I'm not a harsh critique when it comes to slow, beautifully shot romantic films and I grew up with Iranian cinema and the utterly slow movies of Abbas Kiarostami, Majid Majidi and Mohsen Makhmalbaf, but 'Here' is slow for no good philosophical, metaphysical, spiritual, or even sensual reason. The cinematography is lovely, and the production value is good, but the script could have had a couple of rewrites. The acting is okay and what makes it okay is not the work of the actors but the weakness of the script and the lack of enough tension or conflict for the actors to deliver their best performance possible. Despite the slowness and the rawness of the script, I did like the setting, Armenia, which we don't get to see very often in non- Armenian cinema, and how life is like there.
9 Reviews
'Here' is very different
smfilm27 July 2012
Here is different in many ways. Too many to really outline in a review... and different and great in one spot is really really hard to find in cinema these days...
I would say that it is a very refreshing, meditative work of art for those of us who seek more in life. If you are into self awareness and philosophy in life and can open up to it, Here will take you on a journey that is very interesting in a unique way.
A lot of films over the decades have attempted this, in spite of the virtual business suicide that they are, but Here presents it in a contemporary, realist, utilitarian view that is so new.
Ben Foster and Lubna Azabal are two very good actors who get to shine in subtlety... I really wish Ben got more big roles and especially that Lubna was better represented in American / English speaking roles....
Braden King struggled to make this and from looking at the website did some unusual fundraising to get it over the finish line.... he ended up with something well worth your time, I hope it gets some recognition for the top flight, non standard fare it is....
I would say that it is a very refreshing, meditative work of art for those of us who seek more in life. If you are into self awareness and philosophy in life and can open up to it, Here will take you on a journey that is very interesting in a unique way.
A lot of films over the decades have attempted this, in spite of the virtual business suicide that they are, but Here presents it in a contemporary, realist, utilitarian view that is so new.
Ben Foster and Lubna Azabal are two very good actors who get to shine in subtlety... I really wish Ben got more big roles and especially that Lubna was better represented in American / English speaking roles....
Braden King struggled to make this and from looking at the website did some unusual fundraising to get it over the finish line.... he ended up with something well worth your time, I hope it gets some recognition for the top flight, non standard fare it is....
Charming Armenian backdrop can't save tale of lugubrious, self-indulgent US-Armenian romance
Turfseer30 January 2013
Warning: Spoilers
'Here' is the brainchild of Braden King, mainly known for prior documentaries and music videos. With 'Here', King decided to create the first American-Armenian joint film venture. Despite the script's low commercial appeal, he managed to conscript the well-known American film actor for his project, Ben Foster, and obtain almost $1.5 million in financing.
According to King, shooting in Armenia was a logistical nightmare, as he had to contend with a myriad of bureaucratic obstacles coupled with the technical limitations of the Armenian film industry. Nonetheless, as King related in a recent interview, working with the Armenian people was a great experience. 'Here' is mainly worthwhile to see the beautiful Armenian landscape, which few Americans are privy to, due to the dearth of Armenian films released in the U.S.
As for King's story, sad to say it's not all that exciting, quite lugubrious and a tad bit self-indulgent. It's about an American internet satellite map cartographer, Will Shepard (Ben Foster), who meets Gadarine Nazarian (Lubna Azabal), a free-spirited Armenian photographer. While Will maps the Armennian countryside, Gadarine. a photographer, walks around taking pictures. They travel around in an SUV and eventually a romance develops. Azabal, however, is not from Armenia at all. She's of Moroccan and Belgium descent, and memorized all the Armenian parts of her dialogue. To me it sounded perfectly authentic but I read a poster from Armenia on the internet, who claimed her accent was "laughable". That leads me to wonder why King failed to cast an Armenian actress in the role, despite Azabal's talents.
Part of the 'Here' script's problem is that it takes about an hour before any meaningful conflict develops between the couple as well as conflict in the external story. There is a mildly interesting section where Will and Gadarine visit the family of an old high school friend of Gardarine's, but like most of the film, goes on for way too long (the best thing about this scene is that we do learn that many Armenians DO like vodka!).
Another interesting but questionably effective scene is when Will and Gadarine are stopped by border guards at a border crossing into the disputed territory of Karabakh. Will is depicted as a character with quite a bit of repressed anger, but shows little common sense, when he picks a fight with the border guards. It's only through Gadarine's intervention that prevents the couple from being arrested or suffering an even worse fate. According to King, the scene was originally written with Gadarine bribing the lead soldier. Armenian authorities insisted that King change the script as they conceded it was realistic to depict police officers being corrupt in Armenia, but not soldiers. King ended up agreeing to make the change, as in the end, he was advised that the turning down of the bribe in this context, was wholly realistic!
The romance between the couple follows the usual program with a scene of initial intimacy (caressing while partly nude in a swimming spot off the beaten track), full score passion inside the car, an eventual argument and final reconciliation. Garadine proves to be a much more interesting character than Will, as she must contend with the disapproval of her family, as they are unhappy with her traveling and spurning Armenian tradition (she's just a little too liberal for such a conservative place as Armenia). Will is much more problematic because he's basically unlikeable. Not only does he end up failing in his mapping project but there's very little interesting about him. King has the idea that if you turn your main character into an angst ridden sad sack, that's enough to pull the audience in. Unfortunately, it is not.
In addition to the main story, King punctuates his narrative with some weird effects done to a collection of still images. Over these images, a narrator opines, with a succession of cryptic poems. When asked about the still images and the poetry, King remarked that it had something to do with the process of film itself. I didn't actually understand what these scenes meant nor could I fathom Mr. King's explanation.
I really wanted 'Here' to move faster. The romance between the principals meandered just like the entire film. The events that occurred were unexceptional and it was almost as if we were watching a slow-paced documentary. I realize that Mr. King was attempting to present some kind of 'slice of life', but Mr. Foster's character, was just too angry, to be engaging. See 'Here' for a glimpse into both the people and landscapes of Armenia. As for the drama, hopefully the film's creator will choose a much less ordinary and compact story, on his next go-round.
According to King, shooting in Armenia was a logistical nightmare, as he had to contend with a myriad of bureaucratic obstacles coupled with the technical limitations of the Armenian film industry. Nonetheless, as King related in a recent interview, working with the Armenian people was a great experience. 'Here' is mainly worthwhile to see the beautiful Armenian landscape, which few Americans are privy to, due to the dearth of Armenian films released in the U.S.
As for King's story, sad to say it's not all that exciting, quite lugubrious and a tad bit self-indulgent. It's about an American internet satellite map cartographer, Will Shepard (Ben Foster), who meets Gadarine Nazarian (Lubna Azabal), a free-spirited Armenian photographer. While Will maps the Armennian countryside, Gadarine. a photographer, walks around taking pictures. They travel around in an SUV and eventually a romance develops. Azabal, however, is not from Armenia at all. She's of Moroccan and Belgium descent, and memorized all the Armenian parts of her dialogue. To me it sounded perfectly authentic but I read a poster from Armenia on the internet, who claimed her accent was "laughable". That leads me to wonder why King failed to cast an Armenian actress in the role, despite Azabal's talents.
Part of the 'Here' script's problem is that it takes about an hour before any meaningful conflict develops between the couple as well as conflict in the external story. There is a mildly interesting section where Will and Gadarine visit the family of an old high school friend of Gardarine's, but like most of the film, goes on for way too long (the best thing about this scene is that we do learn that many Armenians DO like vodka!).
Another interesting but questionably effective scene is when Will and Gadarine are stopped by border guards at a border crossing into the disputed territory of Karabakh. Will is depicted as a character with quite a bit of repressed anger, but shows little common sense, when he picks a fight with the border guards. It's only through Gadarine's intervention that prevents the couple from being arrested or suffering an even worse fate. According to King, the scene was originally written with Gadarine bribing the lead soldier. Armenian authorities insisted that King change the script as they conceded it was realistic to depict police officers being corrupt in Armenia, but not soldiers. King ended up agreeing to make the change, as in the end, he was advised that the turning down of the bribe in this context, was wholly realistic!
The romance between the couple follows the usual program with a scene of initial intimacy (caressing while partly nude in a swimming spot off the beaten track), full score passion inside the car, an eventual argument and final reconciliation. Garadine proves to be a much more interesting character than Will, as she must contend with the disapproval of her family, as they are unhappy with her traveling and spurning Armenian tradition (she's just a little too liberal for such a conservative place as Armenia). Will is much more problematic because he's basically unlikeable. Not only does he end up failing in his mapping project but there's very little interesting about him. King has the idea that if you turn your main character into an angst ridden sad sack, that's enough to pull the audience in. Unfortunately, it is not.
In addition to the main story, King punctuates his narrative with some weird effects done to a collection of still images. Over these images, a narrator opines, with a succession of cryptic poems. When asked about the still images and the poetry, King remarked that it had something to do with the process of film itself. I didn't actually understand what these scenes meant nor could I fathom Mr. King's explanation.
I really wanted 'Here' to move faster. The romance between the principals meandered just like the entire film. The events that occurred were unexceptional and it was almost as if we were watching a slow-paced documentary. I realize that Mr. King was attempting to present some kind of 'slice of life', but Mr. Foster's character, was just too angry, to be engaging. See 'Here' for a glimpse into both the people and landscapes of Armenia. As for the drama, hopefully the film's creator will choose a much less ordinary and compact story, on his next go-round.
A Meditation on Discovering Love and Self
gradyharp25 July 2012
HERE is not likely to be a phenomenal box office hit - nor does it seem to be intended for that. This extended (126 minutes) visual, poetic, philosophical experience is more an unwinding meditation about the beauty of Armenia and the crisscrossing of two lives of people who happen to encounter each other and find more definition of their own direction through a slowly developing love story. The film's opening moments are visually blinks of light and color and barely recognizable landscape as background to some lovely philosophical commentary made by off screen Peter Coyote. It plays like an overture to the story that lies ahead.
Will Shepard (Ben Foster) is an American satellite-mapping cartographer who has been assigned a location in Armenia to adjust the satellite images of this country. He speaks no Armenian and while attempting to order food in a café he is aided by a girl Gadarine Nazarian (Lubna Azabal) who provides translation. Gadarine is a photographer who spends her time on the road, away from her elderly parents and brother, taking artistic photographs: she has had a successful show of her work in Paris. Will and Gadarine chat momentarily but more importantly they connect with a mutually felt magnetism. Coincidences bring them together to travel as Gadarine photographs the countryside and village people and Will works on his meticulous mapping techniques. Their relationship develops into one of passion and filling each other's needs, but at the same time their coming together defines where each of these unique people find their life direction. How the couple close the film is too special to share in a review.
The true star of this film is the cinematographer Lol Crowley who with director and writer Braden King layout the most mysteriously beautiful landscape images: at times there is no dialogue to interfere with the sheer eloquence of the images of Armenian countryside. The musical score is minimal - by Boxhead Ensemble - and that adds to the meditative aspect of the film. Yes, there are scenes where Will and Gadarine interact with other characters and these are sensitive diversions. But basically this is an extended melancholic road trip, taken at a deliberately slow pace to allow the audience to discover the HERE with Will and Gadarine. It seems even longer than its excessive over-two hour length, but at the same time it is a film that refreshes the mind from all the noise and madness of the other current films. Recommended for those who appreciate experimental filmmaking.
Grady Harp
Will Shepard (Ben Foster) is an American satellite-mapping cartographer who has been assigned a location in Armenia to adjust the satellite images of this country. He speaks no Armenian and while attempting to order food in a café he is aided by a girl Gadarine Nazarian (Lubna Azabal) who provides translation. Gadarine is a photographer who spends her time on the road, away from her elderly parents and brother, taking artistic photographs: she has had a successful show of her work in Paris. Will and Gadarine chat momentarily but more importantly they connect with a mutually felt magnetism. Coincidences bring them together to travel as Gadarine photographs the countryside and village people and Will works on his meticulous mapping techniques. Their relationship develops into one of passion and filling each other's needs, but at the same time their coming together defines where each of these unique people find their life direction. How the couple close the film is too special to share in a review.
The true star of this film is the cinematographer Lol Crowley who with director and writer Braden King layout the most mysteriously beautiful landscape images: at times there is no dialogue to interfere with the sheer eloquence of the images of Armenian countryside. The musical score is minimal - by Boxhead Ensemble - and that adds to the meditative aspect of the film. Yes, there are scenes where Will and Gadarine interact with other characters and these are sensitive diversions. But basically this is an extended melancholic road trip, taken at a deliberately slow pace to allow the audience to discover the HERE with Will and Gadarine. It seems even longer than its excessive over-two hour length, but at the same time it is a film that refreshes the mind from all the noise and madness of the other current films. Recommended for those who appreciate experimental filmmaking.
Grady Harp
Testless, pretentious and over-boring experience
sergius24822 July 2012
This is one of those movies that let one wander ones own masochistic tendencies. There are some interesting premises, the exotic allure of the Armenian location, known and usually decent actors, a background of a complex and modern conflict and the human interest of a different culture. All is wasted. From the first moment of the movies one realizes that it is an exercise in narcissism. All unveils on incredible slow pace, with the long shots of landscapes, glances and a mostly discontinued episodic narrative. The type of film you can leave for coffee and return to without missing much. At the end it boils down to the story of a rather uninteresting romance interspersed with insufferable dullard voice-overs and tedious pretentious imagery. Avoid.
This movie is not about making maps or taking pictures
rayjbuccino19 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
On the surface of it this rather tedious movie is about two people traveling around the countryside of Armenia making maps and taking pictures. They try to relate to each other, but in the end they part. The map-making comes to an unsatisfactory conclusion for one reason or another. So does their relationship.
The story teller tells us that they came to a place with a fence around it that could not be mapped. He says every map and every globe has a space in it like that. So we the viewers are left with a feeling of emptiness. Nothing worked.
But this movie is not about making maps or taking pictures of the Armenian countryside. The Armenian countryside is a metaphor for the human heart. It is not true that every map and every globe has a space in it that is blank and cannot be mapped. Google Earth and satellite imagery can map every inch on this planet. It is every human heart that has a fenced-in blank space in it.
What people are looking for is someone who can help fill in this blank space in their heart that they can't fill themselves. These two people explored each other physically and mentally, but in the end they did not fill this need in each other.
It does not have to be this way. Sometimes it works. In a similar movie Take Me Home it worked. In real life it can work if the space is not too large and if the fence is not too high and if the right people come together.
As a road movie this is a flop. As an existential experience it is pretty good.
The story teller tells us that they came to a place with a fence around it that could not be mapped. He says every map and every globe has a space in it like that. So we the viewers are left with a feeling of emptiness. Nothing worked.
But this movie is not about making maps or taking pictures of the Armenian countryside. The Armenian countryside is a metaphor for the human heart. It is not true that every map and every globe has a space in it that is blank and cannot be mapped. Google Earth and satellite imagery can map every inch on this planet. It is every human heart that has a fenced-in blank space in it.
What people are looking for is someone who can help fill in this blank space in their heart that they can't fill themselves. These two people explored each other physically and mentally, but in the end they did not fill this need in each other.
It does not have to be this way. Sometimes it works. In a similar movie Take Me Home it worked. In real life it can work if the space is not too large and if the fence is not too high and if the right people come together.
As a road movie this is a flop. As an existential experience it is pretty good.
Like having fingernails pulled out
jm107016 July 2013
How do I get it all into just 1000 words? Having read some negative reviews before watching the movie, I set out to prove them wrong. I can't. This is a TERRIBLE movie! I'll just list a few of its most glaring flaws:
(1) The dialog is about half in unintelligible English, half in Armenian; the DVD subtitles translate Armenian into English but leave us to struggle alone through mumbled English and VERY heavily accented and garbled Armenglish; the closed captions do the opposite, giving the English dialog ONLY; all through the movie I had to switch back and forth between subtitles and closed captions as the characters switched between Armenian and English; it was infuriating.
(2) ALL of the dialog is stilted, pretentious, moronic crap, but EVEN WORSE than the dialog is the mind-bogglingly stupid pseudo-mythological narration read by poor Peter Coyote, who must be desperate for work.
(3) In some scenes, extremely shallow depth of field and oblique angles caused the camera to have to shift focus constantly, which completely ruined whatever was going on and gave me a headache; it was most noticeable when Will was writing an email, but the focus shifting happened pretty often; maybe it was supposed to be artistic, but it was just distracting.
(4) Ben Foster is TERRIBLY - and I do mean TERRIBLY - miscast in this movie, and he seems to be angry about it all the way through. I have never seen such obvious discomfort IN EVERY SCENE from any actor in any movie. It's like watching him sulk for two hours. Besides making the whole movie irritating, his extreme discomfort kills whatever chemistry there is supposed to be between his Will and Lubna Azabal's Gadarine.
(5) Braden King is an untalented narcissist. He should NEVER be allowed to make another movie! Maybe he can get a job at Burger King in some small town I'll never have to visit.
(1) The dialog is about half in unintelligible English, half in Armenian; the DVD subtitles translate Armenian into English but leave us to struggle alone through mumbled English and VERY heavily accented and garbled Armenglish; the closed captions do the opposite, giving the English dialog ONLY; all through the movie I had to switch back and forth between subtitles and closed captions as the characters switched between Armenian and English; it was infuriating.
(2) ALL of the dialog is stilted, pretentious, moronic crap, but EVEN WORSE than the dialog is the mind-bogglingly stupid pseudo-mythological narration read by poor Peter Coyote, who must be desperate for work.
(3) In some scenes, extremely shallow depth of field and oblique angles caused the camera to have to shift focus constantly, which completely ruined whatever was going on and gave me a headache; it was most noticeable when Will was writing an email, but the focus shifting happened pretty often; maybe it was supposed to be artistic, but it was just distracting.
(4) Ben Foster is TERRIBLY - and I do mean TERRIBLY - miscast in this movie, and he seems to be angry about it all the way through. I have never seen such obvious discomfort IN EVERY SCENE from any actor in any movie. It's like watching him sulk for two hours. Besides making the whole movie irritating, his extreme discomfort kills whatever chemistry there is supposed to be between his Will and Lubna Azabal's Gadarine.
(5) Braden King is an untalented narcissist. He should NEVER be allowed to make another movie! Maybe he can get a job at Burger King in some small town I'll never have to visit.
Classic road movie, set in Armenia
wavecat131 October 2021
I met the filmmaker once at a party. He was a cool guy and I am happy to report that I am also very impressed with the movie that he made. I think King is primarily a cinematographer, and visually this is often quite stunning. The story, such as it is, follows a young American mapmaker as he travels around Armenia, working on a project. While there, he meets a local woman, an artist who has some issues with her traditional family, and the two of them hook up and travel around together.
That ubiquitous narrator Peter Coyote shows up to do the voice-over. There are some exciting, fast collage sequences and beautiful shots of the Armenian countryside. At the end, Will expresses his love for Gatarina by making a map and leaving it for her, which is interesting. The loose plot reminded me of some classic road movies of the 1960s and 1970s. I hope to see some more films by Mr. King.
That ubiquitous narrator Peter Coyote shows up to do the voice-over. There are some exciting, fast collage sequences and beautiful shots of the Armenian countryside. At the end, Will expresses his love for Gatarina by making a map and leaving it for her, which is interesting. The loose plot reminded me of some classic road movies of the 1960s and 1970s. I hope to see some more films by Mr. King.
about nothing
Vincentiu21 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
at first sigh, a film about nothing. in fact, a mirror. or a trip. or a basket of questions. a poem. and frame of a meeting. the gorgeous images from Armenia, the faces and words of characters, the Romanian "Bun e vinul ghiurghiuliu" in a bus from Caucasus are only ingredients. but the subject of film is importance of roots. discover of sense. silence as aura. and delicate steps of self image. a film about birth of miracle. and about sparkles of its cell. nothing else. nothing more. so, all common pieces are different. the man in a strange country in search of pure freedom. a woman who describes her as result of her pictures. an Armenian family. few friends. and the shadow of gestures. essence of story - the church. the window as stick. the priest in Holy Liturgy. the nuns. and the solitude of stranger far by his guide.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
