The Loneliest Planet (2011) User Reviews

Poor Guy

[ghost_dog86 · 7/10 · 22 January 2013]

While it does have something profound to say about relationships and how one moment can make or break them, "The Loneliest Planet" takes so long to get to its rather poignant yet elusive point, that it may seem to some as a bit too meandering. BUT, if you can stay with it, independent writer/director Julia Loktev does deliver with a payoff that is hauntingly thought provoking, with a high potential for inducing provocative discussions. Written (adapted from a short story from Tom Bissell) and exquisitely directed by Loktev using a plethora of expressive long takes, "The Loneliest Plant" stars Gael Garcia Bernal and Hani Furstenberg and centers around a young, adventurous and engaged to be married couple, who travel on a backpacking trip along the Caucasus Mountains, lead by a local Georgian guide. Sounds riveting right? Well, the initial hour does play out like a rather dull, elongated version of a short story, but then something happens that essentially changes the entire relationship dynamic, and more importantly allows the second half of this 2 hour film to slowly blossom into a tragic and quite engaging dissection of the male and female roles in a relationship. At times "The Loneliest Planet" displays thematic similarities to 2012's independent female relationship point of view film "Take this Waltz", but Loktev seems to be able to get her female visual prospective across with slightly more clarity, while still keeping a fascinating air of ambiguousness.

The truth is "The Loneliest Planet" is a hard film to review because it is contingent on one scene (really one physical movement) an hour into the picture, that I can't really talk about. But what I can say is that the latter half of the movie (after the big scene) although consists of Bernal and Furstenberg continuing to walk around the Caucasus Mountains (mostly in silence) is quite a moving piece of cinema that does show off Loktev's Malick-esque directorial skills.

On the other hand, this film is not for everybody. What will ultimately hold this back for many, will be the (at times) too Independent for its own good feel of the entire picture, as Loktev holds on shots for minutes at a time where nothing seems to be going on, and spends a lot of time filming characters ad-libbing their dialogue. Other issues may come down to the free flowing (slow) pacing of "The Loneliest Planet", which may leave many walking out of this movie questioning: Was Loktev's introspective inquiries really worth the journey? Final Thought: In my opinion this sort of Avant-garde piece about a couple under duress is very much a film geared more towards female audiences. That is to say, the main focus is not Bernal. He is only the vehicle that helps show the nature of the male counterpart. The real star of the show here is Furstenberg, who displays the complex prospective of a female outlook on relationships exceptionally well, and thusly what she goes through should be more fully understood by female audiences. That is not to say that men will not enjoy this film, but for most men, "The Loneliest Planet" may be too hard of a pill to swallow. Plus, if you are currently a male in a relationship, this is one movie that may only serve to plant the seed of an awkward conversation (which in turn, probably is the point).

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

Quite Saifying, But a Bit of a Let Down

[luke-eberhardt · 6/10 · 13 August 2012]

"The Loneliest Planet" is about an American couple on holiday in Eastern Europe, Georgia accompanied by a guide they befriend. They face some hardships and determinations, almost like a pilgrimage.

I went to this film not knowing what to expect, So I was pretty open to anything at the Melbourne International Film Festival.

It started out promising and intriguing, some parts were very interesting to the film's setting and the character's experience in traveling across a vast and unknown terrain. The acting is very Mediocre, the woman looks a lot like Jessica Chastain but less talented.

Its very artistic and visually stunning in cinematography, camera-work and editing that really captures the beauty and resonance.

The script however is very shallow and has minimal dialogue thats very incoherent, the character development isn't too good either, a lot more could have been done on most story elements which lets the film down a lot.

I found it dragging halfway through and became disappointed about the film's conclusion. I found it quite satisfying but a bit of a let down, this is also the first film at the festival that no one clapped at the end.

3/5

An engaging travel flick

[castle1925 · 7/10 · 12 February 2012]

The movie has a documentary look--high on visual and aural detail, where the graphic realism turns the viewer into a bit of a voyeur. The acting is brilliant, natural.

I saw the film in Mexico in an excellent theater. The pivotal and somewhat tragic scene at the midpoint (described in critic reviews) got a laugh from the largely Hispanic audience.

From the midpoint on, the lack of dialog is unsettling, and there's not much resolution to the film at the end. Yet another celebration of dysfunctional relationships, but the film is so well crafted, we can overlook its flaws.

A good travel flick, overall.

Stifled by its own concept

[Agent10 · 6/10 · 28 November 2021]

We all love to see places that seem alien and completely bereft of modernity. The lush mountains, the historic villages that seemingly have no electricity or running water and just the rustic appeal of the supposed third world. Every now and then we have that little itch to explore these places, and that is where the film The Loneliest Planet excels in. Other than that, it doesn't excel at much else.

I guess the problem comes from the trailer, which made this sound like a major issue was going to form between the protagonists Alex and Nica. They seem very much in love and quite comfortable, but it is revealed late in the movie they may have some trust issues. While this is typical of these type of movies where stresses create relationship cracks, it wasn't anything too earth rattling. Even the major moment where the marital bliss is challenged doesn't illustrate this. Another reviewer on this page suggested this would have been a better short film. I would have to agree.

I will say the scenery of the Caucasus Mountains is extraordinary, making me wish I had the means to go out there and experience it for myself. Other than that, a well shot and composed film with little else to really offer.

so many people walked out....

[ffuuut · 2/10 · 14 June 2012]

Never in my history of going to the cinema have I witnessed more people leave a screening while the film continues to meander along. And meander it did.

Basically a three hander with very little dialogue, some of which was in different languages and without sub-title, a ploy I assume to put us in the protagonists shoes of not knowing what is happening and what people are saying, but it was just another issue with a film that was already alienating its audience by being so boring.

Shot in the rugged and sometimes beautiful mountains of the Eastern European country of Georgia. We witness a young couple and their local guide walk and occasionally talk, play, drink and sing. They are happy and at peace until an incident rocks their tranquil trek and there is a distance, tension and edge put through the group as they now walk across the terrain in silence and alone even though they are still together.

I can appreciate the cinematography, the journey, the performances and ultimately what it is saying as a story, but when a film appears to basically not hire an editor and you sit through what is possibly your eighth wide shot of 3 people taking what seems to be 5 minutes to walk across the screen with some searing, but ultimately irritating music playing……enough is enough.

Inspired by a short story, it should have been made into a short film and not one that runs 113 minutes.

At one point the female character sings a horrendously uninteresting song around a campfire, laughs and says "It goes on and on". Yes. It does.

Incredible cinematography suits simple tale

[robertemerald · 7/10 · 8 September 2019]

This one is especially for young couples approaching marriage or similar commitment, though all up it's a good indie. It's worth watching for the beautiful countryside and great film technique. It's a very subtle and sombre movie, and gradually winds its way to the 'issue', which many would value for discussion later. It's also a rather oblique warning for young ladies travelling off the beaten path in Eastern Europe, or any other road less travelled. This is sort of the dark side of Lonely Planet, which is why I guess it's called The Loneliest Planet. For me, it lost points for being too long, and for the naivety of the couple. Neither seems to grasp that a beautiful young girl out in the sticks is naturally going to attract unwanted male attention, regardless of the fact she is obviously escorted by a boyfriend to whom she's in love. That's why I say this is a movie for young couples. I learnt this fact back at 15, and I certainly had the concept by 17. The Loneliest Planet is a great scenic journey with a simple, heartbreaking, but very effective message.

Slow, Boring, Uninteresting

[tabuno · 1/10 · 17 January 2019]

30 December 2012. This movie would be better named "The Movie With The Loneliest Audience" as it is only a collection of colorful vistas with no compelling theme, a number of extras speaking a foreign language with no subtitles and little audience understanding, and finally a couple frolicking. The movie has no direction, no purpose, and no interesting occurrences that stand out from others movies. The sex scenes are either confusing or odd, lack real dramatic relational connection being employed disjointedly or shot in darkened, indistinguishable ways while reminding one of History of Violence (2005) or The Cooler (2003) that offer more graphic and cinematically appealing sexual presentations. Unlike Lost in Translation (2003), this movie's set up has a couple who know each other, understand some of the foreign language they encounter, lacking a backstory and needed character development that distances the audience. In Translation Bill Murray's character like the audience didn't understand Japanese and the audience could relate to the cultural disorientation, provided a brief backstory of Murray's character's attitude of his presence in Japan and introducing a female stranger where the audience didn't need a backstory because just as Murray's character discovered more about her so does the audience through out that movie. The Loneliest Planet shot in an uninteresting, lazy homemade video format doesn't take time for the audience to come to care for these characters, who presented superficially without any depth. While they aren't stereotypical, they appear as empty shells of humanity. There is an extended scene of the back of the girl's red curvaceous hair flopping around (re-occurring again later in the movie in a dilapidated structure) as she and her boyfriend and guide are bouncing about in a vehicle, the characters seeing something much more interesting than what the audience is forced to see, suggesting the audience really isn't as important as the characters and literally being given the backseat. There is an overly long vast landscape scene as the tiny figures trek on a narrow path that is carried along only by the background music and again one is reminded of the more awesome, emotive and mysterious isolated scene from The Name of the Rose (1986) that evokes a primal sense of loneliness, powerlessness, and even fear or similarly ponderous but considered artistically classical and effective scenes are found in Andrei Tarkovskiy's Solaris (1972). But such scenes in this movie eventually becomes uninteresting, disconnected accompanied by what becomes screeching music repeated again and again throughout the movie. One instead is reminded of how Peter Weller melded the haunting landscape into the very fabric of the storyline in Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975). Here, in this movie the landscape is as disconnected to the story as the audience is disconnected to the movie. But unlike The Loneliest Planet, even with the somewhat flawed Into The Wild (2007), director/actor Sean Penn had an artistic eye and was able to capture the look of many of the scenes as if art pieces in themselves. The use of long slow shots with minimal action become ponderous unlike the Lost in Translation or Melancholia (2011) that possess a meaningful enveloping contexts for audience connecting them to deeper emotions derived from passive setting and details. The movie's supposedly big incident involving a threat of harm to our couple that was predictable, lacking suspense, diminished a overly long scene with a long sterile barrel of a rifle and the focus on the man instead of the stranger threatening him. The girl's emotions and fear are completely obviated by her being hidden behind the man taking the audience further taken away from intimacy of the scene, a confusing manipulated scripted exercise in futility. Instead one is reminded of the amazing delicate directorial handling of the intimate facial close ups that enable the characters in Les Miserable (2012) to have their emotional turmoil and suffering projected towards the audience connecting them with a deeply human and empathic experience. Later a dripping water scene also reminds one of the more amazing, psychological tortuously delicious "auditory" scene filmed towards the end of Touching The Void. Such scenes in The Loneliest Planet would have better placed earlier in the movie as the texture and the landscape appears wondrous and intriguing would have been consistently edited together with the characters initial wonder and exploratory interest on their beginning of their journey. Its placement here only detracts from the more important psychological focus of the characters themselves relegating this fascinating geological feature to an afterthought, just like the audience. The audience is further subjected to inane singing cat jokes by the girl around a darkened campfire revealing for the first time a big ugly gaping space between her two upper front teeth detracting from the scene. There's a cutaway to a brief scene of the boyfriend in a tent who oddly covers his eyes even though it's dark, instead of his ears. The movie then cuts back a confusing campfire shot due to the use a different camera angle and lighting from the earlier shot which is off-putting and unnecessarily disorienting. Finally a little background of these characters is revealed and strangely, sadly the tourist guide's own brief personal story is more interesting than the movie itself. In what is supposedly the most dramatic scene ends up subdued rather than dramatic, deflated rather than convincing or powerful, without any earlier setup to sustain an interesting emotional tension, and becomes a jumble of confusion as to who did what to whom and where in the darkness, leaving the audience in the same darkness. In sum, this is one of the most confusing, rambling, uninteresting films produced. The final scene is a wide shot of a magnificent landscape of river, gorge, and mountain vista with small figures breaking down their camp, their expressions too indistinct to offer any valuable or meaningful insight as to what the human component of this movie is moving towards as an ending, almost as if nothing of real consequence occurred throughout the movie.

Brilliant, though not easy

[zetes · 9/10 · 27 January 2013]

A unique, brilliantly structured art-house film that will definitely go down as one of my favorites from the past few years. It's a film that has, really, only a single plot point, and it's one that happens in a blink of an eye. The film centers on two tourists in Georgia (the country, not the state). Gael Garcia Bernal and Hani Furstenberg play an engaged couple, and the first half of the film establishes quite clearly their dynamics, and the fact that they are very much in love. Halfway through the film, the pivotal incident occurs and it's like a prism that breaks up the way the two look at each other, as well as themselves. Sure, that first hour is pretty slow moving (though the scenery in the film is so gorgeous that I was never less than engaged), but, after the incident, you look backward at every small thing that occurred. That first, sleepy hour I was basically just enjoying the scenery, but during the second hour my mind was running a mile a minute, even though, basically, nothing much was happening. It's a weird and uncompromising picture that will surely drive some crazy, but I was absolutely blown away by it.

The Loneliest Planet is about the journey

[dalydj-918-255175 · 7/10 · 29 December 2012]

"An adventures story of this group of three travelling up mountain ranges just having a good time that leads to them finding out more about the other people they are up in this area with"

Just simple adventures with not much drama surrounding them can be fun and this film is an example of one of the those. Alex (Gael García Bernal) and Nica (Hani Furstenberg) are a couple getting married soon decide to go mountain climbing together. Their guide is named Dato (Bidzina Gujabidze) and the three of them venture up the mountain ranges together not saying much only when they stop to rest at times during this long journey.

The film is not trying to build to any dramatic conclusion but just try to show us how these three people get to know each other the higher they climb on the mountains. The film seems very episodic because of far away shots of the three travelling across long distances which are put between the shooting were the camera is closer to the characters. Alex and Nica already know each other quite well so as they travel up the mountain they get to know more about Dato as he talks about his problems even though Nica seems the only one interested in listening. Not much dialogue is needed except for the occasional breath from the actors as they move up the mountains. However we do get scenes by the campfire and we that in the relationship Nica is the more open one compared to Alex who seems more closed off. If there is any dramatic conclusion it may be the kiss Dato and Nica share at the end which shows the cracks that do exist in the relationship between Nica and Alex.

Gael García Bernal plays Alex and while he is great in the film the film is not really about anyone's performance. He doesn't have to show his emotions because that is what the character is written as. Hani Furstenberg plays Nica and in the film she just shines like the bright light. The character calls for her to act almost childish and she plays this happy life well. She really just walks around smiling and almost falling but she just lights up the screen your attention does towards her. Bidzina Gujabidze is the only other major actor but even though he is good like the others he is not called to give much of a performance but just move the story along.

The film can be boring for some and even with it's boring scenes I believe that the film becomes much better when all the characters sit around the campfire and just talk. The actors are having fun and some shots look beautiful as we see some mountains in the backgrounds while characters walk long distances.

MOVIE GRADE: C+ (MVP: Hani Furstenberg)

Not worth the time

[Mainer78 · 1/10 · 19 December 2012]

I decided I had to watch this movie after so many critics raved about it and the "pivotal scene". What a phenomenal disappointment! I felt like the writers came up with the aforementioned scene and then couldn't really figure out how to build an entire movie around that. The movie is just one long shot after another of the leads walking or eating or frolicking in bed. By the latter part of the movie I was ready to pull my hair out watching yet another minutes-long shot of the three leads walking across yet another landscape. The pivotal scene was only mildly interesting, and the reaction of the main characters to that event slowly goes from mostly reasonable to slightly bizarre by the time the film finally reaches its completely unsatisfying close.

A slow-paced but haunting film

[howard.schumann · 8/10 · 17 March 2013]

If, as the famous line from Love Story says, "love means never having to say you're sorry," then Alex (Gael García Bernal) and Nica (Hani Furstenberg), a young couple engaged to be married in a few months, are on the right track. Summer vacationing in the Caucasus Mountains in the Republic of Georgia, Julia Loktev's slow-paced but haunting film, The Loneliest Planet, follows the pair as they trek across the wilderness with back-packs on their shoulders. Based on the short story by Tom Bissell, "Expensive Trips Nowhere" which had its roots in an Ernest Hemingway story called "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber, it is a thought-provoking film that has moments of brilliance, but its strict adherence to minimalism and the emotional distance it creates can be a barrier to full engagement.

Using minimal dialogue, meaning is conveyed mostly by images, silences and sound; the sound of rocks crunching, of water falling, of footsteps walking, at times aided by the lovely music of English composer Richard Skelton. Ironically, it is an exceedingly intimate film yet, as photographed by Chilean Inti Briones, yet it has a sense of vast and empty, almost alien space that makes it look indeed like the loneliest planet. In the first frame, we hear a constant banging without knowing the source until we see the naked red-haired Nica bouncing up and down in a washbasin looking as if she's freezing. Soon the bearded Alex hurriedly throws a bucket of warm water on her.

We do not learn anything about the characters other than what is apparent in their immediate surroundings and the fact that they are lovers. The first part of the film is mostly playful as Nica and Alex make their way through the mountains or stop in the villages, having sex and drinking, conjugating verbs in Spanish, doing stand-on-your-head exercises, or rolling down a hill. Hiking across unknown territory in a country where you cannot speak the language, a fate common to most world travelers, can be daunting and often requires a guide. At one of their village stops, Alex and Nica hire a local guide named Dato (Bidzina Gujabidze, a real-life mountaineer) who speaks halting English and is not averse to telling dubious stories with racial overtones.

Loktev utilizes a documentary-type approach, concentrating on the everyday and the banal, yet there is an uneasy feeling that something unanticipated is going to happen. Around the mid-point of the film, as a result of Alex's thoughtless reaction to a threatening event, the dynamic of the relationship shifts. Sullen looking and uncommunicative, they walk either in front or behind one another. Neither Alex nor Nica talk about the incident presumably out of embarrassment, or because they do not know what to say, seemingly confused about what just happened and what it means for their relationship.

The event seems to be saying, as suggested by the director, that traditional gender roles are still important. In an interview, Loktev states, "The film reaffirms very traditional gender roles. They're hiking a mountain. That's a place where traditional gender roles would show, I'd think. It reaffirms those traditional roles. That for me is the contradiction, for me personally. That I think of myself as a feminist, but I catch myself where I want a man to be a man. I want a man to be a real man." The meaning of the critical event, however, is very much open to interpretation. Loktev relates that, at a showing, she heard two people sitting next to each other in the theatre who saw it as two very different movies.

One said that the incident in the film is something no couple can ever recover from, while the other one asked, "What's the big deal?" This only underscores the point that Nica, though she could have interpreted the incident in several different ways, decides that what occurred was significant without confirming her judgment with the person most involved or attempting to see the other person's point of view, a primer of what does not work in relationships. If, as Werner Erhard put it, love is accepting someone the way that they are and the way they are not, then The Loneliest Planet, for all its remarkable qualities, in my view sends the wrong message and misses the opportunity for an important teachable moment.

Slow but still a watchable film

[ronchow · 7/10 · 22 March 2013]

First off, with all the negative comments I have read, I can only draw the conclusion this film is not for everyone. Yes it is slow, repetitive, and often with the camera pointing at a scene, for a long time, in which nothing much is happening. However, the scenery around the Caucasus Mountains in Georgia, where the film was shot, is breathtakingly beautiful. So it helps if you are an armchair adventurer, an armchair hiker in particular, who enjoys this kind of scenery.

The plot is fairly thin - the relationship between two young people deeply in love, but thrown into question by one simple, disruptive event. Still, it only carries part of the weight for this film. The dialogues are not great either, and I feel much improvement could have been achieved with a better script.

Summing it all up, it is worth 2 hours of your time if you are an art-house film fanatic, enjoy outdoor scenery and have the required patience. Otherwise you may want to skip it.

Pretentious.

[delft_blue · 2/10 · 14 January 2013]

This movie had serious potential. It's filmed in Georgia and the scenery is amazing. You also have three obviously interesting characters but you don't ever get to know them. In fact, I didn't even know their names until I went on to IMDb. Because you don't know anything about the two main characters (other than some tidbits revealed near the *end* of the movie) it's hard to care about them. Are they grad students? Are they American? Why do they like to travel... hell, WHY are they in Georgia? There's no story here. This is why I say the film is pretentious. The people who made the film assume that you can care about the characters without knowing anything about their story. The film is also about half Georgian/ half English with NO subtitles. Now, I get why the filmmakers may have done this. They want you to be as clueless as the two main people when the "misunderstanding" occurs. The problem herein is again, the filmmaker assuming you care enough about their story to *not* be frustrated by the fact you aren't getting any of the dialog. The two main actors speak some Georgian so they know more than we do. They are getting some of what is going on. There's also some Spanish thrown in just for kicks. Your head spins. Like mine did when I found out this was supposed to be a thriller! Huh? If you want an actual thriller about a misunderstanding that happens in this region of the world, watch "Transsiberian". I would also like to point out there are at least two instances where you have the camera pan out and you are forced to watch the characters slowly walk from one side of your screen to the other. If this is a character study, you can observe as much about human emotion by sitting on a bench at the mall on a Saturday afternoon.

a study of a person?

[figjamd · 7/10 · 13 April 2013]

Just watched the film in the cinema with friends. Firstly, I got uncomfortable because of going to a movie with some guys who prefer more dynamic films and by watching a movie, where the actions got so very prolonged two started to talk with each other, the third one fell asleep. I thought I was the only one who really pays attention, but then when it finished I was stunned to find that all of them had made a solid opinion so that we could discuss critically on the story and the relationship depicted. The film proved two thesis I have:

1. Same aswith relationship, there is no bad movie. It may not be perfect,but you can take something from everyone. "No regrets, just lessons learnt."

2. There is no point making a big trip with your loved one. The journey is a way to explore yourself, not to check out how stable the connection between to persons is. I definitely recommend this movie. But please, have no expectations. It wan't give you the recipe for the perfect couple, but rather a bad example and an affirmation of how fragile the proximity based on a physical contact could be.

Like watching paint dry...

[Ellaarethaowner · 3/10 · 1 January 2013]

I was drawn to this film mainly because of Lisa Shwarzbaum's review in ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY. I watched it on Netflix instant; if I had seen it in a theater, I would have walked out. This movie gives us a young couple vacationing in the mountainous regions of Georgia and expects us to care about them without giving a single reason as to why. We know nothing about their relationship, or why they chose this vacation over something else. Instead we get lengthy scenes of them walking silently that quickly grow tedious despite the pretty scenery. No attempt at character development is made, but there is a truly painful sequence in which the woman teaches their guide how to swear in English, and so he does, again and again, for what seems like forever. After an hour of sheer boredom, our couple runs into a man and two children. The man pulls a gun on them, and then reconsiders. Why? Who knows?! Amazingly, this dangerous encounter is never discussed by the couple or their guide. Instead it's back to more boring scenes of them walking. And another dull scene of the woman singing at the camp fire! Generally speaking, I'm fan of so called "art films" (loved PARIAH and FOOTNOTE earlier last year), but this film? It's every excess of the art film laid bare in all it's boring glory. I have no idea why this has gotten good reviews...

Not lonely enough

[mmunier · 5 April 2013]

That's right, if we'd been missing, it would have been perfect. It's quite amazing the rave on it caused. Reading the synopsis you'd think you're on for something special, actually you are as what is special about it is, it's specially boring. Unless you fancy watching someone peeing on the ground or walking slowly sooo slowly.... Or SUDDENLY falling into a shallow stream with little consequence! We usually go to movies as 2 or 3 couples, this time it was 3 and so 6 people felt they'd been conned! I forgot to mention the spoiler...for me it was the whole movie. I found it very disappointing although I know there always will be people who see what other can't see; Yes I have visited art galleries enough to know what can be displayed as "art" but leaves you with a certain smile on the corners of your lips. But if you want for free the same experience this film gives you , Just go almost anywhere with a folding chair sit down and spend a few hours taking it all in, I guarantee you it'll amount to something very similar. Perhaps a yellow dog or a weeping camel here or there may have saved this movie.

Great idea but too much slow pondering scenes

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 25 August 2013]

Gael García Bernal and Hani Furstenberg are an engaged couple backpacking in Georgia along with their local guide. Along the way, they meet up with some locals and one incident causes a major rift between the couple. It is not really spoken of but yet it surely existed. The question then becomes can they heal the rift and reconnect.

I understand the need for this to be understated. That's what's so important here. We don't want some drag out screaming match. But understated doesn't have to mean grindingly slow. At times, there's too many no-talking-slow-walking-long-distance-extended scenes. Those aren't all necessary. Cut those down and insert more dialog.

Yawn.

[camerons_here · 2/10 · 14 June 2012]

This is a movie you're either going to love or hate.

I was not a fan at all. I had so much hope that something was going to grab me and make me fall in love, but sadly nothing did. The film had a similar feel to Tree Of Life. It was long, hardly any dialogue, with long scenes of the landscape - which was beautiful, but not enough to rate the film.

The only present story was the relationship between the engaged travelers. But with the abrupt ending to the film their story didn't seem relevant at all - so I am struggling to find the point to the movie.

The scene towards the end of the movie when Nica and Dato are talking around the fire dragged on for so long I was struggling to keep my eyes open in the dark cinema, only to be blinded by the following scene the next morning.

Waste of time.

Also, if anyone can explain the purpose of the opening scene, please do!

Just Wow!

[renjith-george · 8/10 · 2 October 2011]

Amazing movie. I had absolutely no expectations going in yesterday at the NYC Film Festival at Alice Tully Hall. Even felt disheartened when the director before the start of the movie said " I will see you all after the movie ... If you all are still here".

Long story short at the end of the movie I couldn't help it but had to clap and it was involuntary. I have seen an amazing powerful piece with excellent performances by the whole cast. I do not know how to spell the name of the actress, "Jani" sounds like "Honey". She is amazing.

Please give this movie a shot. I haven't seen any movies lately which touched upon the dynamics between a couple so well.

Bravo to the whole team. Sure I will hear more about this movie in the news and hopefully at the awards.

PS: It is rare for me to post on IMDb, but I had to share :)

Couple hike in mountains

[sergelamarche · 6/10 · 9 July 2018]

Foot travel in the mountains of a strange country with a guide. Not your romantic escapade! Great bodies in shape, great panoramas, not much of a story though. Another I watched the second half in accelerate. Good if plenty of time.

Travelogue that's Waiting for Godot

[gudpaljoey-677-715384 · 3/10 · 12 April 2013]

Is there a reason to like this movie? I can't find one and am surprised by those who do. What is pictured is two young characters who like to walk through rugged terrain, play word games, have sex in the dark, and stay trim. Do I have a reason to like either character? No. What I heard was inane dialog, heavy music as if something was going to happen and doesn't, very little sound of any sort to engage my ears. Was I amused by the word games, liked the music, or understood the inane dialog and stories the players tell? No. I was shown photography of some rugged terrain in the Georgia mountains, a place that few have seen. Was I supposed to be impressed by the beauty and awe of this natural setting? The answer is that it wasn't something I'd seen better done in other movies. The movie seems to suggest that relationships can change radically because of an insignificant happening. But never tell us if they change. I'm still waiting to think of a reason for liking this picture.

A polyethnic couple is threatened by a life and death journey

[ma-carmen-sierra · 9/10 · 11 March 2013]

This is a timeless story of life and death and love. I was sincerely curious to see why the talented Gael Garcia Bernal was playing the role of a quiet yet playful, sensual and adventurous Mexican-American traveling with his girlfriend through Georgia; An hyperactive eccentric, and cultured, red haired eastern European/American.

At the beginning of the adventure. you can tell how they are melted with each other, they are sensual and playful. Their bodies find joy in every corner of the trip. Their intentions to travel into the unknown seem to be aligned.

After they leave the urban sprawl, nature seems to have slowed their need for sensuality. The director tunes into Nature as well. The respect for long silences, gives the spectator an opportunity to appreciate the slowness and continuum of the ecosystem. The water, the erosion, an abandoned old house, the sound of a rock falling down the hill, the change in flora and landscape.

This deep silence can be disturbing in the era of constant stimulation and brain noise.

The purity of the film's message is appreciated in a time where we are bombarded by cultural biasses and empty dramas. The film allows the viewer to receive a simple yet profound story of life and death. It depicts a multi-cultural journey into the phenomenon of the clash of civilizations. An alegoria of a the hunter-gather phenomena. Of survival of the fittest. Of the need for nurture and human connection. And the present gender and cultural archetypes that are yet present across cultures.

Travel by foot

[sergelamarche · 6/10 · 9 July 2018]

Foot travel in the mountains of a strange country with a guide. Not your romantic espade! Great bodies in shape, great panoramas, not much of a story though. Another I watched the second half in accelerate. Good if plenty of time.

Amazingly bad

[kailouno · 2/10 · 4 November 2012]

I'm astonished that there are reviews praising this movie ... did we see the same film?? I completely agree with a previous review that this was agonizingly tedious. It did feel like it could have very easily been edited to a 5-10min short film, but even then it would not be a very good short. The acting was fine, but there is absolutely no plot and nothing to really act to ... they just all sort of go through the motions. I felt no attachment to the characters, no emotion, no tension ... nothing. Filmed on location in the Caucasus mountains on the Georgia border there was great potential for some incredible cinematography ... but it was potential utterly wasted. I really wanted to experience a part of the world that I likely will not see in person. What we are given is long drawn out, still distance shots or close shots that showed nothing - neither of which give any sense of the expanse and majesty of the mountain range, quite disappointing.

Imagine the movie 'Deliverance' except the whole movie winds up really being *just* a canoe trip down a river and nothing more. You keep waiting for something to happen, but it never does. In the end I just stared at the credits in disbelief and a bit angry that there went a couple hours of my life that I will never get back.

Do Not Watch!

[The_Movie_Goers · 1/10 · 19 July 2015]

This movie was an EPIC waste of life. After debating on whether to watch this film or not multiple times, I decided to give it a shot. About an hour into the movie, I felt extremely bored as NOTHING had happened. I gave it the benefit of the doubt, thinking that there is no way a movie can be almost two hours long and have no point...I was wrong. I hung in there waiting for a moment of anything even remotely interesting, and I was severely let down. When I say nothing happens in this movie, I mean NOTHING. You are better off staring at the ceiling for hours than attempting to watch this life draining piece of crap. Just saying. Spare yourself the suffering of watching this movie. Seriously. There is no plot, almost no dialogue, and the dialogue that there is is nothing more than random gibberish, or it is inaudible anyway. There is no character building, and there are no explanations for any of the (very few...) actions that take place in this film. I have never actually been ANGRY at a movie until seeing this one, if you can even call it a movie. Don't waste your time.