Wheel of Time

It's interesting to read that Werner Herzog wasn't an expert on Buddhism when he filmed this. In a way, that's the charm of this film. Essentially we're given a backstage pass to a Buddhist festival. In Herzog fashion, he holds the camera longer than most, filming his subjects looking for any reaction. In a childlike way, it could be very compelling. Especially since this world is so strange to most westerners that the audience is like any tourists in a strange land. We stare a little too long.

My only complaint is he ended the movie in the wrong place. Just because The Dalai Lama couldn't finish the rituals doesn't mean the movie needs to go to another continent to find a happy ending.

Werner Herzog's documentaries aren't like the documentaries of anyone else. Perhaps the best documentaries are unique to the people who make them. You can tell a Flaherty from a Wiseman just as you can tell a Maysles Brothers from a Herzog. Werner is interested in extremes, if only the extremes in subject matter. He will go out of his way to show us places and things other film-makers often ignore. "Wheel of Time" is his film about a place and an event not usually seen here in the West.

Its subject is a Buddhist initiation rite performed by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and attended by over half a million pilgrims. It's a ceremony of such complexity that Herzog's capturing of it is something of a miracle in itself and, of course, it is a thing of consumate beauty. This is what religion should be but very seldom is and Herzog is a masterful observer. He also narrates the film, informing us about what is happening when we need to know but most of the time simply showing us events as they unfold. Wonderful cinema and one of Herzog's best films.

`Wheel of Time' is a very good film, but I admit that it is different from what I expected from Herzog. He is still very talented, but I doubt if the subject matter is best suited to him. `Wheel of Time' concerns many things, including religion, virtue, and faith, which in this case may not be the best subjects for Herzog. But when `Wheel of Time' deals with some strange and crazy rituals, political oppression, and rugged landscapes, these parts of the film are very satisfying.

Some scenes in `Wheel of Time' are magical, especially the scenes which show vast landscapes and people performing strange rituals. Those scenes are Herzogian, I think. Nobody does this kind of thing better than Herzog. If a cinephile watches these scenes, not knowing who shot them, he or she will guess correctly that they were shot by Herzog. These scenes make `Wheel of Time' rise way above television documentaries.

But other scenes are not as magical as I expect from Herzog's films. I think that maybe the religious subject matter of this film doesn't allow Herzog to be as playful in directing as he was in other films. It is very difficult for any filmmaker, including Herzog, to make an interesting documentary about something virtuous like this. It would be much easier to make an interesting film if the film is about `good vs. evil', or about some strange rituals in which people walk on fire and pierce themselves horrifically.

I think Herzog is like a wizard, and one can hardly makes a more magical film than him if the film is about nature-made or man-made madness, brutality, or suffering in life. But because of the subject matter of `Wheel of Time', this film is not my most favorite of Herzog's. I like `Wheel of Time' as much as Herzog's `How Much Wood Would a Woodchuck Chuck' (1976) and `The Flying Doctors of East Africa' (1969). I think these three films are very good films, but because the people portrayed in these films are not `very' strange nor `very' crazy, these three films lack some kind of excitement I found in other films by Herzog, especially when compared to Herzog's `Gesualdo: Death for Five Voices' (1995), `My Best Fiend' (1999), `The Great Ecstasy of Woodcarver Steiner' (1974), and `Land of Silence and Darkness' (1971), which is my most favorite of Herzog's films.

Some parts of Herzog's `Lessons of Darkness' (1992) deal with political madness, and I think Herzog is good at this subject, too. In one scene in `Wheel of Time', a former political prisoner gave an interview about the brutality of the Chinese rule. This scene is very simple. It is just a normal interview. But for me the power of this scene is much more stronger than most scenes in `Wheel of Time'. And it also reminds me of some great scenes in `Lessons of Darkness' in which some people gave their own testimonies to what happened when Saddam invaded Kuwait. I think one thing that makes the scene about the former prisoner stand apart from other scenes in `Wheel of Time' is because this scene talks about `evil forces', while other scenes in `Wheel of Time' are about some kind of virtuous power.

Famed German filmmaker Werner Herzog and his crew travel to a Buddhist pilgrimage site in Bodgaya, India. There they film the believers as they do the many tasks that they feel lead to greater enlightenment. The film's title is about a sand drawing or a 'mandala' that is created for this event.

While my summary is pretty much true of all films, it's especially true of "Wheel of Time". If you have no interest in Buddhism or don't like documentaries that are light on narration and thorough explanations, then you'll probably not enjoy this film. This isn't meant pejoratively--it's just that your interests will really have a lot to do with whether I'd recommend it to you. As a retired history teacher who often taught about world religions, I already had a reasonable understanding of many of the tenants of Buddhism as well as an interest in learning more. But I am NOT the typical person. And, I don't mind the vagueness in the narrative of this film very much--though I would have appreciated it if the film had talked about the basic beliefs of the religion. In other words, before attempting a discussion of the confusion topic of 'mandalas' (something which, it appeared, even the Dalai Lama had a hard time explaining in the film), perhaps it would have been best to discuss other aspects of the religion.

Things of interest to watch for would include the vat of tea (that's a lotta tea!), the great lengths to which some of the followers go to get there, the anticlimactic aspects of the pilgrimage and the later visit to Graz, Austria. Not for all tastes, but worth seeing if it is yours.

This film is an exploration of several Tibetan Buddhist rituals, and centers around an initiation in India attended by hundreds of thousands of Himalayan devotees, many of whom arrive after punishing pilgrimages that, in one case, took up to three and a half years. As Cinema this film excels. Herzog places himself in the midst of the throng. The faces he captures tell a thousand stories. Yet the actual stories are few and far between. There is a cool detachment in this film that gives it an anthropological feel. Herzog admitted in a live discussion after the screening that he had little familiarization with Buddhism, and reluctantly took this assignment after several requests only after the Dalai Lama himself personally asked him to do it. There is little to be learned here about the ritual itself, as the film focuses mostly on the attendees. Herzog seems uninterested in the meaning behind the sometimes strange-seeming actions of the devoted monks, and focuses instead on observation. While this is a smart approach for a film-maker on one hand, since any attempt to explain this complicated philosophical system would undoubtably fall short, I was left wanting more. If I can make a somewhat strange metaphor: it was like seeing a documentary on the Superbowl, which focused on Americans traveling from all over the country, standing in long lines, paying large sums of money to get in, drinking beer, shouting and cheering at the field, or shouting at television screens, waving strange banners around, and possibly braving rain, snow or blizzard to see it--without ever really going into what football is. Long shots of haggard faces and people doing "the wave" would be compelling to watch, but wouldn't give a true picture of the event. If you're interested in seeing a fly-on-the-wall observation of a very interesting and different aspect of the human experience, this film succeeds. But if you are interested in understanding the Kalachakra ritual, or learning more about Buddhism, then, like me, you'll be left unsatisfied. Perhaps the film is mistitled. The title, "Wheel of Time", somehow promised something different to me. A more apt title would be something like, "Naked Devotion".