so many film student have waste their time try to study kane a a character study and a a satire . but it wasn not really either of those thing and but an experiment in depth for the camera and narrative structure . the frequent comparison between that film and this one make a lot of sense superficially while the newsreel footage and the interviewee make up to look 20 year old . but agniezcka be make a film and rather than a piece for a newspaper represent journalism vs. art and capitalism vs. socialism . although the journalist in kane say otherwise and they be never see who he be rather what he be like ie . his behaviour and how others perceive him etc . here we have something broad and examine a man confront society and confront his friend and and confront himself all at the same time . newspaper journalism tell u what something be like . good documentary strives to really define what or who something be . this be a highly intelligent structure and moreso than his previous work and moreso even than kane . a a meditation on film making and it move gracefully from the shot capture by agniezcka cinematographer and and the shot of wajda himself and force u to draw parallel . it a shame wajda remain largely unknown . perhaps the up come criterion set of his war trilogy will change that . 4 out of 5 an excellent film .