Watch Game Changers

Game Changers

Game Changers is a TV movie starring Alex Trebek, J.D. Roth, and Ken Jennings. Alex Trebek hosts a documentary about television game shows featuring interviews with a number of game show hosts and producers.

Other Titles
Alex Trebek's Game Changers
Running Time
1 hours 36 minutes
Quality
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres
Documentary
Director
J. Craig Thompson
Writer
J. Craig Thompson
Actors
J.D. Roth, Ken Jennings, Alex Trebek, Gary Dawson
Country
USA
Year
2018
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Subtitles
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

Alex Trebek hosts a documentary about television game shows featuring interviews with a number of game show hosts and producers.

Comments about documentary «Game Changers» (20)

Brandon photo
Brandon

I first heard of the Amazon reviews and thought it would be interesting to see what others thought of it. It's a really interesting look at a small, indie film, because it's done through the lens of Amazon reviews. There are some fantastic, interesting insights in this film. And it's fascinating that they didn't even attempt to explain their points. It's like, there is no explanation of why the film is bad, or good. It's just a "review" and it's done in a very direct and honest way. The film is not a true representation of any of these reviewers, and I don't know why the people in the film didn't disclose that. They weren't even trying to hide it. It's just a lot of really interesting stuff and really nice photography.

Kenneth G. photo
Kenneth G.

While the movie focuses mainly on the US and China, the movie is not an insult to those countries. What it is doing is highlighting that it is a global story. The US and China aren't the only countries at war with each other. There are countries that have been waging war with each other for thousands of years. Italy, Spain, Germany, Greece, Korea, India, Israel, Thailand, and many other countries have been fighting wars with each other for thousands of years. It was a long, long time ago, before the first organized war between the nations of the world, and yet some nations still have not ended their war with each other. To me, this movie is showing how war can be incredibly destructive to countries and people. In the end, that war was between Germany and Russia. Not between countries, but countries.

Joseph Ramirez photo
Joseph Ramirez

Before, during and after the 2008 presidential election, it's a fascinating documentary, showing a lot of what happened in the world of politics. But there are two particular stories that are so unexpected. First, and most surprisingly, we get a big look into the heart of Barack Obama's family and a lot of personal problems and history that Obama has had. The second story is the one that really makes the film, and that is the relationship between Obama and Hillary Clinton. This documentary does not focus on Clinton, but on her family and the problems that this family has had to deal with. Some people will probably criticize this, and if you do not like the way the film portrays the family, maybe you will not like the film at all. I personally liked the way the documentary went and how it shows the intimate details of the family. I liked that the documentary showed the problems that the family had and showed how they have been dealt with. It is such a unique and beautiful documentary. I think it is one of the best documentaries that I have seen. It is not only a film about politics, but about family and how they have to deal with the problems that their family have been facing.

Jesse photo
Jesse

This documentary is a compilation of interviews, some edited, and some not. I watched the film in a couple of days and found it enjoyable. It's not a true story, and I doubt the right to free speech would have been violated had the film not been edited. The interviews are diverse and of different groups, but the film is overall a well made effort. It has its detractors, and I can see why. It is a strange and lengthy documentary, especially for a film of this kind. But I think it is worth watching, just because it is interesting and worth your time.

Ruth photo
Ruth

As the co-chairman of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, former US President John F. Kennedy, that also included Canada's Prime Minister Lester Pearson, and former Governor General of Canada Jean Chretien, his longtime chief of staff, both spoke about the challenges facing the Canadian people at the time. Some of the issues discussed included racism, racism at the time, and racism that has persisted for many years to come. The discussion also included Canadian society in the past, the history of discrimination and prejudice against aboriginal people, and the racist attitudes that persist in Canadian society today. Another highlight was the experience of four men who became embroiled in the riots of 1968 and the effect of the riots on their families. The video is well produced and shows well the personal and public experience of the four men, who were among many to go through the events of 1968. The video goes into great detail about their experiences, including information on their families, their jobs, and the effects they had on their lives. I personally think that this film would be very valuable for anyone to watch, especially in an educational setting, as well as for anyone interested in the issues of racism and discrimination. It's definitely an important film to be aware of.

Kimberly C. photo
Kimberly C.

Many people claim the fact that this film "refutes" the "Big Bang" model is "intellectual dishonesty" (whatever that is) but the real dishonesty here is in not even attempting to explain the "Big Bang" model to the viewer. In the movie, they try to get the viewer to take a scientific approach to understanding the "Big Bang". They make a lot of big claims about the cosmos but they never say what the universe is made of or how the universe started. All they are able to do is provide a highly simplified and rather simplistic explanation. No one should be tricked into thinking that this movie is an accurate depiction of what "the Big Bang" theory is. They basically just show what they think we are supposed to see. I agree that there are many people who think the Big Bang is the origin of the universe and that is fine. That is one of the many reasons I did not like the movie. But they should have shown the mathematics, the astronomy, and even the "Big Bang theory" itself. They had a lot of explaining to do. So the lesson here is that the Big Bang model is, to some people, not only not scientific but an outright lie. I believe they also tried to portray scientists as "hard-nosed" and "dumber than a box of rocks" when they failed miserably. It is a shame, because the truth is that scientists have some very good ideas and it is clear that the universe has many "big bang" types of things going on. It is just that no one has been able to figure out how to explain these to a non-scientific audience.

Howard A. photo
Howard A.

Two-hundred and fifty-four people gathered in Los Angeles for the World's End conference. Nearly all of them were, in one way or another, a part of the Occupy Movement. Their name was up on a screen in one of the conference rooms: Occupy, with an image of a burning down skyscraper at the center. The words, "Occupy is the thing, not the thing," were repeated. "Occupy Wall Street," on the other hand, was the thing. Occupy Wall Street is an acronym of thousands of people who spoke out against the 2008 economic crash. It's an incredible thing to see, as the mainstream media have treated Occupy as a joke, or a movement that was simply too complex to understand. Even though this event was meant to be a conference, it was too big for one. For all the talk of protest, the media just made it seem like an inconvenience to go to one of these meetings. If the media was at least trying to show Occupy as the thing, then Occupy was the thing. And it was the thing that the media could not fully show. The conference also featured speeches from people who were leading the Occupy movement. But that was just the beginning. It was a two-hour event with two major panels. One panel focused on the economics of the Occupy Movement. The other was on the history of Occupy Wall Street. The first of these two panels, called "Economics of Occupy," was the one that the media could not show. It was full of the usual suspects, like the brilliant W. W. Norton and Kevin Zeese of Occupy Wall Street fame, and Jon Stewart. But most of the people in the room were well-meaning, educated people who just wanted to be heard. These were the people who were trying to change the system, and they weren't ready for this. They wanted to listen to the other side. The other panel, "History of Occupy Wall Street," was something else. It was a discussion about the movement from the founding of the movement until now. It was the most ambitious panel. It focused on the history of the movement, from the early days to the present day. There were so many people in the audience that there were no seats left for the speakers. There was no time to take questions. As the two panels moved toward each other, the speakers were all there, all of them, and no one was missing. At first, I thought the people in the room were going to be interesting and I would learn something. It was all going to be an interesting thing. But the first panel was about economics, and the second was about history. Both were full of people who had no idea about what Occupy was or

Jennifer G. photo
Jennifer G.

This is a very interesting documentary. The fact that so many people's opinions are so different is not a great surprise. I think that the fact that the opinions are so diverse is a good thing. It brings up the importance of seeing the film as a whole rather than just focusing on a handful of people. While some people say that their views are personal and they don't want to be put into a box, others say that they don't want to be manipulated by the media and instead want to be part of a discussion. Personally, I think that the film is very insightful and is able to draw a lot of interesting insights from people who are interested in the topic. While it is interesting to see that there are different opinions on the subject, it is very disconcerting to see how some people are able to discredit anyone who disagrees with them. If the opinions that are presented are objectively and unbiased, then they shouldn't be disregarded. I do not believe that the views presented are inaccurate or wrong. However, there are a lot of people out there who are not willing to be completely open-minded. It is very easy to get discouraged when you are not able to come to an informed conclusion about a topic. While I think that people should be allowed to voice their opinion on a topic, I also think that we need to accept that there is a very wide range of opinions out there and that everyone has their own opinions. We can't come to an informed opinion and think that we know the truth because there is a wide range of opinions. It is impossible to come to a definitive opinion about every topic. I think that the film tries to cover a lot of different points of view in a very balanced way. I would recommend watching the film, but I also think that it is important to find your own opinions and then share them. It is also very important to listen to those opinions that are different than your own.

Doris photo
Doris

The documentary makes some good points about the quality of film versus a digital camera. With the amount of money that the digital cameras can put into producing a movie, the quality of the picture is irrelevant. At times it feels like you are watching a film with digital cameras rather than a digital one. However, this is the reality of the world. Digital cameras are only used for shooting in low light and not for shooting in general. In the near future, the quality of the picture will no longer be a consequence of the camera technology. You will be able to see a quality picture on a camera in the near future, which is simply not possible today.

Harry Johnson photo
Harry Johnson

We're a small but dedicated group of ardent pro-lifers, some of us as young as 16, others as old as 65. We've come together in two groups: one that takes out adverts on abortion clinics and talk to the local clergy, and the other which just goes to abortion clinics to spread the word and hear the stories of those who have lost their babies. This week we visited two clinics in Edmonton Alberta. This is a fascinating and vital film about the abortion issue, but it is also very human and not in the least offensive. It is well-made, well-edited and beautifully shot. Every single scene is engaging and with a deep meaning to the viewer. The story starts with a young pro-choice mother named Marie-France Carpentier, who discovers that she is pregnant after a one-night stand. Her family don't want her to get the news, and she has to deal with her grief and grief-stricken parents. She doesn't want to go to the hospital to deliver the baby, but she has to. Her family has a completely different view and soon the new baby is struggling with his own grief. This is a very personal story, but it is a very real story, and the people who tell it tell it very well. For example, the story of a woman who has lost her baby in an abortion clinic, and who became pregnant again after a few months in a hospital. She is a very strong character and her story is very powerful. It also touches on issues like the conditions of abortion clinics, and the stigma attached to it. This is a very strong and credible film, which is very important. But the movie is also a very human story, and if you have not had an abortion in your life, you will probably be very moved. You may even find it as close to reliving your own abortion experience as possible. I think that the pro-lifers who are speaking in this film are extraordinarily brave, and I commend them for this film. The directors of this film were inspired by many things that have happened in their lives, including their own abortion. That's not to say that this film is anti-abortion. Far from it. But it is more about the fight for abortion, and its impact on women. I saw this film at a special screening at the WACADIA (Women Against Child Abuse Edmonton) on March 19. It was amazing to see all of the women come up to tell their stories, and I heard a lot of really strong personal stories about the terrible effects of abortion on their lives. Some women talked about how they feel shame, guilt, helplessness and confusion, and others talked about how they wanted to die.

Phillip George photo
Phillip George

I saw this movie when it came out in 1983, and I'm glad I saw it, because I now have all of the movie on VHS. I own all of the DVDs too. Some of the stuff I like are scenes with Jerry Orbach and other great actors, and some of the stuff I don't like are the fact that the editor took out some of the more "adult" scenes and put in some of the more "child-friendly" stuff. It's really a movie for the entire family, although I know a lot of parents who would tell me that the movie is not suitable for them, because of the movie they were showing at the time. A very entertaining movie, and all the scenes you could ask for are there, so if you like history, or just a good movie to watch with a group of friends, see it.

Jennifer J. photo
Jennifer J.

Went to see this movie in a theater. And it was great! It was simply a movie that had good graphics, good characters, and great storyline. The movie is about, we all know, the world. We all know what it is, we all know where we come from, we all know where we're going. But it is only a movie. That's why it is so great. It is all a movie. I think that it's the best way to explain the world and where we come from. What is the world like? Why is it this way? What's the point? It's the way it is, and we are here to tell the world the truth. I believe that that is the goal of movie. To tell the truth, the way it is, and show that it is all a movie. It is a movie, and it is a movie that is worth watching. I don't understand why people hate this movie. It is the best movie that is ever made. It's a movie that is worth watching.

Elizabeth photo
Elizabeth

If you're a fan of documentaries you will definitely enjoy this film, even if you are not a fan of documentaries (or even documentaries themselves). It starts off with a brief introduction to the film then gives the viewer some background and historical context on how it was made and what it shows us about the history of the documentary world. If you have seen the trailer, you probably saw the two main characters. Both are really different, both with their own personal flaws, but in the end they came to a mutual understanding. While they are not much like each other they come together and the film ends with the tag line "love conquers all" which is fitting for this movie. The two main characters are shown in two different ways, and both of them are much more likable than the main characters in other documentaries. There is also a lot of stuff that goes on behind the scenes and that the main characters didn't tell you, but it is not really needed. In fact, it would have been better to let the main characters tell you about their background rather than having the whole thing be about them. The documentary itself is really good, there is some pretty interesting stuff going on, but there is a lot of stuff that goes on that could have been left out or shown a bit better. The film is overall a pretty good documentary, but the film could have been better. It's one of those documentaries that you can either watch and enjoy it, or just find it boring and not understand what is going on. Overall, this is a pretty good documentary that is worth watching.

Barbara photo
Barbara

This film does a really good job of describing the propaganda and the media's role in the nation's propaganda war. It is one of the best documentaries about the US presidential election that I have seen in a long time. The arguments are often interwoven and if you read the book of "Brainwashing: The Journeys of an American Child" it will be very easy to see where the media, the government, and the secret agencies are heading. The film focuses on the short-lived career of Bill O'Reilly, who is a lot more than the Fox News host who is notorious for his often homophobic and sexist remarks and his harsh personality. In fact, it is one of the most interesting subjects because of the way that it has been framed and used. The film doesn't just focus on Fox News, it is in fact the center of the propaganda war for the Republicans. I would also like to point out the role of the Pentagon and the Pentagon Papers. I found that very interesting and was surprised to see that it was not mentioned in the film. One of the big problems is that it is very difficult to find information about the war itself. People must either watch the TV or read the book, but because of the popularity of the film and the book, it is very difficult to find a good balance in reporting about what the US government is doing. The book is much more balanced in this regard. I do not think that the movie is objective in this respect. The movie makes the point that the war in Iraq was the worst mistake made by the US government and that they were deliberately trying to weaken and destroy Saddam Hussein and his regime. The argument that the US government was spreading lies and propaganda during the campaign and had also the same aim to weaken and destroy the Iraqi government is very good. The film is able to point out some of the problems that the Bush administration had with the media and the propaganda war. The movie is also a good and informative way of dealing with the propaganda war that is going on today in the Middle East. It shows what is happening in Syria and in Iraq and what is happening in the US. It is also a very good way of explaining the current situation in Syria and what is happening in Iraq. Another great point that the film does is that it does not just focus on Fox News, it also shows what is going on in the New York Times and in the Washington Post, which have made more and more war headlines in recent years. It is important to point out that these are not just the liberal or leftist newspapers. This is a very important point because it shows how much influence these newspapers have on the public. I also really enjoyed the fact that the film is not just about the

Megan B. photo
Megan B.

As a new parent I can say with confidence that this is not the film to show your baby. After seeing a few documentaries on breastfeeding I decided to give this film a chance. Not only does it touch on some very important issues but it is also very funny and has some very inspiring quotes. Having lost a daughter I can say that this film really does touch your heart. The director did an amazing job at showing both sides of the story and giving a perspective that is so different from the one you normally get. It is a real shame that this film was not as well received as it should have been but I would recommend that you watch this film if you can, it is a good film and I would recommend this film to anyone who wants to get a more realistic view on this topic.

Alexander photo
Alexander

A pretty interesting documentary. I am not a fan of documentary style of movie but this documentary is good for that. It gives you an insight on what is the future of CGI and how it is affecting movies. There is no doubt about it: CGI is now more important than the actors. It is everywhere in movies, with more and more special effects, and now we can see CGI in a very good, very realistic way. What is more amazing is that there are movies that were done before CGI, and still they are great movies. And the computer effects are so realistic that you can even make the special effects look realistic. I believe that the future of special effects is going to be very impressive, that it will become more and more important in movies. It is very unlikely that the special effects will stop. As for the interviewers, they are interesting, and they talk about different topics. If you are a fan of special effects, then you should definitely watch this documentary.

Angela Gomez photo
Angela Gomez

It was interesting to see the views of two scientists in an area where there is no debate about the risks. We see how their views differ, how they are held up by scientists and those who believe in climate change. What I found interesting is that there are people who believe in climate change and yet do not accept the mainstream. It is the same with the views of those who believe in evolution. This documentary is very good in the way it deals with scientific issues. It uses various scientific techniques and the audience is given ample opportunity to study the issues. It is clear that they are presented as an alternative to the consensus view. I would recommend this documentary for anyone who wants to know more about climate change and the views of those who do not accept it.

Kathy photo
Kathy

I was looking forward to seeing this documentary because I had never heard of any of the people it featured and I loved the idea of having a documentary that had a lot of inside knowledge of a movement. I came away feeling like I was not only missing out on an opportunity to hear about this movement but was also completely robbed. The acting is very good and the perspective and information provided is accurate. The discussion between the participants is lively and interesting. I would have been happy to have spent the money to rent the DVD and hear the entire conversation, however, I do not have access to the Internet and had to go to the library to obtain the DVD. This is a shame because the film should have been even better. I would recommend that people see this film, but only if you have the means and are willing to go to the library and look up the people in the documentary.

Dorothy photo
Dorothy

This is the second documentary I have seen on the subject of giving or donating blood. The first was "Blood Drive" which was also written by Martin. I do not know if Martin saw this before writing the book or if it was before he wrote the book. The book is full of intriguing stories about the struggle of a man to achieve a goal, but the film seems to focus on his relationship with his son and the nature of his fight. While the film does contain some interesting things, it also seems to miss some important information. For example, it is never mentioned how the two brothers decided to become blood donors, it is never explained how the blood center works, and no one ever asks about the blood that is donated. I was very surprised that this documentary was not mentioned in the book. It would have been interesting to know how the brothers became blood donors. Perhaps someone will write a book on the topic. All in all, it was a good movie, but it could have been a lot better.

Stephen photo
Stephen

I've watched many documentaries in my life and this one is no different. It is a well researched and researched documentary. The film follows the birth and growth of Bitcoin to its current exchange price of around $500,000. It is a well written and well put together documentary. The film would have been even better if it had been shorter, but I was riveted to the screen. I am sure I could care less what Bitcoin is about in 10 years time, but I'm not here to worry about that. I am here to study Bitcoin, what it can do, how it can be used, and how it will be used. It is truly one of the most fascinating and intriguing topics I have come across. In the end, the film is a well put together documentary that I was completely engaged in the film. I recommend this film to anyone who wants to learn more about Bitcoin and what it can do for the world. The film is well worth the time and money you would spend on watching it.