Lost on Everest

This program seems promising at first but then Mark Synnott opens his mouth. I was expecting a little more substance from National Geographic. Then again, perhaps they were disappointed, too. Synnott comes off as a rather self indulgent man-child who's been given a camera crew and lots of climbing gear. His commentary is so self-serving, it's ridiculous.

Comparing the unbelievably long line of summit seekers to Malory's and Irvine's experience (I mean, it's basically the same thing, right? And he just wishes he could be up there with them...) in a whiny voice tells you everything you need to know about this "documentary." My advice: give it a miss.

Before watching this I thought the reviews about them not searching only summitting were relatively harsh. After watching this, I don't know what to say.

This isn't a documentary and I'm really embarrassed for the crew. How come they published this? Are they not ashamed?

I have read The Third Pole by Mark Synnott. It's the book about this expedition and I liked it a lot. If I remember correctly, he describes that they had problems with the sherpas because they wouldn't allow them to search or go off rope and they would only help them go up the mountain, if they summitted. So they had to change their mission, they had to make it look like they want to summit. This made sense to me, especially because there was a notion of the Chinese removing Mallory's and Irvine's bodys etc. But actually summitting wasn't necessary I think, they could've blown their cover the moment they were at the search site and this film makes this as obvious as it can get. Sure, they may had to descend on their own, but who knows if the sherpas would actually left them there on their own.

And why is this whole thing about not being allowed to search for the bodies not covered in this so called documentary? Is it even true? After watching this, I don't know anymore.

The photography is remarkable. The talent and determination of the climbers and crew was also admirable. But it's about 15 minutes too long. We got the message very quickly that we are watching an heroic search for a dead explorer. So don't keep hammering that into us every few minutes. It's also redundant to keep telling us what difficulties the crew had to endure. It sounds like a rationalization to make us feel better about what turned out to be just a massive ego trip.

A Selfish summit.

Putting personal ambitions to summit ahead of historical science.

The aim of the expedition was suppose to be to find Irvine's camera. Not to summit and have no strategy/energy to look for Irvine's body or camera.

It seemed as though they had the mountain to themselves in the window they had. Why didn't the take the 'direct route' up to the summit along irvines route.

A more scientific process would have drawn more conclusions than a Nat geo funded summit for a couple of guys who "never had the desire to summit" until it was funded with camera crew.

Save yourself 1hour..

Have long been intrigued by the mystery of Mallory and Irvine. I love basically everything about Everest, and have since I was a kid. This National Geographic documentary is no exception!

Some spectacular cinematography and footage of Everest. Viewers are made to feel like they're part of the adventure and expedition. The conditions and danger of Everest are captured well.

Numerous moments made me go "whoah". Full credit to all the guys for the risks taken. It just got slightly frustrating towards the end. For a film that is basically all about Mallory and Irvine, and looking to solve the mystery, it then descends into a usual 'lets summit Everest' documentary.

The actual search for Irvine's body seemed to take a real backseat towards the end - just seemingly tacked on. But still, this was a great documentary for Everest buffs and those into unsolved mysteries. National Geographic have been putting out some excellent climbing films recently.