Watch Catching the Sun

Catching the Sun

An unemployed American worker, a Tea Party activist, and a Chinese solar entrepreneur race to lead the clean energy future. But who wins and who loses the battle for power in the 21st century?

Other Titles
Chasing the Sun, 日の当たる産業, Solarize This
Running Time
1 hours 15 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Documentary, History, Drama, News
Shalini Kantayya
Shalini Kantayya
USA, China, India, Germany
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

Comments about documentary «Catching the Sun» (14)

Harry Schultz photo
Harry Schultz

I'm not really a big fan of "documentary" films, but this one was well done. It was very interesting to see how the documentary process was different than how the news is. The editing was good, and I appreciated that it didn't skip over parts of the film. The main parts of the documentary were done very well, so I was able to get the most out of it. The interviews with the three surviving survivors were also very well done. It was interesting to hear their recollections of the event, and how they had made it through the storm, despite the harsh weather conditions. The documentary was also interesting to hear how these three survivors had been dealt with, since they had been the most vocal and the most accessible, and they also had been the most affected. The only one who seemed to have gotten the worst treatment was the reporter, who was shown being harassed by the weather forecaster. It was also interesting to hear that the main factor in the storm was not the rain, but the wind. Overall, this documentary was very interesting to watch, and I recommend it.

Scott photo

I saw this movie at the Austin Film Festival and was pleasantly surprised. The movie had a great flow, good music and interesting facts about the Kennedy assassination. I am glad to have this movie on my DVD collection. I think it is a must see.

George Sims photo
George Sims

A little bit of history is never a bad thing. This documentary is a great introduction to what was a unique period of time for the United States, and how it was affected by the country's first first lady. Mrs. Kennedy and her husband President John F. Kennedy took office in 1963 and immediately instituted a policy of trying to build up the nation's nuclear arsenal, while simultaneously trying to encourage international cooperation. The new president went to great lengths to convince other nations to join the U.S. in our efforts, as the U.S. was becoming a nuclear power. Mrs. Kennedy was no exception to this policy, as she was to serve as first lady to both her husband and the first president. She joined the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, in 1961, and was to become a Naval Officer in 1964. The young lady was a kind hearted and compassionate person, who made the nation proud, and who was also a dedicated advocate for peace and justice. When Mrs. Kennedy was still in the White House, the country was going through an era of political polarization and the Watergate scandal broke. This documentary provides some background to what happened, including the Watergate scandal itself, and how it affected the nation and the world. The filmmakers have done an excellent job of combining some very personal, and sometimes very uncomfortable, stories into a cohesive narrative. They have done this with the stories of some of the world's most famous celebrities, such as the two main characters, Barbara Bush and Jacqueline Kennedy. These two stories, along with other personal stories, show the impact of the Watergate scandal, and the world we live in today. I was impressed with the documentary, and I recommend it to everyone who wants to learn more about the Kennedy's first two years in office.

Philip Castillo photo
Philip Castillo

I saw this film on the big screen at a film festival in Berlin. It was a film festival for the first time and it was a very nice experience. It is not a bad film, but it is not a good film either. It was a documentary about the extraordinary journey of an artist who works on a large scale in the natural surroundings. The film tries to show that we have to be able to see nature, and not only in the movies. The film is very well made, but I think that the director could have put more focus on the subject. The film is about some big problems, such as the pollution of the atmosphere and the climate change. The film also talks about the relationship between people and nature. The director says that it is really important for us to see nature, but it is not enough to see nature, we have to learn how to be aware of nature and how to make the most of it. In the end, I think that the director missed the main point of the film, that we have to be able to see nature. We have to see it in all its glory and also in its dangers. There are also some scenes which are not so inspiring. But I think that it is still a good film.

Austin B. photo
Austin B.

I am a regular viewer of "The Story of O" and I was a little disappointed in this film. The amount of time that the "old" characters spend in this film, and especially in the later portion, was a little disconcerting. They were very much "new" and very much not present in the previous film. And as far as I could tell, the director was trying to make this film into a "new" film. If this was the intent, then I was disappointed. Also, there were some inconsistencies. For example, in the first film, the narrator and narrator's assistant go to the museum, but in this film, the narrator is in a nursing home, and his assistant is a nurse. This is just one example. Other examples: The narrator was clearly not from the East, and his wife was clearly from the West. The narrator has a tattoo that is clearly not from anywhere. (Maybe the director was trying to represent the Eastern influence in the film, but I don't think so.) This film is well worth watching, and I would like to see a second one.

Carl photo

I was pleased to see that I had not missed any aspect of the film as it was so full of so much information. This film is well worth watching. I did not find the time to read the book, but had to know the story. I can imagine that it would be very difficult to translate to the big screen. The documentary style of the film is great and the subject matter is interesting. I felt the film was informative, and I believe that it should be a part of every high school biology class. If you want to see a great documentary about the "other side" of evolution, I would recommend "Making of a Movie" by director Ron Fricke. It is a must see.

Justin Salazar photo
Justin Salazar

The quality of this documentary is really good. I really enjoyed it. I've been looking for something to watch, not to make a comparison. I like documentaries about things like GMOs, etc. So I have been looking for something about the GMOs. There's nothing to compare it to, just a fact based documentary. So I'm glad that I found it. The interviews are really good. The kind of interviews that you might not be able to find in a book. They are interesting and you get a good feel for what they are thinking and feeling. So, it's a good documentary.

Rebecca S. photo
Rebecca S.

This documentary covers the life of Daniel Pearl, a legendary jazz pianist who was the leader of the band the Eagles. He was involved in a car accident in 1958 and was in a coma for over a year. He was able to talk and communicate by blinking his eyes, and he was able to communicate to his band through a kind of mental telepathy. This documentary is about his brain and his brain, and it shows how the music he made affected his life and how he came to be a musician. It also explains his evolution from a schizophrenic to a rational person. It is interesting to see how his brain changed over time. I thought this documentary was well done. I thought it was very good.

Jacob photo

I really enjoyed this film. I'm not usually a big fan of documentaries, but this one really surprised me. I had no idea what to expect going in, but I was totally blown away by the time the film was over. The footage was extremely well-edited, and I really felt like I was actually there. The emotions that the two guys were experiencing were so real and genuine, and I really felt for them. The way they communicated with each other was really great. I especially liked how they filmed the various conversations. It was really interesting to watch them talk about their experiences and how they were coping with their illnesses. It really showed you the process of a cancer diagnosis and how they are trying to make sense of it. They really did a great job at showing you the ups and downs of being diagnosed. The one thing I really didn't understand was how they were able to keep their marriage together so well, despite their illness. I don't think they were able to do that, and that was definitely something that I had a hard time understanding. I also thought it was interesting that they weren't able to communicate with each other throughout the course of their illness. That was really strange to me, but I guess it's something that people in a relationship would deal with. Overall, I thought the film was really well-done and I really recommend watching it.

Paul photo

I was really disappointed by this movie. It is about the events of the years following the beginning of the oil industry in the mid-20th century, and was supposed to be a great film. Well, this is a great film, and I am giving it a 7 out of 10. It is about the energy crisis of the 20th century. However, this film is more about the politics than about the history. That is, the politics of the day and the politics of the past. It is a very fine film. I was very impressed with the performance of the actor playing President Kennedy. He was an amazing actor. I have never seen him in anything else, and I think he is very good. There are two other actors who are great as well. The best performance I have ever seen in a movie was given by the late Richard Gere, who played President Reagan. This film was very good, but not as good as it could have been. It was very good in terms of the history of the times, but it was not as good in terms of the politics of the times. I was really disappointed with the film because it was a great film, but it was not as good as it could have been.

Harry Hicks photo
Harry Hicks

A great documentary on the efforts to stop the Vietnam War. Some great interviews, a bit of history, and an overall good story.

Daniel Alvarez photo
Daniel Alvarez

An interesting documentary, focusing on a problem that has been known for decades, but which only became apparent recently due to the IPCC reports. As far as I can see, this is not a "dissident" documentary, but rather a documentary that, once again, gives the facts. That said, I was really impressed by the attention to detail and the factual background presented. I can't really say much more without spoiling the film, but it is worth watching if you have a little bit of interest in global warming, or if you just like documentaries that are interesting.

Gary photo

I was going to watch this movie because of all the good reviews and I just happened to find out about it from a friend of mine. I thought it was going to be a documentary but it wasn't really that kind of a documentary. I liked the way they used this camera but that's about it. The story is pretty simple but it is really interesting and I think you should see it. I'm not sure why the people rating this movie so low are rating it like it's the worst movie ever. I like documentaries and movies but this one was way better than a lot of the other documentaries I have seen. I would definitely recommend this movie.

Gary photo

The film itself, and the documentary as a whole, are actually quite engaging. The movie focuses on the "Hollywood songwriter" who founded and produced the first rock 'n' roll band. The documentary follows his life from his childhood through his early years in the US to his death. It covers his early music career, his career as a musician, his relationship with his wife, his relationship with his children and how his wife and children were affected by his work and life. He also talks about the differences between musicians and artists, how his wife was able to see him work in his house, how he worked with the children and his relationship with his family. It also shows how his son and daughter are influenced by his work and life. The film covers a lot of ground, and it does a good job at showing how an artist is treated differently from a musician. The film is also a good representation of the time period of the early 70's, and how the music industry was still very much in its infancy. It also shows how the artists were treated differently by the music industry. While it is true that many people, artists and musicians alike, were not treated fairly in the industry, it was also true that there were still many who wanted to give them an opportunity to succeed. It is also true that some artists and musicians were just a lot better than others, and the documentary does a good job at showing how the former is treated better than the latter. In the end, I found this film to be a good watch, and I would recommend it to fans of the subject matter.