Visit the link below and send in your suggestions
The word “panic” should definitely be in the title.
Here are my suggestions:
Panic!
Panic Returns
Panic Forever
The Amazing Panic
Dystopia
The Rise of Dystopia
Dystopian Dyansty
I could go on but obviously I am introducing the word Dystopia to the discussion…
Collapse 2008: the End of Liberty
I think you should actually call it The Panic of 2008. It gives it a sense of authority by not trying to appeal to popular emotion. Plus, the word “panic” is enough to draw the attention. It needs to appear scholarly, not sensationalized.
But do you see what he’s getting at? I completely agree it sounds “historical”. I guarantee you calling “[anything] 2008” and you’ll have people not be interested because they’ll think “I know what happened. I don’t need to relive it. It’s old news. I’m tired of dealing with it. Move on dot org.”
I’m sorry, but you need to be more striking than that. Inside Job won an Oscar. (Granted, that has more to do with it bashing the free market than being popular, but the point is, it was popular, and the title helped that.) It let’s people know they’re going to be getting new information. People need to have a reason to watch something about a subject they think they already know everything there is to know.
I don’t think people are understanding this. Check out Tom’s post and see the comments. You have a few good ones in there, but most of them are either jokes or basically the same kind of title he’s trying to get away from.
Forgive if this is a silly question, but what’s wrong with calling the documentary ‘Meltdown’ ?
I said they should call it:
“McMoney: The Panic of 2008”
“The Austrian Explanation of the Financial Crisis”
And Nero wins most boring title of all 
DON"T PANIC!!! DON"T PANIC!!!
Bailout?! But I’ve been bailing in!
Perpetual Panic (main title). Had a subtitle, but clicked another thread and immediately forgot it, but something like Perpetual Panic: The Continual Meltdown of our Economy or to that extent. Had a better one, but forgot…
I feel the word “perpetual” works just as the way “continual” will work in a subtitle; psychological or emotionally it can trigger something, that it’s a state of decay, never ending, but regardless it must be known and solved. I also feel with the word perpetual, as well as continual, it sort of has past, present, and future context to it, that’s it’s cyclical. This gives the documentary more room in explaining what led to this, the current situation, and what to expect instead of being stuck to one time. The documentary shouldn’t be some historical work, it should be a learning process for it’s viewers who are unaware or less educated in econ theory. What they take away from it they should be able to apply to past and future econ problems. With this they should understand and know how to work with and in this perpetual panic and apply the right actions - individual and gov’t policy - into perpetual prosperiety.
(If my title is used I’d like signed copies of Tom Wood’s books please.)
Um, Meltdown?
Thank you. A title is supposed to be descriptive. It’s for people who aren’t already into Austrian economics. Generic titles would just as well apply to a Keynesian or Zeitgeist documentary about the economic crisis. It is important not to bury the lead.
Meltdown: The Untold Story of the 2008 Global Panic
Meltdown seems to be popular in this thread but it is a term that sort of absovles responsibilty. When you think of a “meltdown” do you envision some deliberate immoral act, something that just happened, or some kind of inherent failure?
“Bankers’ Holiday, or Too Rich to Fail: How the Fat Cats Laughed All the Way to the Bank”
Easy Money, Hard Landing
Soft Money, Hard Landing
Fast Money, Slow Recovery
Fast Money, Faster Talk
Ignorance Made Law
Fed & Friends Goofy Cash Dance Decade Extravaganza