SVT Play: All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Online Monrovia, Indiana

(594) 6.9 143 min 2018

Following the 2016 presidential election, Frederick Wiseman's documentary dissects small-town America to understand how its values impact and influence the political landscape of the nation.

Frederick Wiseman

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Top reviews

Saturday, 09 Jan 2021 12:41

As the movie opens we are introduced to the film's protagonists. Wayne W. Gacy, a well-to-do man with a nice house in a nice neighborhood, a big house with a swimming pool, and a nice Cadillac. He also owns an art gallery, where he takes pictures of himself and his wife and friends. The first of his victims is a girl, Nancy (Tessa Thompson), who is obviously a virgin, having sex with Wayne's friend who lives next door. Wayne decides to kill her as he likes the idea of killing a virgin, but it turns out to be a good thing, because Nancy's death also makes him jealous. Wayne is, of course, arrested for the murder, and then it turns out that Wayne is actually guilty. He is a serial killer, who has been killing girls, and who has been having sex with them for a long time. The movie also shows his wife and daughter, who is very sick, and he takes pity on them. He has a bad toothache, and this is the only time that Wayne has shown any concern for his daughter. The movie ends with Wayne, still in jail, asking for mercy, and being granted, and then he is released. It is a very sad ending, because the movie could have been good, but the ending is very sad, and shows that Wayne was a very sick person. This movie also showed that Wayne was a serial killer, but in a very weird way, and the ending does not make sense. There were many problems with this movie, but they were minor. The acting was really good, and the photography was good. The acting was so good, that I think it was one of the best movies I have ever seen, but the problem was, that this movie was very sad, and the ending was very sad. This movie was very sad, and the ending was very sad. This is the kind of movie that a lot of people will not like, but it is very good.
Friday, 25 Sep 2020 08:06

It is always good to be reminded that even though "the journey of a thousand miles" has been a staple of travel books and other movies and documentaries for years, there are still some things that just simply cannot be reproduced. This is one of those. At first glance, this story of a sailor and a doctor who do nothing but travel around the world seems like just another one of those stories about people getting a little bit of adventure and finding happiness. At first glance, you may wonder why these two would be traveling together. They simply don't have any reason to be together and you're likely to ask yourself why they would want to go to Africa. Well, to answer that question, I'll tell you. Their journey is far from ordinary, as they get wind of a disease which was never seen in any other humans and thus is never used in any other movies, novels, books, documentaries, or otherwise. However, in order to properly tell this story, they must make the journey and when they get there, the adventure begins. Although not a journey the two might have expected, they both get lost, but they don't let that stop them. They want to continue the journey, which they had originally thought to be over, and because of this, their journey is remarkable and wonderful. I highly recommend this to anyone who likes to travel and enjoy the wonder of it, especially when it comes to disease. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who likes to travel, especially those who enjoy it the way this movie does.
Thursday, 24 Sep 2020 22:35

Pretentious and uninteresting to anyone who wasn't there at the time. It seems to me that director Stanley Kramer went out of his way to make this documentary. He did not attempt to hold back his emotions or fill time by condensing a lengthy collection of interviews. The only time I could see that he went against his own advice would be during the closing, and perhaps final, segment. The way he presents it to the audience is to put the viewer in a position of being in the White House. As one of the main points is that this was not an "American" film, and that this was made in an American setting. I'm sure that many would have enjoyed this much more if the director had gone out of his way to make this an independent film. He would have been able to demonstrate that even though he had been inside the White House, he was the first American president to be filmed that way. The only other way it could have been different would have been to have the footage of the filming of the TV interview edited into the film, and have the interview take place in the Oval Office. There is a time in the film when the cameras are running, and when we can see the camera operator in the Oval Office talking to the president. It would have been a much more powerful way to show the power and the authority that President Carter had over his press corps. He would have been able to show that the administration did not use the press as a tool to advance their policies. They used it as an effective tool to protect the American people. The one thing I could think of as making this film un-American is the fact that the White House tapes were made and all of the footage was first hand. It is apparent that they were making this film as a document in a more than documentary way. It is only a little cliche in that sense. It's hard to say whether the final interview would have been better or worse, as it was already known that the president had died. It seems rather obvious that he would have done the same thing to his press corps, and it would be hard to see him doing anything different.
Wednesday, 23 Sep 2020 05:47

The entire film is basically a 9 1/2 hour documentary about a special type of AIDS that's had a huge effect on the entire world of AIDS research. There's the good news, which is that there are some very promising and effective treatments on the horizon. The bad news is that AIDS research is a long, slow, tortuous, and seemingly endless process. The doctors are constantly stymied by the difficulty of finding funding for the basic research that is needed to figure out what causes AIDS. There are plenty of good things about the film, but it's the documentary that makes the film. This is a real life case study that is so well researched that it's hard to describe it in words. It's like watching a documentary of the entire work of James Joyce. There is a feeling of real magic and humanism that the documentary effortlessly conveys. The production is done so well, and the footage is so very strong, that it will stay with you long after the film is over. The actors are all extremely well-known, and really are a joy to watch. The only reason that I'm not giving it a 10 is because I think that the film would be a little too emotional if it was more focused on the good news. But, even though this is a 9 1/2 hour documentary, it's more of a 25 hour film because there's so much good information in it. It's almost as if you can take one aspect of this documentary and make a film about it. In fact, I would suggest that this documentary would make a great short film.
Saturday, 25 Jul 2020 01:01

We are so used to modern life and marketing that we are willing to turn our noses up to the plight of the poor and oppressed. The results are plain to see. We now live in a world of suffering, starvation and hopelessness, and this film is about a hidden side of that world. What happens to those who still have a basic sense of humanity? Here is a film that not only looks into that side of the story, but examines the deeper moral issues of the tragedy of war and the world now. It is no coincidence that it is the film that first made me aware of the plight of the Serbs in Bosnia. It was as if I had spent the last five years traveling in Africa, in South America and in the Middle East. I remember one of the war's earliest victims, who had a nose of scarred flesh and a fistful of broken bones, and looked like a skeleton. It was very frightening to see her, the picture of beauty that she could not escape her past. I watched that picture and knew how weak, miserable and desperate she was. The film uses modern technology to show the plight of the poor and oppressed. It seems to me that modern technology might be used to show the human suffering, but it also should be used to show the contrast and the beauty of the Serb people. We need to ask ourselves how our society has changed so drastically over the past five years. I remember a time when a film like this one would have been forbidden. I remember how people talked about this film when it came out, and when I saw the special edition DVD, I was saddened by the "name" of this film and I was sure that it was a piece of trash. When I saw that the special edition DVD also included the behind the scenes featurette, I was happy to see how the director spoke of the movie in the same kind of way that I remembered it, "a gritty, raw look at a story of hope". It is also very important to look into the Serbian culture. The film goes to great lengths to show how they live, how they dress, how they look and how they behave. I also noticed that it is a small film, but a very important film. It is as if the entire world is watching this story unfold and it is a part of that world that needs to see the picture. It is not the only film that shows the horror of war and the difference in human nature. It is that difference that is important. I see the similarities between the way that the Serbs were treated in the film, and the way that the USA treated the Jews during the Holocaust. This film is a must see. I hope that the American public sees it as well. If you are not willing to see it, please don't watch it. That's my advice to the filmmakers and everyone else who has an interest in the Serbs.

Write a review