To the Arctic 3D

Meryl Streep narrates this environmental IMAX nature film. Paul McCartney provides the songs. There is a warning about global warming projecting declining ice-coverage to the year 2050. This follows a mother polar bear and her two cubs. There are also other life such as the herd of caribou, underwater life, and the people of the north. There is one particularly intense scene as the polar bear family is chased by a large male. Otherwise, the animal photography is functional without being exceptional. There are some beautiful grand sweeping vistas. I would have liked more underwater filming of the tiny creatures. As a nature film, this is good enough. The environmentalism can be grating. Sometimes, it's not necessary to preach so much.

This documentary film is about the life of wild polar bears residing in the Arctic.

Though it is just under 40 minutes long, "To The Arctic" transports us to an unfamiliar world where the landscape is just barren ice and snow. The landscape is beautiful, and the only life forms we see are polar bears. Filming the polar bears curiously exploring the camouflaged camera was a nice touch, as it was funny and provided a light touch to the documentary. The scene where mama polar bear protects her cubs from the other polar bear is tense and thrilling as well. However, it would have been good to have more educational elements as well. As it stands currently, it is more like a collection of footage of polar bears rather than a complete educational documentary.

I checked this DVD out from my local public library thinking it would be a great documentary on the Arctic. Well, there are some great images, but the overall production/direction is almost too distracting. Paul McCartney added some music for the score, and much of the time, it distracts the viewer rather than adds to the experience.

And instead of presenting the content and allowing the viewer to draw their own conclusions, in my opinion the film goes too far in trying to emotionally manipulate regarding climate change and its effect on the animals of the Arctic.

Argh...

Here are 3 things that lost this exceptionally well-photographed, IMAX presentation some very serious points.

(1) It contained some really pathetic, "grate-on-your-nerves" songs from 71-year-old, pop icon (and former-Beatle), Paul McCartney.

(2) Its phone-in narration (which was absolutely "dry-as-a-bone") was lifelessly delivered by veteran actress, Meryl Streep.

(3) This "message" documentary also got a bit out of hand when it came to driving home the point that it was, indeed, all man's fault for being the one who was creating all of the greenhouse gases that were causing global warming to accelerate (which, in turn, was destroying the arctic environment for polar bears and other such cold-climate wildlife).

But, on the other hand - There certainly was some very outstanding camera-work done in this documentary whose story traced the journey of a mother polar bear and her two, 7-month-old cubs as they bravely navigated their way across the ever-changing arctic wilderness.

The flick begins by mentioning that polar bears resulted from brown bears (grizzly bears) migrating to the Arctic and adapting to that environment, a theory that comports with accepted thinking. Unfortunately, the idea that polar bears might migrate south and re-adapt to a different climate totally escapes the biased story-line developer. Never have I heard such misguided and erroneous information about anthropogenic global warming and the plight of a subspecies. That said, the photography was exceptionally good in part. While providing a glimpse into the life of polar bears, the focus on their supposed plight became tedious and boring. Minor and limited photography of other wildlife and sea creatures was of interest if you can forget the overall bias. I have to wonder how the story-line might be altered if presented from the point of view of the seal - a primary source of food for the bear as presented by the flick. I also continue to ask myself the question, "Does Ms. Streep have the slightest clue why Greenland is so named when 80% is covered in ice today?". I certainly enjoyed much of the photography, though the film dragged at times and the bias caused attention to drag.