Libramedi Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

kapadiaahmadfan Kapadia (Welles) vs Ahmad (Kubrick) - Battle of the Asian Welles & Kubrick of UK Cinema Both magnificent film directors Kapadia older in age has 3 feature films beneath his belt. The Warrior, The Return and recently Far North.As their careers grew, the two directors could hardly be more different in film-making style, yet encompass dissimilar personalities. Both of these young prodigies turned to film-making in their early 20s. Kapadia studied graphic design before his interest in film-making led him to Newport Film School, the University of Westminster and then the Royal College of Art, where his graduate short The Sheep Thief won awards around the world, including at Cannes. He began at the very top of the pyramid with his first feature, The Warrior, won two Baftas with its huge technical crews and was offered great support.Whereas Ahmad the otherwise little-known self taught film-maker, who was brought up on a poor and often violent estate in Manchester directed his first short film on a tiny budget of 2,500 pounds Waiting For Sunrise (won Unicef award 2005, nominated for a Grierson 2006).Ahmad's power draws from his understanding that if the film-maker is not in charge of every module of his creation -- from the original screenplay down to the promotional campaign years work may go for nothing. While Kapdia as a feature filmmaker has gone strength to strength being hailed as one of the best young film directors in the UK.Ahmad become visible on the film scene 7 years after Kapadia, and in that decade beginning in the late 1990's considerable transformations took place, which he, unlike Kapadia, was able to turn to his advantage. The changes in technology and Internet marked the shift of the hierarchical, all-powerful influences by major UK studios.The increasing popularity of the Internet, coupled with the movement of younger talents bursting with new ideas. Unlike Kapadia, Ahmed took advantage creating a huge independent worldwide database of media professionals and the public to gain entry to his work. He now has a huge worldwide fan base. After 10 years of struggling to even create an indentation within the business Ahmad made 3 diverse short films A Man's World, Waiting For Sunrise & Boot Polish and is an independent who learned the whole thing on the spot, originally with whatever means that were available.While Kapadia the more professional of the two, premiered his new film Far North at the Venice Film Festival. It stars Michelle Yeoh, Sean Bean and Michelle Krusiec and was shot on the archipelago of Svalbard, one of the most northern settlements in the world, two hours south of the North Pole. Ahmed the more outspoken and naturally gifted of the two yet still has to prove himself on feature film level, while Kapadia is now an experienced veteran with international acclaim.Quotes Kapadia "I love being on the set, shooting. It's very nerve-wracking and very tense and very tiring, but for me it's the best part.There's one other moment that I think is really special: when you're finishing a film off and you put the first bit of music to it. It's a really beautiful moment because you know what the film is" Ahmad "The great thing about being a filmmaker is in that it's visual as compared to say a novelist who tries to get the readers imagination to comprehend the story, whereas the visual in the cinema is more easier to digest and as a director you can use that power to do amazing things."

JohnHandyman This was a very enjoyable film. The introduction to a different culture was exciting and mentally invigorating.The ending was the best, as it strayed away from the typical western film. Seeing this makes one realize how homogenized the movies in the US can be at times: bad guy turns good and wipes out the head boss and all of his cronies; roll credits. This was starkly different from that, the contrast was glaring when the end credits rolled and all of your expectations ingrained from seeing US films were not met.The film was centered on the idea of action and reaction, in a literal and spiritual sense. Everything occurred for a reason, and was linked together weaving a tapestry much like the woman in the hut at the end of the film was doing; strand upon strand, all connected.If you enjoy foreign films, and are able to sit still through a movie that has some slow parts, then you will enjoy this; the slow parts were important pauses in the story adding to the idea being conveyed. If you can't enjoy a film without a bloody closure and continuous action then this is not for you. I left the film with much to think about... and an incredible hunger for some Indian cuisine!

cribyn44 Since previous comments have adequately summarised the main story line of this film, there is no need for me to repeat them. However..... I first saw this film on television a short while ago, and again over the Christmas period, on DVD. Seeing the film by itself, one can possibly enjoy the final cut for what it is, although I have to admit that my second viewing did tend to highlight the sparseness of the story-line and film. It is when one comes to see the film on DVD that the trouble begins. I would STRONGLY advise all viewers who have otherwise seen and quite enjoyed the film NOT to view the "extra" feature on the DVD entitled "Alternate and Deleted Scenes". Otherwise, you will be reminded of the Marcus Antonious speech in "Julius Ceasar".... "if you have tears, prepare to shed them now.......". For nearly one hour the viewer is presented with alternate or deleted scene after scene that did not make the final cut but whose cumulative effect is to underline how otherwise totally brilliant, impressive, and moving the final cut of the film could have been had they been included - and had made the film probably around 120-plus minutes of viewing time instead of its measly present 87 minutes. Time and again the exclusions really did make one wonder about the so-called film-making thinking and skills of the director and his film editor, given that all those exclusions would have superbly rounded-out not only the story line but also the "feelings" of involvement of the viewer. In addition, viewers should be warned that for virtually the whole of that hour of alternate and deleted scenes section, the director's voice intones non-stop about how superbly he thought his film-making skills were in lining up particular shots or how far better he thought it was to drop completely many shots. In addition, I found the director's uneducated use of the English language to be screamingly annoying....."He sort of got up and went into the desert...."; " He kind of did this as the camera follows him...."; and "like" this thing then happened....etc. I am of course paraphrasing, but that gives a taste of the horrendous misuse of the English language that one has to put up with in that section. In other words, what this film absolutely requires is a patron saint who will purchase all its rights from the present director, and start again with all the alternate and deleted scenes inserted in order to make it the masterpiece it really deserves to be.

kathuria_nidhi Inspired by a Chinese fable as the writer-director Asif Kapadia admitted, the film progresses through rich imagery and metaphors suggestive of the human mind scape that is put through the test of tolerance, resolve and will. And just as a dull mind or an infant mind must go through a stream of experiences that must rip open the layers of dreary or steady existence, similarly it was essential for the story teller to envelope the snow-capped terrain of earth which must be climbed by a traveler who has sweat for the reasons he never challenged before, burnt his skin and bled too, both in his body and soul. There is almost a ghost-like resemblance with King Ashoka who goes through a change of heart and denounces blood- shed and war after the famous battle of Kalinga. One can't help notice similarity between the warrior hero and the character from Indian mythology Shravan who carries his blind parents. Even after initiating these referral points in his journey, the warrior-hero does not follow his crusade to the end, thus proving that he is not a superhuman, neither has any inclination to accept the role of Job from Christianity. He belongs to this era, where a man when pushed to his limit will break, or more appropriately, react. But the warrior-hero is not here to prove any fallacies or be put on a pedestal by those who look upon him as the one with a spine. He must take his own course, take responsibility for his actions and be the heir to the destiny misbegotten when he opens the gates of hell to please his tyrannical lord. It is the rule of the jungle that as soon as your shield is dropped by trick or by your own accord, the tyrants who live for nothing else, will attack you. Referring to the mythology again, in Mahabharata, Karan, who came into the world out of benediction of Sun God, was born with a shield, which no human sword could pierce. Tricked into removing it and offering it to the enemy in disguise, Karan didn't give up his other weapons, mainly his resolve, mental strength and pledge. Once again, coming back to our warrior-hero, who tends upon the path covered with thorns that shall pierce his bare feet and also make his soul bleed, he assumes the emotions of a human being contrasted with that of a warrior that almost led an animal like base existence. Through his transformation from a warrior to a human being, he realizes the simple pleasures of love, caring and life itself. The warrior-hero also gains the redemption pact when he chooses not to whet the appetite of his bloodthirsty sword. But the deal is only struck when his son must lose his life and pay for his father's deeds. The film is about Lafcadia (Irfan Khan) who lives in a violent world, but on his journey he seeks the strength to turn his life around – to become a much better person and, in a sense, a better father. The film is gripping until last half an hour, where it begins to drag. What is unique about this film is that with least dialogues or any verbal communication, the characters succeed in portraying pain and turmoil the writer chose for them. Irfan Khan is one of the superlative actors of the Indian film industry today, who uses his body and expressions most effectively and adds a new dimension to his character. Here too, Irfan puts his best foot forward in this realistic war saga woven with the morality tale in a film made by a visionary director from UK. Kapadia found a true street urchin who had been living on a train station platform since the age of 7 –Noor Mani, who reminds Lafcadia of his son in the film. He plays his part to the perfection and not even once gave an impression that he is acting. Damyanti Marfatia also played her real life handicap of blindness in the movie infusing some heart wrenching emotions with her realistic portrayal.The Story: Irfan Khan stars as Lafcadia, a skilled and deadly Rajput warrior, who works at the behest of a brutal local warlord (Anupam Shyam) who regularly sends Lafacadia to carry out such savage punishments as be-headings and pillaging raids of entire villages. Then one day, Lafcadia decides to go straight. In the middle of a massacre, a mystical encounter with a young girl brings about a moment of transformation in which the warrior drops his sword and vows never to kill again. Gathering his only son Katiba (Puru Chhibber), Lafcadia hits the road and heads for his native mountain village. But the warlord who controls Lafcadia will not let his warrior go. The warlord soon dispatches a second warrior, the ruthless Biswas (Aino Annuddin), to hunt down Lafcadia and bring back his head. Still Lafcadia will not be deterred. Challenging the strict codes of the warrior life, he will sacrifice more than he could imagine in his quest for a peaceful existence.