Play

00:00

Captions

Volume

Part one of five from this full length documentary.

Part two of five from this full length documentary.

Part three of five from this full length documentary.

Part four of five from this full length documentary.

Part five of five from this full length documentary.

The credits from this documentary.

Part one of five from this full length documentary.

Part two of five from this full length documentary.

Part three of five from this full length documentary.

Part four of five from this full length documentary.

Part five of five from this full length documentary.

The credits from this documentary.

The Hollow Men

Film (Full Length) – 2008

Exempt

Add to watch list

David Russell

16 Aug 2014 - 03.23am

Isn't amazing how nothing really changes. John Key was lying back then, and he still lies in exactly the same way. At the end of the documentary, as Brash is thrown out (lost the election because of the Exclusive Bretheren's actions) and John Key takes over, in reply to a question, he says " I never received any correspondence with the Bretheren, I was not aware of their campaign, I stand by everything I said, I have nothing to hide, if I did I would tell you up front, .. I am not stupid enough to know that these things don't come out" ..... but he forgets that earlier in the documentary he was filmed having a meeting with two Exclusive Bretheren members.... but of course,then as now, he remembers how important it is, that he has a very bad memory.

Liam

3 Jul 2013 - 11.58am

Jesse:

Because the National Party (at this time, though I have no doubt that all major parties continue to do so) gives a greater degree of influence to some portions of the constitutency than it does to others. This selection criteria is made without reference to the relative and legitimate 1-vote-per-person grundnorm of western democratic society. It is made on the basis of financial profitability.

How could this not be unethical? As contextual moral guidelines, political ethics direct politicians to accurately and fairly reflect and represent their ENTIRE constituency. Just because the problem is endemic in every political party does not make it "a dull narrative", it makes it a crucial problem which is generating a significant democratic deficit in this country.

16 Jan 2012 - 07.24pm

I have finished the first two clips, I am 40 minutes in, and I still don't see the purpose of this? How does this discredit Don Brash and the National Party? Is this a dull narrative about standard political practice in a rather inconsequential period? This documentary really does not provide any strange or unfamiliar dirt on a political party, a political party is supposed to represent a commonly held opinion and influence the constituency to vote in favour of that opinion, and therefore that party. That is what Don has done. That is what all politicians do, this is not unusual, this is not unethical. Labour does the same, ACT does the same, NZ First does the same, The Greens does the same, The Maori party does the same. There must be better dirt than this? I'll keep watching.

Jack

29 Nov 2011 - 11.08pm

John Key has flat out lied about his knowledge of the exclusive bretherens campaign. I don't mind their campaign because they paid for it but what strikes me is how Key can lie which shows me this man has no integrity. It has showed these last three years and it will continue the next three years.. I voted for National in 2008 but instead voted for Winston Peters in November. Now I am waiting for the master to cut John Key in small pieces. Winston has the facts to do the damage with.

Oliver Peryman

29 Aug 2011 - 06.21pm

I'd like to pick out the documentary's final comments if I may. Here they are again:

"A week after he became leader, John Key flew to Canberra, a meeting had been arranged with the political strategists 'Crosby-Textor'. Key signed them up, and work began immediately on his two-year campaign to become Prime-Minister.''

The passage buttresses my own suspicion that the 'hollow men' have never actually gone away. It wouldn't suprise me if similar personnel and practices remain. Similarly, I wouldn't be suprised if the ongoing activity was captured by a kind of Hollow Men 'sequel'.

A wee story to end: In 2007 I attended a political science lecture where National's Simon Power was guest-speaking. I asked him if he knew of any continuing relationship between the National Party and the PR firm 'Crosby Textor'. He said no..

david scott

29 Aug 2011 - 02.04am

does xanadu know more about the leaks

Brent

1 Aug 2011 - 11.30pm

Someone should have done a documentary about the hollow lesbians from labour.

Ross Mackintosh

30 Jun 2011 - 09.43am

It appears that, in order to gain power, they (Brash, Key etc) were willing to compromise on everything. They planned to make the big changes in their second term. Looks like soon (next year) we'll get to find out just what they had in mind.
I wonder how many "swinging" voters will live to regret their decision to vote these people back in this November.

Chillchills

9 May 2011 - 04.02pm

First off, I'm by no means a National supporter, but this totally comes off as a overblown tirade against the party. As if it's just Brash who worries about his media image and personal branding, the only politician with a speech writer, or the only manipulative member of parliament. If you don't like his policies (I certainly don't!), that's one thing, but I don't think he's any more of a grease-ball than anyone else in parliament.

Mike McGavin

7 May 2011 - 06.16pm

I'm not convinced it's especially one-sided --- it just focuses on a particular subject, being the National Party leading into 2005. I know several people who (probably) voted for National and whom I think would perceive the documentary as showing a well run campaign rather than convince themselves there was unethical deception occurring.

Interestingly enough.

5 May 2011 - 10.24am

Brendan, you're a twit.

Brendan

4 May 2011 - 10.15pm

I really take issue with taxpayer money being spent hosting this one sided attack on a New Zealand hero.

Shame on NZ on air for condoning the theft of Dr Brash's emails,

Alvina Barrett

1 May 2011 - 09.07pm

‎"I think most people would say that Adolph Hitler was the personification of evil. I would say that Don Brash is a reincarnation of Hitler" and his party caucus are the campaigners; the military beasts, and crusaders that act against various ethnic groups (which, in my personal opinion, is the ultimate evil)

Jabberwock

1 May 2011 - 05.56pm

Some questions (Q) and some observations (Obs):
Q1) Does Don Brash REALLY know the difference between right and wrong?
Q2) If Brash holds a position of influence post the 2011 election will he still recommend ditching our nuclear-free policies?
Q3) Is Simon Power stepping down in November because he finds the National-ACT behind-the-scenes plotting unpalatable? (Remember Power was one of the solitary Nats who declined offers of assistance from local Brethren in 2005.)
Obs.1) Brash's current media package is consistent with the Sinclair construction of 'an honest gentleman' ... hopefully all those journos who are still perpetuating this urban myth will be named so a gullible public can keep up with the cut and thrust of this evolving script?

Xanadu

30 Apr 2011 - 08.55pm

Observation: Anita Ferguson's face, when Rod Donald (politely) confronted Brash with the smoking gun: The Pamphlet :) Priceless! Personal Assistants know the truth lol

claire Bleakley

30 Apr 2011 - 07.18pm

"Gone by Christmas?"