Michael Terceiro The Power of Nightmares is a fascinating look at the war on terror. It's central thesis is that Western politicians have effectively manufactured the war on terror in order to make themselves needed and relevant to the general public. In support of this thesis, the film makers present a range of experts, including many former CIA operatives, who all confirm that: (1) the islamist terrorists were generally poorly organised and lacked an an overarching structure and (2) that Western leaders, particularly Bush and Blair, knew that the Islamic terrorists operated in an ad hoc and fairly chaotic manner but nonetheless have been trying to convince the public that there was a well-organised and centrally controlled global terrorist organisationSome of the interviews with the neo-conservatives are very amusing, particularly Professor Pipes who headed up a committee during the Cold War to examine Soviet military capabilities. Accordingly, to Pipes the absence of evidence that the Soviet's had a particularly military capability, was proof that they did in fact have that capability.The only criticism I have of this documentary is its use of images. There are fairly lengthy periods of the three hour plus film when all the filmmakers do is flash up a series of images which have a loose relationship to what the narrator was saying. I found this technique quite annoying after a while. I think it would have been more engaging if they had simply had an on-screen narrator rather than a voice-over narrator.Overall this is a very fascinating and well put together documentary which is available for free download at the Internet Archive - http://www.archive.org/index.php.

ufotds I clearly have to agree with most people that this is a very nice film, but I want to mark two things however: 1. I seriously regret that the film is more critical about the past than the present. In a society that is shifting to the right swiftly, it is far more important to analyse the present than to distract people's attention from it by pointing to the past. It is a bit the same effect as pointing at someone else's business if you have lots of cleaning up to do yourself. In short, the third film is far less powerful than the first two, and I found that a bit disappointing, since there are more than enough things to say...2.This didn't happen by coincidence though, and neither did it happen only because it's just harder to do it about the present, but it has to do with the director's view on current politics. When we spoke to him after he showed his films, he explained that he thought this tactic of fear would be short lived, and blow in the politicians faces. I think this is a blatant error though, looking at how well propaganda works, and at how lame the people are in western nations. Curtis thought for example that a lot of the "anti-terrorist" laws would not be passed, and was overall optimistic about the future. This is clearly naive, and about the laws he has already been proved wrong, as they have been passed...

blacknight595 This was is one of the greatest documentaries I've ever seen. I saw it as it appeared on British TV, in 3 parts, but all at the same time. It was entertaining and informative as any documentary should be and would recommend it to nearly anyone. The first sections simply explained how both Islamic fundamentalists and neo cons (Christian fundamentalists) rose to power. It went into detail how they came to power and what their motivations in office were. It is brilliantly and insightfully done switching back and forth between the two with ease and precision. It also helped to connect the two, pointing out their similarities and differences. It was even able to connect the neo cons to famous 1960's dramatic western TV series "Gun Smoke". Unfortunately by the third part the documentary began to fall apart. It became less a documentary and more a speculation making the war on terror seem like a weak conspiracy theory. These speculations had a weak base which I might have been willing to follow had the comments had any evidence to back it up. However, unlike the previous sections the third just explained these assumptions and moved on without providing the audience the evidence to draw the conclusion. It quickly lost my attention leading me with contempt. Overall the documentary was still tactful and intelligent and I learned a great deal from it.PS it might be noted that part of my dislike for the final part of the film is that I am a moderate. The film is clearly marketed to a more liberal audience, but I still enjoyed it.

tresdodge This is a highly intelligent, informative, sometimes humorous and superbly edited series of programmes that look at two types of dominant fundamentalist groups that exist in the Twenty First Century. On the one side we have the Neo-Conservatavists, mostly all white, affluent Christian men (believers in Creationism mostly), who Western society is obviously supposed to value highly compared to the dark, foreign 'others' that make up the 'terrorists' from 'un-civilised' lands. The programmes chart the historic roots of these two fundamentalist groups, and reveal that they both came about from a belief in the corrupt and morally unsound nature of Western society after the threat of the Cold War dissolved. The programmes look at the the War on Terror and Curtis clearly presents the way that 'Nightmares' about terrorism can coerce and manipulate the 'big beast' that is society. Through propaganda, the media becomes a tool where lies are peddled and fear is stoked up to tame and create (un)believable truths in the mind of the general populace. For example a clip from a news programme shows lies about Al Qaeda being a highly organised network with vast caves full of high tech computers and complex equipment. This has been shown as a complete fabrication among many supposed truths presented to the general public.The series is principally excellent in enlightening us with 'facts' but also the way in which music and editing is used to bring the message across. For example a plethora of clips from the film 'Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves' and the use of traditional American music with images of Al Qaeda. I found this to be a humorous and unique touch that really makes these programmes stand out. Overall what this film reasserted once again is that these Neo Conservativist terrorists are no better than un-organized or partly organised Islamic terrorists. George W Bush is a terrorist of the worst kind, who through repeating lies long enough and hard enough to his scared citizens can manipulate them into believing ,for example, that an unprovoked and illegal war is justified. This idea of good versus evil is a dominant myth within Western societies, and George W Bush et al know that through creating this 'other' evil and building it up continouously, whether it exists or not one can win people on your side. The prime example being his victory in the Presidential elections, a great many of the people interviewed said they would vote for Bush because he would keep U.S.A safe. Which is of course quite the opposite in my opinion. A great series I hope Curtis and his team make many more enlightening and technically competent documentaries.