CinemaDude1

At ever turn, the cruelty to this kid is grabs the viewer by the throat and won't leg go of that emotional choke-hold. But without even a moment of catharsis, not a moment of relief, the compassion that is felt for the child turns into a sort of steady-state anger that we are not give a reason for this cruelty or why it needs to be endured. The minimalist, underlying and pervasive theme is no great philosophical statement but just that life is cruel to the most vulnerable of us and to bad, make the best of it. The we are served up what amounts to child abuse that just goes on and one. Yes, pretty depressing stuff. Still, it is so well performed, paced and the characterizations by the leads are nothing short brilliant, that I would still have to recommend it; just make sure you are in a really REALLY positive, up mood. Don't go near it if you are even slightly depressed.

As an avid IMAXphile and even more of a 3D fanatic, I found out that THE LAST BUFFALO was playing in the IMAX theatre in Vancouver...and in 3D!

Not only was it in 3D, but that day was the last day it would be showing. I calculated that if I got in my car and drove from Seattle that very moment and missed every red light, I MIGHT be able to catch it. In my mind, the risk to life and limb was more than worth it.

This is a docu/art film that defines "cinema" as an art form. Visually it is STUNNING; conceptually, the juxtapositioning/intercutting images (edited by Andrew Kitzanuk) of these magnificent animals in the wild with the images of a sculptor creating an artistic rendering of the beasts, trying to capture their essence and beauty in hard metal, truly evokes the wonder of the artist's quest and Nature's resisting, begging to remain wild and unincumbered. It is both a marriage and a conflict and has been the nature of art since the first buffalo was etched on a cave wall.

The 3D component is nothing less than spectacular -- so happy to see the person responsible for the 3D credited as Stereographer (Noel Archambault). While, yes, you can appreciate the film in 2D, experiencing it in 3D is the difference between listening to a symphony in mono instead of stereo sound. Coupled with the the cinematography by Andrew Kitzanuk which is breathtaking, even for those who are not particularly fond of 3D or nature films, I strongly urge you to try to remember what it was like when you were young and open-minded, and force yourself to catch this beautiful film in REAL 70mm IMAX 3D; you will kiss yourself many times over for doing it!

However what is truly unfortunate, is that this film, because of the special format in which it was created, 70mm IMAX 3D, it will be difficult to find an "true" IMAX theatre (on 70mm FILM and in 3D) where you will be able to see it; that means hundreds of thousands of cinema lovers will probably never have the opportunity to see it.

And worse, as of this writing, I have not found it on BluRay 3D. This is a real shame, as that's akin to the sadness we fell when we learn of any of the great films that have been lost forever, never been seen or will by seen in the future by the very people who would appreciate them the most.

" The producers need to make this film available on BluRay 3D; while BD will not deliver the same incredible visual impact as seeing it an IMAX film theatre, at least it will allow many more people to see the film as it was created with all its beauty and emotional impact.

There is no good reason why this film isn't available in BluRay 3D; it is an affront to the cinema-loving public and it disrespects the director Stephen Low and the all the other incredibly talented people who created it, IMHO.

At some point during this meandering trek from point A to point B, you will wonder 1) did we actually get to a point B at all 2) is there a point to any of this 3) would I hang out with ANY of these characters for a hour much less three days --duh, NO and 4) does this filmmaker really know ANY gay guys in real life at all or does he just surmises that all gay folk are as joyless and vapid as his characters?

VERY derivative of Friedken and Crowly's BOYS IN THE BAND some twenty years its predecessor, and even back then, there was harsh critisism that the story and treatment focused to much on the unhappy and tormented gay, but at least those boys might have been tortured souls in one way or another, but at least they also had humor and were able to to wring out some joy amidst the garbage and the flowers, and there were indeed some lovely flowers. Unfortunately, in this voyeuristic peek to see what it's like for those queer guys, there's not a flower to be found. If you are watching just for any homoerotic elements...don't hold your breath....even a bit of Bulge and Ass would have at least brought some human quality to the proceedings.

And the above critisism can be blamed squarely on Edgar Bravo's lack of any sort of focus on what we wants to say. The actors seem to do well enough, but at time I sound myself yelling at the screen, "Hey director...give your wooden soldiers some damn DIRCTION! Other than have them give each other "knowing glances" and tension that seems to be just under the surface for which there is no clear explanation. There are only short bursts of anything that resembles authentic.

Then there are the technical horrors. IMDB Tech Specs say this was shot in 35mm, well that might be true, but what is available on the streaming channels where you can see this definitely is not from an original 35mm negative; what we have to look at is most definitely scanned from a 16mm positive release print, with all the dirt and scratch lines clearely visible from the first frame to the last. So along with all the distracting artifacts of a scratched 16mm print with the ridiculously high contrast and practically non-existent grayscale with no detail and the inherent soft focus from whatever 16mm print and how many generations away from the O-Neg THAT was, you had to endure those multiple scratch lines and groups of lines constantly weaving and dance across the screen like a Norman McLaren handpainted film. There's enough dirt to tell me the print wasn't even cleaned before the transfer.

Then there's the sound equally which, without exaggeration, almost unbearable as listening to fingernails scratching across a blackboard. Every "s" is distorted and super sibilant; the Foley effects for some reason are mix much louder than the dialogue so water splashing, doors closing, paper crackling -- they are all startling and distracting in the same way objects being thrown at you in a 3D movie are disconcerting.

I don't know if this were a normal, decent transfer from a pristine 35mm negative and the sound were a normal sounding decent track, would it have made the overall impression better? Probably not; what the filmmaker wants to let us in on the lives of these individuals is pretty uninteresting and quite frankly, they just don't ring true.