5/5 Profound and Enlightening
  by Fred Puaatuua
This is the third installment to a 3 part series. Due to advancements in modern technology, this one is more visually stunning. An excellent blend of Cinematography and Editing over a bed of music scored by Phillip Glass. To the discerning eye, here-in lies many of the reasons the world has been in decline for so long. Fabricated by their own hands, mankind is the architect of its own demise. The inclusion of the Hopi Indian prophecy quotes add a thought provoking, and often times stunning, characteristic to the work. I would Suggest watching a DVD called: HOME, by Yann Arthus-Bertrand (20th Century Fox), and then watch this DVD.

4/5 Powerful but not easy....
  by StrayDog (London United Kingdom)
I think this film pays the price of being the third in a sequel and the existance of the two easier-to-watch predecessors.
I think the music in this one is wonderful, the images are not as beautiful as the natural ones of Koia but equally strong - almost hypnotic at times. The logical thread is difficult to follow and it either needs repeted viewings or some external help. I couldn't get it.
What in my opinion spoiled it a bit are the recurrent similiarities with the previous movies (the approach is the same: music+imagery, the music is often veeeeery similar to Koia, some scenes of autos lights are a copy from Koia, etc...) which keep tempting an uncaptured viewer into thinking that this third release was merely a money-making exercise trying to capitalise on past successes.
I too like other reviewers was looking at the timer waiting for the end, but now I have it in the background as I am writing, and it's not bad at all...

My tokenworth for those who haven't watched any of the Qatsi? Watch them in reverse order... 1) Naqoy, 2) Powaq, 3) Koia. It would be great to get your comments.

2/5 Instantly Forgettable
  by Doug Anderson (Miami Beach, Florida United States)
After seeing Koyaanisqatsi in an art house many many years ago the images & sounds re-played in my mind for days. But this latest installment is instantly forgettable.

What this film feels like is an Epcott ride; a kind of tourist's vision of the technological age, the information age, or the digital age, or all three conflated into one big amusement ride.

Postmoderns argue that we are bombarded with so much information that we no longer have the ability to make heads or tails of it, or that we simply don't have enough time to make heads or tails of it, or that we have lost the desire to make heads or tails of it. All fine arguments, all perhaps partially true (or true for some), and all perhaps leading to the feeling that we are no longer in control of our world but that our world is in control of us. Hence, the relevance of the -qatsi trilogy, a semi-mystical trinity of pictures thats intention is to produce nostalgia for a time when there was some kind of balance between man and environment. But information in the information age has a very short shelf life, as does new technology, as do new age & postmodern philosophies, as does art. And the -qatsi trilogy, too, seems dated. In the years since the original, Koyaanisqatsi, the message has changed but the films have not. The second and third films just seem like redundant copies, redundant because they do not advance or refine the original, now outdated, formulation.

New technologies are not going to go away, we marvel at them and we depend on them, and we do not want them to go away. New technologies do create problems, but they also solve many problems. Rapid transformations in the private & the public sphere tend to excite some people and frighten others. The first -qatsi film came along when many people were maybe uncertain about how they felt, because they hadn't yet had time to contemplate what all the new tech meant. Now we've had time to adapt to it and our reponses to it have grown more nuanced. The problem with the second and third qatsi films is that they have not grown more nuanced with us.

Also, new tech often impresses us and we treat it with an almost religious awe. But then the shock wears off and it becomes part of our daily lives. The first film was impressive because it was the first time that many of us saw time-lapse photography used on such a massive scale and matched with the perfect music. It produced a strong aesthetic reaction. But the aesthetic is not new anymore. Nor does it seem to be as profound.

In fact, there is very little to prevent one from reading this latest film as a celebration of our technological-information rich-digital world instead of as a critique of it.
And maybe thats intentional, maybe the filmakers have changed their own minds about technology etc... and have reached new conclusions (despite the continued use of those Hopi titles).

In any event, the film is only to be recommended to those who adore time-lapse photography and Philip Glass.

Personally, I find I can cope just fine with the digital age. But this much time-lapse photography and this much Philip Glass give me a headache.




2/5 There is something better out there
  by The Concise Critic: (New England)
This ain't "Fantasia"
I like--to some degree--the music of Philip Glass. (But apparently I don't like 89 minutes of it at once.)
I like--to some degree--the flash of images--even the flash of discordant image--and the thoughts these images provoke.
But, mostly through it, I was rooting for Mickey Mouse to appear and hungering for the triumphance of "greatest" classical hits.
This won't be viewed again; "Fantasia" will.

2/5 Mayhem
  by CK (Australia)
Mayhem, missiles, madness and bombs in high contrast black and white or supersaturated, highly tinted colour. A dark and unpleasant collage of images, not particularly imaginative, that almost left me with a headache. Occasionally visually striking, so 2 stars rather than one. But overall - disappointing.