Ghost Elephants (2025) Has a special screening Feb 26, hits theaters Feb 27 and then on Nat Geo March 7

Werner Herzog  profiles Steve Boyes who is trying to see if he can track any relatives of the elephant known as Henry, aka the Fenykovi elephant who was shot and killed in the 1930’s and is in display at the Smithsonian. Henry is the biggest elephant known to have been killed by a human being, and Boyes thinks he is part of an unclassified species of giant elephants. Herzog and Boyes go into wild to see what they can find.

I’m kind of confused that National Geographic would have Herzog make a documentary for them. It’s not that there is a problem with Herzog’s documentaries, rather they tend to be about things not so much in the frame. Herzog is always reaching for a greater understanding of the universe by looking beyond the normal. Here Herzog isn’t just looking for elephants but examining, among other things, why we would gout and search for elephants. There is this moment about 38 minutes into the film where, where Boyes said that things don’t matter if they actually find the elephants and that perhaps it would be better if it remained a dream. If this was any other documentary by Herzog the film would have ended there. Boyes after all gives us the great revelation which is the sort of thing Herzog normally looks for.  However, in this case the film keeps going for another hour. What follows isn’t bad, it’s a National Geographic documentary filtered through the hands of one of the greatest directors ever, which if you know Herzog’s docs means you know what you are getting- something you think you know but really don't.

Herzog knows he must do a lot more than his typical soul searching and as a result we get a film that goes into a lot of interesting places.  For example, in trying to explain the scale of the destruction of the elephants over the years he turns to the infamous film AFRICA ADDIO so that he can use the footage of the helicopter elephant hunts and the endless carnage left behind. It’s a stunning moment that anyone not familiar with the earlier film is going to find rocks their world.(For a discussion of that film go here) Herzog makes his point and then some. He also gives us a look at the trackers they use to find the elephants (and which could have been a film untoi themselves)

To be completely honest I’m not sure all of this works. While never bad the mystical nature of Herzog’s style doesn’t always mesh with your typical Smithsonian films. The tone feels off. Yes the information is great, but at the same time it isn’t as smooth as it should be.

At the same time it’s a Herzog film which makes it better than almost any other film out there.

Recommended.

Into The Inferno (2016) Toronto 2016

Cinematically there are few things as perfect and beautiful as Werner Herzog operating at the top of his game. When Herzog clicks with his subject the most amazing mind blowing things happen. With INTO THE INFERNO Herzog is (mostly) operating that in rarefied air where cinematic classics dwell.

This film is nominally a trip around the world with Werner Herzog  and his co-director Clive Oppenheimer, a vulcanologist to see active volcanos. Herzog met Oppenheimer during his trip to Antartica for ENCOUNTERS AT THE END OF THE WORLD. The pair  fell in with each other on the edge of a crater and have been talking ever since. The trips allow Herzog to ruminate on the volcanos, the lives of the people who live by them and his career (Herzog has been chasing volcanos for decades).

Leave it to Herzog to go off with a scientist and and end up making a film that is mystical and more interested in the unquantifiable questions concerning the effects of the living mountains on human beings Clearly Herzog knows that they haunt people since they have been in several of his films going all the way back to the marvelous LA SOUFRIERE  where he went to an island that was about to explode. Herzog's examination is book-ended with the words of two tribal elders on different islands of the same archipelago talking about the spirits that inhabit the volcanos. The sequences are not condescending nor funny. We don't laugh at the men, the first, because his sincerity comes through so clearly that it's impossible not to believe him, while with the second we have traveled long enough and far enough with Herzog that we accept hat he is saying as a kind of truth.

Herzog's quest to see effects of the mountains on people takes us to some interesting places including North Korea where where a now dormant volcano is said to be the birth place of the Korean people. It's a weird sequence that even Herzog acknowledges is strange with it's stage managed presentation of life in the country. As Herzog says its just something where you just have to go with it. It includes a weird encounter where a bunch of college students sing to the volcano. Its one of those odd moments where you think that Herzog is putting us on except it's so weird a thing and North Korea is supposed to be crazy enough that you accept that it's something that happened

While Herzog's contemplations are interesting, what givess the film and Herzog's words their power are the visuals. A mix of old and  new footage both from Herzog and by others showing the volcanos erupting, sputtering or just simmering. Herzog gives us some of the most amazing things you'll ever see and and they are of such power that you come to understand why the living mountains have such a hold over the people living around them. If I saw the things in this film on a regular basis I too would find them mystical. The images are so over powering that I want to see the film several more times just to see the imagery.

As good as the film is the film has a major flaw that upsets the films narrative  to the point it makes what is largely one of Herzog's best films and makes it a little less. It happens during the trip to Ethiopia where Herzog and Oppenheinmer connect with an anthropologist who has just located the fossil remains of an ancient hominid. In a sequence that runs way too long and in no way ties into the rest of the film we listen to the man prattle on about human origins and watch as he and the filmmaker root around in the dirt for bone fragments. It stops the film dead and runs so long that the film kind of never recovers. The thematic threads of volcanos and people get stretched or snap and one wonders how some of the next sequences tie in. Honestly it wasn't until the final bit with the talk of a mythical American god and a cargo cult that the film got back on track

Problems or no INTO THE INFERNO is an amazing film. In a weird way it's one of my favorite Werner Herzog films because when it's on and the sound, narration and image link up it becomes one of the great brain expanders of the year. This is a magical film that should be seen as big as possible. I can't recommend this film enough.

INTO THE INFERNO is heading for Netflix on October 28, but  the film is getting festival a nd theatricalscreenings so if you get a chance see it- preferably on a big screen where the sound and image will leave you in state of ecstatic giddiness.

One of my favorite films of 2016

Lo and Behold Reveries of the Connected World (2016)

LO AND BEHOLD is Werner Herzog's dizzying look at the Internet and our interconnected world covers a wide variety of subjects and is almost too much to take in on a single viewing.

Herzog's look at technology begins at the beginning on the night in 1969 when two computers 400 miles apart spoke to each other. The first message was Lo, then the computer crashed. They had been trying to say log so that one computer would log into the other but the G was never sent. From there the film shoots off to look at all the possibilities and realities of this now interconnected world- both the good and the bad. Its a heady mix that will get your brain going...and make you want to pause from time to time to think about hat you're seeing.

And as much as I love the film I really do think the film is trying to do too much in 98 minutes. There simply is too much here including driverless cars, on line courses/games, programming robots, solar flares and their effect on the world, game addiction, the dangers of radiation from cell towers, the end of civilization, hackers and artificial intelligence. There is even more that I didn't mention, so much in fact that I got to a certain point and I just threw up my hands, I was losing way too much because I simply didn't have time to process all that was being thrown at me. Honestly I need three or four more passes through the film in order to fully comprehend it all.

Herzog has enough material here for a film twice as long or even a series of films. We are given lots to contemplate before we are suddenly bumped to the next thing. We don't have time to ponder anything because we have to get through all of the parts in under 100 minutes with the result it often feels rushed or unfinished. I think the reason for this is that the film doesn't connect everything together, yes people appear in several segments and yes some things tie together but there isn't one giant "ah ha!" moment where all the ideas come together where you know what Herzog was getting at..  I know you can argue that's the internet, but at the same time a film, especially one that's only 98 minutes, needs something more to hang all its ideas on beyond a general statement. (Compare this film to any of Adam Curtis's films or even his sensory assault live show that he did with Massive Attack and you'll see how information overload can be done right)

I'm sure there are people who are going to go into the film and insist they got it all the first time and I will call them liar. I'm also suspicious of some of my fellow writers ho have written long detailed pieces on the film. I'm certain that any of their long pieces are the result of press notes and cheat sheets, things the average movie goer are not going to have. Personally I don't think it's possible to fully get most of what is being said is interconnected with the film and once you see it you kind of have to go back and see it again to see the connections.

Be certain I'm not dismissing the film or even remotely suggesting that its anything less than great, I'm simply saying that Herzog has made a film that assumes his audience has a brain in its head, can actually process a great deal of information and is capable of independent thought. Here is the exact opposite of pretty much every summer film from a major studio for the last 40 years and it's refreshing and utterly daunting, and even exhausting.

I know some of you are saying what did I expect from Werner Herzog? Exactly something like this. As any long time readers of Unseen Films know Herzog is one of my favorite directors and while he doesn't always turn out masterpieces or documentaries that tell the complete truth (the end of CAVES OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS), he does make films that challenge you, sometimes, like now, where they kick your legs out from under you. LO AND BEHOLD begins begins simply and then gets complicated not in what we see but what Herzog chooses to point out to us. His sly comments twist what we've seen and what we are told in such away that we are forced to contemplate it. We are seeing the world in a new way and it makes you dizzy.

I am overwhelmed by the film. That's a good thing and a bad thing. It's good because I know I have to go back and see this film again if only to see what I missed. Its bad because I know that there really is too much here for one sitting, or two, and because I suspect that it may just be a bunch of random pieces too loosely tied together that they are falling out of the bundle, As I said I had to throw up my hands. I really wish I had the film on DVD or Bluray so I could stop and start as I wanted and so I could jump through the film referencing pieces.

I love it and I hate it.

LO AND BEHOLD is one of the headiest films of the last decade. It's a must see for Herzog fans or anyone who wants to go as far from the multiplex mentality as possible.

Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe (1980)

Les Blank's short documentary Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe is built on a bet between Werner Herzog and Errol Morris. Morris had still not made a film at that point of his life, and had abandoned previous creative endeavors (not just films). To egg his friend on, Herzog said that if Morris actually completed a movie, he would go to the premiere of the film and eat his own shoes.

And so in 1978, Herzog, at Chez Panisse with the assistance of Alice Waters, cooked his footwear in duck fat and spices for five hours and then ate his shoe in front of an appreciative Berkeley crowd at the UC Theater during the premiere of Morris' Gates of Heaven.

Herzog's persona is in full effect here—observant, at times seemingly alien, deadpan hilarious, but always intelligent in articulating the points he's getting at, and often poetic while getting there. At one point, he lambasts the inadequacy of the images in society that are fed to us by commercials and television, and says that maybe a society without adequate images is culturally doomed. Minutes prior to that, he talks about having once jumped into a cactus as a promise to one of his actors.

This sense of high and low—the absurdity of eating a shoe to push someone to create, the fact we can debase ourselves to allow others the ability to dream—is what makes Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe both silly and yet oddly inspiring.

One of Herzog's more profound observations about the struggle to create art and the persistence of achieving this vision appears in two works about the making of Fitzcarraldo, the book Conquest of the Useless and Blank's 1982 feature-length documentary The Burden of Dreams: If I were to abandon this project, I would be a man without dreams, and I don't want to live like that. The line contains a dogged sense of hard work being worthwhile, the struggle being better than not having to struggle at all.

Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe offers two lines that I think could be viewed as a precursor.

The first: Making films turns me into a clown, but that happens to everyone; what filmmakers do is immaterial—it's a projection of light—and it makes you a clown in the process. Herzog says this while eating his shoe. As far as clowns go, I picture a clown who takes pratfalls and pies to the face yet keeps going; a silent clown like Charlie Chaplin's tramp (who appears briefly in the doc), or even a cartoon clown like Wile E. Coyote or Daffy Duck in "Duck Amuck," clowns less like Bozo and more like Sisyphus.

The second line, which comes at the end, is the burden of fools and a call to other creatives out there to be honorable clowns: To eat a shoe is a foolish signal, but it was worthwhile, and once in a while I think we should be foolish enough to do things like that—more shoes, more boots, more garlic!

Werner Herzog: Parables of Folly and Madness starts Friday at Lincoln Center

Herzog with Klaus Kinski the master of folly and madness himself

Friday at Lincoln Center starts Werner Herzog: Parables of Folly and Madness.

This is a now increasingly rare chance to see some of Herzog’s films on a big screen in 35mm. While all the films are good the real treats are the screenings of Aguirre and Fitzcaraldo, two huge epic films which gain much by seeing them BIG. The series runs Friday through next Thursday, but you’ll want to camp out on Saturday and especially Sunday when you can overdose on the mania.

For full details, including a multi film discount, go here.

La Soufriere (1977)

When word that La Soufriere, a volcano, was about to explode Werner Herzog dropped everything and ran off to try and find the one inhabitant of the small island that didn't leave. Scientists were expecting an explosion of catastrophic proportions and fled themselves. When Herzog and his camera men arrived on the island they were greeted by a eerily silent landscape and a sense of impending doom.

The film that resulted from Herzog's trip is strange viewing experience. As Herzog remarks its as if he were dropped into a science fiction movie where everyone in the world has disappeared but the electric, phones and TVs still worked. Its a place where thousands of snakes fled the rumbling mountain by going into the ocean while the only humans around spend time getting closer to the danger. Its an odd experience as we watch and wait for what we are told is inevitable....

Herzog has made a film of stark beauty that is also deeply disturbing. There is something about it that is not quite right. Of course it has to do with the fact that the film is like real life Waiting for Godot, we are waiting for the end that never comes, despite all the signs. Its an unnerving proposition that messes with your head, but in a good way. Its 30 minutes well spent.

This is currently out in the Werner Herzog Documentary and short film box set from Herzog's web sit but also on a DVD of three short films of Herzog's work.

Werner Herzog looks at what it means to be handicapped

Land of Silence and Darkness (1971)
Story of Fini Straubinger who is "trapped" in her own body being both deaf and blind. Since the condition came on later in life she is able to speak and tells us what its like. We also watch as she goes around helping those like her. Communication is done via touching or writing on the hands. It becomes clear that the people in the film with this condition are trying to live full lives. An amazing film that shows us what its like not to be able to hear or see. Hopeful and yet unnerving-its not a state one really wants to contemplate having-its an important film since we see the world with a different set of eyes. Taking the matter even further Herzog and his crew also show us what its like for people born deaf and blind and how hard it is for them to even learn the basic things we take for granted. Moving. Haunting. Worth a look since it will make you reflect on how we get along.

Handicapped Future (1971)
Werner Herzog co directed film about handicapped children in Germany in 1969. The point of the film is that the Germans don't want anything to do with the kids who are all but locked away. Even the fact that they are building special apartment blocks for the kids and their families is seen as segregation from the rest of society. Its a sad film in that the kids are clearly seen to be no different then normal kids, only with physical handicaps that reduce their mobility. Its a damning indictment of German society at the time especially when in the final minutes the film moves to America where we see a young man who moved to the US to get a college degree. He is a teacher and able to to go where and do what he wants thanks to an understanding society. Its a good film that that only suffers in retrospect since almost 40 years on we don't know how far Germany may or may not have come. (Its also eerie in that watching it it becomes very understandable how some of the Holocaust happened-the German's clearly wanted imperfection locked away.) 6.5 out of 10 because its dated in some ways.

Bells from the Deep (1995)

Portrait of superstition and faith in Russia.

Completely neutral Werner Herzog film simply shows the people as they are and lets them speak for themselves. One is a "reincarnation" of Christ speaking of love and brotherly love. Another is a man who plays the bells at a church. We see a faith healer and mystic blessing a couple. We also spend time at a village near a Russian lake. Here is its said that God saved a village from the Mongol Hordes by placing it at the bottom of a lake, where if the conditions are right you can see it through the ice when the lake freezes in the winter.

Non-judgmental to the point that anything approaching a voice over is simply the translation of the words of those we see on screen. Even the "silliness" of the people who live near the lake with their crawling around it from holy site to holy site ceases to be funny when you realize that these people actually believe in what they are telling you. It's a haunting film that makes you wonder about how and what some people believe.

Highly recommended.

---

Okay what you just read was essentially the post I made for the film at IMDB. in looking for a picture for this post I ran across a piece, I thought it was in Slate but I'm not sure now, which quoted my review and then took me to task for believing the film was serious.

I was bewildered and confused. How did they know what Herzog's intentions were? I was shocked so I watched the film again. Watching the film again I tried to find out why they would think it wasn't serious, I mean beyond the intrinsic silliness (at least to me) of some of the material?

I can't figure it out.

Taking their questions to heart I was faced with a serious question- How can we ever tell what an artist means if there are no clues in the material? Think about it you can't have an instruction sheet with every film, book and painting. To do so would work against the purpose of art.

After much thought and much discussion, I've concluded you can't. Once you put something out you have to allow it to be taken for what it is. If people get it then you've succeeded. If they don't you've failed- or failed as far as what you've intended.

Works of art are like children you can't control them once you send them out the door.

As for Bells From the Deep, I stand by my review. That's how I feel.

I don't know, as of this writing, what Herzog intended, and on some level I don't care. I like the film as I see it. Down the road when I get more distance I'll look to see what Herzog intended, but for now I'll take the film as I first came upon it, completely fresh and on face value with in interpretations from anyone, even the director.

----
On October 2nd I saw Herzog briefly speak about his films in connection with a screening of Caves of Forgotten Dreams. When asked about whether we can trust what we see in his documentaries he said consider that everything you see has been filtered through him. Every shot choice is his, everything you see was done by him in order to get to what he calls the ecstatic truth which is something we have to work out and fill in for ourselves. We have to be an active participant in the film. If that is the case and since Herzog doesn't seem to be condescending to his subjects then I would say that the film is more or less true at least on an emotional level.

Wings of Hope (2000)

Christmas 1971. A plane full of people crashes into the Amazon Jungle. A massive search is started and the wreckage is found. Despite the best efforts of rescuers no one is found alive and the search is called off. 16 Days later Juliane Koepcke, aged 17 stumbles out of the jungle, the only survivor.

Leave it to Werner Herzog to talk Juliane to go back into the jungle and show us what it was like. Amazing, hypnotic film who's subject haunted Herzog for decades-he was in the airport at the time the plane took off when he was making Aguirre The Wrath of God. Clearly Herzog's obsession is our gain since this is a film that you fall into and watch in a state of wondrous disbelief. Tthe thought of what this young girl went through is mind blowing, even if you take into account that she was raised in the jungle at a scientific station. No matter how you slice it she was ten ways to Sunday lucky. Julianne tells us what happened in a weird detached manner of fact manner that is strangely inviting and yet eerily unemotional. As she says she has wall up that will keep her safe.

Its a wild film of an amazing story, a sibling of Herzog's Little Dieter Needs to Fly and Aguirre. I kept thinking that someone should turn it into a movie---and then Herzog shows clips from the movie that was made of the story complete with catty commentary by Juliane Koepcke who is standing in the jungle laughing at the silliness of it. I was very amused.

See this film. It will amaze you. Better it will entertain and inform you.

Werner Herzog- Two Looks at the Man

Today I present two looks at the man himself. One made by himself and another made by others.

Portrait Werner Herzog (1986)
Odd rambling self portrait by Werner Herzog on himself. Mixing brief biographical information with clips from his movies this is more a sketch than a real portrait, and even then its incomplete since he only touches a handful of films and never really gives full biographical details.The problem here is much of this film can be found in other films in other forms, the clips certainly can be seen in other films, but even a chunk of the biographical info can be found in other documentaries about the man (I Am My Films, My Best Friend, Burden of Dreams). The result is a film that is mostly going to be a loss to anyone coming to Herzog and his films with out some form of prior knowledge since the material doesn't have much context. That said anyone who is a fan and who loves his movies are going to be nicely diverted for its brief running time as we get a few bits of information concerning his life and learn of at least one unrealized project, a mountain film that was to be made with Klaus Kinski. Worth a look for fans, but anyone not knowing of Werner Herzog and his back catalog should stay away or risk being lost or worse bored

I AM MY FILMS (1979)
Want to know why I love the films of Werner Herzog (he's possibly my favorite director)? This is the reason. In my film class in high school we were shown this film and several of his films.The result was a life long passion for the man and his movies. The film is an interview done at the time of Stroszek, it has Herzog talking about each film, talking about their creation and what he hoped to achieve. Its the director explaining his films in a way that enlightens on more than just a cinematic level. Herzog not only talks about his films but also his larger ideas about what film is, both fiction and documentary. One of the reasons this film is so powerful is that we get some of the more hypnotic scenes from his films, the decent in Aguirre, The procession from Even Dwarfs Started Small, the volcano that wouldn't blow up, and on and on, all explained by the man himself, all hung out so that their beauty might tempt us to dive deeper into his back catalog. The result is that we get a greater appreciation for what we are seeing in the films he talks about and cinema itself. Its magic. Its the best sort of documentary, the subject in his own words. Its one of the best (filmmaker) portraits I've seen and an interesting companion piece to Herzog's My Best Friend, where Herzog once again talks about his films, though with a bend toward his Klaus Kinski films. This film will help you understand what he is doing better than any other film, article or book. If you love films you need to see this, more so if you love the films of Werner Herzog. Just see this film.

Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2010)

Cave of Forgotten Dreams is a film Werner Herzog had to be talked into shooting in 3D. The film, a record of the cave paintings at Chauvet in France doesn't sound like the sort of thing that you'd expect to see in 3D. Cave paintings are flat right? Actually no, and it wasn't until Herzog saw them that he realized that the film needed to be in 3D.

Okay, let me step back and start again. This past Saturday night I had a ticket for a talk with Werner Herzog that was being held as one of the events at the New Yorker Festival. This is a festival held in Manhattan once a year where all sorts of interesting people come to town, under the sponsorship of the New Yorker Magazine, and are interviewed by many equally clever people. There are panel discussions, walking tours and scavenger hunts. Its generally a lot of fun. Over the years I've seen Clint Eastwood, Ricky Jay and a kick ass panel on acting in Shakespeare with Ethan Hawke, Liev Schreiber, Martha Plimpton and Kristen Johnson.

Waiting on line outside the Directors Guild Theater a person from the festival told us that the movie would be 90 minutes or so. It was in 3D and that we would have to give the glasses back. We were also told that there would be a very brief Q&A afterward. This confused everyone on line since none of us knew anything about a movie. As for the 3D part I remembered reading about a film going into production but I couldn't recall what it was suppose to be about.

Inside I ended up sitting 2 rows behind Mr Herzog. I wanted to say something to him but there was a din of activity around him and I never got the chance.

The project, to make a film record of the cave paintings at Chauvet, was suggested to Herzog by the producer. Herzog said that he instantly said yes because he knew that this was probably going to be the one time the paintings would be filmed (they are behind a bank vault like door and access is restricted. )They had only four hours on each of five days to actually film the paintings and had to follow certain strict rules: stay on the 2 foot wide path, use only a crew of 4, use only non-heat producing lights, and a few others.

Herzog starts the film with lo-res video footage of the first trip into the cave. They had exactly one hour to go in and see what was there so they could make plans. The 3D footage here is a bit odd due to its low quality, there is an occasional odd bending of the image, however that is a minor annoyance since we are instantly in the cave and marveling at the sights. Pristine paintings are on the wall and it's as if they were painted yesterday. They are truly beautiful.

Herzog introduces us to some of the scientists studying the paintings and artifacts. And he cuts back and forth between this first trip into the cave and interviews outside of the cave. As time goes on a certain tension is built up as we begin to ache to really see the cave and the paintings in their full glory, since during these early scenes we only getting brief looks at the art.

Then finally this "first" trip is done and Herzog says that he was then allowed to go in and film. From this point the images spring to life in beautiful high resolutio, and if you're like me your jaw hangs wide open at the magic.

Horses, Rhinos. Mammoth. All sorts of creatures line the walls. There are no people (well there is a half human creature), just animals in motion.

What master artisans these people were. The beauty and wonder of what was put on the walls makes us, as Herzog wishes as to, wonder at what point did we, as a species, become human? At what point did we develop the need to create? The paintings here 30 thousand years old and possess a clarity and a vision and a use of space that wouldn't really be matched for thousands of years.

Seeing this film in 3D blows you away because the paintings are not on flat surfaces, the walls of the cave protrude out or bow in and by moving the 3D camera you get a better idea of what the walls really look like. Added to that is the fact that Herzog moves his lights around as if they are torches so we see the images closer to what they would have looked like in torch light. It's amazing and makes the case for a scientist's suggestion that some of the paintings are a sort of "proto-cinema".

I don't know what to say.

This film just blew me away with what it showed. The beauty of it all really moved me. Its as if we are reaching back 300 centuries to hear a small voice in the wilderness... and I think that 3D was the way to go simply because it makes us feel as though we really are in the cave.

My feelings toward 3D are mixed. I really love the effect, but at the same time I know that its rarely used correctly. Almost never is it used to add to a film, rather its used like a sideshow gimmick. That's not the case ;here the film needed to be in 3D because it's documenting a real place that isn't 2D. This is one of the few rare occasions where the effect of seeing the film in 3D or 2D will be different (at least I think so).

Werner Herzog isn't a fan of 3D. During the talk after the film he admitted to seeing Avatar, but he added that" porno films should be in 3D but romantic comedies shouldn't" because the the 3D takes away a layer of engagement and doesn't allow our imaginations to fully connect to the film we are seeing. He feels we play along less with a film in 3D than a 2D one; we don't full engage with it since the extra dimension takes away the desire to ponder where it's all going. (I'm explaining it badly, forgive me his explanation took up a large portion of the post film talk and my trying to get it into two or three lines which doesn't do it justice.) I think Herzog used 3D here because there was no story to get short circuited, its simply real life.

I'm floored by the film. Its not that its perfect film, it's not, it's probably ten minutes too long, rather its a film that makes you wonder at man and life and the world we live in. There is a form of "ecstatic truth" that Herzog aims for in his films. This truth is a greater truth beyond the images and the films.

Frankly this is a film that should have been at the NYFF because its one that breaks boundaries and forces us to think and consider and really experience something.

See this film. See it in 3D if you can, in 2D if you can't. This was produced by History Films an off shoot of the History Channel so I'm guessing it will be eventually on cable. I know it's the opening night film at DOC NYC in November so look for it after that.

ADDENDUM:
Herzog admits that he's played with things a little bit, adding that he always plays with things since he picks the shots, chooses the music (which in this case is hauntingly beautiful) and everything else. He says that he is looking for a greater truth. To that end he openly states that the asking for quiet scene was staged for effect. He also said the end piece about the a albino crocodiles isn't true. The place is real but they are albino alligators from the US and are used with his comments for effect and to get at his truth.

I mention this because the question of what is real and what isn't is raised during next weeks week long look at the some of the documentaries of Werner Herzog.

And in the interest of full disclosure on my part the week was prepared way in advance, long before I sat in the theater seeing Cave. To that end keep in mind that when I mention not covering Herzog's films before that I really meant it at the time. It was only a happy accident that allowed me to see and review this film.

NYFF-Day 3.5- Social Network, Nuremberg and a tease at the New Werner Herzog film

Today was a make up day in regard to films from the NYFF. Basically I'm behind where I wanted to be with the number of screenings for a couple of different reasons. However today I went into Manhattan and tried to make up for lost time.

The first film I saw was Social Network. This is the story of the creation of Facebook. I'm not going to go into the film because it's playing everywhere and is being lauded as one of the best of the year and the decade....All I can say is look for a On Further Review entry down the road.

The short version is that the film is about a Mark Zuckerberg, who is best described by his soon to be ex-girlfriend in the first scene as an asshole. He's a socially backward genius of the sort that I grew up around in high school. Actually I know versions of all of the characters, sans the money, and I really didn't like them all that much. Any way Zuckerberg takes the idea of Face Book from a couple of rich guys who need his expertise and turn it into what we know today. Lawsuits result.

For me it was kind of hard to care about anyone in the film when everyone is either a jerk or incredibly shallow. I couldn't fathom why I would want to watch this film other than out of a feeling of obligation.

Don't get me wrong it's not a bad movie, its good, its just that it's hard to feel anything about a bunch of clever guys who are incredibly shallow. In its way the film is as shallow as the people it portrays...all of whom live in a shallow time. The fact that some has called it the film of the decade kind of makes it clear these are shallow times...and wonders what took the reviewer until this movie to notice it?

As I said, it's not bad, its just not as clever as it thinks it is.

People who love mistakes in films will have a field day of sorts as its clear from the poorly added breath mist that the film was not filmed in the dead of winter.

(I should also mention that Jesse Eisenberg nails the tics of an uber geek- however his mannerisms may annoy you, one person at the screening I saw liked the movie but Eisenberg made her nervous and she left.)

I also saw Nuremberg a restoration about the war and the trials that resulted. The film was never shown outside of Europe and the film elements have been lost or destroyed and it was only by careful searching that some of the elements were brought back together.

A good film, but not a great one, the film is very much you are there sort of thing. Its a good film to see if you keep it in the historical context, however if you are expecting something as gripping as a PBS special or a something from the History Channel you'll be disappointed. Its just not that exciting or interesting.

Worth a look but wait for cable.

Lastly I want to mention that I also attended the New Yorker Festival today as well. It was suppose to be a conversation with Werner Herzog. It ended up being a special screening of his new 3-D movie Cave of Forgotten Dreams. It's about the recently discovered cave paintings in Chauvet France. Its amazing and the 3-D actually has a reason to be there since it puts you in the cave. I want to do a full review later, if not this week then next week as part of the week long trbute to Herzog's documentary work.

That's it for now, its late and I have things to do in the morning.