Documentary ‘Mountain’ has glorious panoramas

( PG ) ( Monitor Movie Guide )

When it is not making us 'ooh' and 'ah,' 'Mountain' features all manner of adventurers, including ice climbers, parachuting mountain bikers, wingsuiters, and daredevil downhill skiers. 

Courtesy of Greenwich Entertainment
Ben Briggs appears in the film 'Mountain.'

Movies about extreme heights and extreme sports invite a particular kind of voyeurism. For those of us who would never in our wildest imaginings ride a bike off a sky-high mountain peak and then parachute to earth, I can heartily recommend the documentary “Mountain,” where such feats are standard.

Actually, I’m making the movie sound a lot more like an ESPN special than what it really is: a cinematic essay, complete with high-flown voice-over narration provided by Willem Dafoe. The Australian director Jennifer Peedom, with the immense contribution of her cinematographer, Renan Ozturk, and a pull-out-the-stops score featuring Richard Tognetti’s Australian Chamber Orchestra, shot over 2,000 hours of footage in 15 countries, including the United States, Norway, Tibet, and New Zealand. At a brisk 74 minutes, it’s a high-altitude jamboree. (Peedom’s 2005 doc, “Sherpa,” was much more straightforward.) 

A word of caution about that voice-over narration: It’s derived from Robert Macfarlane’s memoir “Mountains of the Mind,” and it’s so florid that it verges on parody. Here’s a sample: “Only gods and monsters dwelled at heights.” Or this: “To those who are enthralled by mountains, their wonder is beyond all dispute. To those who are not, their allure is a kind of madness.” 

Count me in the “kind of madness” camp, at least when it comes to doing anything other than marveling at them. It’s one thing to gaze up goggle-eyed at Everest, quite another to dirt-bike down it. When it is not making us “ooh” and “ah,” “Mountain” features all manner of adventurers, including ice climbers, those aforementioned parachuting mountain bikers, wingsuiters, and daredevil downhill skiers. Their exploits are captured by helicopter, drones, and GoPros. As someone who has difficulty negotiating the rope tow on the beginner ski slope, to me all of this is quite heady.

The movie isn’t real big on who/what/when/where, and I often had to figure out exactly what mountain range I was looking at – except for Everest, of course, which gets pride of place here. The film’s thesis is that, until three centuries ago, it was deemed an act of lunacy to climb such a mountain. Mountains “were places of peril, not beauty,” intones Dafoe, although, if anything, “Mountain” demonstrates that they can be both. He adds, “They were rituals of awe, but only from a safe distance.” What appears to have changed is that, in the film’s view, urban life just became too darned safe, and so we needed mountain climbing to seek out new perils. I use the term “we” here advisedly, although Dafoe doesn’t. I often felt like piping up, “Speak for yourself. I’m content with climbing stairs.” 

It’s questionable whether this film needs narration at all, or at least whether it needs the faux biblical lyricisms served up here. The panoramas are so glorious that I didn’t ache to hear any highfalutin hoo-ha on the soundtrack. It’s the same problem I have with most Shakespeare movies, in which the “poetic” imagery often competes with the language to the detriment of both. “Mountain” would be better if it were simpler.

Peedom dutifully records some of the injuries, and worse, that extreme mountaineering entails, but she saves her biggest sorrow for what Everest has become: an overrun tourist trap for amateur adventurers who, guided by a fleet of overworked and presumably underpaid Sherpas, attempt partial ascents. But Everest doesn’t seem to care that it has become Everest Inc. It rises into the clouds as unspeakably beautiful as ever. Mountains, the movie suggests, want nothing from us. Grade: B (Rated PG for perilous sports action, some injury images, and brief smoking.)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Documentary ‘Mountain’ has glorious panoramas
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Movies/2018/0601/Documentary-Mountain-has-glorious-panoramas
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe