Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

SoTrumpBelieve Must See Movie...

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

brchthethird NAQOYQATSI is the third installment in a trilogy by Godfrey Reggio and Philip Glass that began with KOYAANISQATSI. It is a documentary (loosely so) that examines globalization, technology, and violence in a rather oblique way that uses image juxtaposition to make its points. And, for the duration of the film, is accompanied by a Philip Glass score. I only recently saw KOYAANISQATSI, which I thought was OK. I didn't completely "get" it, but the title's meaning at the end did help a little bit, in retrospect. For me, the meaning of NAQOYQATSI was a little more clear from the outset, as the idea of technological advances alternately helping and harming humanity isn't really anything new, having been addressed in a many a sci-fi film before and since. The film is divided into different segments, with each one going into a different aspect of technology or violence in human society. From all of the imagery, I gleaned that technological advances have created a passive, spectator society that, despite being able to move rapidly, still isn't going anywhere. We have also cultivated a society in which we obsess over superficial things, as well as worship power, fame, and money; and the advent of mass media has only entrenched this further. There was also images relating to the destructive power of technology, and its contribution to/role in real-world violence (juxtaposed with video game violence). All things considered, there is a lot to digest here, which would seem to indicate that this film requires multiple viewings to take all of it in. Still, I feel like the film lacked a strong through-line and cohesive message. Granted, the segments work individually, but taken as a whole, it smacks of throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. Overall, I would place this on a level a little below KOYAANISQATSI, from which it seemed to recycle a bit of thematic material. It is well-made and contains some good bits of message, but none of the observations are that original and it didn't quite gel into a cohesive whole.

sassari23 A stunning piece of art. Images and music work in synergy to bring you a strong message. As a depiction of the brutality of war, this movie speaks to the fragility of human balance and how ultimately war is a detrimental element to the value of life. Unprecedented scientific discoveries, inventions, and beautiful works of art have spoken throughout history to the greatness of humanity. However, the destruction brought by war will inevitably undermine such greatness and possibly destroy it in its entirety. In the potential for advancement also lies the potential for destruction. The most beautiful work of art, the most intelligent design or scientific progress will never bring back our loved ones.

mickgg Just a small comment to add to jaesboxer's lengthy review ("Beauty without depth" 9th March 2006) For a film made in 2002, the image I was most expecting to see as the film drew to a close was images of the WTC buildings collapsing. One would have thought that Reggio would not flinch from inflicting the horror upon us, but it must have been too sensitive for him or the director/producer.Nevertheless, the only way I can interpret the inverted skydiver sequence of the Vivid Unknown is to see it as a not-so-oblique reference to the WTC occupants who jumped and free-fell to their deaths rather than be cooked or crushed within the failing structures.On so may fronts today, there are bodies splatting all around us, but still we fail to abandon this seemingly resilient edifice called progress. It is time we made peace with planet Earth.

epsilon3 What a let down. Koyaanisqatsi was brilliant, Powaqatsi was quite good, Naqoyqatsi is the same thing all over again, without the beauty and profundity.It's not that I don't sympathise with the meaning behind the film, but bombarding me with images of dollar signs and corporate logos is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The majority of those who view this movie do not need to be chaperoned around these issues.The film feels structureless and jumps back and forth from one point to the next and then back again. I suppose you could argue that this reflects the chaotic nature of the films subject matter, but to me, that's just making excuses for a poorly conceived narrative.The computer graphics don't work well at all. They often feel like an excuse to show of a few fancy special effects and already look dated (Max Headroom came to mind on several oc...oc...oc...occasions.). They just don't have the beauty of a 'real' image.To add insult to injury, the film has been stretched out from a 4:3 aspect ratio to 16:9 so all of the people appear distorted. This is because the stock footage used was 4:3 and they couldn't be bothered editing it to fit into a widescreen presentation. They just stretched the lot, and when you watch the DVD it is very noticeable. It's claimed that this was a deliberate move and not a decision based on technical difficulties, but I'm not sure.Overall - I'd say watch koyaanisqatsi again - it's the only film out of the three worth repeated viewings.