MovieChat Forums > Kundun (1998) Discussion > Surprisingly Disappointing Film

Surprisingly Disappointing Film

posted 16 years ago by tompardi
7 replies | jump to latest

I'm a big fan of Scorsese and Glass and have a budding interest in Buddhism. I guess that may be why I am slightly disappointed in the sum of these parts.

The cinematography is superb, I remember seeing previews for this film before its release and knew then I had to see it. Well I did, just a decade later.

I was hoping to see more of the thought process and intricacies behind the enlightenment and wisdom of the Tibetian culture but it seemed that it was just barely skimming the surface of what could have been. Then again I'm reading my expectations into it, possibly unfairly.

I felt there was a distracting effect during the dialogue between the male figures in the movie, I can't place it if it was the dialect or the volume. I think it would have been much more enjoyabe if the language was authentic with subtitles.

The pace--almost every scene unfolded so slowly that it actually hindered the dramatic effect and gravity of the situations.

The score seemed mis-timed and inappropriate for the scenes in a lot of places and sounded almost exactly like the tracks on Glass' 'Anologue'. The swirling LFOs and synths didn't work with the 50's eastern culture, IMO. The one exception was the opening few minutes of the film with the unusual percussion and mantra sounding pads.

Overall, I rate Kundun 6/10. (6.5--better, we need half-stars , IMO )

my movie rating history: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=34889543

[–] jjcalzada 16 years ago

This is not a documentary. This is a visual elegy and must be taken as such. Long live the Dalai Lama. May the heavens grant Him the safe return home He wishes for.

[–] Alacrates 16 years ago

I saw it in the theatre twice, and it had a much bigger impact on me there then when I saw it a home. The music and sound effects were really wonderful in the theatre, and the final montage of the sand mandala was really great. Not the same on DVD, I found.

[–] Falconeer 14 years ago

I'm curious; What did you think of Jean-Jacques Annaud's "Seven Years In Tibet" filmed the same year? I actually prefer that one. It is less heavy-handed, and possesses a quiet and understated elegance that "Kundun" seems to lack. 'Seven Years' also has this beat in the cinematography department IMO. I think of 'Seven Years' as the European take on the subject, and "Kundun" as a more Hollywood style approach. what's your opinion?

[–] melskaya 14 years ago

This movie was perfect. You can watch it without sound or listen to the music with no picture and you can get the same emotional punch. Together they are perfection. I saw both Seven Years and Kundun in the theater. I went back and saw Kundun two more times and it was worth the price of admission every time. You really need to watch this again and listen... to the words, to the music. I'm reading his autobiography and the movie is very faithful to what really happened. Even such small moments like the rats climbing on the curtains in his room or playing games with the servants are things that really happened. I can't praise this movie enough. I have been a Buddhist for 22 years but seeing this movie was one of the defining moments of my Buddhist studies and indeed my life. And no, I'm not an Asian. I am writing this to you as a white/Romani chick from the midwest.

[–] cuyocksol-UK 14 years ago

I agree, 'skimming the surface'... I expected to find more BUDDHISM in this film. Perhaps not explicit spouting of doctrine, but giving an impression of something essentially Buddhist somehow.

The Korean film "Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter... and Spring" (as one example) is far more satisfying in this respect -- a much more harmonious marriage of sound, image and content.

[–] amungiu 13 years ago

I perfectly agree with your remarks and I would add just one on the down side. I think the quality of the film is much decreased by the chapter containing Kundun's visit to Beijing. The Chinese leader, Mao, is caricaturized, established as a feminized character with no eloquence. You really wonder how such a man became the leader of the largest nation on earth. A more realistic approach in his presentation would have made the film more credible.

[–] alex-simmons-843-329258 10 years ago

It's also debatable that tibet under chinese rule has better conditions honestly. the way marty portrayed mao as well as china is pathetically shallow. I would prefer marty to keep his obnoxious religious outlook to himself.