MovieChat Forums > Naqoyqatsi (2003) Discussion > Somewhat disappointing

Somewhat disappointing

posted 19 years ago by mikeyb-2
5 replies | jump to latest

If I had to describe this film, I would say Nagoyqatsi is "somewhat disappointing". I'll say this with the disclaimer: I am a big fan of the films in the same genre. Baraka is truly a masterpiece. Chronos is fabulous. Koyannisqatsi is an achievement.

But, Nagoyqatsi was truly a letdown. The first 10 minutes of the film are very good, giving us an updated and twisted view of our world, that was on par with the other films in this genre. Then, the use of numbers kind of took the film them in a wierd artistic direction. I can understand the director's theory: the world is no longer a place of human beings interacting with nature, it's a supplanted capitalist system of numbers and computers. Still, the way it was done was a little too cliche-ish and didnt ring true with the other films in this series.

Then the segment on athletes in contrast to our military people I found a little strange. Again, I get the message: our whole way of thinking is ultra-competition/war. I think he may have tied some genetic altering issues ( the double imaged gentically reproduced sheep, steroids, etc..) into the mix as well. But, the contrast, while somewhat well done, didn't seem to need as much time spent on it, and it didn't ring all that true to me.

The part where they focus on human expressions and faces is also a little off base with that theme. I know in Koyanniqatsi and Pawoqatsi they explore people and facial expressions as well as this film did. I guess a lot of the people's expressions made them look ghostly or fake (some like demons), which was the director's intention, but I didn't really feel some of the segments ringing true with the message.

Overall it's an average film in terms of watching enjoyability (although I found myself getting bored with it sometimes). Visually and graphically, it is definitely a breakthrough in art and film. Musically, as all of the films in this genre, it was very good, very interesting, and flowed with the cinematography well. Yet, the theme wasn't explored well enough, the editing seemed to be a little shabby ( I think it would've worked better as a 45 or 60 minute film), and the director overdid his newfound ability to use strange computer graphics and images.

I would suggest watching this film to someone who hasn't seen the other films in this genre first. Rather than waiting to watch this film after watching Baraka, Chronos, or the other Qatsi films for two reasons. One, because it isn't really like the other films, it's kind of in its own category. Secondly, because your expectations will be so high after seeing the other films, this one will "somewhat disapoint".

Rating 5/10

Life isn't like in the movies. Life... is much harder.

[–] sdbloom 19 years ago

I don't understand why people is so disapointed with this movie. Maybe is just a prejudice, maybe they expect to see "Koyaanisqatsi 3". I would be very disaponted if Naqoyqatsi was just "Koyaanisqatsi 3". But fortunately, it is not. It's a different film.

One common critic is the "it wasted too much time in this theme" thing. What about the "grid" part in Koyaanisqatsi, which is fifteen minutes long? I have never seen somebody complaining about that scene. So time is not the problem.

I think the problem is we are completely surrounded with the imaginery that Naqoyqatsi uses that it seems very usual and common to people who see the film, and they accept it without asking for further meaning. They just ask for "more and better". They think: "ok, I get it; I don't want to waste more time watching this". And maybe they need to watch theirselves while watching the film to truly understand it.

I'm not saying they are plain and superficial. I mean that we have accepted those kind of images and effects as part of our "languaje". Like if we were put in front of a keyboard to think about the symbols we see and the complexity of the cerebral processes that give them some meaning to us, and we just say: "ok, I get it, they are just letters and numbers..."

PD: Sorry for my bad english, I'm still learning.

[–] mikeyb-2 19 years ago

No problem with the english, if you're learning the language youre on the right track.

I think my point was that although I think that the film was an achievement and a good film, it didn't live up to the other films in this genre. Baraka, Chronos, Koyaniisqatsi are all better films that raised my expectations very high for Naqoyqatsi. While Naqoyqatsi is a good film, it very much lacks the essence of the other films.

Life isn't like in the movies. Life... is much harder.

[–] joemoseleymustbestopped 18 years ago

I think perhaps some people struggle with this film because, unlike the others you mentioned, Naqoyqatsti is not 'beautiful' in a conventional sense.
Sure, Baraka and Koyaanisqatsi are far more than postcards but there is that aspect of 'natural' beauty for an audience to fall back on.
With this movie the stock imagery has been manipulated beyond conventional recognition and the visual effects are created from a digital realm with which a film audience is not fully farmiliar.
Its worth bearing in mind that twenty years seperate the first and last in this trilogy. Thats not much more than what separates Monet and Kandinsky.
The ten year gap between Koyaanisqatsi and Baraka produced what, to my mind, was a very similar film, representing perhaps what Fricke would have produced if Reggio had asked him back for Powaqatsi? Discuss.

[–] gameshowalex 8 years ago

AND what would that problem be? Reality? It's not all real in the first 2 films either, what I am understanding is why there are so many negative reviews.

[–] qwertyuioptom0902000 10 years ago

This film is terrible when compared to the first one, the images are meaningless and disorganized, doesn't blow my mind anymore