It shows that people don't see reality, but only see what someone else wants them to see or in the case of many of the reviewers what they want to see. It's a self defeating ego. That is what Tom Shadyac does in this crappy adolescent film. I think he should stick to what he does horribly well. Making crappy B rated comedies. There is a lot being said, but no proof or science, just pure opinionated speculation. He even puts down science in the film, yet tries to use science to prove his wild assumptions horribly. Make up your mind. If science is bad then why try to use science to justify your claims? If living in a primitive tribe was so great then how come he doesn't live as one, or how about we all do? At times I get tired of many using primitive tribes as if we have evolved backwards. There is a reason why most of us don't live as primitives anymore, because there are many negatives to being primitive. They weren't the loving peaceful primates that some people make them out to be. That's the problem with this film is that it does what most Facebook Meme Crack does. Makes you feel good, but only tells one side of the story. It's not reality, and people become addicted to its short lived message. Many of these films have been produced, and in what way have they contributed to the evolution of people? They haven't. If anything I'm surprised anyone even goes tot he doctor anymore. They are synonymous to snake handlers. Its very dangerous and irresponsible. They believe faith will cure them. They never tell you the negative consequences. They hide them, and cover them up. They are not very transparent. They are very opaque. They give the impression they are open and honest, but in ALL things there are negatives, consequences etc, but they show none of it, or the other side of their argument. Debbie Ford plagiarized and misrepresented Carl Jung's work on the shadow self in her book, "The Dark Side of the Light Chasers". She basically says the same thing as many of the New Age movement does. She claimed miraculous healing by following what she instructed yet the reality is she could not save herself from dyeing from cancer. Yet people still read and buy her book? Because people want to believe even if it harms them. This is the problem with the New Age moment and why it is not very scientific. It is taken from personal experiences that have no way of proving or disproving. It's the same reason why eyewitnesses make the worse kind of witnesses. Its perception, which is not based in over all reality, but only personal reality which is skewed. Tom Shadyac had the obsession to reach out and give a message of love and hope because of his accident, but this happens all of the time. We don't suddenly become spiritual gurus because of near death experiences. It's a false sense of reality due to that traumatic or near life act. It more complicated then that. The movie description explained about renowned philosophers and intellectuals, yet I have found none! There was very little science and the science they did show was extremely skewed, and taken out of context. He picks and chooses who he interviews making sure they go along with what he wants. He even puts down science in the film equating it with communism. That's horrendous and irresponsible. In his review of "Life's Operating Manual" for the New York Journal of Books, Martin A. David states:"Many, if not most, of Mr. Shadyac's elucidations are mundane truisms. But this absolutely does not discredit them ... Books like his are frequently read by people who already understand the messages contained but desire booster shots of energizing inspirations. Preaching to the choir is not a bad thing, but the preacher has to do something more to keep the choir awake ... Tom Shadyac's view of what we need to keep our world from continuing on its downward spiral would have carried more gravitas he had said it better and with more convincing clarity. It would, indeed, be helpful if a how-to book for existence were available."Enough said.

After telling us in no uncertain terms that science is nonsense—because people once thought the earth was flat—in the opening minutes, Shadyac goes on to speak to a scientist about how great it is that science can tell us how many particles of argon are in the air, before talking to a bunch of pseudoscientists about how our hearts are psychic and yoghurt has feelings.As he has it, since quantum mechanics seems to suggest that electrons can be into two places at once, the yoghurt on the table must be responding to his emotions. Not the other guy's, nor the camera guy's, mind you. Can't seem to make any logical connection between one hypothesis and the other, or think the experiment is a bit iffy? Then you have been brainwashed by Big Business, or something.And it must be true, because a dude who can't get hired to direct in Hollywood anymore sold up and moved to a smaller place in Malibu and then made a movie about how enlightened that proves he is.My sister is not talking to me because I mocked her praise of this film. I stand by my decision.

Interesting and thought-provoking. The overarching sentiment of this movie - co-operation beats greed - was a great and admirable one. The director/presenter, Tom Shadyac, makes a compelling case for what is wrong in our society and, to a degree, how we can fix it. The interviewees and contributors are luminous and knowledgeable, and come from varied backgrounds and professions, making the discussions even more the interesting, as they are often on the same wavelength. However, there is a lot of padding and airy-fairy stuff that goes on that ultimately looks very gimmicky and like a smokescreen (the yoghurt scene...). Plus, while the conclusion is admirable, it is a bit idealistic.Still, overall, many lessons for our society in this movie.

As a pastor I often try to make the point that faith and science are not opposed to each other. Rather, they're complimentary. They approach many of the same questions, but they do so from different perspectives. It's difficult to convince a lot of people of that. Hard core atheists will deny it; hard core religious extremists will deny it. But I believe it's true. And that's one of the reasons that I was so delighted to stumble across this documentary.It was made by director Tom Shadyac - who's perhaps best known for directing some of Jim Carrey's comedies. This, however, is not a comedy. Shadyac made this after a life altering experience that had him facing mortality. It's not a "religious" documentary. It doesn't promote any particular religion or faith. It's more of an exploration of "spirituality" as I understand it - the reality of the interconnectedness of everything that exists with everything else that exists. It makes the point that science is increasingly discovering the wisdom of ancient spiritual texts that spoke of and celebrated community and connectedness. Most provocatively, perhaps, it critiques modern society's "me first" mentality with the emphasis being on acquiring more and more of whatever we value - suggesting that acquiring more than what we actually need is a form of mental illness, especially when we're well aware of people living in need at the same time. I was taken by the note that in "The Origin Of Species," Darwin mentioned "survival of the fittest" only twice, but used the word "love" 95 times - noting that it was those who came after Darwin (especially Huxley) who emphasized survival of the fittest and never-ending competition and conquest; the drive to be the best rather than one of the group. It also holds up the ideal of non-violence (using as examples Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela) as one of the best ways of engaging oppressors.I have to admit that some of the scientific discussions contained in this were a bit over my non-scientific head, and this certainly won't appeal to those who are convinced that life is a competition and that the only way to survive and get ahead is to achieve and acquire more than anyone else. In fact, it won't appeal to those who are convinced that the whole point of life is simply to get ahead. Such folk will likely find this too challenging to their worldview; too "liberal" and naive. If you can approach it with an open mind, though, this is very inspiring. It seems a bit cliché as it approaches the end, using imagery like "when a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil it affects everything else" and other familiar sayings - which perhaps lose their power a bit because they are so familiar. Still, I felt uplifted and hopeful as this came to an end. (8/10)