It was inevitable to expect any thing but a lack of consistency in a documentary made by so many different names with significantly different styles. And as such, some segments are good, some are not so much. Freakonomics is an enjoyable ride and that's about it.
I'm not exactly sure what this film was meant to do. I'm sure the book might be interesting, but as a documentary this was kinda weak. Any film which spends half an hour poking fun at the superficial differences between 'black' and 'white' names probably should've undergone a tighter edit.
While somewhat interesting, certain segments are definitely better than others, and the whole thing is never able to gel very well. All of it seems mismatched and really sort of just randomly thrown together. Unengaging, disposable, forgettable documentary.
It's just an OK documentary. I'd say very much like some random episode you get your eyes on after some zapping and then you end up watching out of curiosity. The first installment is by far the least enjoyable. I hated the the tone used on it, an impression rarely lowered throughout. Right after, we have in my opinion the best of this whole doc: the direction and writing for "Pure Corruption" is really good.
The information that they try to make sound astounding in reality just comes off as really really basic and by the end of the movie i felt as though I would have had more benefit just by reading a couple articles off any news site. The graphics were nice at least
Enjoyable. I read the book years ago, and read the Freakonomics blog often, so view this film as sort of a supplementary/bonus. The pacing and editing and "storylines" were creative.
I can see why some may find the Topics of sumo wrestling and the crime rate abortion link in the first half of the film as more exciting, but overall, the film represents the ideas of Freakonomics well.