Startup.com - which is the title of the documentary - chronicles the trials and tribulations of Kaleil and Tom, childhood friends who venture into building a governmental internet corporation. Nodding off yet? Granted, the subject sounds boring enough. However, instead of focusing on the technical matters of their ever-growing business, the movie explores the personal lives of Kaleil and Tom. When the company that they built together begins evolving into something they can no longer control, their relationship inevitably reaches a turning point.

The documentary executes a fantastic job of revealing how professional lives and personal lives are two different beasts. It's great because you don't have to know anything about the complicated business Kaleil and Tom are running. The corporate part of their lives are vague in order to emphasize the personal struggles of Kaleil and Tom. However, this said approach can be frustrating for viewers who want to see more than the feature characters ambiguously walking in and out of the offices, revealing little about what they're conflicted about. All the movie clearly depicts is that their relationship is depleting... hence, you never know who's right and who's wrong. The documentary's neutral point of view can be baffling for viewers who are used to the conventional formula of protagonist-vs-antagonist of reality TV.
_________________

I agree that this is an excellent documentary. I don't completely agree that the film omits details about technicalities of business. Some examples are as follows:

1. A couple of MBA/Business major type young people got together to start the business. The business was an internet business, yet none of them knew practically nothing about engineering or computer science. Typical .com start-up during dot-com era, and you can see how the company is going to be ran.

2. The company managed to burn $50 million while they did not build any infrastructure or business worth $50 million. Another typical .com start-up during dot-com era, and you can see how the company was going to be managed.

3. Company founders mostly focused on meeting superstar investors like those at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

4. You do not buy a bunch of servers to start up an internet business today. You also do not build basic applications from scratch today. You just get a hosting service. You outsource. You build on top of existing applications. That's how you start today. They did not do any of these; it's partly because that was how the business was started. It's partly because they were so wasteful.

I can go on and on, and I can honestly say that details in this film are great.
_________________
Online Art Education : Online Degrees : Biographies

I know you're great with symbolisms, but those are details that I just didn't catch. In fact, I have little idea what you're talking about. The movie says nothing regarding what their business is even about. All I knew was that it had something to do with paying parking tickets online. Perhaps you read the fine prints online, but nothing technical was revealed in the movie.

You know that there's a disagreement, but you don't know what it's about. Here are some examples.

1. They're not happy with the website's features, but what they are and why they need to argue about it, as opposed to simply creating the code for the feature, is not revealed.

2. Why is Tom being kicked off? Granted, he's not as technically savvy as he should be, but he's the founder and most companies would keep those people on board, as long as they don't directly hinder the company's direction or progress.
_________________

quote:

---

Originally posted by ghostman:

2. Why is Tom being kicked off? Granted, he's not as technically savvy as he should be, but he's the founder and most companies would keep those people on board, as long as they don't directly hinder the company's direction or progress.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cinemaKid:

My guess is that Tom didn't really focus on what the company needed to work on at that time; he was kind of distracted and tried to work on so many other things. Kaleil Isaza Tuzman probably wanted to have one clear objection rather than being distracted.

I don't know, with regard to details, I felt like that the movie had great details, but it's maybe because I stretched my imagination after I read and heard many events and stories during dot-com era. I myself was kind of a part of it, so ... it felt like that the movie caught many small details. Maybe ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ghostman:

I was especially baffled when they were arguing about the internet features. Tom wanted something, but the webdesign team manager was saying it couldn't be done. Apparently however, the competitors have done it. So... are the webdesigners a bunch of lame ducks? They had about 30 guys working on the site, and it was hard to believe why something couldn't be done. It was frustrating that I didn't know 1. what Tom exactly wanted and 2. why is the manager saying it can't be done? Did Tom want a rabbit to pop out of the computer screen and onto the visitor's lap?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cinemaKid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ghostman:

I was especially baffled when they were arguing about the internet features. Tom wanted something, but the webdesign team manager was saying it couldn't be done. Apparently however, the competitors have done it. So... are the webdesigners a bunch of lame ducks? They had about 30 guys working on the site, and it was hard to believe why something couldn't be done. It was frustrating that I didn't know 1. what Tom exactly wanted and 2. why is the manager saying it can't be done? Did Tom want a rabbit to pop out of the computer screen and onto the visitor's lap?

---

Tom never seemed to have a clear understanding of the scope of the project. He exhibited in conference rooms and also in the company office. Maybe he just didn't understand business, maybe he got lost. I don't think that he fit into the organization, and that's essentially probably the reason why he got laid off.

Kind of feel bad for saying this, but failures like this make Startup.com a great documentary film. Human nature at best (or worst?).

---

I own this movie and have never bothered to give it as much analysis as you folks are giving it. I own it because we bought it at a yard sale where it will go again.

The movie does depict the frenzied startup of a venture capitol funded dotcom during the early 90's when money to burn was what made a dotcom seemingly worthwhile.

there have got to be better documentaries out there than this.
_________________
TalkWhatever Open Discussion Forum

quote:

---

Originally posted by Toucan42:
... there have got to be better documentaries out there than this.

---

Smartest guys in the room is great! I'm gonna have to watch this one now.
_________________
The American Voters | Fan Smack

Enron? Oh ... I'll have to seek that out - I love hating a corporate pig ...
_________________
TalkWhatever Open Discussion Forum