"Australia: Land Beyond Time" is another IMAX 40-minute documentary and the writer, director and producer is David Flatman. He has not worked on as many IMAX films as some other filmmakers, but was also a producer on "Antarctica" over 10 years ago before this one here. And it was a really great job he did here. I was very well-entertained from start to finish. The title may be a bit misleading as this one is really more about animals in Australia than about the country itself. Nonetheless we get informative content on several occasions during this film on all kinds of subjects besides animals. So this one was cute/beautiful and informative, which are the two key achievements that every nature documentary should go for. And Flatman succeeded. In case he is still alive and reads this review at some point, I would like to say: I applaud your work here Mr. Flatman. It was a joy to watch and I recommend this little movie to audiences young and old. Thumbs up, very well worth seeing.
3 Reviews
Prime example of what a documentary should look like
Horst_In_Translation6 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
"A beautiful, documentary of Australian nature"
simon-trek10 April 2004
This IMAX movie is a wonderful documentary about what a beautiful and desolate place Australia is. This film explores Australian life right from the very beginning to the present day. This film talks about what a harsh and unforgiving environment the Australian outback is. The film also explores the beautiful and remarkable Australian rainforests. The film also talks about the trials of life all Australian animals and plants must face in order to survive the harsh and changing Australian environment.
The narrator of this film describes Australia as "More like another planet than another continent." I believe this narrator was almost as good as David Attenborough. Overall I believe this film is a remarkable documentary the Australian environment and Australian wild life.
The narrator of this film describes Australia as "More like another planet than another continent." I believe this narrator was almost as good as David Attenborough. Overall I believe this film is a remarkable documentary the Australian environment and Australian wild life.
Too Vast
tedg3 May 2008
I have some serious confusion about IMAX. Movies are a serious part of my life. IMAX is a presumably important development in that world, but I just cannot figure out what it means. That confusion is compounded by the sorts of films one can see there.
This uncertainty conveys the thrill that something important is going on. I think there have been two or three cusps in the evolution of film where it went into a period of multiple, clouded options about just what it was. I'm curious now, because I think some of the evolutionary results in the past trimmed off options that could have been important to me.
So I go to IMAX. I see conventional movies made in three-d and projected on the large screen as well as smaller ones. These effects are tuned to multiplex screens though. I do see three-d movies made for IMAX, things that are generally short and have no narrative coherence. They seem designed to show off the uniqueness of the technology well, but after that we have little that matters. (I still have a once-used expensive vinyl LP that was supposed to show off the range of my then new fancy hifi.)
The two-d films are less confused. Sure, I can go see the same movie I can see in the mall, only bigger. But with something like The Spiderwick Chronicles, that simply inflates the flaws.
Then there are films like these.
I chose this because Australia fascinates me. Its an amazing place which incubates artists with powerful charms. Its identity and history as a place are interesting too, but only as they influence the souls therein. We get no souls here. The idea is that in the short time of exposure to the terrain and animals, you will have some small sense of influence.
To make this work, they find a narrative, one about an expectant desert occasionally turned into a wetland cornucopia of life for a few weeks, and then to return to its exotic sleep. As with all these projects, we see color and scale all of which is explained in an earnest narration.
The problem is that all the narrative, the story, is contained in the narration, and the images are mere confirmation, essentially busyness for our eyes while we hear what is being said. There's no conveyance directly from the images. And that's what the promise of IMAX was, I think, that we would open a new vocabulary of cinematic narrative.
Not yet.
Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.
This uncertainty conveys the thrill that something important is going on. I think there have been two or three cusps in the evolution of film where it went into a period of multiple, clouded options about just what it was. I'm curious now, because I think some of the evolutionary results in the past trimmed off options that could have been important to me.
So I go to IMAX. I see conventional movies made in three-d and projected on the large screen as well as smaller ones. These effects are tuned to multiplex screens though. I do see three-d movies made for IMAX, things that are generally short and have no narrative coherence. They seem designed to show off the uniqueness of the technology well, but after that we have little that matters. (I still have a once-used expensive vinyl LP that was supposed to show off the range of my then new fancy hifi.)
The two-d films are less confused. Sure, I can go see the same movie I can see in the mall, only bigger. But with something like The Spiderwick Chronicles, that simply inflates the flaws.
Then there are films like these.
I chose this because Australia fascinates me. Its an amazing place which incubates artists with powerful charms. Its identity and history as a place are interesting too, but only as they influence the souls therein. We get no souls here. The idea is that in the short time of exposure to the terrain and animals, you will have some small sense of influence.
To make this work, they find a narrative, one about an expectant desert occasionally turned into a wetland cornucopia of life for a few weeks, and then to return to its exotic sleep. As with all these projects, we see color and scale all of which is explained in an earnest narration.
The problem is that all the narrative, the story, is contained in the narration, and the images are mere confirmation, essentially busyness for our eyes while we hear what is being said. There's no conveyance directly from the images. And that's what the promise of IMAX was, I think, that we would open a new vocabulary of cinematic narrative.
Not yet.
Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
