author of over 21 books and 10 DVDs and has lectured in over 25 countries, speaking live for up to 10 HOURS to huge audiences, filling stadiums like Wembley Arena. In April 2020, Icke gave a two-and-a-half-hour interview to the British online channelLondon Real. The video is dubbed in English, Spanish and French, and subtitled in multiple other languages. At the time, it was shared by several million internet users but for some reason the organisations controlling the mass media and all social media blocked this interview completely, and by all possible means, disinformation campaigns were launched to ridicule Icke's theories.

Jimi Hendrix, Monterey Pop 1967: a live performance never bettered The festival belonged to Hendrix. Dazzling technique, feedback and fuzz transformed him from a relative unknown into the personification of rock. When, in June 1967, Brian Jones sauntered onstage at the Monterey Pop Festival to introduceJimi Hendrixas “the most exciting guitar player I’ve ever heard”, theRolling Stonegot a bigger reception than the act he was announcing. Although a fair few of those in attendance that final evening – some estimates have put the figure as high as 90,000 – would have heard Hendrix’s British hits on America’s new-fangled FM radio, this was effectively the guitarist’s homeland debut. Indeed, the Jimi Hendrix Experience only made it on to the bill after strong lobbying fromPaul McCartney, a member of the festival’s organising committee (alongsideMick Jagger,Brian WilsonandSmokey Robinson). That Derek Taylor, formerlythe Beatles’ press officer, was one of Monterey’s three founders (the others were Mamas and Papas’ John Phillips and record producer Lou Adler) and knew all about the trio, secured them a prestigious Sunday evening slot. Coming on after 40 minutes of genial musicality from theGrateful Dead, the Jimi Hendrix Experience had maximum impact as they blasted into their high-octane take on Howlin’ Wolf’s Killing Floor followed by Foxy Lady, the latter introduced with a self-assured: “Dig this.” Their first big American gig might have been a touch belated, but as a band they were more than ready after honing their stuff on the European psychedelic scene. Mitch Mitchell’s jazz-rooted drumming was not fazed by the guitarist’s flights of fancy and able to take a few excursions of its own while holding the groove. Noel Redding’s liquid playing approached the bass as another lead instrument, contributing ideas of its own rather than simply supporting. The threesome meshed superbly on what is acknowledged as one of the best festival sound systems ever – play their Live at Monterey album and you’ll have to remind yourself there are only three people on stage. Wild thing … Hendrix at Monterey Central to this, of course, is Hendrix himself: his dazzling technique combines with a use of feedback and fuzz to almost casually create music of stunning strength and inventiveness. His vocals are warm, wistful or lascivious on cue, and never less than engaging; what passes for banter between numbers is winningly self-effacing. This is peak Hendrixosity, a live performance that has probably never been bettered or was never recorded if it was. The finale of a properly wild version of Wild Thing was the big talking point – unconventional guitar-playing, humping PA equipment, rolling around on the floor and the sacrificial-type guitar burning. But some 50 years later, this looks contrived – merely tricks that obstruct the real magic. The true high point comes midway through, with the run of Hey Joe, Can You See Me and The Wind Cries Mary. Away from the gimmicks, these 12 minutes establish Hendrix as the embodiment of the counter-culture’s musical revolution. The blues was squarely at the centre of so much new rock music. Here was a player who, unusually in that world, saw the blues as a living entity, not a museum piece to be reproduced. With this performance Hendrix let it be known he understood the blues as a spirit rather than a defined expression and presented its power retooled in a way that musically made sense to hippies’ forward-facing ideologies. Importantly, for the generation that was vociferously protesting the war in Vietnam, theJimi HendrixExperience reeked of danger, while the debauched dandy apparel and afros from both the black and the white guys was about as far from wholesome as possible. All of this made a big contribution to funk as it was beginning to take shape, as Hendrix reclaiming the blues became one of the crucial bridges between the Black Arts Movement of the early 1960s and funk as a renaissance emerging at the end of the decade.  'It felt like a wonderful dream' –DA Pennebaker on making Monterey Pop Monterey Pop wasn’t the first or the most famous rock festival but it was the most significant, marking the moment the previously regional hippy scenes came together and, culturally, could build. Jann Wenner, an attendee who a few months later would launch Rolling Stone magazine, summed it up: “Monterey was the nexus – it sprang from what the Beatles began, and from it sprang what followed.” The festival’s success and exposure turned the US music business upside down by bringing the underground overground with more than a glint of gold about it: “rock”, as opposed to pop or rock’n’roll, became recognised as the new cash cow and executives started conspicuously growing sideburns. Ultimately, the Monterey Pop Festival belonged to Hendrix. He arrived as a relative unknown to become the personification of organiser John Phillips’ intentions for three days of inclusivity and adventure during the Summer of Love. It is a bitter irony that Phillips had scheduled his group, the Mamas and the Papas, to close the weekend – ie to go on right after Hendrix. Their gentle psychedelic pop looked decidedly anachronistic: there could be no doubt that rock’s baton had been passed forward. This article was amended on 4 August 2020 to correct a homophone: Mitch Mitchell’s drumming was “not fazed” by the guitarist’s flights of fancy, rather than “not phased”. It was further amended on 5 August 2020 to clarify the attendance figure of 90,000 given for Monterey’s final night is an estimate. … we have a small favour to ask. Tens of millions have placed their trust in the Guardian’s fearless journalism since we started publishing 200 years ago, turning to us in moments of crisis, uncertainty, solidarity and hope. More than 1.5 million supporters, from 180 countries, now power us financially – keeping us open to all, and fiercely independent. Unlike many others, the Guardian has no shareholders and no billionaire owner. Just the determination and passion to deliver high-impact global reporting, always free from commercial or political influence. Reporting like this is vital for democracy, for fairness and to demand better from the powerful. And we provide all this for free, for everyone to read. We do this because we believe in information equality. Greater numbers of people can keep track of the events shaping our world, understand their impact on people and communities, and become inspired to take meaningful action. Millions can benefit from open access to quality, truthful news, regardless of their ability to pay for it. Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/aug/03/jimi-hendrix-monterey-pop-1967-a-live-performance-never-bettered REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.productreview.com.au/reviews/9946e14a-16e6-5780-8089-629629a750f7

The fact that the footage of 1969’s Harlem Cultural Festival that makes up the bulk ofSummer of Soullanguished for so long outside of the public eye is an injustice. The fact that first-time filmmaker Ahmir “Questlove” Thompson has now brought it all brilliantly into the light makes him not only a documentarian but a revolutionary. The stunning 1969 performances themselves are worth the price of admission, but they grow even more transcendent when spliced together with delightful talking head interviews and haunting historical context. The result is both archival and activating, showcasing a past cultural moment while pushing audiences to pour new energy into the present and the future. Dubbed “the Black Woodstock” by Hal Tulchin, the man who rolled cameras as the event unfurled, the moving parts of the Harlem Cultural Festival represent a movement that is far more than what that nickname might suggest. The brainchild of event organizer Tony Lawrence, attended by thousands, and boasting a lineup of essential artists, it was and remains an overwhelming example of co-creative, faith-fueled community organizing. There are abundant shots of the crowd accompanying the footage of the performers, but these attendees never seem as if they are simply onlookers. They instead look like they are simultaneously at church, at a rally, and at a club, showing how intersectional true spiritual experience can be, pulling in elements from all three sacred spaces and crafting something that can’t exist without all of the ingredients.  And, in turn, the performers deliver a combination of a service, a protest, and a show. Though good showings are to be expected from names like Nina Simone, Stevie Wonder, The Fifth Dimension, Sly and the Family Stone, and Gladys Knight and the Pips, the performances inSummer of Soulreach greater heights than could be expected. Whether or not these are the best technical performances that these stars have achieved is hardly the matter; these aren’t just performances, they’re incantactions, invocations, and explosions of unshakeable inspiration. Though there are countless high points, the centerpiece of the performance footage is an impromptu “Precious Lord, Take My Hand” duet between a weary Mahalia Jackson and a fresh-faced Mavis Staples. This collaboration would have been a wow moment even if just performed well but these two vital voices combine to craft something almost otherworldly, something that truly must be experienced to be understood.  The interviews and accompanying contextual footage add both levity and gravity to the proceedings. Hindsight reflections from performers and audience members show the human hearts and souls at the center of the excitement while accompanying snapshots of what was occurring in the world outside Harlem’s Mount Morris Park keep the happening firmly planted in the bending moral arc of the universe. Together, these aspects makeSummer of Soula truly prophetic offering, not simply a chronicle, not merely a concert film, but something wholly different and beautifully holy. It’s a passion project that not only unearths and restores a long-hidden piece of history; it might also contain enough restorative breath to unearth a collective liberative spirit that is in need of regular resurrection. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.spiritualityandpractice.com/films/reviews/view/29127/summer-of-soul-or-when-the-revolution-could-not-be-televised

Soaked in Bleach. 2015. Directed by Benjamin Statler. Written by Donnie Eichar, Richard Middleton, and Benjamin Statler. Starring Tyler Bryan as Kurt Cobain, Sarah Scott as Courtney Love; featuring, as themselves, Tom Grant, Brett Ball, Max Wallace, and Norm Stamper. Admittedly, even though I’ve always thought Courtney Love is bat shit crazy, I never believed she (or anyone else) might’ve been covering anything up or hiding information concerning Kurt Cobain’s suicide. As much as I loved Cobain, worshiped Nirvana as a young musician with a bad attitude and even worse fashion sense, I just took what the media fed me about his depression and how he’d always seemed suicidal, that he took his I.D out and put it on his wallet so that when he shot himself they’d be able to identify his body easily… and so much more.
After watching this, the other reviews and articles touting this documentary as a ‘conspiracy theory’ are way off base. There’s too much in this film to deny, from actual police documents, the tapes Private Investigator Tom Grant has with Courtney Love on it saying some downright incriminating things and even some with Rosemary Carroll (the Cobain/Love lawyer) saying things against Love. See for yourself. Judge on your own. But here’s my take: The first thing we hear is a conversation between Tom Grant and Courtney. She hired him to investigate after Kurt went missing, this was only briefly before his alleged suicide. On this first tape, Grant questions Courtney about where she’d found some other letter, supposedly from Kurt, and she is telling him it was under the pillows on her bed. Grant, being there the night before Kurt was found dead, knew different; he’d tossed the bed and found Rohypnol, which Kurt had a prescription for. He knew the difference, and yet Courtney tried sticking to her guns even when Tom told her otherwise. So right off the bat, we get this very real, raw version of Courtney – outside of the media, outside of other celebrities and what they think of her or the general public and their view – right from a tape. It’s damning. 
From there, we learn a little about Grant whose life story reads much like a lot of police/military officers. The thing I kept wondering is, for those who don’t believe the man or doubt he is credible – what does he have to gain from this? He’s pretty much haunted with what he sees as the facts. He’s not exactly a celebrity himself because of Kurt or Courtney; most people pass him off as just another conspiracy theorist. Yet, as he mentions later, Tom still gets letters, e-mails, all sorts of communication asking about Kurt, wondering why nothing has been done when there’s actually a lot of evidence suggesting he did not die by suicide. It isn’t only Tom who believes, but unfortunately the police seem to be the real roadblock. It becomes very clear that police negligence really had a hand in what came to pass. On top of that, Courtney Love set the stage for this “suicide” – when she hired Tom Grant, filed a police report (and did so in fake fashion using Cobain’s own mother’s name – the media promptly reported his mom was worried he was suicidal and filed a Missing Persons), and then perpetuated the myth of Cobain being frequently suicidal. What really troubles me is this idea of the myth – that Kurt really wasn’t a suicidal person. Yes, he was depressed. Yes, he had killer stomach pains that put him in agony. But he was happy with his friends and people around him. After the stomach pains were cleared up and doctors put him on the correct medication after many stressful years, Cobain himself told an interviewer he felt the best he’d ever felt and he was plenty happy. Sure, no one knows what’s going on in the mind of someone behind closed doors – ultimately, we never know. I had a friend who killed himself and none of us in our circle of friends ever expected it. Yet so many close friends claim Kurt never ever talked about suicide once. 
Furthermore, he’s not in the movie but Buzz Osborne knew Kurt, and the rest of Nirvana, from the beginning – he and Kurt went to high school together, he knew him before and after Nirvana hit the bigtime. Buzz claims Kurt was never suicidal, it was all a lie. He has harsh words for the other Cobain documentary that recently came out,Montage of Heck, because aside from the suicide myth it portrays other stories that are not actually true (the story that Kurt supposedly had sex with an overweight, mentally handicapped girl when he was young is a total fabrication, according to King Buzzo). So duringSoaked in Bleach, we get a lot of other opinions from people very close with Cobain that jive with that of Osborne – that Kurt could be quiet, shy, but the idea that he was a suicide case is untrue.
 What really drove this home is Courtney Love. When Cobain accidentally overdosed on his Rohypnol prescription after having a glass of champagne, the incident wasnotcalled a suicide at the time. At first people speculated it was an attempt, but it was confirmed as being accidental afterwards. Love did not, at the time, claim Kurt tried to kill himself. Nobody did. Then, after Kurt was found dead, immediately Courtney began telling the media how he tried it in Rome, he tried before, so it wasn’t exactly a surprise. This is categorically untrue. Max Wallace brings up the fact they even talked with the doctor who attended to Kurt that night in Rome, and the doctor also denies to the bone it was a suicide attempt confirming it was most certainly an accidental overdose. It isn’t hard to see Love helped the media run with the image of Kurt as a suicidal persona. Once things get to the real down and dirty faces, looks at the crime scene and all that, it’s even more of an affirmation that Tom Grant is not just some ‘conspiracy nut’. The tapes are one thing, hearing Courtney go on about how maybe Kurt disappearing and all that before his death would be good for publicity on Hole’s next album and hearing her just lie to Grant over and over, but the crime scene is a whole other beast. I don’t want to say too much more because the evidence is some of the real knock-out stuff in this film. I did like the little drama recreations they did with actors playing Love, Grant, Cobain, and others involved. Some of it was pretty decent. Not that she doesn’t deserve it after seeing this movie, but they really went hard at Love with their portrayal. However, I don’t see it as being that far off base. If you didn’t think Love was crazy before, you absolutely will after watching this. It’s hard not to. A lot of the evidence presented makes you wonder how this case isn’t being re-opened and investigated again. Truly. This was an eye-opener of a documentary. Even worse, it’s coming out that apparently Courtney Love has bought Twitter followers, et cetera, to help tank ratings on websites for the film; IMDB is usually bad for ratings, but the skewed low rating for this was ridiculous as about 1,000 ratings of 1 before the release drove it down. Suspicious? Make up your own mind. This is absolutely a 5 star documentary. I love Cobain, his music, all of it, but to see this was truly fascinating. I can’t get over it, honestly. I want to watch it again several times just to take in all the information. The whole thing is spooky. I’ll say no more other than – the directing is great, this whole film is put together well, and Tom Grant is a saint for offering himself up all these years as “that conspiracy guy” who has actually been fighting the fight for real justice. 
One thing resonated with me deeply. Tom brought up how there have been tons of suicides that have been copycats of Kurt – either they did what he did exactly, or their suicide notes quoted Nirvana and related to the late rockstar – and he just wants the truth out there. Because it’s a shame for any kid to kill themselves, but if it’s partly due to the fact Kurt supposedly did, when he might not have, then there is a real need to have the truth known. Not only for all those kids, future kids possibly, but also for Kurt, for Frances Bean, and for all the people of a generation who related to him through his music. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://fathersonholygore.com/2015/06/15/soaked-in-bleach-2015-review/

Sound has the power to charm, annoy, and even change history. Sonic Magic: The Wonder and Science of Sound reveals the historic force, promise, and potential of sound – and a strange phenomenon called cymatics that has created a new scientific mystery. Sonic Magic explores how sound has shaped our history, introducing us to fields of acoustic ecology and also research labs where sound is eliminating cancer tumours and much more. RESOURCE: https://spark-doc.com

The story of Martin Armstrong Can a computer model predict the world economy? The year is 2014: Europe is stumbling from one emergency summit to the next. America has gone crashing through the 15-billion-dollar debt ceiling. People are taking to the streets across the world because they have realised that something has been thrown off kilter; that the market economy is tearing a vast rift between the super rich and the masses; that the banks have spiralled out of control; that governments have lost their grip on public debt. And after eleven years off the radar, a man resurfaces in Philadelphia, a man who used a computer model and the number pi in the nineties to predict economic turning points with astounding precision: Martin Armstrong predicted the exact date of the October crash in 1987, the demise of the Japanese bull market in 1990, the turning point for the US and European markets in July 1998 and the Nikkei crash in 1989. He was one of the wealthiest Wall Street market analysts and was named economist of the decade and fund manager of the year in 1998. But he refused to play along with the bankers’ game and warned his customers that “the club” was manipulating currency and silver markets. He quickly made powerful enemies: New York investment bankers, hedge funds managers, Salomon Brothers, Goldman Sachs. The FBI and SEC, US Securities and the Exchange Commission, started to show interest in his computer model. In 1999 he was arrested on charges of fraud which he still disputes to this day. He was incarcerated for seven years for contempt of court. After time in solitary confinement and threats against his mother, he signed a partial confession and was sentenced to a further four years. This documentary film portrays a man returning to his life after eleven years in prison. It follows him as he meets his old partners for the first time and depicts his first public speech to people who are still prepared to travel from across the globe and pay handsome sums to hear him speak. The film shows him attempting to prove his innocence and expose the power of the New York banks. Martin Armstrong’s career thus began with a complete error of judgement. Even at this young age, he tried to understand the system, to grasp the logic according to which each boom was followed by a bust. Was Niccolo Machiavelli right in his belief that history repeated itself because man’s passions remain the same? He analysed the financial markets, studied the history of business cycles, stock market crashes and global monetary systems. He visited libraries and collected historical data: gold prices, exchange rates. He played around with figures and dates, he divided the time span between the Rye House Plot in 1683 and the year of the bankers’ panic in 1907 (224 years) by the number of market crashes during this period (26) and ended up with an average of 8.6 Eight point six – the global economy appeared to be based on this 8.6-year cycle. He multiplied the cycle by six which gave him 51.6 years and once again it all fitted perfectly: Black Friday in 1869, the commodity panic in 1920, and the Second and Third Punic Wars. He divided, subtracted and multiplied and established that 8.6 years equalled three thousand one hundred and forty-one days: 3,141, the magic number pi times a thousand. Did pi perhaps also govern the markets or the actions and moods that manifested themselves in these markets? Armstrong was sure of one thing: there is a geometry of time. He may not be able to explain why, but there is some order to the chaos that exists around us. Martin Armstrong had just published the secrets of pi when FBI men stormed his office. Soon his accounts and those of his partners in London, Australia and Japan had been frozen. They were not to meet for twelve years. “Is financier Armstrong a Con man, a crank or a genius” asked the New Yorker headline in an eight-page article written as Armstrong was in a maximum security wing in New York. What are the judicial facts, the legal peculiarities and the juristic doubts involved here? And who could have profited from Martin Armstrong’s lengthy sentence behind US bars? And: what does all this say about a system on which we are all dependent in one way or another? 12 years after the demise of Princeton Economics Martin Armstrong is released from prison after he signed a coerced guilty plead. His new life commences with a “World Economic Conference” in Philadelphia. Only three months after his release, he’s back again. As if nothing had happened. As if there’d been no twelve years where he was deprived of the world. Martin Armstrong lectures to 350 people, who travelled especially to Philadelphia to see him. He speaks of his initial approach towards solving the global financial crisis, which he compares to the fall of the Roman Empire. And twelve years later, some of his former partners are back to perhaps resume operations where they’d left off. Will Martin Armstrong and his former partners join forces and re-establish Princeton Economics to make their distinctive mark on the desolate landscape of the financial sector? WITH (IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE) OFER COHEN VICKY ARMSTRONG DANIELLE WHITE LARRY EDELSON IDA ARMSTRONG SAM COLAVITA ANTHONY GODIN MICHAEL CAMPBELL BARCLAY LEIB NIGEL KIRWAN JUSTIN PFEIFFER NEILL MACPHERSON JANA ASPRAY DAVID GLOVIN TOMAS V. SJOBLOM LESSLIE MACPHERSON GEORG SPERBER OLIVER BROWN

Filmworkercharts the multiple decades that Leon Vitali spent as the jack-of-all-trades assistant to famously demanding film director Stanley Kubrick. It’s a glimpse into the ways Kubrick worked that is both fascinating and heartbreaking, especially in the ways the director, and then his estate after his death, treated someone who was unwaveringly loyal. The lone bonus feature is a Q&A with Vitali and director Tony Ziera. Behind every Hollywood legend there’s usually at least one assistant who helps keep that person’s world turning in countless unsung ways. In the case of famous film director Stanley Kubrick, there was Leon Vitali, who was different from other assistants in film lore because he cut short a promising acting career to take on a thankless role. He was also different because he did so much more than keep the trains running on time, so to speak. When needed, Vitali served as casting director, editor, film archivist and restorationist, and more. He even stepped in to play a masked role in Kubrick’s final film,Eyes Wide Shut, which, of course, didn’t allow him to shirk his other duties even as he was filming his lines over and over again, as the director famously liked to do. Director Tony Zierra’s documentary about Vitali,Filmworker, takes its name from the occupation Vitali put on various forms. It was something he came up with, he says, because he saw himself simply as someone who works in film. He acted in many British TV shows and movies before being cast as Lord Bullingdon in the 1975 Kubrick filmBarry Lyndon. While on theLyndonset, he was fascinated by how the director was involved in every aspect of the production and how every crew member around him had a key role to play. That fascination led him to essentially creating a job for himself with Kubrick, who, as Vitali tells it, was masterful at coming across as benign and gentle at first before later revealing his controlling and demanding side. In that context, Vitali notes that Kubrick loved to play chess, but I don’t know if that’s a masterful relationship move as much as someone who wants to hide their distorted personality until the other person is in too deep. Kubrick was brilliant, but he was also abusive – I’ve long felt that his infamous obsession with shooting even the most mundane moments over and over wasn’t so much about perfectionism as it was about a sadistic tendency to see how far he could push people. In Vitali’s case, I don’t think there was ever a notion that he was in too deep. He seemed to revel in his relationship with Kubrick, enjoying the fact that he worked long hours seven days a week to serve all of the director’s whims and needs. The only times cracks seem to appear in that happy façade are when he relates moments where he’s perhaps considering that Kubrick went too far – such as when he horribly mistreated Vitali on Christmas Eve, gave him a present and sent him home, and then started calling him on Christmas Day to hound him about many tasks that needed to be done. When Kubrick died, Vitali seemed to be cast aside by people closest to the director who took over his estate. It’s telling, for example, that this documentary doesn’t feature interviews with Kubrick’s widow Christiane and her brother Jan Harlan, who executive produced several of the director’s movies and was known as his right-hand man. Vitali was constantly at Kubrick’s home when he wasn’t on movie sets or doing prep work for movies such as location scouting and casting, so obviously the two of them would have been around him quite a bit. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.flickeringmyth.com/2021/03/blu-ray-review-filmworker-2017/

This documentary looks inside the life of a high-powered music publicist who became a techno-age philosopher. For the past 20 years, in his second career as a best-selling author,Howard Bloomhas been grappling with the big questions, all of which can be boiled down to, as he puts it here, “What does the universe want from you and me?” Bloom has, in the pre-Covid-19 world chronicled in this documentary about him, a strict routine that helps him in this discipline. It includes morning exercise and consulting a list of reminders of what to take with him when he ventures out of his Brooklyn brownstone. It also involves a staggering number of medications, which he needsto combat his chronic fatigue syndrome, which struck him in 1988 and left him unable to step out of his bed, let alone his apartment, for many years. Directed by Charlie Hoxie, “The Grand Unified Theory” is a moderately engaging documentary that credibly portrays Bloom’s indefatigability. He speaks of his aspiration to be a “24 hour-a-day information processing device” and defends his auto-didacticism by saying “Grad school looked like Auschwitz for the mind.” That eyebrow-raising simile is emblematic of Bloom’s bluff offhandedness, which likely served him well in his first career as a high-profile music publicist. (Recalling his tenure representing Run-DMC, he says, “We made rap.” Kurtis Blow and others might like a word.) The movie spends more time on Bloom’s personality than it does on the ideas promulgated in such volumes as “The Lucifer Principle,” for which the actor Jeff Bridges contributes an onscreen blurb. And when Bloom confides his plan to let a Dubai-based fitness instructor and gym entrepreneur handle his archives, we get into what looks like some P.T. Barnum territory. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/21/movies/the-grand-unified-theory-of-howard-bloom-review.html

No other filmmaker has married his dueling passions for cinema and music like Martin Scorsese. Just think about the way he used the Stones’ “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” inMean Streetsor “Gimme Shelter” inGoodfellas. And then there are his masterclass documentaries likeThe Last Waltz. It’s a given that Scorsese’s knowledge of film history is encyclopedic, but it’s also fair to assume that the guy probably has a vinyl collection to match. In his powerful and playful new film,Rolling Thunder Revue, Scorsese invites us to ride shotgun in his wayback machine to 1975 — a time when America was still licking its Vietnam and Watergate wounds on the way to its star-spangled bicentennial. The country needed the healing power of rock n’ roll more than ever. Then, along came Bob Dylan, like a barnstorming carny barker with a wild band of oddballs (Ramblin’ Jack Elliott, Allen Ginsberg, Joni Mitchell), offering live-wire salvation. Dylan’s Rolling Thunder tour played small venues, electrifying audiences with old classics (“Knocking on Heaven’s Door”) as well as songs from the soon-to-be-releasedDesire(“Hurricane”). Scorsese, really acting more as an editor than a director here, mixes archival concert footage (featuring Dylan in white kabuki face-paint and sporting a wide-brimmed hat with a peacock feather) with merry-prankster contemporary interviews that play fast and loose with the facts. As for the 77-year-old Dylan himself, he’s at turns introspective, grumpy, and characteristically misleading. Scorsese has peppered the film with playful little jokes and fictions that some Dylanologists will savor as exciting Easter eggs. But the real-life story behind the tour (not to mention the music performed nightly on it) is so fascinating it doesn’t need all of the narrative trickery. It occasionally feels too clever by half. But before you can object, there’s Dylan, mime-faced and re-energized, singing a poignant duet with ex-flame Joan Baez or blistering through “Isis” to knock you right back on your heels. The Rolling Thunder Revue was Dylan’s personal magical mystery tour — and in Scorsese’s hands, there’s no shortage of magic or mystery. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://ew.com/movie-reviews/2019/06/13/martin-scorseses-rolling-thunder-revue-review/

Raoul Peck’s outstanding,Oscar-nominated documentaryis about the African American activist and author James Baldwin, author of Go Tell It on the Mountain andThe Fire Next Time. Peck dramatises Baldwin’s unfinished manuscript Remember This House, his personal memoir of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr and civil rights activist Medgar Evers,murdered by a segregationist in 1963. Baldwin re-emerges as a devastatingly eloquent speaker and public intellectual; a figure who deserves his place alongside Edward Said, Frantz Fanon or Gore Vidal. Peck puts Samuel L Jackson’s steely narration of Baldwin’s words up against a punchy montage of footage from the Jim Crow to the Ferguson eras, and a fierce soundtrack. (It’s incidentally a great use of Buddy Guy’sDamn Right I’ve Got the Blues, which never sounded so angry or political.) There is a marvellous clip of Baldwin speaking at the Cambridge Union Society, and another on the Dick Cavett Show – the host looking sick with nerves, perhaps because he was about to bring on a conservative intellectual for balance, whom Baldwin would politely trounce. Baldwin has a compelling analysis of a traumatised “mirror stage” of culture that black people went through in 20th-century America. As kids, they would cheer and identify with the white heroes and heroines of Hollywood culture; then they would see themselves in the mirror and realise they were different from the white stars, and in fact more resembled the baddies and “Indians” they’d been booing. The film shows Baldwin refusing to be drawn into the violence/non-violence difference of opinion between King and Malcolm X that mainstream commentators leaped on, and steadily maintaining his own critique – although I feel that Peck’s juxtaposition of Doris Day’s mooning and crooning with a lynch victim is a flourish that approximates Baldwin’s anger but not his elegance. There is a compelling section on Baldwin’s discussion of dramatist Lorraine Hansberry, author of A Raisin in the Sun. It is vivid, nutritious film-making. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/apr/07/i-am-not-your-negro-review-james-baldwin-raoul-peck-documentary

George Harrison first became known to the world as 'The Quiet Beatle', but there was far more to his life than simply being a part of The Beatles. This film explores the life and career of this seminal musician, philanthropist, film producer and amateur race car driver who grew to make his own mark on the world. Through his music, archival footage and the memories of friends and family, Harrison's deep spirituality and humanity are explored in his singular life as he took on artistic challenges and important causes as only he could. Using unseen photos and footage, Academy Award®-winning director Martin Scorsese traces the life of George Harrison in a personal film, weaving together performance footage, home movies, rare archival materials and interviews with his family and friends including Eric Clapton, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, George Martin, Paul McCartney, Yoko Ono, Tom Petty, Phil Spector, Ringo Starr and Jackie Stewart.

Watch PART 1 here => https://rumble.com/v31usog-march-of-the-penguins-1-2005-documentary.html After a long summer of feasting, their bodies stately and plump, the emperor penguins of Antarctica begin to feel, toward autumn, a need to march inland to the breeding grounds "where each and every one of them was born." They are all of a mind about this, and walk in single file, thousands of them, in a column miles long. They all know where they are going, even those making the march for the first time, and when they get there, these countless creatures, who all look more or less the same to us, begin to look more or less desirable to one another. Carefully, they choose their mates. This is not a casual commitment. After the female delivers one large egg, the male gathers it into a fold of his abdomen, plants his feet to protect the egg from the ice below, and then stands there for two months with no food or water, in howling gales, at temperatures far below zero, in total darkness, huddled together with the other fathers for warmth. The females meanwhile, march all the way back to the sea, now even more distant, to forage for food, which they will bring when the spring comes, if they know it must. When the females return to the mass of countless males, they find their mate without error and recognize the cries of chicks they have never seen. "March of the Penguins" is simply, and astonishingly, the story of this annual cycle. It was filmed under unimaginable conditions by the French director Luc Jacquet and his team, including the cinematographers Laurent Chalet and Jerome Maison. There is not much to choose from in setting up their shots: On the coldest, driest and (in winter) darkest continent on Earth, there is snow, and there is ice, and there are penguins. There is also an ethereal beauty. Although the compulsion to reproduce is central to all forms of life, the penguins could be forgiven if they'd said the hell with it and evolved in the direction of being able to swim to Patagonia. The film's narrator, Morgan Freeman, tells us that Antarctica was once a warm land with rich forests that teemed with creatures. But as the climate grew colder over long centuries, one lifeform after another bailed out, until the penguins were left in a land that, as far as they can see, is inhabited pretty much by other penguins, and edged by seas filled with delicious fish. Even their predators, such as the leopard seal, give them a pass during the dark, long, cold winter. "This is a love story," Freeman's narration assures us, reminding me for some reason of Tina Turner singing "What's Love Got to Do With It?" I think it is more accurately described as the story of an evolutionary success. The penguins instinctively know, because they have been hard-wired by evolutionary trial and error, that it is necessary to march so far inland because in spring, the ice shelf will start to melt toward them, and they need to stand where the ice will remain thick enough to support them. As a species, they learned this because the penguins who paused too soon on their treks had eggs that fell into the sea. Those who walked farther produced another generation, and eventually every penguin was descended from a long line of ancestors who were willing to walk the extra mile. Why do penguins behave in this manner? Because it works for them, and their environment gives them little alternative. They are Darwinism embodied. But their life history is so strange that until the last century, it was not even guessed at. The first Antarctic explorers found penguins aplenty, but had little idea where they came from, where they went to, and indeed whether they were birds or mammals. The answers to those questions were discovered by a man named Apsley Cherry-Garrard, in one of the most remarkable books ever written, The Worst Journey in the World (1922). He was not writing about the journey of the penguins, but about his own trek with two others through the bitter night to their mating grounds. Members of Scott's 1910-1912 expedition to the South Pole, they set out in the autumn to follow the march of the penguins, and walked through hell until he found them, watched them, returned with one of their eggs. Cherry-Garrard retired to England, where he lived until 1959; his friends felt the dreadful march, and the later experience of finding the frozen bodies of Scott and two others, contributed to his depression for the rest of his life. For Jacquet and his crew, the experience was more bearable. They had transport, warmth, food and communication with the greater world. Still, it could not have been pleasant, sticking it out and making this documentary, when others were filming a month spent eating at McDonald's. The narration is a little fanciful for my taste, and some of the shots seem funny to us but not to the penguins. When they fall over, they do it with a remarkable lack of style. And for all the walking they do, they're ungainly waddlers. Yet they are perfect in their way, with sleek coats, grace in the water and heroic determination. It's poignant to watch the chicks in their youth, fed by their parents, playing with their chums, the sun climbing higher every day, little suspecting what they're in for. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/march-of-the-penguins-2005

After a long summer of feasting, their bodies stately and plump, the emperor penguins of Antarctica begin to feel, toward autumn, a need to march inland to the breeding grounds "where each and every one of them was born." They are all of a mind about this, and walk in single file, thousands of them, in a column miles long. They all know where they are going, even those making the march for the first time, and when they get there, these countless creatures, who all look more or less the same to us, begin to look more or less desirable to one another. Carefully, they choose their mates. This is not a casual commitment. After the female delivers one large egg, the male gathers it into a fold of his abdomen, plants his feet to protect the egg from the ice below, and then stands there for two months with no food or water, in howling gales, at temperatures far below zero, in total darkness, huddled together with the other fathers for warmth. The females meanwhile, march all the way back to the sea, now even more distant, to forage for food, which they will bring when the spring comes, if they know it must. When the females return to the mass of countless males, they find their mate without error and recognize the cries of chicks they have never seen. "March of the Penguins" is simply, and astonishingly, the story of this annual cycle. It was filmed under unimaginable conditions by the French director Luc Jacquet and his team, including the cinematographers Laurent Chalet and Jerome Maison. There is not much to choose from in setting up their shots: On the coldest, driest and (in winter) darkest continent on Earth, there is snow, and there is ice, and there are penguins. There is also an ethereal beauty. Although the compulsion to reproduce is central to all forms of life, the penguins could be forgiven if they'd said the hell with it and evolved in the direction of being able to swim to Patagonia. The film's narrator, Morgan Freeman, tells us that Antarctica was once a warm land with rich forests that teemed with creatures. But as the climate grew colder over long centuries, one lifeform after another bailed out, until the penguins were left in a land that, as far as they can see, is inhabited pretty much by other penguins, and edged by seas filled with delicious fish. Even their predators, such as the leopard seal, give them a pass during the dark, long, cold winter. "This is a love story," Freeman's narration assures us, reminding me for some reason of Tina Turner singing "What's Love Got to Do With It?" I think it is more accurately described as the story of an evolutionary success. The penguins instinctively know, because they have been hard-wired by evolutionary trial and error, that it is necessary to march so far inland because in spring, the ice shelf will start to melt toward them, and they need to stand where the ice will remain thick enough to support them. As a species, they learned this because the penguins who paused too soon on their treks had eggs that fell into the sea. Those who walked farther produced another generation, and eventually every penguin was descended from a long line of ancestors who were willing to walk the extra mile. Why do penguins behave in this manner? Because it works for them, and their environment gives them little alternative. They are Darwinism embodied. But their life history is so strange that until the last century, it was not even guessed at. The first Antarctic explorers found penguins aplenty, but had little idea where they came from, where they went to, and indeed whether they were birds or mammals. The answers to those questions were discovered by a man named Apsley Cherry-Garrard, in one of the most remarkable books ever written, The Worst Journey in the World (1922). He was not writing about the journey of the penguins, but about his own trek with two others through the bitter night to their mating grounds. Members of Scott's 1910-1912 expedition to the South Pole, they set out in the autumn to follow the march of the penguins, and walked through hell until he found them, watched them, returned with one of their eggs. Cherry-Garrard retired to England, where he lived until 1959; his friends felt the dreadful march, and the later experience of finding the frozen bodies of Scott and two others, contributed to his depression for the rest of his life. For Jacquet and his crew, the experience was more bearable. They had transport, warmth, food and communication with the greater world. Still, it could not have been pleasant, sticking it out and making this documentary, when others were filming a month spent eating at McDonald's. The narration is a little fanciful for my taste, and some of the shots seem funny to us but not to the penguins. When they fall over, they do it with a remarkable lack of style. And for all the walking they do, they're ungainly waddlers. Yet they are perfect in their way, with sleek coats, grace in the water and heroic determination. It's poignant to watch the chicks in their youth, fed by their parents, playing with their chums, the sun climbing higher every day, little suspecting what they're in for. REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/march-of-the-penguins-2005