SummitPost.org

I hate watching climbing movies

I hate climbing watching movies.

Im going to see it tonight

Hitting IMAX on Sunday, very interested but it'll be tough to beat Meru.

The film focuses on the 'good' guys on the mountain in '96, but there was a 'villain' as well who gets a mention in the film - Ian Woodall, the charlatan who led the South African team. read about the most dysfunctional expedition led by a delusional leader here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B014VMISCE

I watched the movie yesterday. Seemed a good one to me, dramatic and well filmed, photography...

Just got back. I must admit went in with low expectations but thought quite amazing especially cinematography wise. I guess they somehow managed to super embellish google earth. Camps, 1, 2 and 4 looked very realistic. Was amazing how little has changed in Nepal over 20 years. More cellphones and less faxes but everything else looks very similar. Sherpa involvement in the icefall, setting up camps, oxygen carrying etc etc was obviously glossed over. I did chuckle at how quick everyone got out of their tents on summit night from camp 4 and obviously everyone had their goggles up so we could identify the characters. ooh the panning shot of climbers on the Lhotse face look like it had been 'tilted' as sure did look steep....oh and sometimes climbers were shown wearing climbing ropes for some reason and wearing full yet suspiciously light looking packs.

Watched the movie last night. Overall I thought it was very well done. I think for the average person who doesn't know a lot about the tragedy, they probably would have love the film. It did not take any stances really on placing blame anywhere, they glossed over the 2pm turnaround time, they glossed over not having the ropes at the Hillary Step, it left a question mark regarding the Oxygen being at the south summit or not and they minimized Anatoly's roll in saving three climbers and the amount of climbing he did after his summit to save lives and trying to go from camp to camp to recruit climbers for a rescue. There virtually no mention of the roll of The Sherpa either and they might play the single most important roll in the climb. Still, it was a good movie

Saw it last night in 3D. I guess the extra cost of 3D was worth it for the long shots of suspension bridges with lots of people on them. Brought back lots of memories. I wanted to see more of Scott Fisher and a bit less of Rob Hall.Wanted to see a bit more of the contribution by the sherpas.
A gripping story that keeps you on the edge of your seat, even if you know the entire story, for the last 45 minutes of the movie. Overall a good movie, but I liked Meru more.

I didn't have much interest in watching it, but maybe I will now that I've read the remarks here.

I saw it in 3-D with my family and friends. We all liked it. It's been a while since I've watched a movie where my heart was pounding. There was another instance where I felt my heart drop a little. Entertainment wise it kept it's momentum through out pretty much the entire movie. As others noted it was very visually pleasing. Certainly worth seeing on the big screen. I admit that the trailer really did not do justice for the movie.

What strikes me most is that this movie is not as negative as Krakauer's version of the story. Not surprisingly, he is not a big fan of the movie.

It captures all of the problems that led up to the disaster but it does not lay heavy blame on any one person. The slight exception to me was that this movie depicts Fisher as much more of a party guy and more careless than Krakaurer did, though that only played a minor role in the story.

Krakauer placed more emphasis on the competition between the 2 guides as reckless motivation to get all of their clients to the summit at any cost whereas this movie made it seem like Rob Hall wanted to get Doug to the top solely to help him achieve his dream. It's all speculative anyway as no one can say for sure what was in the minds of Hall or Fisher.

Overall, I thought it was well done. The scenery alone makes it worth seeing.

Interestingly, Beck Weathers' book appears in the credits at the end of the movie though his book does not give a detailed account of the 1996 Everest tragedy. (His book is about his life journey and how the tragedy affected him.) Conversely, Into Thin Air is not listed in the credits.

As long as this thread is still at the top, I'll give my 3 cents. First, I'll qualify myself. I have not read any of the books about the events. I have only read bits and pieces about the events, such as Wikipedia and forums like SP. I have no technical climbing experience and have never been much above 14k.

For the uninformed general public, I thought they did a good job of emphasizing the wait at the ladders, 2pm turnaround time, lack of fixed ropes, lack of oxygen near the south summit, and Boukreev's efforts. I think they also did a good job of emphasizing the pressure clients put on the guides to make poor decisions, and the pressure the guides may have felt with a journalist present. Maybe those that have read all the books and are really knowledgeable about the events feel otherwise.

Things I would have like to see more detail on include, Sherpas, Fischer's team, and the South African team.

Also, I was confused by the mention of David Breashears in the movie. Was he on one of the guides or clients?

I don't think the movie tried to do anything but give an account of what happened on the mountain. I didn't take it as trying to prove or disprove anybody's story, including Krakauer's.

jdzaharia wrote:
Also, I was confused by the mention of David Breashears in the movie. Was he on one of the guides or clients?

He was the guy making the IMAX film, so not a client or a guide.