John Boorman, I like your movies. Your movies are cerebral, but do not rely on symbolism or language to convey thought. They seem to rely on emotions, sometimes clichéd (not always a bad thing, and you do handle it well, in that your people say what one would expect a person to really say in that situation, even if it has that feel of a cliché), and lots of water and green vegetation, mud, earth, breath in the cold, dragon's breath, stuff like that.
Your films remind me of David Lean and David Attenborough, which makes sense, but, as you would probably agree, more dreamy.
A possible misgiving is an expectation set up with your stuff that right away tips me in a certain direction, and takes away possible surprise.
Not so with Beyond Rangoon, which I found was beyond the others you have done that I am most familiar with (Emerald Forest, which I need to see again, and Excalibur).
Beyond Rangoon is the story of one woman set against the backdrop of events in Myanmar (Burma). The story makes no attempt to give us a comprehensive picture of those events, just an introduction, but it is a solid introduction. I feel I know a lot more, and I have a sense of connection with those people that I did not have before, however tenuous from my place of privilege.
Overall I found the story moving and filled with meaning. I always like Patricia Arquette, and her leading man in this film is just great. Actually, she's the lead in this film, and that is what is great.
So much of the film is told with film language, that is, images, that I can see some critics being a little impatient with it, but it is probably because they overanalyze and find it fearful to feel anything too deeply.
Anyone out there wondering if this movie is worth it should watch it to find out. It will not be a waste of your time, whether you like it or not.
