Aquarela

Exquisitely filmed and orchestrated, highly absorbing and, on occasion, providing an overwhelming feeling of 'Mal de Mer' - that is until the floods and winds arrive that turns it into a saturated 'Mal de Fossil Fuels'. Let's leave them in the ground and avoid a wet and watery apocalyptic drowning - while hoping its not too late to avoid the deluge that's imminently upon us.

Greetings again from the darkness. This is not your father's Nature documentary. It's more like Mother Nature giving us a glimpse at her most beautiful, peaceful, ferocious and terrifying self. And it's just water. Simple H2O. Only it's not so simple. In fact, water takes many forms, and Russian filmmaker Victor Kossakovsky serves up some stunning water photography from around the globe.

The film begins with a rescue team working frantically to pull out a car that has fallen through the ice. When the camera finally does pull back, we see the vast space of the lake covered in ice. Other cars speed across the frozen body of water as if it's a sport or thrill for the driver. When another mishap occurs, we realize the tragedy is blamed on ice that has melted "3 weeks" earlier than usual. So we brace ourselves for another lecture on climate change.

It's a lecture that never comes. Surprisingly, there is no narrator. Perhaps Morgan Freeman signed a non-compete with the penguins. Kossakovsky allows the camera and nature to show the story, albeit with periodic musical accompaniment from composer Eicca Toppinen - sometimes with heavy metal chords, sometimes with soothing strings. Filmed in Greenland, Venezuela, Siberia (Lake Baikal), and Miami, Florida, where we see the effect of Hurricane Irma, water is shown in its glory. At times peaceful, at times violent. A sailboat captain fighting a storm might be followed by a breath-taking waterfall, which might be followed by a flooded town ... and even a swimming horse is photographed underwater.

Waves, glaciers, whales and dolphins combine for an unusual cinematic experience, and the most staggering sound comes courtesy of the ice moaning and water running. It's one best enjoyed with theatre screen and sound, and a film that will likely lose something even on the finest home systems. Filmed at 94 frames per second (rather than industry norm of 24 or 48), the visuals are truly breathtaking ... and sometimes disorienting. As George (on "Seinfeld") once said, "The sea was angry that day, my friend"; and now we have witnessed the anger for ourselves.

My favourite film is "Koyaanisqatsi", which is a documentary about nature and urban life. It's probably not a well-known film, but that doesn't matter to me. I absolutely love it and it made me cry the first time I saw it. When I went to see "Aquarela", I was hoping it would be like "Koyaanisqatsi" and I guess you could say it's kinda similar, but it didn't blow me away. I feel a bit disappointed. Maybe my expectations were too high? I dunno, but I still enjoyed it.

"Aquarela" is basically a documentary about water and ice. Like "Koyaanisqatsi", there's no narration. We're just shown footage of water and ice, among other things, like people boating and people getting cars out of water and ice. There's a scene where I think people are trying to rescue someone who may be drowning. You don't see them successfully rescue that person or recover a body. Did the person die? Maybe the filmmakers know, but you don't, at least just by watching the film. Is it fair to criticize the fact that you don't find out? Granted, you don't know anything about this person, but after the film is over, you might still be thinking about him or her. I don't know if there's a message or a dedication in the end credits.

I feel disappointed that you don't hear that much music to go along with the footage, but when you do hear music, it's pretty good. The footage itself is nice to look at. You see waves of water, ice falling, etc. There were only a few times when I thought the footage looked utterly amazing, though. There is one part that I had trouble watching because it was quite overwhelming for my eyes and not in a good way, but I'm not sure how to distinguish that part from other footage in the film.

Does "Aquarela" have anything to do with climate change? I'm not sure. You can think about that yourself if you see the film. This is probably one of those films that isn't for everyone. Maybe you'll be really bored watching it, but I wasn't. I liked it. Some of the footage is really quite breathtaking and when there's music, it suits the footage. I think I might've liked the film more if there was a lot more music.

I really didn't like this movie. It starts off with some kind of rescue operation, with some very impressive imagery, but the lack of context and information render this section a bit pointless and hard to invest emotionally. The rest of the movie is just images of water around the world in various shapes and forms, again with no context or information. Movies like Koyaanisqatsi and Baraka come to mind while watching a movie like this, but the imagery in this movie, while good, pales in comparison with the before mentioned masterpieces, and if you're not invested emotionally the cinematography should be jaw dropping. But if you like to watch a movie while contemplating about your life and what groceries you need to shop for tomorrow's dinner, this is the movie for you.

Saw it at Sundance 2019. There is no plot, and it's all about water in different aspects. I don't have anything against plotless films, as long as they are engaging and interesting. This film definitely has beautiful cinematography and some interesting scenes, but there is too many similar frames with water, so that after some point it becomes boring. Some narration or story would help. It started with scenes on Lake Baikal that involved humans and some stories. That part was great. But then it dies out and transforms into pure water scenes.