Voyage of Time: The IMAX Experience

This film does not require much of a description... or, rather, it kind of defies it. However, given the paucity of extant reviews at time of writing, I thought I'd throw in my 2 shekels worth (NB: Nothing worse than few or zero reviews for one to scope out a potential viewing with... and without the ye olde forums to call upon for forewarning, going in blind is very risky nowadays).

'Voyage of Time' is essentially the hypnotic space sequences of Kubrick's 1968 seminal work, combined with 'HD Star Gaze'-type spacescape porn, and a sprinkling of the trademark Malick, meandering copy pasta (*the shtick is now getting to the point of overuse, that it almost feels vacuous... no "flowing curtains" here, though) thrown in for, err... coherence(?).

Do not see this expecting another 'Thin Red Line' or 'Days of Heaven' ― this is seemingly far more of an indulgence for Malick, than anything approaching an opus. The film is good ― do not misconstrue. It's just that it's more a spacescape with some evanescent Blanchett ruminations about "mutter" (?) ― then book-ended with an Australian aboriginal (perhaps inspired by the {vocal} presence of said actress... dunno) take on the '2001' director's famous "chimpanzee / Monolith" scenes ― than a film with a coherent tale underpinning its wistful veneer. There is a narrative one can interpolate here, but it's a 'each to their own' kind of offering.

I feel asleep watching this (twice)... But only because of how dreamy its visuals were; not because it was boring per se.

My God! It's made of 8 stars / 10.

How do you condense the story of the universe into just 45 minutes? Well, you need:

• Poetic and vague voiceover narration from Brad Pitt
• Beautiful images
• A keen ear for music to match to said images, and
• To be Terrence Malick

I think this mostly works. It really does aim to encompass as much as it can in less than an hour, all with the patient pacing most Malick films have. It makes for an interesting experience. Sometimes, it feels a little too abstract, but other moments are quite powerful.

Still, it feels like a companion piece to Tree of Life, and almost like an extended version of that film's birth of the universe sequence. I don't think it's nearly as powerful as that sequence in that film, but it scratches a similar itch. Parts near the end reminded me a little of Koyaanisqatsi, too. It's also not nearly as good an exploration of Planet Earth and its inhabitants as that iconic documentary is.

But for any grievances I have, this documentary/art film is still very impressive. I know something would have been lost from having watched it at home, too, instead of an IMAX screen, so I'm willing to be a little more generous when it comes to rating this.

A very slow film with little narration. The CGI blends seamlessly and is undetectable. Many (scientific) inaccuracies though, either from artistic expression or from ignorance. I viewed this at the Smithsonian's laser iMAX for $9. What I thought would be the highlight of my trip to Washington turned out to be the trough. This was the newest iMAX film there (and made especially for the Air & Space Museum?) and with the most renowned director and narrator. I only realized afterwards why it had only a single showing compared to the other films. The iMAX theater was not any better than the one back home, and I dozed off a few times.

Not short enough to be a short and not long enough to be a feature, Terrence Malick's "Voyage of Time", (subtitled, 'The IMAX Experience' to give you an idea what kind of screen you should see it on), is like an extended sequence from "The Tree of Life" or outtakes from "2001; A Space Odyssey" and is visually superb as we might expect from Malick but it's hardly informative and even at 46 minutes is just as likely to bore as to enthrall.

Brad Pitt is the narrator who asks us do we ever wonder where we came from when we look at the stars or when did dust become life. Malick doesn't tell us and you will almost certainly get more information from a David Attenborough documentary than from this. That said, it looks amazing in ways that even Attenborough can't match and to Malick's credit he does ponder 'big' questions as if the asking itself is enough to satisfy the lack of an answer and anyone remotely interested in the visual power of cinema won't want to miss it and yes, see it on the biggest screen possible. There's also a 90 minute version, narrated by Cate Blanchet, and still awaiting a release.

As a scientist myself I enjoy this type of documentaries. I have watched plenty of documentary series on the universe and I always search for more bcs my kids like them as well. I can say without any hesitation that this was one of the worst I have ever watched. Very dull and boring Zero explanation.

I have watched youtube videos far more interesting.

I did not watch it on IMAX. Maybe there ,the cinematic experience would be better.

But on TV is is almost unbearable to watch.

I am really disappointed.