Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Janis One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

petesea A bunch of this footage is "amazing" - I would have preferred if the filmmakers had stuck to the true to nature stuff and not taken the "cast" to the Statue of Liberty, Paris, etc.This is an amazing "story" of the journeys, hazards and adventures of some beautiful creatures. There are a few quite shocking moments - but they are explainable to young viewers.What kind of "documentary" edits shots to make them more interesting? For me, this is the film's major flaw and is downright unconscionable. Cut out 20 minutes or so of this tomfoolery and fakery and this would be a "10" – easy!

billion_mucks ¿It is me or is it not extraordinary that a single documentary filming for hour and a half only birds? Alright, birds are cute, ¿Who doesn't love to see a parrot eating a piece of pie and chanting for 2 minutes? Well, Jacques Perrin achieves with extraordinary cameras (how did he do that?)to trap us in the poetic flight of a condor, in the lightness of an albatross and in the comical stumbles of a penguin. We are amazed just with looking at the bird, learning at its migratory course, and contemplating the fastuose sky that lies as a recurrent location. This film has a poetry, a music that involves the soft movements of the birds. If you are patient and decide to take up this challenge; one Sunday evening after you took a shower: trust me, It will be a everlasting experience.

bob the moo Following migratory flight paths for different types of birds across the world, this film is an impressive piece of documentary making that is relaxing and easy to watch even if it is not particularly educational. Personally nature films are not really my thing and, although I can appreciate the beauty and wonder of nature, I prefer them when they are not only showing me something but also really helping me learn and understand what I am seeing. To that end then, Winged Migration wasn't all I would have liked it to be because the focus here was the showing rather than the telling or explaining.Of course this is really a minor complaint based on my own preference rather than a valid criticism of the film because otherwise the film engages simply by how impressive the footage is. Technically I have no idea how they shot most of the stuff they did but I do know that it must be a significant challenge. The work has paid off though because the film looks great and has amazingly beautiful shots that are worth watching the film just to see. I do want to apply the criticism of visuals without substance to this film in the same way I would to a blockbuster that relies on effects to keep me watching but somehow this film also manages to have enough substance to it despite the thankfully limited use of the narrator. Admittedly it does this by playing on the human emotions of the viewer rather than sticking true to nature but it is hard to think of a single scene that will convince you shooting birds is wrong than the one where a beautiful sweeping shot sees the birds suddenly drop, flapping to the ground far below.With such reliance on images and footage though I can understand why some viewers get bored because they are waiting for "something" to happen. Of course "something" happens but it is not the "something" that viewers accustom to a traditional narrative will easily take to. Worth seeing in my opinion for the sheer visual and technical splendidness of the presentation which will be more than enough to engage those who enjoy nature documentaries.

Brevity The cast seems to be very, very comfortable with the camera. I don't know what the director has done to achieve this. I'll take a quick glance around to find out. Oh, so he used professional actors. Good choice. Takes a lot of effort, too - something that must be appreciated.The costume designer must've been smoking something. The designs are in some cases utterly, outrageously unconvincing and inconsistent.The script, then. There are just too many characters. No one gets enough attention. There should've perhaps been less characters. Moreover, it almost seems they aren't even connected to each other. The movie lacks a clear protagonist, a centerpiece. Of the ensemble, the Canadian chaps seem to have a bit more screen time than most. The others do get their moment in the spotlight, and deservedly so. Also featured are very brief but powerful cameos from P. J. Squirrel and Randy Warthog, among others.This paragraph has been designed to be a bridge between the two halves of this comment. I trust you'll notice what changes.I watched a version cut into a two-part miniseries and with Finnish narration, so I can only speak about that. (No penguins! Now, where the penguins? The runtime seems to be the same, though, so I don't know...) It isn't very informative. Eero Saarinen's voice stated such facts as "it is not for aesthetic reasons that the birds fly in formation". Mm-hmm.Some bad-quality video shots - if I have seen correctly - here and there and the ill-chosen music almost ruined my awe at points. I didn't notice the much talked-about CGI shots. Maybe there were none in this version.But the visuals... Simply stated, they are breath-taking, particularly during the airborne scenes, as you'd imagine. One four-second shot of a (excuse me while I consult my dictionary) stork above the Pyrenees alone is worth it.