Cave of Forgotten Dreams

I might have to strongly agree with this crit. However if I were to watch the film and believe its a pseudo-artsy-fartsy-comedy mockumentary I think this film might just sing for me. As it is I felt that Herzog's clumsy esoterica just got in the way of what is a profound man made wonder. Its a shame that someone else wasn't asked to do the job first. I did enjoy the scientists trying to steer their way through Herzog's messy, spiritually leading interviews. That was quite fun and almost worth the effort.

Nov 6 - 11:04 AM

Andrew Kafoury

I disagree with you both but respect where you come from. I think given the limited time allowed to film...they did a really marvelous job.

Dec 6 - 05:51 AM

Georg Pauwen

One of the few good reviews. This 'movie' is unbearable to watch mainly due to the fact that Herzog takes part in it. His narrative is nauseatingly boring and lifeless, pretty much like everything else he has made during his career. He calls himself a filmmaker, but he really is not. This film is about a cave with drawings, drawings whose main purpose is to find a way to hunt down these animals. That's all, that is the main reason for why these drawings were made 30,000 years go.
Now we have a weirdo with a camera who gathers around more weirdos and then embarks on a ninety minute long mind-boggling journey to find the hidden meaning behind these drawings.
Someone please put this man in a Bhuddist temple in Tibet, and let him smoke pot for the rest of his life, but do NOT ever let him near a camera and an audience again.

Dec 17 - 10:16 AM

Connor Still

Please dont be so narrow minded. The paintings do not seem to be related to any sort of hunting practice, for many reasons. Please consider the range and distribution of animals depicted. It is not sufficiently related to what we believe a typical diet to have been. Also, consider, the actions of the animals. None of them, i believe, relate to hunting, unlike some cave where we find what look like spears sticking out of animals. Rather, the painters of the creatures must have had a very specific and certain (spiritual?) relationship with the animals. Many people, with good reason, believe that the creatures depicted hold spiritual importance. The greatest piece of evidence for this (which i am disappointed that they did not refer to in the movie) is the placement of the paintings. Like in many caves in France (most notably Font De Gaume) position, orientation, and association of paintings to other paintings suggests that the walls were chosen for certain (again, spiritual?) reasons (considering that the paintings are not placed on what we might see as the "easiest" place to paint.) For this reason, many believe that the paintings hold a distinct religious or spiritual meaning. Second, it is agreed upon that only a few people had made the paintings, as if they were trained, chosen, etc. In other words, the creators themselves may have had a certain importance within the group living unit. If nothing else, this demonstrates that the paintings hold a clear importance to the culture who made them as the painter himself is held with a distinct regard by his people. These paintings are definitely NOT mere representations of the world around peoples who made the paintings. I see your disappointment in the way Herzog tries to convey this spiritual nature to the cave. But, it is really not his fault. It is what anthropologists have to struggle with every day when studying such caves. Anthropologists, as people of science, cannot drift into the realm of fantasy when studying such displays of human ingenuity, yet it is critically important to find an appreciation for the simply amazing and wonderful considering that that is what they may have been to the creators. In this way, Herzog finds himself in a sticky situation, balancing between scientific research and the accompanying wonderful, yet not exactly factually confirmed, stories of human genius. Personally, i think he finds that balance the best he can.

Jan 1 - 05:47 PM

Rhett Peter

That's a really good comment, well written.

Aug 31 - 09:15 AM

No�mi Titarenco

The cave drawings are not about how to hunt the animals. Often times (like in Lascaux) the things they drew were not even animals they hunted. There are many different theories and Herzog's interpretation is accepted by a chunk of art historians. It was most likely a religious or spiritual ceremony that involved the cave drawings. It was also not necessarily related to hunting because at Chauvet we have the first "named" artist, ie the guy with the weird finger. This means it was his job to draw, the drawings were not made by hunters. So whether his title was leader, just artist, or spiritual guide is up for interpretation.

I do feel that the actual filming could have been stronger, I really felt like I didn't get to see the whole thing, that sometimes the camera was too zoomed in or too zoomed out.

And the white crocodiles were way off-base.

Dec 21 - 06:25 PM

Felipe Garcia Ramos

Tom, if it wasnt for this movie, you wouldnt even know the cave exists, so STFU.

Jan 21 - 07:13 PM

Sleepy Boy Blue

Tom, you are alone and sad with nothing but your over-cynical and underdeveloped mind to comfort you.

Sep 30 - 08:18 PM

Opening this week

Movies

New on DVD

DVD

Who's In Theaters This Weekend?

Celebrities

What's Hot on Rotten Tomatoes

News

Spotlight

Critics

Critic Review - Moviedex

Comments