Atanarjuat - La légende de l'homme rapide

It tells a legend from the two thousand years ago, about Atanarjuat, who incurs the jealous enmity of Oki when he marries Atuat… Oki kills Atanarjuat's brother, but Atanarjuat escapes in a stunning sequence, running naked across the ice floes, outstripping his pursuers until, his feet torn and bloody, he is taken in by a friendly sorcerer…

The motion picture concedes nothing in the way of authenticity, with sequences that show in realistic detail the training of sled-dogs, cutting up animal carcasses or making an igloo… But the convincing ethnographic elements only serve to intensify the compelling story and characters, which take on a truly epic dimension…

If the purpose of a national cinema is to represent the culture of the peoples it belongs to, then "Atanarjuat" achieves this victoriously, both the content of the film and the manner of its telling being wholly specific to Canada, yet in the process achieving a universal appeal

A man runs naked across a plain of ice and snow, his feet bloody and his eyes desperate as he glances back at his hunters. When he falls, even having just come in from the sweltering summer heat, you feel the cold.

This is the best scene in ‘Atanarjuat, the Fast Runner', a movie very different from any other you will have seen. What makes it so special is that it is about and made entirely by the Inuit of Canada. It immerses you in the harsh, nearly desolate world of a tiny Arctic community.

In such a small group, where a few families live in confined spaces, tensions can be explosive. The story is centered around the rivalry of Atanarjuat and Oki over Atuat, a rivalry which echoes that of their fathers, Tulimaq or Sauri, for leadership of the tribe. In the prologue to the main story we see Sauri assassinate his father with the aid of an evil spirit who continues to haunt the tribe. The struggles of the families of Tulimaq and Sauri lead to a betrayal and a murder that sends the naked man running across the ice.

It is a good story, though it is long, slow and sometimes hard to follow. What makes it so memorable is the remarkable lifestyle that it makes seem so real. From dogsleds and ritual combat to seduction and exorcism, we see many of the facets of pre-modern Inuit life, which was built entirely on just two things: water and the flesh and bones of Arctic animals. The acting is completely convincing, the music is sparingly but powerfully used and the cinematography captures both the beauty and cruelty of that vast wilderness in the north of the world. It is something far from the conventions of Hollywood and if you have the patience, you will find it fascinating.

7/10

How many times have you heard this philosophy in film: `All I have is memory'? `The Fast Runner' is just such a memory film of the Iglooik people telling a 1000 year-old story of feuding brothers, unfaithful wives, and patricide most foul. The beginning voiceover says, "I can only say this story to someone who understands it."

If it sounds like `King Lear' or `Hamlet,' it's not quite Shakespeare but close. It is as close to today's internecine and global wars as any other movie you will see this year.

Set against the vast, frozen, flat, brilliantly-lit Arctic Circle, this tragic tale slowly reveals a small family circle that must deal with their crimes without the help of kings or counselors or cops. They have only themselves, and despite that, or perhaps because of it, they must work out solutions that not only do not disintegrate the circle but also mete out the punishment satisfactorily.

A naked man running for his life for 15 hours over the frozen tundra is an enduring image; two men alternately hitting each other in the face, waiting for the blows, is as unusual a fight scene as you will ever see. It's all a part of the heavily ritualized culture, where breaking from the norm is a critical occurrence. Everyone sleeping in the same tent lends a new meaning to family unity. Forgiveness for heinous crime is a lesson still to be learned by far more advanced cultures.

I was moved by the grandeur of last year's epic `Himalaya.' This year's extraordinary `Fast Runner' has given that film a run for its money. The humanity of the characters, both good and bad, and the dazzlingly vistas make this film memorable. Don't miss the outtakes at the closing credits and the shots of the very modern actors who so convincingly play first-millennium Inuits.

`The Fast Runner' deserved the Camera d'OR for best first film at Cannes.

Perhaps the word that best describes this film is 'remarkable'. It is remarkable that it was made at all, by an Inuit film company, remarkable that it was shot on location in the High Arctic in conditions of winter and summer, remarkable for its absolute authenticity, for its faithfulness both to its subject and to the Inuit culture, which transcends remarkable.

I have been to the High Artic more than once. I have sat in the great silence of the north on the late summer tundra when it turns purple and the winds begin to blow across the ground and make the cotton grass sing. I have heard the snow squeak at thirty-five below zero, as it did in this film; filming in such conditions must have been a nightmare. Metal does strange things at those temperatures; cameras freeze and film becomes brittle and breaks into pieces. Actors get cold and those just standing around get colder. There are no local power sources. And everything must be flown in by transport plane, including everything needed for the film crew to live and eat. There are no hotels and no restaurants, no pub of an evening and the daylight hours for filiming in February or March are very short. And in the summer, there are the flies.

The use of Inuktitut, which is still a living language, preserves that essential atmosphere of complete authenticity; the building of igloos, the darkness inside the communal dwelling with only seal oil lamps, the use of bone and driftwood and dried seaweed for tools and fuel are absolutely authentic. And yet not once did I have the impression of watching a documentary. These were real people, living real lives, using real tools, wearing real clothing, relying on the hunt, on luck and on each other for survival.

The story is set a thousand years ago. It is a legend, but one easily sees that it was a real story, passed down through time in the oral tradition. As it plays itself out - in the slow pace of Inuit time, not the frantic, high-pressure pace of our everyday existence - the rules of survival become clear, family alliances, taboos, social practices. Where survival in a lethal environment is moment to moment, social rules broken have immediate consequences not only for individuals but for the whole community, which usually consisted of no more than a dozen or so related individuals. Jealousy, murder, theft could not be tolerated. The story must not, therefore, be judged by our standards. The only way to see this film is with complete openness; not only must you let the characters tell you the events of their drama, you must let them show you why those events were so destructive and why their way of dealing with it was right for them.

This is about survival in a way that someone living in a city with a supermarket down the street, medical care and central heating can probably never fully grasp. It is not for the small-minded, not for anyone who cannot see past his own prejudices or narrow moral concepts and it is not for the squeamish. Survival is messy; it involves animal guts and blood and pain, it involves you in your own continued existence in a way that we can no longer experience in all our plenty and our ease. This film is also about fierce love, blinding jealousy, hatred, courage and abiding patience - all things we share in our common humanity. But the filmmakers did not present the characters as 'noble savages'. Life was about food, about having it or not having it, about hunting it, gathering it, bringing it home, preparing it, preserving it, eating it and then doing it all over again. All the time. The Inuit are in no way 'primitive' people, whatever that truly means; this is how they survived. We couldn't do it - and perhaps that makes us the primitives.

I was fascinated. It takes a short while to become used to the unfamiliar, the setting, the names, the culture shock. After that, it is compelling, and very, very real. The events unfold tragically and inevitably in a distressingly familiar, a frighteningly human way. And you care deeply about the characters, about what happens to them, about whether they win out - because it is made very clear that they have every chance of not surviving for any number of reasons.

And it is gorgeous. The Artic is immensely photogenic but the cinematography was up to the challenge. The sounds are a whole new experience for those who have never been there - the wind, the squeak and crunch of the snow, the dogs, the singing, the drumming, the rattling of bones, the sounds of the ice.

This film is an experience; if the Arctic has ever intrigued you, this must not be missed.

I saw this movie last night and went to bed without words. After having a chance to sleep on it, it is now starting to sink in how truly amazing this movie was. You will be first blown away by the fact that this movie even exists. It is truly unprecedented in every sense of the word. I don't remember seeing anything like it, since maybe "Nanook of the North", which would be a stretch. Unlike "Nanook", this movie is shot from the Inuit perspective, the characters are not looked upon as anthropological specimens. They are people living in a fragile existence, where any wrong move could mean sure death.

The actors are astonishing, and it must have been so terribly cold up there, that you know this was a labor of love for the production team. The scenery is astonishing. Almost everyone who participated in this production was full-blooded Inuit. It is a beautiful story based on an Inuit legend that exists on many different levels and subplots, etc. All told on the frozen tundra without ANY indication given about the timeframe, or even century, in which it was set.

I am just astonished at the painstaking attention to historical detail. I have read many books on Inuit culture, and most everything I have read was visualized in this movie, the social structure, the power of the patriarch, the constant looming of starvation, the role of the hunter/husband, the insubordination of women (pre-arranged marriages), the obsession with taboo and curses, the fine art of building igloos and staying warm in -60 temps, and yet, through all the hardships, there was so much happiness. They even showed how the dogs were handled and treated, even down to the way they would slicken their sledge rails by spitting small amounts of water on them until a layer of slick frozen ice formed, which makes the sledges slide easier over the pack ice. The one thing that I thought of today was how the movie was TOTALLY absent of the white, European influence. Their knives were made from caribou horns; they had no metal knives or metal cookware, which indicates that the movie was purposely based on a time before the Inuit's first contact with white men.

It has a slow start, it's only fault. You will be a bit confused at first, trying to understand the characters and what exactly is happening, but then it starts to really suck you in, you begin to love the protagonists, who are physically beautiful people, and then you will grow to hate the antagonists, who are mean and undesirable. Afterwards, you will realize that almost all of these people, cast and crew, were full-blooded Inuit. You will then want to immediately see it again and demand a documentary on the making of this film. You will want to know who these people are, what they do in their normal lives, because most of these actors are making their big screen debut. The end of the movie gives you a quick behind-the-scenes peek, but it serves as only a small appetizer to a bigger feast. Most importantly, your respect for their pride and perseverance of their culture will increase ten-fold