Amazon.com essential video
It would be a mistake to call Kundun a disappointment, or a film that director Martin Scorsese was not equipped to create. Both statements may be true to some viewers, but they ignore the higher purpose of Scorsese's artistic intention and take away from a film that is by any definition unique. In chronicling the life of the 14th Dalai Lama, Kundun defies conventional narrative in favor of an episodic approach, presenting a sequential flow of events from the life of the young leader of Buddhist Tibet. From the moment he is recognized as the reincarnation of the 13th Dalai Lama in 1937 to his exile from Tibet in the wake of China's invasion, the Dalai Lama is seen as an enlightened spiritual figurehead. This gives the film its tone of serenity and reverence but denies us the privilege of admiring the Dalai Lama as a fascinating human character. There's a sense of mild detachment between the film and its audience, but its visual richness offers ample compensation. In close collaboration with cinematographer Roger Deakins, Scorsese filmed Kundun with great pageantry and ritual, and meticulous attention to details of costume, color, and the casting of actual Buddhist monks in the scenes at the Dalai Lama's palace. Certain images will linger in the memory for a long time, such as the Dalai Lama's nightmarish vision of standing among hundreds of dead monks, their lives sacrificed in pacifist defiance of Chinese aggression. Is this a film you'll want to watch repeatedly? Perhaps not. But as a political drama and an elegant gesture of devotion, Kundun is a film of great value and inspirational beauty--one, after all, that perhaps only Scorsese could have made. --Jeff Shannon
Flawed, but beautiful and undeniably important - Reviewed on 2008-04-30
1 customer found this review helpful.
Martin Scorsese has created a visually stunning, mostly-accurate but otherwise extremely hagiographical view of the life of the Dalai Lama when he was discovered to be the reincarnation of the 13th Dalai Lama to his flight from Tibet in 1959. Only one scene takes place in India and a few take place in China, though I am to understand that it was shot almost entirely in Morocco. Of course no movie can be filmed about the Dalai Lama in Chinese-controlled Tibet, but Scorsese manages to recreate the rich mountain landscape through brilliant splicing with the Moroccan sets. Philip Glass's score, which mixes orchestra music with Tibetan chants, creates a passionate effect. I confess I always get a little choked up at the end, when the young Dalai Lama approaches the Tibetan-Indian border and takes his final steps out of his homeland, then looks back on the mountain range he is forbidden to return to.
The movie's main weakness is pacing. The early scenes of the Dalai Lama's childhood are touching, the views of rural Amdo (now a Chinese province and not part of the autonomous region of Tibet) and feudal Lhasa area a portrait of a life that is gone, and very reminiscent of the movie "The Last Emperor." After age 12, the movie jumps ahead to age 16 and the invasion of the Chinese, and becomes a complex political story of mediation, disappointment, and disaster. It runs about half an hour too long, though the last 10 minutes will stay with you for a long time.
Tenzin Thuthob Tsarong plays the adult Dalai Lama (age 16 and on), and has been criticized for his acting, as he is often passive and lifeless and not resembling the real Dalai Lama we know from speeches and public appearances, who is charismatic and smiling. Of course some of this is based on fact; the Dalai Lama is more serious when dealing with Tibetan politics than when addressing a University crowd, and he was going through a difficult time and faced with impossible political choices. Still, he doesn't liven up the screen, and the actors playing his real-life advisers (who match photographs of them very well) are still serious but more fascinating to watch as actors. The Dalai Lama at this age is overwhelmed by his political position, and the actor is overwhelmed by the role.
There are some historical inaccuracies, though to be fair, not many. The opening line on the screen about how Tibetan lamas had practiced non-violence for centuries isn't true; the movie contradicts it by showing the Regent's uprising when the Dalai Lama is 12, when Reting tried to unseat the current Regent with his army of monks. The lamaist state had an army, and used violence to protect the country and occasionally to suppress other strains of Buddhism. It's hard to open a film with a lie; I don't understand Scorsese's decision there.
The movie is accused of being a hagiography, but almost all of the significant events have been confirmed by several sources, from the Dalai Lama himself in his autobiography, to his mother's autobiography, to the official Tibetan state records, to photographic records, to his brother's autobiography. Several minor facts were changed for dramatic purpose: the 2-year-old Dalai Lama ran out to greet the disguised monk looking for him in real life, while in the movie it occurs later, in the house. The scene where the 4-year-old Dalai Lama finds and identifies his "old teeth" (dentures belonging to the 13th Dalai Lama) is confirmed in his mother's autobiography, though HH says on his website that he has no memory of it, but does not doubt that it happened.
Several key issues are not addressed. Heinrich Harrer, the Dalai Lama's childhood friend until he was 9, is absent from the film, either because of timing reasons or because Harrer was a Nazi in hiding. There is one image of a Tibetan slave in the film, who bows to the Dalai Lama, who prays for him. The man is not identified as a slave by the film; a viewer could assume he is a convict by his shackles. Scorsese does not shy away from portraying Tibet as a corrupt, backwards state that even the Dalai Lama admits to several times in the film and has admitted to in real life (he was very impressed with Mao Zedong until Mao said all religion was a poison, at which point the man regarded as a living Buddha probably thought they weren't seeing eye-to-eye). The Panchen Lama, who was very active in Tibetan politics at the time of the Chinese invasion, is completely absent from the film. (The current Panchen Lama is a political prisoner in China, so he couldn't be consulted) In the scene with Mao, only the Dalai Lama is present, but in historical photographs of the meeting, the Panchen Lama is there with him.
These quibbles are actually quite minor; the vast majority of the film is drawn from historical sources and stands up to the account of everyone who was there and lived to tell about it (except the Chinese gov't, which has banned the film). Much like "The Last Emperor," it captures a world that was lost to time and political change, and can never be seen again, except in this re-creation.
As the Dalai Lama says himself as he passes over the mountains that lead to India and his future exile, "All will become nothing. Just like a dream, whatever things I enjoy will become a memory. Whatever is past will not be seen again." Except, of course, on DVD.