jesper-1 A strong start with high production value deteriorates into repeated political messaging. After the first hour I was just waiting for this one to end. I am no expert in the Alt Right movement or Richard Spenser, so I was pleasantly surprised with the opening of the movie, as it looked like I would get some new insights. As the documentary progresses it turns out to be more of a collage of monologues made by Antifa activist Daryl Lamont Jenkins.The messaging will be completely clear to the viewers once the movie ends: Alt-Right is "kind of" neo-Nazi or outright neo-Nazi, while Antifa are a democratic opposition which violent acts are never questioned.My frustration grew as I watched how facts were distorted and the double standard of the makers became more and more clear. Let me point to some examples:Richard Cohen of the Southern Poverty Law Center talks about threats to his life (victim) while doxing (revealing private information publicly) about his opponents and Lamont Jenkins thinks it is good that people in Alt Right lose their job, when he exposes them.Antifa activist is doxed by Alt Right (victim) and he dresses up in protective combat gear when going to a protest against a completely peaceful closed Alt Right conference. He is in a fight, that he most likely started himself, and is then saluted by Antifa including Daryl Lamont Jenkins when released by police while his victim is in the hospital.Antifa activist does not want to speak about what she knows about which masked Antifa thug who violently attacked Spenser while he was being interviewed. This violence is somehow justified, okay or even funny.The failure of the Charlottesville police to stop violence is somehow manipulated into being a police support for Alt Right, while in fact it is clear from the documentary, that anti-Alt Right protesters instigated the violence. Focus then turns to the 20-year-old Alt Right supporter who rammed into a crowd with his car leaving a woman dead. Trump is then portrayed as a "kind of" neo-Nazi supporter for condemning violence "on many sides".Dangerous and scary background music are played when Alt Right speaks. When Lamont Jenkins incites the crowd with his chanting that they repeat, heroic music is played.Daryl Lamont Jenkins are the hero of the movie presenting one up close and personal monologue after another for the audience. In the end of the movie, this constant preaching was almost unbearable to watch. Richard Spenser, on the other hand, is shot from a distance and without the same coherent point of view. My criticism should in no way be confused with support for the Alt Right movement, but I am on the other hand left with the clear impression, that the documentary lacks credibility in its portrayal of the movement.For me it is absolutely absurd, that assault rifle armed private militia shows up to provide security to a demonstration, but contrary to the documentary's narrative I found myself thinking that it was properly good they appeared, as the director seamed apologetic to violent Antifa protesters. The first half an hour is definitely the strongest part in regards to insight and production value. The last part of the documentary is week. Half an hour could easily been edited out.

JustCuriosity Alt-Right: Age of Rage was well-received at its world premiere at Austin's SXSW Film Festival. It provides a detailed examination of the ideology of Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, David Duke and several of the other so-called "alt-right" leaders. What it really reveals is that this movement is just a rebranding of the same old KKK white supremacists who are wearing suits instead of hoods. Director Adam Lough spent time with these cretins and let them do much of the talking so that showed much of their true colors. (It actually reminds me of the film Jesus Camp where the directors let a nasty ugly group of individuals reveal themselves before the cameras.) Still at 112 minutes the film was really too long and showed too much coverage of these individuals in a way that became slow and repetitive at times. By focusing on the coverage of their most recent events such as Charlottesville, they failed to really provide historical context for these movements and connect them back to the long history of white supremacy. They could have benefited from including historical interviews with academics who have studied the history of the far rigtht. They also could have done more to linked the alt-right much more directly to the coded language of Trump's 2016 campaign and to the writings of Steve Bannon and Breitbart. This movement gained credibility through its rebranding which allowed it to promote the Trump movement. The heart of the film was the powerful voices of Richard Cohen of the SPLC and activist Daryl Lamont Jenkins who each in their own way are fighting back against the alt-right. Daryl is a truly heroic figure. Still there were often ideas that were raised and not followed through on. At one point, Cohen appears to critique Antifa tactics for opposing the alt-right, but instead of exploring this insight, the director just moves on. While the film is revealing as a starting point for exploring the alt-right it lacks direction and scholarly exploration of this important subject matter which should concern all of us. Good start, but it could have been a lot better.