Powaqqatsi

The imaginative slow-motion documentary without any line,sequence, camera just goes through nature , cities and public over third world counties. Everydays routines seems amazing , ordinary motions put in slow are breath-taking.Sense for camera scenes and views and extraordinary shots make this one worth to see. Plus mixed with Philip Glass's composed music - it is relaxing and mild. Also you can find some scenes showing our world going to destructive end and the most moving scene in the end when there is shown that we mostly even can not see pictures like these because this "kind" of world is situated behind a certain curtain, for most of us hard to see through - we live above and look only to our reflections.

This film is, according to its director, a look at a "global culture"; a visual assessment of the response of the "third world" to the force of globalization and the pressure to modernize. He says there are both good points and bad points to be observed, and hopes to portray the creativity and industriousness with which people around the world respond to the demands of their environments.

I do not see this. I see a moving, and beautiful film, but not about this. I see the destructive effects of the ever-increasing commodification of nature, life, and labor, on people as they are forced to abandon their homes and livelihoods to nationalist projects and capital ventures. I see (to use Karl Polanyi's words) the uprooting of peoples and places, and the destructive forces of market enterprise disguised under tropes of progress and modernity.

Yes. Human beings are creative and industrious, and have dealt with these problems in unique and fascinating ways. But, rather than simply celebrating the Beauty of Human Life, in all it's glory, let this film be a call to recognize this beauty, and recognize its value as intrinsic, as part and parcel to the livelihoods of the people it is embodied within.

Don't worry: no spoilers here. I felt the need to rebut several of the negative reviews I have read about this film ( both here and, most notably, from critics Maltin and Ebert). This film follows a totally different concept from "Koyaanisqatsi," which concentrated on largely inanimate structures in the continental U.S. This is a film about people and lifestyles of the developing world, and for that I believe Reggio chose wisely not to utilize many specialty visual techniques (i.e. time-lapse and high-speed photography), and settle for a more low-key approach. Though the film cannot match the visceral gee-whiz impact the original 1983 audience must have felt with all the revolutionary visual stylistics of "Koyaanisqatsi," "Powaqqatsi" has greater thematic depth. Essentially, "Koyaanisqatsi" was best at impressing the audience, and this film is better at making the audience think. To tackle such a wide-ranging subject as globalization is a tricky task, yet I believe this film to be the best cinematic portrayal I have seen of the effects of modernity upon the 75% of the world that still lives much of its life the same way it did hundreds of years ago.

All of the shots of people working, carrying baskets on their heads, etc. show the immense effort required in the third world to carry on an industrial revolution one hundred years behind the West, and in a much shorter span of time. Essentially, the societies in the Periphery are being forced to play catch-up. The imagery of the fallen laborer being carried up a hill (the opening shots of the film which are later referenced at the end) represents the immense hard work and sacrifice necessary to build a modern society - an idea lost upon many in the First World, who protest the working conditions of societies on the Periphery, yet do not realize that their own Western industrial revolutions faced the exact same hazards, tribulations, and hardships one hundred years ago - yet did eventually manage to emerge successfully. Like "Koyaanisqatsi," "Powaqqatsi" is a film one can view multiple times and absorb new meanings upon each viewing.

The structure of the film is the same as that of "Koyaanisqatsi", which I believe is the most important consistency between this film and the first in Reggio's trilogy. Both films are divided into three distinct sections: primitive/archaic life, early industrial life, and finally full-fledged modern existence (lifestyle, or "-qatsi", being the connecting thread within and between the films). In addition, Philip Glass score is a superb accompaniment to the visual images. Otherwise, the films are not at all alike, and should not be unduly compared to one another. Both films show their American audience something they have not seen before: in "Koyaanisqatsi" it is simply themselves from a very different angle, and in "Powaqqatsi" it is the rest of the world.

Koyaanisqatsi, which is Powaq's predecessor and successor, is my all-time favorite film. It has the beautiful cinematography of Ron Fricke and Godfrey Reggio with the wonderfully-timed score of Philip Glass merged into an emotion-evoking, powerfully mindblowing cinematic experience, after which the viewer feels weak. But watching this, I appreciated the wonderful cinematography and the--ahem--interesting music, but it evoked no emotions inside me, and I felt I hadn't learned anything from it except the things we see in those "You, too, can sponsor a child" television ads. It's quite an experience, and I don't wholly denounce it or condemn it, but I wouldn't expect another Koyaanisqatsi. I hope Naqoyqatsi has "packs the same emotional wallop" of the original.

I saw Koyaanisqatsi several times in the late eighties and was truly mesmerized. After that Powaqqatsi was a true disappointment. I didn't understand it, to be honest.

Many years later I bought the DVDs and saw them both recently. I still like Koyaanisqatsi, even if it couldn't meet my great expectations. But now Powaqqatsi emerged as a true beauty!

I find the photography and music far superior to that of Koyaanisqatsi. Real people, instead of land- and cityscapes (even if wonderful). Some of the Powaqqatsi scenes are simply breathtaking. African women in clear red cloth against the desert sand, the introductory (horrible) scene from the Brazilian mine, etc, etc.

I strongly recommend all those that were utterly disappointed 10 years ago to see Powaqqatsi again!