User reviews

I was rendered speechless by KUNDUN when I first saw it, and subsequent viewing have only confirmed my impression that this is one of Scorsese's finest films. Yeah - it's slow and elegant. So what.

I've long held an admittedly superficial interest in Buddhism, and also been a fan of Scorsese, liking most of his films quite a bit, so I went into this with some biases, but with every viewing this seems like a richer film. I also think that Scorsese was in some ways far more at home with this material than he was given credit for being. The cinematography and performances are excellent - the cast of mostly non-actors is surprisingly good, and much of KUNDUN is staggeringly beautiful to watch.

It has also struck me that this film isn't as much of a departure for Scorsese as it first may seem - this film works well as something of a companion to LAST TEMPTATION OF Christ in that both pictures examine great faiths through spiritual figures in a way that personalizes the divine. This simply literalizes undercurrents running through a number of Scorsese's other films, which often turn on themes of loyalty, conviction and ethics (like the self-assurance, against massive obstacles, shown by Alice Hyatt in ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE). All evidence a worldview where some form of redemption or transcendance is possible. In their own ways, several memorable Scorsese characters - Sam Rothstein (CASINO), Henry Hill (GOODFELLAS), Rupert Pupkin (KING OF COMEDY), Paul Hackett (AFTER HOURS) and Alice Hyatt attempt this, some in ways that are desperate, comically misguided or just plain wrong, but they're all human, driven by some redemptive impulse nonetheless.

The Catholicism of Scorsese's youth places great value on the importance of ritual, which is also true of Buddhism, which is depicted in a detailed and respectful fashion here, and the rhythm of KUNDUN - where the chronology of events isn't (or at least doesn't seem) forced, but are instead allowed to unfold in a more naturalistic and lifelike fashion also seems to mirror Buddhist ideas admirably.

This is a far more complex film than it first might appear to be - far from being a simple biopic, KUNDUN is much much more. Definitely one of Martin Scorsese's least appreciated films.

This movie is like a breath of fresh air, for once a topic well chosen. Very nicely produced, directed and and very well acted. a very moving tale that hinges not only on the 14th Dalai Lama but of the struggle for Tibetan freedom from Chinese communist imperialist rule. This movie should be more widely shown. An interesting portrayal of the cruel,bullying, arrogant imperialist Chairman Mao enjoying the good life whilst his citizens suffered. The film portrays the issues successfully and is memorable.

We should not forget Tibet and the Tibetan peoples' desire for a restoration of independence and freedom. Marvellous just marvellous.

You don't need to be Buddhist to love this movie. It's the story of the rape of a nation along with the biography of the man who leads that nation. The images, the dialogues and the music are very powerful. Of course it omits the question of democracy under the rule of Dalai Lama but anyway nothing can be worse than Chinese oppression and total violation of Tibetans' human rights under the eyes of an indifferent West which seems to think that human rights must not be equally valued everywhere and that human rights of Kosovars are more important than human rights of Tibetans. And we won't discuss either in this context if religion is the opiate of the people or not. In this case we prefer to state that we respect all religions and beliefs. As a matter of fact Buddhism is more a philosophy than a religion. The important thing to say is that this story is true and we hope that movie will contribute to open the eyes of the so called democratic countries to the drama of those people and force them to condemn Chinese authorities overtly for it and stop the hypocrisy of showing great indignation (sometimes feigned)for some human rights' violations while at same time disregarding some others even more brutal.

I live in South Korea, so I didn't think I would get some insights about buddhism from a Western movie. But this movie shocked me a lot. Very beautiful and meaningful visuals, quiet but spiritually forceful atmosphere every single moments are in the movie, I could hardly breath during playing. This movie is not just about one man, but about the pain of all mankind and the way to transcend the pain and sin of ours in a very buddhist direction. China in this movie got a bad part. Ironically they were also victims of imperialism but learned the exact way to extort, destroy the property and beliefs of others by the power of machines. It was just sad to watch. But as Kundun implied, those violence's are in the shadow of our minds which should be overcame by the power of spirit. For me, this movie tells that.

First, I will say I am one of the strongest admirer of Scorsese work. He is on my top list with movies like Taxi Driver, After Hours, Goodfellas, the Age of Innocence.

However Kundun did not felt right. Yes the cinematography is stunning, the editing perfect, the music original. Yet I felt this movie did not reach the truth of the actual Chinese/Tibetan drama. This was not the great movie it should have been.

The fact that Tibetans and Chineses were speaking English was quite annoying. Philip Glass music was too much. I longed for silence, for this Buddhist silence. Mysticism was underplay, the political plot took over. The actors were not really convincing - the one playing the Dalai-lama and Mao especially.

Is this a bad movie? No. You are captivated. You learn if you did not already know about this terrible war, genocide, invasion. You feel the pain. But yet, you don't feel it the way it was felt there, you feel it as an American would: the struggle between the good guys and the bad guys.

Budhism is still hot in Hollywood. Although the newest religious hype is the Kabalah, it is a fact that several actors and actresses, directors, scenarists, music composers and many more others have converted to the ancient religion which Budhism is and that's probably also the reason why the subject Tibet has been used a few times in the movies. In the same year, 1997, we got Jean-Jacques Annaud's "Seven Years in Tibet" with Brad Pitt and Martin Scorsese's "Kundun" with no known professional actors.

It's not easy to tell which movie of the two was the best, because each of them has some good and lesser things to offer and both have a completely different approach to the subject. While "Seven Years in Tibet" told the story from the perspective of an Austrian mountain climber, who got stuck in Tibet after the Second World War broke loose, met the young Dalai Lama and became friends with him, you'll not find anything of that in "Kundun" even though both movies are said to be based on real events.

"Kundun" tells the story of Tibet's fourteenth Dalai Lama, from childhood until adulthood. In 1937, in a remote area of Tibet close to the Chinese border, a two year old child is identified as the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama and is taken to Lhasa two years later. Here he is schooled as a monk and thought how to be a good head of state. When he's only 14 years old, the Chinese invade Tibet, claiming that it has always belonged to China and that they only come to help the Tibetans to reform their country. In reality they enforce an oppressive regime upon the peaceful nation and the Dalai Lama is forced into a shaky coalition government. He travels to China where he meets chairman Mao and returns to Tibet afterwards, confident that he can stay with his people. But in 1959 he sees no other option, but to flee to India. He's ill, has a lot of difficulties to make it to the border and has visions of his people being slaughtered by the Chinese, but eventually makes it to safety.

I'm sure that what is told and shown in this movie all is very accurate and that the Chinese really oppressed (and still do) the Tibetans and their culture. Of course the Chinese government isn't too happy with that and they would like to see a different story, because this doesn't belong in the perfect image they want to show to the world. But apparently the truth hurts and that's why the people who made the movie were banned from China (as were the people who made "Seven Years in Tibet"). I guess this only proves how historically accurate this movie actually is. But next to the historical accuracy I also liked the nice costumes, the buildings with their beautiful interiors,... It's very clear that they have put a lot of effort in it to make it all look realistic and believable and that certainly adds to the value of this movie. Also the fact that the actors were real Tibetans is nice, although I don't really understand why they had to speak English in about 99% of the time. Only a couple of times you get to hear them speak in their native language. Is that because this movie was shot by an American director, for an American public who isn't used to read subtitles while watching a movie? I don't know, but I believe that it would have given an extra touch of realism to this movie if they had chosen to let them speak Tibetan all the time or, if that wasn't possible, not to use Tibetan at all.

And the language wasn't the only thing that 'bothered' me. This movie is very detailed, but also very slow. Especially during the first 1.5 hours the movie sometimes seems to drag on for an eternity. Perhaps that's the way the life of a holy man like the Dalai Lama should be told, or perhaps it is a part of the Budhist culture that for everything you should take your time, but sometimes I really wanted that it all went a bit faster. Also the fact that it wasn't filmed in Tibet, but in Morocco is sometimes very obvious for the keen observer. I'm not saying that it isn't well done, but the Atlas mountains can't be compared to the Himalayas in structure and scenery.

Nevertheless, I must say that this is a movie that certainly deserves to be seen by a large audience. Even when you aren't very familiar with the Tibetan and Budhist culture (like me), this movie is worth a watch. Only when you aren't interested in it at all, you better leave it alone and go for another movie. Personally I give this movie a score somewhere in between 7/10 and 7.5/10.

Knowing very little about the history of Tibet and the Dali Lama I was fascinated to learn more about it, and through this film I did learn something. But although it touched my mind it left my heart rather cold. "Kundun" comes across like a worthy B.B.C./P.B.S. docu-drama crossed with a beautiful travelogue film. The acting is not bad but passionless and the story is told as if to educate not entertain. There have been films that have managed to do both sucessfully, like "Ghandi". I was also disappointed with the Phillip Glass score which recalling earlier works only accentuated the distance between you and the film.(6/10)

I rented Kundun to further my quest to see all the Scorsese movies I can. I never expected such an incredible movie. I didn't want this movie to end. It's really difficult to describe how I feel about this movie since I have only viewed it once and was completely blown away, it left me in complete awe.

Like most when I first started watching Scorsese I thought that he did brilliant gangster films and that was his thing, but I have recently discovered that this couldn't be further from the truth. Fist seeing The Last Temptation of Christ and now Kundun I wouldn't care if Scorsese ever made another gangster film. It is easy to see that he is an artistic genius, the acting in the film was great, but I could have watched it on mute and still have been amazed.

If, like I was, you are unfamiliar with the Buddhist religion and the Chinese takeover of Tibet this film has even more to offer. Scorsese's risk of using real Buddhists to do all of the acting payed off better than I ever expected it would, the fact that we are hearing the story through the people it affected adds another level to this movie.

I cannot believe that this film only has a rating of 7 on this site. If you are a fan of Scorsese and are not sure you are going to like this just give it a chance, it deserves at least one viewing, if you give it that I am sure you will be amazed as I was. Scorsese's vision's in this movie are unlike any of his films, not to mention a great score by Phillip Glass.

Kundun, Martin Scorsese's beautifully realised story of the Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, is possibly his most divisive amongst fans. Directed by the guy whose specialities are wiseguys in sharp suits and dazzling camera-work, Kundun is a remarkably subdued tale. Scorsese had tackled religion before with the controversial The Last Temptation of Christ, but his version of the story of Jesus also came with a recognisable edge. Yet even his roughest and toughest movies come with a sense of spirituality - Mean Streets in particular - and Kundun has this in abundance, so Scorsese isn't exactly far from safe ground. Spirituality is woven into the movie's very fabric, as is the idea of watching a ready-made saint in action.

A saint is precisely how Scorsese views the Dalai Lama, and Melissa Mathison's script paints him like a key religious figure whose teachings can now only be read in scripture. As of 2017, Gyatso is still alive and reigning, although the film begins in 1937. This almost mythical presence does work in the context of Buddhism however, as if their beliefs in reincarnation are true, then Gyatso is just another body containing a soul hundreds of years old. As a young boy (played by Tenzin Yeshi Paichang at 2 years old), he is shown various objects, some of which belonged to the previous Dalai Lama, by some Tibetan monks. He chooses correctly, and is taken away to lead, but as to whether this was the expression on the monks face as he fondled the items or genuine reincarnation, Scorsese lets you ponder. He grows old and wiser, and faces difficult decisions as Imperial China invade to claim Tibet as their own.

This is undoubtedly Scorsese's most beautiful picture, and he takes his time to admire the lavish golds and reds of the ceremonial robes, as well as the intricate creation of Bhavachakra and its inevitable destruction, all backed by Philip Glass' haunting score. The decadence comes at a price however, as although we spend near enough the entire screen time with the Dalai Lama, we learn little about Gyatso. He must suffer his decisions in relative silence, or in hushed utterances to his trusted council. The refusal to follow a traditional narrative makes for a slow-moving if never boring movie, with the drama punctured by a powerful sequence depicting Gyatso standing in a sea of slaughtered monks. While it may leaving us questioning who this man truly was, I can only admire Scorsese's insistence on making the movie he wanted to make. Movies like Kundun are the reason why the director will always be remembered as a true master of his craft.

"Kundun" is Martin Scorsese's most underrated film. It's something quite fantastic to watch such an amazing film about the early years of the Dalai Lama and the plight of Tibetan Buddhists knowing that it comes from a man who has long wrestled with his own religious ghosts (witness the still hotly debated conundrum that is his "Last Temptation of Christ"). With probably only "The Age of Innocence" to compare to in Scorsese's now hallowed canon, "Kundun" is a breathtaking work of art--visually sumptuous (with beautiful work from cinematographer Roger Deakins), hauntingly transcendental, and deeply symbolic.

As an outsider looking in, Scorsese manages to create an intimate level of detail that someone who lives and breathes Buddhism might have overlooked. Many rituals and practices are presented exactly as they are with no attempts to explain their purpose or translate their meaning to Western culture. This allows them to keep their rich symbolism, which translates perfectly to Scorsese's visual palette. From the rich colors of meditative sand art to the bright red blood spilled during China's unlawful occupation of Tibet, everything takes on a deeper meaning that leaves much to the imagination and higher mind.

Wisely, Scorsese follows the same template of Richard Attenborough's equally resonating Oscar winning epic "Ghandi" by adapting a straight forward approach to his presentation of the Dalai Lama's most tumultuous years. Except for a few dreamlike vision sequences, he stays mostly out of the man's head, and instead shows his power through his actions and dedication to his people and the practice of non-violence. "Kundun" is as near perfect a biopic as one can make.

With his obvious deep interest in spiritual themes, Martin Scorsese was probably a standout choice to bring Kundun, the early story of the 14th Dalai Lama, to the big screen. In doing so, he brings his customary visual flair to what proves to be a terrific film to look at, especially considering it was shot in Morocco and not in Tibet.

Not to be handicapped geographically, Scorsese also managed to largely import an Asian cast (albeit English - speaking) actors, who with only a few exceptions, generally give a collectively convincing account of themselves, in a variety of Tibetan and Chinese roles. Unfortunately the storyline, written by Melissa Mathison, dealing with the first 24 years of Tenzin Gyatso's life, is almost too deferential in its workings and observations of the Dalai Lama. It results in Kundun looking and sounding like an extremely expensive and glossy documentary, rather than a dramatic feature.

Kundun is a long film and Scorsese with his impeccable research and attention to detail, is keen to bring a very realistic eye into the many unusual practices involved in both selecting, installing and developing the young Gyatso as he is recognised into his official role and matures into an adult. Along the way, we see him fostered and advised by a coterie of assorted senior monks, with occasional re - visitations to key family members, such as his mother. With an almost Zen - like inevitability, national conflicts with Communist China are hinted at, before being realised more overtly in the final quarter of the movie, which deals with the 1950 invasion of Tibet and its aftermath, especially, that involving the Dalai Lama.

I personally found Kundun, whilst extremely respectful of Tibetan culture and Buddhist religious practices, lacking in suspense and any sort of dramatic energy. The film is just too episodic in nature for its own good. Any real action concerned with the invasion, is virtually kept offscreen, resulting in a movie, that is factually complete, but dramatically antiseptic and nearly inert, despite the late inclusion of audiences with Chairman Mao and arduous, but scenic mountain escapes to India.

A critical success, but commercial failure, it was arguably Kundun's curse to be released the same year as Jean-Jacques Annaud's Seven Year's in Tibet, starring Brad Pitt in the biographical role of Heinrich Harrer, whose character is not referred to in this film, as best as I can remember. Seven Years covered many of the same topics as Kundun, but did so in a manner that carried a lot more dramatic heft. It deserved and succeeded in securing a much larger global audience.

As "The Last Temptation of Christ" showed, Martin Scorsese is not a filmmaker interested in playing it safe when it comes to religion. Instead, he wants to get into the heart and soul of it. While that film was obviously closer to his heart, since he was raised Catholic, this one burns with the same conviction and passion. The difference is he and writer Melissa Mathison adjust themselves to the way of storytelling needed to tell the life of the Dalai Lama. Unlike say, "Little Buddha", though, where Bertolucci seemed to have no sense of distance from his subject, Scorsese does, so we are allowed to come to our own conclusions rather than having them shoved down our throats.

Visually and aurally, this is also a real treat, with the images being more powerful than anything Scorsese has done before. And while the music here is old territory for Philip Glass, he produces a stunning score which should have won the Oscar. The mostly non-professional cast(I did see a familiar face here and there, but I can't remember them) also does good work.

Kundun is the telling of the fall of Tibet to China in 1950. It also shows the trials of the Tibetans between 1950-1959 and the eventual evacuation of the Dalai Lama to India.

TIbet suffered terrible losses four times during the Chinese invasion. First, in 1950, it lost its independence. In 1959, it lost the Dalai Lama, the spiritual head of Lhasa, sort of the Vatican of Buddhism in Tibet. There was great upheaval during the Great Leap Forward, and millions died within China from starvation. Many died from starvation in Tibet as well during this period. Then finally, the last spasm of the Mao regime, The Cultural Revolution, unleashed a final assaut on Tibet; overrunning the country with Han settlers and carpetbaggers.

To his credit, Deng Xiaoping tried to reverse some of the damage done to Tibet by liberalizing the previous restraints put on by Mao. In addition, Deng made Tibet an autonomous zone, which was supposed to be run by Tibetans, but, unfortunately continued to be run by Han administrators until the present day. The film shows the Dalai Lama trying to accommodate the PRC in the fitst ten years of the intrusion, but eventually giving up and moving to India before he was assassinated. The film is relatively depressing from start to finish, although it is inspiring in spots. To be fair, the PRC made many positive changes to the region as well. It created a highway and rail system where one never existed before, it improved the educational infrastructure by a factor of ten or more, and it redistributed valuable land to common people that was originally owned by land barons and Buddhist officials.

Unfortunately, over 6000 monastaries were destroyed during this period; fewer than a dozen remain, and Buddhist monks and nuns have had travel restrictions put upon them. And so, the modernization of Tibet has been a mixed blessing, so to speak. Interesting film.

Beautiful cinematography. Fullstop.

The rest of it doesn't seem to ring true about the Tibetan people, the culture, nor the practices in Tibetan monasteries.

Having them speak English instead of Tibetan and subtitling in English is a huge mistake.

Overall it is in essence an entirely westernized version of a period costume drama that doesn't relate significantly to Tibet, Buddhism and the Dalai Lama.

For example, having the child Dalai Lama violently playing with toy soldiers is entirely what a western boy would do, but never with the Dalai Lama.

The movie is also way too keen about the China politics and invasion element rather than about Kundun. If so, then a different movie should have been made and not be titled Kundun.

It is a dressed-up movie meant only for western eyes and perceptions, but convey hardly anything about things truly Tibetan.

While Scorsese meant well, he should have produced it and left the directing scripting and proper research to Tibetans who know better.

Though I see a lot of films (usually 100+ in theaters per year), I can't say that I'm much of a student of films. I go to be entertained and/or moved. And Kundun moved me in a way I don't think has ever happened before.

I saw the film in the multiplex in Phipps Plaza, probably Atlanta's most upscale shopping mall. At the end of the film, when I walked out the theater exit into the mall, I was emotionally stunned. Scorsese had hypnotized me into the world of Bhuddist simplicity and wonder. Seeing the activity and commercialism (which I normally love) of the mall was a shock.

Peter Weir once said: "The true test of it is when you come out of a picture and you can't remember whether it was day or night when you came in." I think that barely remembering what country I was in shows that for me, this film passes that "true test".

This movie is best viewed *without* reading HH The Dalai Lama's autobiography beforehand. Having read the book, having been emotionally involved in the religious aspects, the heady politics and in the man himself, I expected much of this movie.

The movie looks great, is well shot and Scorsese paints a wonderful and strangely glamorous view of HH Dalai Lama's early life as spiritual leader of Tibet. But at its heart it is also a cold, detached and distanced view.

You always feel removed from the characters, feeling that you don't know them or somehow don't understand them very well. The Buddhist mentality and ceremony is captured credibly to a degree, but without the true warmth or conviction of the "real thing".

The movie skims over and misses huge chunks of HH The Dalai Lama's story. Leaving us with almost a brief documentary of a life rather than a movie of one. The story was too big for Scorsese's hands I think.

Wonderful photography and artistic direction does not save this unmemorable take on one man's historic journey.

Scorsese has made nearly a dozen films based on real lives, except with Kundun, which would appear to be at many right angles from his other work, the real-life figure is taken very literally at face value, perhaps the only literal thing about this nonrepresentational construct. It essentially exists as a conjectural impression of the world through the transcendent view of a life in a very spiritual culture. The reason it is difficult at first to comprehend most things that everybody does for the first half hour is because this figure through whose eyes we're seeing had no concept but a present-tense experience of any of it. That's also the reason, I feel, why there is no plot but this purposely disjunctive succession of installments. If we knew what fills the blanks in between this experiences that we see, the abstract effect would be spoiled. Every scene brings us in cold. There is even a streak of Herzog in the odd or uncanny being seen as incidental and off-hand, as in a couple of formal gatherings where a mouse is allowed to sip freely from the drinking water.

One could argue this is not minor Scorsese, even though not even my biggest fellow Scorsese admirers seem to have ever breathed a word in conversation about it, because it's one of his boldest visions. He marshals a series of images in sync with sound and music he feels are more effective the less we know about the cultural and narrative details. How easy it would be for most filmmakers, even other great ones, to allow that to translate practically as, "The less coherent I make it, the more it will seem exotic and spiritual." But Scorsese's earnestness in and integrity to his intentions are so for real that doubt never arises. But my experience of this film may be, and probably is, very different from yours. You need look no further than Raging Bull, his most highly revered film at least academically, to see that he is a poetic filmmaker, an intense visual and emotional thinker. And despite how baffling the departure of Kundun seems to be for so many of his fans, it may be his furthest distilled achievement at creating a cinematic experience that can't be described objectively but can only be seen and heard.

Sometimes this doesn't come off successfully. Some scenes end up with us not knowing whether to have already understood what goes on between the cuts or to just accept a character's take on whatever it is. Early, for instance, young Kundun is playing a board game with a Lama comprised of battle figurines. The cutting speeds madly through the game by merely whittling down to Kundun saying, "I have more men," the Lama saying, "I have smarter men," until the Lama finally says all the figurines are his men and gathers them up. He's won, and he tells Kundun he may win tomorrow. The scene is pared down to that inherent lesson in humility, but they seem to be making up the rules of their game as they go along, so we don't feel we've experienced the lesson alongside the characters.

Tenzin Topjar, whose name I just copied down because I've never been able to retain the names of this cast, is a great child actor. In playing a spoiled and proud little Dalai Lama, the vanity he projects is always as guileless and dopey as every kid aged five to ten that you've ever met. The contrast between the pure showcase of his age and the stateliness he takes on is one of the various intrigues of Tibetan culture that drives the abstract fascination of the film. He loudly sucks up drool from his lip when saying the words, "I take refuge in the three jewels until I attain enlightenment." His tutor tells him Dalai Lamas aren't supposed to eat eggs, so he makes a face at him and gobbles down an egg. Spiritual leaders remain extraordinarily patient as he snatches precious things from them and saying, "Mine!" Idiosyncratic fascination with the story's culture itself is perhaps the most potent thing about the film, made explicit by the 1940s episode in which an adolescent Kundun reacts with wonder to various Western conventions, including an unexpected hint of slapstick in his unsuccessfully trying to drive a car, as well as his captivated discovery of old Melies reels hand-cranked through an old motion picture projector, which is as good as Scorsese's written signature on the screen, though it's apparently a true memory of the real-life 14th Dalai Lama. The most poignant of these moments, though, is the clash of East and West as these young Buddhists look on at footage of the atom bomb destroying Hiroshima.

I appreciate this sonnet of textures and stillness for being so wholeheartedly faithful to its vision, for being keen to disentangle from audience expectations and abide by its heart. I esteem it for its formalistic grace. And yet Scorsese seems to be rummaging here for something that's not part of him and never could be. What normally characterizes a Scorsese film is his fervent knowledge of exactly how his character feels at every moment. Here, I perceive him asking himself conceptually about who Kundun is.

You would expect more from a director like Scorsese on an epic story such as this one. The Chinese occupation of Tibet and the escape of Tibet's spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, are certainly stories that have the potential for great movie-making. These are also important parts of human history and of the way our leaders deal with conflicts. In this case Non-Violence is a constant theme in the film. Scorsese has instead obviously wanted to concentrate on the story of the life of the 14th Dalai Lama as a boy and young adult and not on the Chinese occupation of Tibet, or the spiritual message of Buddhism. Either of these last two might have been better choices. In spite of this effort, character development is actually quite poor. One of the reasons this film tends to be boring at times is the fact that the characters are not played by professional actors. Perhaps it is for this reason that their characters are not being allowed to develop. Keep in mind though that these actors are actual Tibetans, closely related to the real story and to the Dalai Lama himself in real life. The decor is beautiful, and you often can't tell that the film was not shot in Tibet but in Morocco! This is a great story, but it is more a dramatised documentary than an entertaining movie. I would still recommend seeing it.

I was very pleased to discover that this film wasnt the Scorcese dud some of the user comments and critics had suggested it to be. While I am no expert on Buddhism, I know enough about it to see how brilliantly Martin Scorcese and Melissa Mathison weaved the core philosophy into this tale of the Dalai Lama's formative years. They did it without succumbing to ostentation, sentimentality, or populist good vs evil film dramatics. And yet it showed us how human the child was--laughing as the monks meditated while a rat drank the ritual offerings; being frightened in the dark monastery; taking on the very great responsibility of leading a truly wise, noble and compassionate religion while being confronted by the threats of the modern world. I appreciated how they didnt portray the Chinese as simple villians--by including the scene where he dreams the army personnel are explaining to him why they embrace Mao's communism. And they also presented enough of the Buddhist ritual and way of life to show us how alien it is to western religions(the scene where they cut up the body for the vultures comes to mind), though they dont gloss it over by excluding comments about the Lama's isolation and loss of childhood or the corruption surrounding his first Regent. It was also quite moving to observe the devotion of his monks and people.

Scorcese really demonstrates here that he is a true film artist and master storyteller. I wholeheartedly concur with the commentator that compared this film to the Last Emperor--despite similar story frames and lengths, this motion picture doesnt drag at all. If this had been say, Steven Spielberg's project you would have expected to see some manipulative melodramatics and insincerity. And how can one not be impressed by the performances he got out of mostly non actors! That alone was amazing. The film maintained its pace from the early years to the Lama as an adult. From what little of the man I have seen on tv, his humor, and wisdom was conveyed remarkably well by Mathison's script and the actors chosen for the role.

Finally, his comment to the Indian guard near the end after being asked if he was the Lord Buddha--encapsulates the wisdom and the humility of its spiritual leader perfectly.

Kundun is charming because it is fresh and relatively free of the usual Hollywood pretence. It is beautifully filmed and the score is marvellous.

Although background knowledge of the Dalai Lama and Tibet does serve to highlight scenes which might otherwise be considered exclusive, Kundun remains a thoroughly touching account of a man and nation torn by the terror of communist Chinese abuses.

At times the English is a little hard to follow as the actors are all non-professional. But that really only serves to creative more ambiance.

The film could have been improved by creating a more exciting plot base and so I have only rated it a 7/10. The Dalai Lama's tale is far more exciting than has been portrayed. Yet the film captures well the mystique and experience of the man and his people. Great film.

For all its spiritual density and visual richness, "Kundun" is a rather straightforward biopic chronicling the coming-of-age of the fourteenth emanation of Buddha, also-known-as the Dalai Lama. It starts with the discovery of a young little boy who passed all the tests and left no doubt about his 'identity' to his departure to Lhassa, followed by years of initiation and finally, the confrontation with the Chinese Imperial Force, that made him witness the horrors perpetrated against his people and his fruitless attempts to awaken the world about Tibet's condition, leading to his exile.

There's nothing the film shows that can't be covered by a good documentary but one would expect from cinema to tackle its main subject with more curious and investigative eyes, especially when the director happens to be Martin Scorsese. Now, that's the core of the riddle, Scorsese's movies have always centered on characters who tried to relieve themselves from a cultural or life-related burden and couldn't accomplish such a feat in a peaceful way, his movies always culminated with a bloodbath or an outburst of violence highlighting the statement made in his seminal movie "Mean Streets": "You don't make up for your sins at church, you do it on the streets".

There seems to be a connection between a Scorsesian character and sins to some degree, even his Jesus Christ wasn't an angel immune to temptation but was about to change the face of the world for worse by embracing the very parcel of humanity that allowed him to reach people, talk about a double edged sword and a haunting character study. As a fervent catholic and a former aspiring priest, Scorsese knew one thing or two about Jesus and could handle him on a personal level. But the Dalai Lama is a such an untouchable figure or so remote to Scorsese's world that he can never really get "personal" with him. "Kundun" has a lot of things going but not the 'Scorsese' touch.

So I spent the whole film being touched by that little child trying to fit in the saintly shoes too big for him, by his homesickness, enjoying the devotion of the monks, the immersion into the closed world of Tibetan temples but the film never manages to transcend itself, to use spiritual vocabulary. It has been praised for being at least more accurate and serious than "Seven Years in Tibet". I still have to re-watch Annaud's movie but I don't think this is the right angle to judge the film. "Kundun" should be compared to a similar Asian epic biopic, which is Bernardo Bertolucci's "Last Emperor" and on that level, "Kundun" fails by contrast, even in the costume and visual richness' department.

Bertolucci's Best picture winner was a masterpiece in the way it portrayed the emperor as a fallible human being, victim of a contradicting condition, he started his life believing he was above anyone else and the end, being just a cog in China's society. The transition between the two states and how it overlapped China's History is a school-case of how to make a riveting biopic, it didn't even rely on linear narrative. Maybe the subject was different as he wasn't deified, but then I guess the Dalai Lama is too sacred to make a good biopic. Or maybe Scorsese wasn't the right director.

By that I mean Scorsese respected Buddhism so much that he told the story as if he believed the Lama was Buddha's reincarnation. I don't mind a movie embracing the religion it deals with but then it keeps the character so remote from the audience, so enigmatic that we have no other choice than suspending our own disbelief and accept it as a reality. Fair enough, but there's never a real bridge allowing us to reach him, moments of doubts or self-introspection. Even in the crucial and entertaining exchange with Mao with that infamous "Religion is poison", the Lama doesn't react, he lowers his eyes, and we're just trying to interpret his body language.

"Kundun" is a movie that constantly seems in awe of its own material, and while there are many elements to praise and the film was certainly paved with the best intentions, I think it might have did a disservice to the cause it embraced by deifying the Lama a tad too much, it focused on the religion before making it a human cause. Here is a man who represents a civilization that has rejected non-violence for centuries and is confronted to the indifference of the world and violence from an overwhelming opponent, on the scale of history; he was the ultimate "underdog". Now, what if the Lama felt some a violent impulse for rebellion as a reaction from this injustice, in the name of love?

Maybe there would have been some artistic licenses that's what the film lacked at one point or another: a daring move. In the end, it's too purist and pure for its own good and prevent the narrative from a powerful internal or emotional conflict that could have been pure Scorsesian. In the end, we've got a movie only good enough to earn Oscar nods for Cinematography and Production Design. In the end, we have what seems like an oddity in the Master's body of work, a movie where there's not much to criticize but not much to love so much you'd love to give it a second watch. Finally, the name of Scorsese is its greatest blessing, publicity-speaking.

I think the Dalai Lama or the Tibetan cause deserved better, but sometimes you have to deflate a few figures and de-sanctify them to reach people, there's a time for gazing, praying and "looking" and there's a time for something more gripping especially on the screen. A wasted opportunity.

I have reviewed this film several times, and find new details I missed. How did they film this, and using non-professional actors, as well? Mysterious, magical, educational, and dazzling to the eye and ear. Seems much careful planning went into this production, a labor of Love. The Dali Lama, must be grateful his story, can now reach the world and his personal mission, may be recognized and possible fulfilled in his lifetime?

Like the "Last Emperor" and "Little Buddha" this "slice of the metaphysical river", is breathtaking in its visual beauty. A story that grabs your heart and soul, and you find yourself, thinking about it weeks later.

Now I have a "Free Tibet" sticker on my Pathfinder, out of reverence for this tiny country, raped by the political powers in control of China.

Bravo to the cast, and film crews.

Well-intentioned, but dull. Seven Years in Tibet gave a good and interesting account of the life of 14th Dalai Lama, particularly the Chinese invasion, capture and oppression of Tibet. I was expecting the same of Kundun. I was overly optimistic.

Martin Scorsese does capture the outrage and injustice of China's invasion of Tibet, but only to small degree. Too much time is wasted on scenes and sub-plots that go nowhere. The movie moves at a glacial pace.

However, cinematography is great. Some amazing landscapes. Sadly, not actually of Tibet. Strangely, the Chinese wouldn't let Scorsese film there.... However, you wouldn't know the difference, showing how well the locations were chosen.

Performances are very flat, and contribute much to the dullness of the movie.

Watch Seven Years in Tibet instead.