If you know my history,
I was one of the very first Kyrie stans on this board. I've defended his play more than anyone else; you will not find another poster who has come to his defense more than I have. I've gone through years and years of battles arguing with others.
It's unfortunate that instead of using my energy to praise his game, I've gotta be doing this.
But that's besides the point, because my opinion of his game doesn't even factor into it when I'm talking about him when he's removed from the hardwood.
If a documentary has content of that nature, than the entire thing should be condemned, because quite obviously it's not operating in any realm of truth.
You can't just gloss over that as if it's creator doesn't hold those beliefs.
If they're willing to sink to those depths of deception, than what else are they willing to do to tell their story? If you think that wasn't connected to the material that the documentary is based upon than you quite obviously are either incapable of contextualizing film properly or you're being dishonest.
It's hilarious how you think you're making some sort of point with this. You even have the nerve to make out like you're on a higher level of cognition, as if you aren't running around in a
Dunning-Kruger hamster wheel, thinking you're covering miles but only running in the same spot.