gruenig

I saw this film at the New Orleans premiere and found it to be an interesting spectacle that I largely enjoyed watching. I'm writing to let the public know that the numbers look strange at this point (September 17, 2006). Why? Nearly 20% of the votes have been in the 1-3 range (which would rate this film to be in the ranks of the worst low budget films ever made). One voter has commented that he did not see the film, but hates Sean Penn's politics so he won't see it and will give the film a 1 just to spite Penn. At the same time, nearly half of the votes give the film a perfect 10. I don't think that the polarized ratings to date reflect careful attempts to rate the film. Perhaps that's often the case with IMDb. I suggest taking them with a grain of salt for the time being and deciding for yourself if you are interested in the film.

This was an interesting film, but viewers should know that it does not represent the traditional tale(s) of the relationship between Buddha and his wife, Yasodhara. According to the oldest (?) lineage of Buddhism (Theravada), Yasodhara knew about the predictions about Buddha's spiritual destiny; discussed his leaving with him; and offered her blessing to him when he left.

Other traditions offer versions claim a variety of things, including (a) that he was not married at all; (b) that he was married and stayed with his wife.

The spiel at the end by Tashi's wife did not reflect any of these myths. It seems to be based on a possibly agenda-ed misreading of the tradition and will be seen by many Buddhists as informationally problematic in that it misrepresents the story of the Buddha.

For me, plot and character depth/development are very important

factors in a film. This film lacks these elements completely.

I also value the ability of a film to convey and provoke reflection on

aspects of the human condition. This film does not deliver very

much on this front either.

When I left the film, I said to a fellow attendee: "That was not a

film, it was a museum." But it was worse than a museum in that

we are forced to look through the eyes of a meandering dolt, rather

than attending to details that we ourselves are interested in and

skipping the ones that bore us. It was an experiment where the

film maker asked, "can we?" rather than "should we?" Lots of

pretty costumes, but no depth. All Schein and no Sein.

My advice: if your values are aligned with mine, skip this movie

and see something with a plot. Or if you want a dose of history,

visit a museum or historical site in person. But skip the film.