User reviews

I was fortunate enough to come out of a European premiere with Glass and Reggio doing a small Q&A after the screening, providing some insight in their scoring/filmmaking process.

Should you already be familiar with other Reggio/Glass collaborations, expect no surprises; the film takes gracefully advantage of modern cinematic techniques and some CGI, but in its core is using the same visual narrative introduced in Koyaanisqatsi, albeit using humans primarily as a focus.

Reggio does have an overarching vision and communicates it with deliberation, but that vision tries to capture expression and reaction predominantly around technology, in its spontaneity. Although most of the people depicted are indeed actors, they were given no script or instructions, merely captured after given certain stimuli. The nature/human relationship is once again explored, I feel however, to a lesser degree compared to his older material.

A lot of viewers would not find logical or coherent structure in it, but as Reggio pointed out, that was not the movie's goal. Rather, it is more of a collage of visual elements as for the viewer to experience, absorb and process as they will.

It may be too strong of a word, but I liked KOYAANISQATSI and, to a lesser degree, NAQOYQATSI. Maybe I shouldn't use "like," when "appreciate" would be a more accurate description. For what it's worth, Godfrey Reggio has a distinct style of "documentary" filmmaking that combines images and music in interesting ways, and VISITORS is no different in that regard. Where this particular film failed for me is its extreme obliqueness and refusal to contextualize anything or even hint at a possible meaning. Perhaps it's my fault and I "just don't get it," but film appreciation goes both ways, and I shouldn't have to do all of the work. Still, however boring or unengaging I found it, the photography was nothing less than stunning and Philip Glass' music was excellent as usual. As for what's in the film, there was a lot of slow-motion close-ups of people's faces expressing a range of emotions, time-lapse photography of natural elements and man-made structures, a close-up of a gorilla, and aerial photography of the moon's surface. I suppose I could conjecture, based on what is shown and the title, that humanity is interconnected in our emotional expression as well as being "visitors" to Earth (in that we aren't here forever). There was also some juxtaposition between natural and artificial things, but that element was common in both of the previous Reggio films I watched. To be honest, I don't know quite what to make of VISITORS. It looks pretty and has a great score, but its meaning eludes me, and that's why I found it frustrating.

Wow! The word review does not apply to this film. A review implies an explanation. Which in this case would be like trying to explain a vivid dream several hours later. This film truly is a cinematic experience. A journey that I was twenty five minutes into before I realized that I was not watching a film, but rather a film was watching me. Each emotional nuance expressed created a cascading effect of conscious questions and reflections of the artistry that was unfolding. Masterfully woven images driven by an exquisitely orchestrated musical score. The images accentuate the music, or the music enhances the images. Or it could be completely the other way around? I was fortunate enough to witness the world premiere of this masterpiece at TIFF. The Toronto Symphony Orchestra performed the soundtrack live. Which in itself was a most unique cinematic experience, I strongly suggest live musical accompaniment of film should be repeated not only here in Toronto, but Globally. Everything that is old is eventually new again. Godfrey Reggio, Sir you are a genius. You have created your own artistic genre, you have expanded on it, reinvented it and turned it around on itself to create something completely new. Philip Glass, Sir you are a genius, your music is the life blood of inspiration. To all the cast and crew of this gem of a film, congratulations! And thank you.

I'm not familiar with Godfrey Reggio's work, but looking him up, he's an acclaimed documentary filmmaker who likes to make movies that have no real plots and instead relies on silent videos and images, set to usually very haunting music. Visitors seems to continue that trend by making a movie that from a visual perspective is fascinating to look at, but from a sit down and watch perspective is a little harder to view. In many respects, this film is basically a challenge to watch, but I don't regret seeing it, because after watching this film, I'm more interested in looking up this man's work than I ever was before.

Visitors has no real plot. Instead it is a film that tries to reveal humanity's "trace-like" experience with technology, which, when commandeered by extreme emotional states, produces massive effects that are far beyond human reach. The film uses footage in black and white of people and places to try and get a particular feeling from the audience.

The films opening should be a warning for the audience. It features a shot of a gorilla played to dramatic music that slowly pans to a shot of what looks like the moon. The first ten or so minutes of the movie is shots of people, but they are very still. It's an impressive feat, considering these are real people, and not trained professional actors. Despite this they manage not to move a muscle, back or forth.

The film has recurring motifs. Shots of the outside of a building are shown ten times or more. The film also has interesting ways of shooting; a slow motion shot of a man yawning, a closeup of kids on what appears to be a merry go round, going back and fourth, a shot of just three heads and so on. There are a lot of fascinating things to watch from a film fan perspective.

The music can go from being slow and mystical, but then it becomes very overpowering, and in some ways, interrupts the film.

Visitors is an interesting experiment. Out of the all of the films I've seen this year, this is probably the most bizarre and surrealistic of all them all. No plot, but the film pulls me in, because of how it is made. I can't really recommended this film to everyone, but I can say, if you're interested in watching a movie that is basically images and music, then go right ahead.

It's been a real privilege to have followed Godfrey Reggio's work from Koyaanisqatsi (1982) until his latest, Visitors, a bold and profound continuation of his cinematic vision and dialogue.

Some of the readers of the reviews of this movie will hopefully see the particularly relevant irony of those who lividly complain about this movie being "boring, "slow", "uninteresting", "pointless", "a waste of time", "worst movie ever", "watch in fast forward mode!". They may never appreciate that the long takes of people's faces, seemingly in trances, are simply reflections of their own faces in the Reggio mirror. They are looking at themselves as they spend most of their awake time - visually plugged into their Wide Screen TVs, computer screens, video games, movie screens, smart phones, etc.. Immediate gratification, exuberant sensory stimulation and simple short answers frustratingly pervade these commentators as it does our now screen-based civilization.

With the ubiquity of screen-based existence, humanity has changed drastically in only a few decades. It's up to you to decide if that's good or bad but if you are familiar with Reggio's work, it can pretty much be summed up as his artistic rendering of the impact industry and technology has had on us - our species - spiritually, culturally, socially, individually, artistically, commercially etc, and importantly, the parallel impacts these changes have had on nature. The continuous visual juxtaposition between humans and animals, between dead buildings and dead landscapes are pure Reggio, beautiful yet deeply dark, illustrating this parallel both literally and in layers of metaphor and symbolism. The inability to sense or comprehend these layers is, as always, a limitation of the viewer, not the artist.

The movie itself, is bold in a number of ways.

Style-wise, it is Reggio's first all black & white feature with all or much of the background transformed to black and foreground detail replaced with blown out whites - visually stunning. The underlying themes are so effectively brought out with this style. The complete lack of colour further emphasizes the addiction of our culture to sensory extremes which induce pleasing and intense moods/mental states that do not require physical motion (other than to actuate a mouse or remote control) and only require our eyes to be open and lock into the screen interface.

But the true boldness is that the focus of his "critique" is not generally towards modern human civilization (industry, war, human exploitation, environmental exploitation, poverty, etc..) as in his previous work but this time, there is a personal element mixed in with the more familiar artistic diatribe against technology. This time, you look into the Reggio mirror, and you see yourself staring, blankly, quasi-comatose, right back at yourself. You are watching yourself.. watch yourself, and it's not pretty. An unsettling realization for each and every one of us.

Relax, perhaps a glass of wine, settle down for an hour and a half, douse pre-expectations, open your mind and experience another Reggio masterpiece. Ask yourself what 'Visitor' means… Buddhists already know.

I really liked the shot of the gorilla and also the buildings but I couldn't help but not care about the people so I went to write this review instead.

The pacing of the images adds up to a constant slow mo effect, which is nice but gets old quickly.

Being a Philip glass fan I can only like the music but to be fair I wouldn't put it on much by itself. I'd have rather liked to hear some crazy Einstein on the beach rhythms with these images, it might change the tempo and vibe a bit. Wait I can just listen to the album on my headphones and mute this.. later..

Godfrey Reggio first came to international prominence in 1982 with his extraordinary visual essay "Koyaanisqatsi", (I don't think of it as a documentary). This wordless account of 'life out of balance' was followed by "Powaqqatsi" and "Naqoyqatsi", all similarly looking at life on this planet as if seen perhaps by an outsider, an alien observing us but keeping their distance. These films were tone-poems in the most literal sense; wordless they may have been but all driven forward by the continuous, energizing scores of Philip Glass.

He made "Visitors" in 2014. The title alone alludes more to the concept of 'outside' observation although the second face we see, (of many, many faces; the first is that of a large gorilla), is of a young girl looking directly at the camera, followed by that of a man. Who, we find ourselves asking, are the visitors? The faces on the screen? Us, the audience in the auditorium? Are we watching or are we being watched? If "Koyaanisqatsi" was about 'life out of balance' then the measured pace of the shots in "Visitors" would seem to be very much about life in balance although gradually these 'still' images give way to movement, of people in slow motion, of clouds racing across the sky. Children are seen in close-up but they seem to be on a merry-go-round; the balance is being interrupted.

Of course, it's impossible to think of these images without Philip Glass' accompaniment. Perhaps never in the history of the movies has music and image been so conducive to one another than in the films of Godfrey Reggio. Lacking any kind of narrative structure I have often felt his films were more like video installations to be experienced projected onto the walls of an art gallery rather than to be seen in a cinema or on television. They are certainly the kind of films for which the term 'art-house' might have been invented.

"Visitors" is shot in black and white, making it perhaps the most 'art-house' of all his films. Is it boring? I'd be a liar if I didn't say yes but only because we are not used to seeing this kind of film-making, which is hypnotic if nothing else. Is it pretentious? Probably, but in relation to what since no-one else is doing this kind of stuff outside of the avant-garde. What's for certain is, you won't find its like elsewhere.

Visitors is an 87 minute journey through the electronically obsessed life as we know it today. The film forces you to stare deep into the soul of other beings experiencing life on this rock that we all are ultimately just...visiting and destroying at the same time.

The way the film stares out at you and forces you to stare back at it is nothing less than creative perfection. The cuts are just long enough for you to understand the message while making you squirm in your seat as you imagine each move of the character on-screen reflecting your very own movements in the audience.

I would recommend this film to anyone who appreciates great art in movement.

Well, this one certainly tested my patience. Director Reggio, known for his illustrious "Qatsi" trilogy, attempts to thematically explore humanity's relationship with modern technology through a series of miniature slow-motion clips. This mostly comprises of entranced faces staring directly at the camera, a dilapidated amusement park and overbearing concrete buildings. An eclectic selection of contemporary images one may find when watching the tape from 'Ringu'.

Ironically, Reggio portrays this documentary as a horror film, concluding his non-verbal art installation piece with images of deforestation, pollution and abandonment. Acting as a last resort to attempt to convey the apparent message of humanity's enslavement by technology causing the disinterest of our planet's welfare. Y'know what? It's condescending as hell! A pretentiously contemporaneous method of communicating an issue we are already aware of, except instead of actually displaying the dark side of civilisation, we are presented with an hour of faces. Hauntingly hypnotic? Definitely, particularly when accompanied by Glass' repetitive orchestral piece that further enhances the trance-like state when staring at a screen for an hour and a half. But absurdly ineffective due to the lasting power of these images being absent almost entirely.

Reggio could've condensed this down to thirty minutes and still have the same result. An additional hour of gormless eyes and general unhappiness is not going to further the director's point. Self-absorbing indulgence, I expected nothing less from an artist who is attempting to claw back his cult status from 'Koyaanisqatsi'. Heck, the images themselves aren't majestic enough to appreciate, unlike 'Samsara'. This is art. It's ambiguous. People will extrapolate something different out of it. Whilst some clips substantiated their purpose, notably the auditorium staring at an ape, most just had me rating faces out of ten due to their lack of impact in a message that should've been conveyed with more urgency.

Having loved Koyaanisqatsi and its first sequel, I was looking forward to this film. In case anyone should think I'm unfamiliar with art-house films or anything without a conventional structure, I'm a serious arty film buff and avoid Hollywood or mainstream commercial cinema like the plague. Mostly I watch subtitled foreign films. I was also a Reggio/Glass fan. However, after 20 minutes I found Visitors so tiresome and boring that I fast-forwarded the rest, and in 5 minutes had reached the end. I realise this was supposed to be a trance-like film, but after a short time it was obvious what Reggio had to say (much the same as in Koyaanisqatsi), and it seemed almost like a pastiche of a Reggio/Glass film. It almost seemed as if the film had been made at normal speed and then shown in slo-mo to achieve a mesmeric effect, because to see it played faster didn't appear to miss much. I replayed the opening 20 minutes just to make sure.

Avante Garde. French for "monkeys throw handfuls of feces at blank canvases and art critics line up to pay obscene sums of money to have one in their trendy loft." Tedious...monotonous...inane...insipid...got a $10,000 camera for my birthday so I went around the world shooting long snail-paced pans of stuff all of us see every day and I string them together into a film that the average person will find mind-numbingly boring, but the critics will rave about how absolutely dull and simple the people are who don't appreciate "the art". As I let this thing run, I flossed, scratched my itchy back with a $2 bamboo back scratcher from CVS, typed this negative review, and shaved my taint with a plastic picnic knife. So my time wasn't completely wasted. if I am in the minority and everyone else was glued to the edge of their seat, I guess I might have to consider the possibility that I'm a droll and vacant rube. If, on the other hand, I am not in the minority, I have to wonder, yet again, how the hell IMDb rates movies. I've learned that they cannot be trusted.

I have never written a review before EVER! and i was so looking forward to this movie for months! All i can say is what a frigging waste of time!!! sorry for swearing. This is the MOST PATHETIC movie i have ever seen in my entire life! I had to rate it a 1/10 because there are no other options but if i could i'd rate it a -10/10 it's really THAT BAD!!! :(

It started off with some really nice music drawing you into the film along with some still pictures of man and ape which for a bit was intriguing but one still picture lead to the next still picture and yet more still pictures and even more still pictures.

Before long i had, had enough and couldn't handle it anymore, so i went to fast forward it to find the story line, only to realize i had been watching it for 20 minutes! Then when i did start fast forwarding it, all i got was more still pictures until then very end of the movie! It was just bad and in all honesty, there's just no other word for it!!! That can be used on IMDb.

I have never written a movie review before, although I have seen many thousands of movies.

This is the most unspeakable piece of garbage I have ever watched, for all the reasons given by others who have rated it a "1." The only thing worse than this movie is the effete, pathetic, pretentious reviewers who thought that this is a magnificent piece of "art."

Visitors is the kind of movie that makes me wonder if I am just totally dense or I'm the only one who gets the joke is on us.

This 87 minute film is a plot less series of images mostly of people with a variety of reactions ranging from solemn, to sad to happy to laughing to other reactions. At first its unclear what if anything they are looking at as the images of people are interspersed with images of animals, space, buildings and other things. Eventually it becomes clear they are looking at something perhaps a movie, or pictures or whatever.

As the viewer, we are supposed to take something away from this. Mostly likely the relationship between the increasingly enthralled people on the screen and what they are watching. I prefer to think it is the willingness of us the real audience to sit through anything in the hope that we will get something out of it. I didn't.

I don't know what the director had in mind, but really, how could he not make the same point in 20 minutes rather than force us to waste 90.

Makes sitting through David Lynch's Eraserhead feel painless in comparison.