Okay, I've now finished watching Mikki Willis' latest documentary called 'Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening'.
Already prior to watching, based on the title, I had a suspcicion that the film makers had chosen a somewhat 'New ageish' approach that would not quite dig deep enough. Sadly, my suspcicions were confirmed. To put it bluntly, compared to the previous two plandemic movies, this time Willis and his team bit off more than they could chew. The good news is that IMO Willis has become an even better director. The editing, scenery and other things that in my layman's view constitute excellent movie making are there.
So, in this film the main message is that the root of our problems is all forms of collectivism, and mainly communism. China is of course presented as the evil example, and there is a lot of footage of various historic displays of communism in the US. The CCP is covertly taking over the US etc. Desmet is there delivering his 'mass formation' thesis, and Edward Griffin (in clips from 50 years ago) occupies a good part of the film explaining the dangers of the 'communist takeover'. However, as we know, these ideologies are only the surface manifestations of ponerological processes, instigated by schizoids and other psychopathological characters, and then later fully utilized by psychopaths. Harrison has explained the problems with Desmet's 'mass formation' and related views much better than I ever could, so I will not attempt to describe it in more detail.
On one hand, I don't hold the film makers ignorance against them...the subject of ponerology and psychopathology is quite complex and still, sadly, 'fringe'. On the other hand, I see it as unwise to try to 'cover all bases' without a clear understanding of the facts and underlying causes.
All in all, I would've been more pleased if the film makers would've focused on a narrower segment/set of problems. I see this attempt to address everything in a 'big swoop' without keeping the motto
ignotas nulla curatio morbid in mind as counterproductive by giving people a false perception, and thus, a false kind of hope for the better.
Sorry to deliver such a negative review, knowing that the people behind this film are good, kind and hard working. Yeah, I know, I hear you saying "Well, smartypants, do a better job yourself!"
I'm curious to hear what others think of the film once you've watched it.
I've read that he was a founding member of Finanzwende, which is sponsored by the Open Society Foundation. I was impressed by how sloppy that Grand Jury thing was, and some of the testimonies were just opinions, not straight facts or pieces of evidence. Day 2 aka "The Historical Background" was unneeded, and loaded with speculations. Why they didn't use profit as a motive? Like it was multiple times before for the whole pharmaceutical industry? Flirting with no-virus theory and talking openly about using astrology Fuellmich sounded like he's a leader targeted for a certain group of recipients. Like from that counterintelligence playbook video: you found a leader for some idea you want to subvert, and when he's gaining an audience, let him start talking weirder and weirder things, to root association in the society that everything he represents is crazy.
