Share

Watch It

On DVD: TBD | On Blu-ray: TBD

Hating Breitbart Review

Other Critics provided by Metacritic.com

Critics scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more favorable reviews.

  • 2.0
    29

    out of 100

    Metascore®
    Generally unfavorable reviews
    based on a weighted average of all
    critic review scores.

  • 20

    out of 100

    Village Voice Alan Scherstuhl

    A shapeless, uncritical documentary.

    Read Full Review

  • 40

    out of 100

    Variety Joe Leydon

    Not so much a probing examination as a fulsome celebration.

    Read Full Review

  • 40

    out of 100

    The Hollywood Reporter Frank Scheck

    Lacking the objectivity or contextual analysis to more fully examine the important issues it raises, it’s a minor chapter in an unfinished story.

    Read Full Review

  • See all Hating Breitbart reviews at Metacritic.com

For Families provided by Common Sense Media

OK for kids 13+

Docu one-sidedly reveres late right-wing media provocateur.

What Parents Need to Know

Parents need to know that Hating Breitbart PG-13 (the original cut, which was rated R for language, was titled simply Hating Breitbart) is actually an homage to the late right-wing activist and new media entrepreneur Andrew Breitbart. The documentary offers an overwhelmingly reverential portrait of the conservative media mogul, who considered it his job to discredit what he considered the liberal mainstream media. It's not an objective film; all but one or two of the people interviewed are friends, family, or admiring colleagues. Where your family stands on the political spectrum will likely determine how much you enjoy this documentary, which portrays Breitbart as a brave, almost heroic figure in American journalism.

  • Families can discuss Hating Breitbart PG-13's intent: Is it to counter the negative media perception of Andrew Breitbart or to explain why people either love or hate his style of journalism?
  • What are the differences between fact and speculation or opinion? What tools do we have to help us determine which is which? Do you think documentaries are required to be objective? Why or why not?
  • Breitbart's untimely death is never mentioned except for a graphic that shows his birth and death years right before the credits. Do you think Breitbart's death and how it affected the Breitbart media empire should have been discussed?

The good stuff
  • message true1

    Messages: Regardless of your politics, the message that journalism should be about the truth -- or that biases should be clearly noted -- is an important and thought-provoking one. But whether an audience will appreciate this film's additional messages about "citizen journalism," covertly video-taping people, etc. is completely tied to how much you agree with the late, self-described provocateur's opinions.

  • rolemodels true2

    Role models: Andrew Breitbart is depicted as a brave voice of truth in the otherwise untruthful world of media, but its position may be interpreted in different ways depending on viewers' political leanings.

What to watch for
  • violence false0

    Violence: Not an issue

  • sex false1

    Sex: Mentions of prostitution and of an elected official's sexting scandal.

  • language false3

    Language: Lots of "f--k"s are bleeped out, but other words aren't: "a--holes," "piss," "bitch," "hateful bastards," "bulls--t."

  • consumerism false2

    Consumerism: Apple (MacBook Pro), Starbucks, and various publications are shown or mentioned.

  • drugsalcoholtobacco false2

    Drinking, drugs and smoking: Breitbart speaks at a couple places where people are drinking (most notably New Orleans and a restaurant with a full bar behind him), and he says that if he hadn't been so drunk throughout college, he would have "joined the left."

Advertisement