Recensioni degli utenti

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.

first off i consider koya one of my top movies and think highly of powa as well. this is not either of those movies. it has been made in a different time .

because my expectations were so entrenched i had to stop this movie halfway thru thinking it was crap and take a break.

then i came back to it and really enjoyed the last half. not to say this movie is as well crafted as koyaniqaatsi because it isn't.

but it is very different, the linear sense of koya is gone replaced with chaotic and seemingly unrelated images thrown together into a relentless barrage. At first i struggled to find the underlying theme/string that connected it all as such was in koyanisqaatsi but there was none and i became disappointed. but perhaps the movie is more reflective of the chaotic barrage of information we live in. the unending information and violence overload.

in koyanisqatsi i felt hope perhaps in this nothing but the maddening roar of modern day society tearing itself apart.

its been twenty odd years since koyanisqaatsi and everything portrayed in that movie has only become more intense, more fractured. perhaps this movie lacks the simple sublimeness of the first because reggio not longer sees the world as such. the madness of modern man is much more evident in this. the oversaturation in the movie reflecting the over saturation the skewed perspective our world has.

this movie is certainly not as easy to digest as reggio's other works and i would like to return to it as some point. To those who enjoyed the first two i would say watch this but leave your preconceived notions and expectations behind.

Being a big fan of Koyannisqatsi and Philip Glass in general, i was looking forward to this quite a bit. It's unfortunate that this film turned out to be as cliched and flat as the first film was pioneering and bold. Some of the music, especially the first and last pieces, is stunning, and sounds amazing in Dolby Digital. Reggio's images, with some notable exceptions, such as some famous works of art morphing into one another (with a technique far more interesting than the typical morphing), are nothing new, and the usual topics of the hazards of technology and corporate greed feel all too well-worn. Whereas the first film may have inspired a style of tv commercials, Naqoyqatsi just feels like one.

I read the other review here before seeing the movie and desperately hoped it was wrong - it wasn't. Koyaanisqatsi was, and still is, a great movie -- full of sweeping images and magnificent scope, the movie certainly had an eloquent statement to make. I was hoping for something similar in the third installment.

This was an exercise in tedium. It seemed as though the filmmakers raided the Time-Life library of iconic 20th century images and fed them through a special effects filter. It's as if they felt that what worked in Koyaanisqatsi, would work here -- extreme closeup, slow-motion etc. But the images here had nothing to say.

There was no emotion. Just wall-to-wall shots of everything from dollar signs, 0's and 1's, faces, bodies, computer chips, JFK, Martin Luther King, Bin Laden, buildings ripped by tornados... you get the picture. To make matters worse, everything was put through amateurish f/x-- mosaic, grain, vortex, inverted.

While it may have been a technical marvel, the end result felt empty and labored. Footage near the end consisted of juxtaposing images of real global street violence with video game violence -- but so what? Nothing new was said here. A real shame to end this way...

Welcome to the digital age, a world of speed, cultural hybridity, multi media, and perceptual overload, all of which are expressed beautifully in Godfrey Reggio's third entry Naqoyquatsi.

This one is vastly different from the previous two. Wheras Koyaanisqatsi and Powaquatsi were done in the real world, much of Naqoyqatsi is done on the computer. Using just about every computer graphic available at the time, Naqoyqatsi feels more like a piece of art than the other two. After deciding that Powaqatsi was a dud, I was pleased to see that Godfrey Reggio made a recovery. Naqoyqatsi is almost on par with it's fore father Koyanisquatsi, although depending on which on you see first, you may prefer this one. This one strikes me as less epic than Koyanis, in part because it's faster editing allows for much more advanced montages which are so overwhelming at times that they occasionally provoke headache.

The message behind this film is the way humanity is a competitive species. I think Alfred Adler would adore this movie. One of Freud's students, he believed that the human condition is based on seeking superiority. Naqoyqatsi shows us two forms of competition. One is sporting events, and the other is physical war and fighting.

Phillip Glass once again, works his musical magic, although it seems like some of the score was borrowed from Koyaanisqatsi. Together, Reggio and Glass have provided a trilogy of sights and sounds that defy all the conventions of cinema, to favour aesthetics.

Naqoyqatsi was a visually interesting film - most of the time. There are certainly moments of beauty; it is in essence a ballet of motion put to screen viewed through the eyepiece of various manipulated patterns, which we are reminded pervade our existence, as we see with the stunning Mandelbrot sequence. Yet this "ballet" at times does get old. For instance, we could have seen less of the tunnel motion effect and the flashing of ones and zeros.

The images were ever-interchanging and evolving into each other or into something different. I don't believe the editing was amateurish at all. As for the remark about the film appearing low-tech, as if filmed from a TV screen, those were intentional effects!

Where I seem to differ from others on this movie is with the musical score. I simply felt on the whole, structuring Naqoyqatsi with the Phillip Glass compositions and Yo Yo Ma Cello work - beautiful though they were - as the only sound dimension left the film somewhat flat.

What was lacking here was more artistic communication. This I believe could have been achieved with a more lucid sound content, as one possibility, in contrast to the long singular unfolding set of somber strings. It could also have benefited from a minimal narrative treatment, perhaps separating the film into sections with more meaning, or with some dialogue.

The theme elements treated in the movie were mostly evident, if not a little underdeveloped and foggy. The primary causes of misery and war today being: consumerism, conformism, over-competitiveness, and modern technology on overflow. These we see through flashes of violence, slow motion imagery manipulation, and various negative aspects of society (mixed with various displays of innocent emotions). The found images are sometimes commonplace ones. But usually they are re-introduced with a unique enough flavor. However, often I wished Reggio would have done more with his image sequences. Perhaps the film was too careful in attempting to be visually appealing yet startling, while it would have done better to lend itself a little more to some chance events.

Naqoyqatsi achieves some great visual feats. But for a montage of this length, more coherency and less filler would have been kind of nice.

Well, I'm still not sure what to make of this film...it was definately not forgettable as a whole, but the barrage of images was a bit overwhelming in retrospect which kind of blurs them all together in my mind. It's not that I didn't like the film, but it didn't really affect or enlighten me in any big way (and I'm not a cold fish by any means). The score, as mentioned several times already, was excellent and I'm not even a fan of orchestral type music. Overall a positive experience, but may be more enjoyable in a slightly more intimate setting than a crowded, cruddy old lecture theatre, so I shant judge it harshly at this time.

This is a failure so complete as to make me angry.

All of the subtlety and structure of Reggio's early films is gone, leaving nothing but a hash of digitally smeared images whose sole purpose seems to be Whining About Bad Things Humans Do. Just how do Star Trek-like wormhole graphics, slo-mo colorized seascapes, mutiplicities of obviously fake computer icons, and shots of athletic competition that, incidentally, show that no one has ever been able to top (or even match) Leni Riefenstahl for filming bodies in motion, edited together with an overlay of video colorization that a 1980s "Dr. Who" producer would have rejected as "too cheesy," add up to a polemic against "civilized violence"? There is no intellectual, emotional, or visceral connection between these images as assembled and mutated by Reggio and way too many digital effects artistes, and the cautionary tale I assume he wanted to produce. With all of the "dramaturgical consultants" involved, no one seems to have pulled his head out the his own feeling of Saying Something Important and considered that they might all be failing to say something new.

Only people who watch too much television could make such a film and believe that it's meaningful; this is kindergarten Stan Brakhage, and ultimately gutless in its relentless obviousness. The only irony and tension evident here (unlike in "Koyaanisqatsi" where the relentless beauty and strangeness of time-altered ordinary images forced you to consider their meaning) was when the DVD I was watching jammed and skipped. This is MTV for the Noam Chomsky crowd, based on reflex rather than reflection and signifying nothing. Two stars for the music, which is in Glass's best pomo-Cesar Franck style and features some passionate cello from Yo-Yo Ma. (I hope for his sake that he didn't have to record his parts to a playback of the film; there are some things you shouldn't have to do even for a paycheck.)

After reading different comments about this movie, I've decided to see it, and I'm really surprised because what I have found has little to do with what I thought it was.

Naqoyqatsi is about the loss of our natural perception of reality and its substitute: the image itself as a product of technology, the image as a weapon in a globalized war. And here comes the apparent incoherence, because the film is a parade of these images, a product of the same technological violence it is reflecting and criticizing. That's not hypocrisy; the contradiction is part of the film itself.

Although I do not completely support Reggio's point of view, I admire the way he expresses it through his films without impositions of any kind, so that the viewer can find his own perspective. While watching Naqoyqatsi, I was asking for the "original" pictures that were below those distortions and filters, but soon I realized the real world wasn't there. It was like "OK, so that's all... Well, let's see it".

A few words about the inevitable comparison with it's predecessors: if you are looking for something like Koyaanisqatsi, go see Koyaanisqatsi again. Naqoyqatsi is a different film. It does well as the third part of the Qatsi Trilogy, but like the other two, has its own "personality". And I think it's a great film. Maybe not a masterpiece like Koyaanisqatsi, but a great film.

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.

"Naqoyqatsi" is an experience different of what many viewers might seen it in the past 20 years. Remember the 30 last minutes of "2001: A Space Odyssey" when there was only visual effects images and the frightening music in the background and no words, no quotes were heard? Now, imagine almost 90 minutes of only that, the only exercise you have to do is sit, watch and think about why those images appeared and their meaning. This is "Naqoyqatsi".

In this documentary director Godfrey Reggio, music composer Philip Glass (from "The Hours") and animated director Jon Kane created an enormous montage about many aspects of life on Earth. But his approach is to show how our society became violent and that progress is an important part of that cause. The first image that appears is the Babel Tower and after that technology appears in its several forms in buildings, computers, science, medicine, our human body capacities of doing miraculous things, the relation between men and the sports, and the decadence of the mankind in violent acts. All this achievement was possible because of technology.

One important thing showed here is the difference between what humans can do and what technology can imitate too. For instance, the adoration that we have with famous people. In a take, celebrities generated by computer walk by and the people are crazy about them, waving to them, taking photos. In the next scene we seen real artists walking in the red carpet; Marlon Brando, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Elton John and we see the difference between them and the digital celebrities. It might seem the same thing but it's not. We are really interested in the real people and not in some CGI creation.

Here comes the difficult part of this film: the discussion and what do we learn with "Naqoyqatsi". There's criticism and there isn't, it seems plausible in one moment and totally useless and pointless in the other. In the whole film there's no critic but after the credits roll in the end and the meaning of the word Naqoyqatsi is shown there's a criticism, there's the point of view of the director, and by that I mean that it might be too late for people to get the idea of what this movie is about. Naqoyqatsi is a word of a tribe that means: societies that lives by killing each other, people living of war. This is a statement towards our society that gave 10 steps forward and walked backwards in 30 steps. Our material evolution led to our physical destruction and will lead to our possible extinction. Atomic bombs, protests, dictatorships, dictators and their ideologies, weapons of mass destruction, all the math used by Einstein and Oppenheimer for good reasons used in the bad and dangerous ones. Since there's no quotes, captions and that sort of things many people will walk out of this documentary without understand what the director meant to say with it.

This is a patient, wordless, and mind blowing experience where only the visual and the real images are important. Many of the images are shown in slow-motion, giving the viewer time to think, formulate a thought about what he's seeing at the moment. And of course Philip Glass's music, in it's quiet and slow language. Very mental and hypnotic.

I recommend you to watch if possible a similar documentary called "Nós Que Aqui Estamos Por Vós Esperamos" (translated by "Here We Are Waiting for You") a Brazilian documentary that follows almost the same path of "Naqoyqatsi" but it has more messages, more substantial meaning and captions that explain things. In this documentary director Marcelo Masagão collected several images of the 20th Century and created a fictional story for those images stating the different aspects of the human mortality. It's terrific. 10/10 for both projects!

AFTER seeing this film, I logged on to IMDB and read all of your reviews. And there is one common thread that linked all of the negative reviews together...everyone had a pre-conceived notion of what this film was to be, they had already drawn pre-cast conclusions about the work based on the previous two films in the trilogy. Most of all, and this is what is what closes the mind the most when observing a work of art so open to personal interpretation, everyone had already decided what this piece would MEAN TO THEM BEFORE they saw it.

That said, I had heard of neither this film nor the trilogy it completes before I saw it. In the truest sense of the term, I was a blank slate going in. This is what I saw.

This truly is life as war. More on that later.

I saw brilliant, beautiful moving images of the human condition. Pain, happiness, loss, sorrow, joy, all the perfectly precious elements of humanity that make us who we are. We are all, each and every one of us, a work of art. Each of us holds the brush to our spiritual pallet, and, through being born, and experiencing, living, loving, growing, we slowly, yet masterfully create ourselves, our values, our souls. All of us together, works of art drawn into one, create, for better or worse, the enormous canvas that is our world, each of us drawn together like a collage to form the overall work of art that is humanity. It is our idiosyncrasies as well as our ideologies that make us who we are; "Naqoyqatsi" clearly presents the beauty of these idiosyncrasies in a swirling, glorious montage.

Humanity has spent millennia growing, learning, striving, achieving, evolving. Keep that in mind.

Montages of celebrities are certainly nothing new. "Naqoyqatsi" presents to us those who have reached within themselves and strove to achieve all they could. For better or worse, these are people who changed the world, who exemplified and personified the human condition. The symbolism here is that we all have the power within us to make a difference, to effect a change, to be the representative work of art our generation. Hitler, Lincoln and the Beatles certainly wouldn't be mingling at dinner parties, but they changed the world, and, in some microscopic way, they have played a part in forming us.

Every human being is influenced, touched, formed, brushed by all the events of the past. Keep that in mind.

What is the message? This is what I saw...

No other review has touched on this, and, again, it may be because they had targeted other interpretations beforehand. Besides the war, I feel that the other blaring, screaming message inherent in this work is that WE MUST NEVER, EVER CLONE HUMAN BEINGS. The images of the beauty and magic of the human condition speak to the divine beauty each of us is inherently born with. Now look at the sequence full of crash test dummies and humanoid life-forms. Moving the same, looking the same, no life no soul, no art. CAN A CLONED HUMAN HAVE A SOUL? My God, what an unbelievably complex, mind-blowing, staggering question. As this is a film review, however, I will simply state that the answer I got from this film is NO!

And now, the war. So many reviewers were disappointed by the fact that they were not confronted with 90 minutes of war montage. I would go so far as to say that some of the reviewers actually felt they had been intentionally deceived by the title. I ask you all, what is Reggio's statement? Think about it. Not YOUR statement, and not what YOU WANTED Reggio's message to be before you watched the film. Remember, I was a blank slate going in. This is what I saw...

Humanity has spent millennia growing, evolving, learning, striving, achieving. Thousands and thousands of years.

And how long would it take to completely obliterate all of it? As long as the war montage of this film.

This was beautiful.

Having enjoyed Koyaanisqatsi and Powaqatsi I was looking forward to this third part of the Qatsi trilogy and seeing what direction it had taken. Rarely has a film so spectacularly failed to live up to its predecessors and lost its way. Although it tries to represent "civilised warfare" in the form of sport, science, trade and other forms of competition, it lacks the global scope and even the coherently developed themes of its predecessors. War is chaos, but even wars have an aim in mind and this film had little structure and unclear goals.

Naqoyqatsi is flawed by being a chaotic melange of images that does little to develop its theme. On the plus side, it wisely avoided using some of the iconic images of last century's wars.

Naqoyqatsi is also so insular that several times I had to remind myself that I was not watching an advertisement promoting the American way of life. Perhaps this insularity reflects the ongoing "War on Terror". When representing "sport as war" the prominent team logos ensured that the USA was depicted as the winner. Hence it missed the opportunity to depict some of the many sports around the world and showing that humanity is united in its use of sport as a form of civilised warfare.

Apart from newsreel, the footage seemed to have been shot on a budget in the confines of New York and there was little recognition of "life as war" in the rest of the world. The gallery of faces (waxworks) gave only a nod to the existence of important personages outside of the USA. The makers missed the point that globalisation does not mean Americanisation.

The Philip Glass soundtrack sounded much like every other Philip Glass score I've heard (with the possible exception of Koyaanisqatsi) and at best can be described as "inoffensive" neither adding to, nor detracting from, the chaotic imagery.

In the hustle and bustle of a chaotic world, we often don't take the time to stop and really look at all the beautiful things that tend to pass us by unnoticed. It is Godfrey Reggio's aim in `Naqoyqatsi' – as it was in his previous `Koyaanisqatsi' and `Powaqqatsi' - to focus our attention on all the artistry inherent in the shapes, forms and patterns that make up our universe. His film is a succession of images, some of them derived from nature (clouds, ocean waves), others from Man (buildings and bridges), and others from computer-generated fantasy. These he filters through his observant camera eye, state-of-the-art processing and ingenious editing to create a cinematic tone poem. The element that most separates `Naqoyqatsi' from Reggio's earlier works is the much heavier reliance on camera trickery and CGI effects here. For the most part, Reggio has moved away from nature as his subject and towards the cyber realities of the current age. Thus, the altered emphasis in form seems not merely appropriate but thematically valid as well, as Reggio examines a world in which nature has been largely eclipsed by computer technology.

At the end of the film we are told that `Naqoyqatsi' is a Hopi word meaning, essentially, `war' and `violence.' I'm not sure, though, that Reggio has really earned that title with his film. True, he does include a few shots of mushroom clouds, of street riots, of violent video games, but they hardly account for the majority of the images we see. Perhaps it is the clash between nature and technology that he is referring to here, but the title – at least as defined at the end - still seems to fall a bit short of the mark.

Still, Reggio is often able to find poetry in even the most disturbing of images. For instance, there's an amazing shot of a trio of crash test dummies performing a macabre, yet strangely beautiful slow motion `dance' in a simulated airplane crash. It is but one of the many unforgettable images in the film.

Enhanced by the haunting music of Philip Glass, `Naqoyqatsi' offers a dazzling kaleidoscopic view of the world, a visual tour de force for the aesthetically inclined.

A weak ending to a beautiful trilogy but powerful nevertheless.

For those new to the series, check out Koyaanisqatsi before seeing this one.

3.5/5. Felt as if it's riding the success of the first film but still had strong social commentary.

I sat down to watch the third and final film of the 'qatsi' series last night as so far Reggio's work has really inspired me in my film making. The last two films has such a huge impact on how I saw life I could not wait to be inspired by Naqoyqatsi. The start of the film felt very much the same as the past films with the sublime music score. I did enjoy the film but I dint feel that the series evolved as much as I hoped it would. The film is breath-taking at first but the same shocking images after awhile become dull and you are numbed to the full effect of them. I was left at the end of the film with a strong feeling of emptiness and sadness. I always knew war was out there but this film really brought in into my mind. The films trys to show that war is life. At times I found the images to be to in your face but that is something I have not made my mind up completely as of yet. All the images are of some kind of war but they do not flow as well as I would have hoped as you would have images of Hitler and then Binlarden. Sure they are linked but its not as smooth as I feel it could have been. Koyaanisqatis had a much stronger beginning, middle and end. I really tried to find the meaning in this film but kept getting lost in the overpowering images. Even though I do not think this film is perfect like the last two films were,

The music is really stunning and takes you into the experience just like in the other qatsi films. But what exactly is this journey?: Maybe a grim view of the world? the title after all means "life as war". A world full of technology and the humans as master or as slaves of this technology? These were my expectation of the film. In stead of the unique and wonderful story telling Godfrey Reggio did with koyaaniqatsi en powaqqatsi which makes you see the world with different eyes . You get this film. What is it? I can't tell you. you see a stream of floating images, symbols and what not. But it doesn't make a coherent story. It is even difficult to watch because the images you see make no sense what so ever and you can easily loose interest. But the music still keeps you going. After watching this film you have two thoughts: 1. I got to have this music on cd 2. what did i see?

The director Godfrey Reggio must be a very charming and persuasive man for this dreadfully botched project to have seen the light of day. Reggio's message, so powerful and resonant in his previous two Qatsi films, is hopelessly jumbled here. Athletes, equations, oceans, keypads, laughing heads, etc, mingle without purpose. The parade of banal imagery is mostly generic stock from Getty Images et al, and the heavy-handed digital manipulations are amateurish in the worst way imaginable. Surely someone involved (Steven Soderbergh, executive producer?) could have pointed out that applying a solarizing filter to nearly every frame was a VERY BAD idea? The crude looping, layering, and distorting of images recalls a freshman Photoshop class. And to make matters worse, the computer animation sequences are more artless than a 1980's Wall Street pie-chart. This is not to say that improved aesthetics alone would have salvaged this film, but some meager effort in this direction may have made it tolerable as visual fodder for the accompanying music. I feel compelled to point out that the score by Philip Glass will certainly satisfy his fans. Not a radical departure, but rather a refinement of what Glass does best with lovely violin contributions by Yo Yo Ma. If you decide to see this film be certain to focus your attention on the brief opening sequence. While you may already be familiar with Detroit's once majestic but long abandoned Michigan Central Railroad Station 89 minutes later you will find yourself remembering this image of 20th century decay as the critical point when you should have headed for the EXIT sign/hit the STOP button, etc. You've been warned.

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.

I've seen all 3 now. I just can't believe how bad Naqoyqatsi is. Not in comparison to the others, but simply on it's own merit, or lack of.

I can't understand how the average rating for this movie is over 6 out of 10. I gave the first 2 movies 8 out of 10. They were thought provoking and beautifully done. I gave this movie a rating of 1. If a 0 or negative number was available, I would have given it that rating instead. What a total waste of time it was watching this movie. I thought after the first 30 minutes that I should turn it off, but then I figured that it was just a (very) slow starting movie. I thought the same thing after 45 minutes, then 1 hour, etc. Then I realized that it wasn't going to get any better.

It's very tedious to watch and without any redeeming qualities. Don't take my word for it, watch it yourself. Be sure to see the first two movies before this one. If you see this one first, I can just about guarantee that you'll never want to see the first two, but they are definitely much, much better than this "piece of work".

The best part of the movie is when the credits role at the end. That's when your penance on this earth is complete and you can foregoe 89 minutes in purgatory, for the suffering that you've endured watching this "film". If God is truely merciful, he'll be more generous.

So some of it's definitely disappointing. I watched the first two Qatsi films back in 2013, and despite liking both a lot, seeing that Naqoyqatsi was less well-received made me apprehensive about watching it.

Finally watching it now, some eight to nine years later, some of that apprehension was reasonable, but some not so much.

The digital effects sometimes work and sometimes don't. To have computer-generated images of falling coins pop up multiple times in a montage that also shows stock market traders yelling, people gambling, and wealthy celebrities is pointless. You're already getting your point across just fine!

The computer-generated images are inconsistent, too, as are the filters used. Sometimes it's striking, like some night-vision type footage of warfare scenes. Sometimes, it looks pretty bad (there's a great time lapse shot of the White House that's preceded by an awful looking CGI-ish shot of the Hollywood sign, for example).

But y'know what? For all its flaws, it does do a decent job at capturing what the first decade of the 21st century sort of felt like. It's the only Qatsi film made during my lifetime, so that's something I could appreciate more so here than with the other ones. And the other thing done well here is the score: even if Godfrey Reggio might occasionally let you down with the visuals, Philip Glass brings his A-game when it comes to the music.

Things have changed so much since 2002 that I'd honestly like to see another film in this series that tries to capture either the 2010s or (god forbid) the mess that has so far been the 2020s. Even though both Reggio and Glass are still alive, I'm not holding my breath that they'll collaborate again to put out something similar, but you never know...

(EDIT: Looks like they did do another documentary called Visitors in 2013, so might have to check that out)

Where do I start? I couldn't even check the spoiler alert box because I'm not even sure I could describe what takes place in this movie. It has no coherence whatsoever. This would be fine if the movie was entertaining or at least beautiful to look at or listen to. Sadly, it's none of these. It's a patchwork of edited film. What I mean by edited is that every image is blurred and discolored as if a teenager with Windows 95 got a hold of it and used the dated software to take the definition, color and quality out of the footage. This movie was painful in every way. The only reason I gave it a second try today (that's right, a second try) was because I just bought the Criterion Trilogy on Blu-ray. I didn't want to waste a nice Blu-ray disc and have it go unplayed. Well, I wish I would have left Naqoyqatsi in its box. I can't get this Saturday afternoon back. This is my regret.