You can get a good idea of the film from the other reviews. If you are a liberal or progressive, you'll think it's a good film. If you're conservative and think Reagan did a lot of good while president, you will be disappointed.
The first half is good. The film does a good job with his childhood and early years. It is fair regarding his acting career and how he became a GE spokesman when his acting career faded.
(By the way, why do leftist posters call him a corporate shill? Many of their lefty media heroes promote for corporations.)
The second half is frustrating. We get a taste here and there of the good things that Reagan did, interspersed among a catalog of the supposedly bad things.
His probable cooperation with the FBI regarding communists in Hollywood gets the second part rolling. Then his governorship in California gets brief coverage and most of that coverage is negative.
On to the reason he's the subject of a documentary: his presidency. This section could have been longer as it should be the main part, but perhaps it didn't need to be any longer than it takes to thoroughly cover his assassination attempt, "Star Wars", and Iran-Contra.
We hear several Keynesian economists who say that Reagan's policies were bad for the country, and they actually blame Reagan for the problems we have now. As the film came out in 2011 I guess they prefer to ignore the booming 1980s and 1990s, when the era of big government was supposedly over.
Reagan is blamed for deficits caused by increases in defense spending and tax cuts. Not discussed is that non-defense spending skyrocketed and that the Dem congresses always spent more than Reagan budgeted for. Also not discussed is that, after taxes were cut, GDP growth and tax revenues did indeed increase. If you are hoping for a Hayek view for balance you will be disappointed.
By the end, conservatives will regret watching. They'll wonder why so little discussion of the many good things that happened during his presidency. They'll wonder why a dramatic economic recovery and major foreign policy achievements get shortchanged. They'll wonder why the contrast between the 1970s and 1980s is skipped.
The film ends with criticism that Reagan didn't do enough when the new disease AIDS took off in the homosexual community.
Other reviewers praise the "objectivity" but that is because their liberal point of view is dominant throughout the second half.
.
The first half is good. The film does a good job with his childhood and early years. It is fair regarding his acting career and how he became a GE spokesman when his acting career faded.
(By the way, why do leftist posters call him a corporate shill? Many of their lefty media heroes promote for corporations.)
The second half is frustrating. We get a taste here and there of the good things that Reagan did, interspersed among a catalog of the supposedly bad things.
His probable cooperation with the FBI regarding communists in Hollywood gets the second part rolling. Then his governorship in California gets brief coverage and most of that coverage is negative.
On to the reason he's the subject of a documentary: his presidency. This section could have been longer as it should be the main part, but perhaps it didn't need to be any longer than it takes to thoroughly cover his assassination attempt, "Star Wars", and Iran-Contra.
We hear several Keynesian economists who say that Reagan's policies were bad for the country, and they actually blame Reagan for the problems we have now. As the film came out in 2011 I guess they prefer to ignore the booming 1980s and 1990s, when the era of big government was supposedly over.
Reagan is blamed for deficits caused by increases in defense spending and tax cuts. Not discussed is that non-defense spending skyrocketed and that the Dem congresses always spent more than Reagan budgeted for. Also not discussed is that, after taxes were cut, GDP growth and tax revenues did indeed increase. If you are hoping for a Hayek view for balance you will be disappointed.
By the end, conservatives will regret watching. They'll wonder why so little discussion of the many good things that happened during his presidency. They'll wonder why a dramatic economic recovery and major foreign policy achievements get shortchanged. They'll wonder why the contrast between the 1970s and 1980s is skipped.
The film ends with criticism that Reagan didn't do enough when the new disease AIDS took off in the homosexual community.
Other reviewers praise the "objectivity" but that is because their liberal point of view is dominant throughout the second half.
.