This is coming together as some of Curtis' finest work.
It combines elements of Century of the Self, The Mayfair Affair and Hypernormalisation and fills in the gaps left in those documentaries either because events hadn't happened yet or it was a side story.
Still as always you need to know a thing or two about the historical events he's talking about. He's not going to explain exactly what the Watergate scandal is or what happened in depth during the Cultural revolution (that would take up an entire documentary).
But he is going to use those events to tell his story and perspective. Now I wonder if he does this on purpose (so you look up these not all so well known events yourself) and people get a better understanding of how history has shaped the world.
As far as this one goes, he has hit the nail on the head of how the system runs the west after politicians gave up their power to bureaucrats, bankers and technocrats because collective force could no longer compete with power in the age of individualism.
I wonder when he himself realized this is what was happening as most people weren't aware of this until it was right in their faces during the pandemic.
The criticism (which i noticed it quite common of his work, so i'm not really the only one who noticed this) isn't that he doesn't explain what major events are, infact, that's about 50% of what he does in the run time.
The criticism moved is how he sometimes uses intriguing thematic connections, as questionable connections of (often direct) cause and effect, zooming past as to how that would be, and taking it for granted, when it really isn't.
I understand he can't stop building up every strand of the web in complete detail, as this is a movie, not a 3000 pages research paper, but it does sometimes leave you with a raised eyebrow.
On the one hand it's a stylistic choice that gives the work its compelling pace and energy, on the other hand, it's something that when abused can get you in dumbass Zeitgeist territory.
Doesn't help that he can get a bit lurid with his material (this more in HyperN than CGYOOMH so far), which further declares a will to manipulate.
Now don't get me wrong, every documentary is this essentially (every piece of art, too, i would argue), but i feel it's a play that breaks its spell when it cease being invisible, and i think he sometimes overplays his hand, in this aspect.
But again i don't want to sound too critical, since i usually agree with the general points made, more or less, especially about the big picture, and am enjoying the ride there.