Sorry, this movie sucks

Just perfect...

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Everest (1998) *** (out of 4) Liam Neeson narrates this rather uneven documentary about climbers trying to reach the summit of Everest. Throughout the 44 minute running time we hear about the history of the mountain as well as its location and why it's such a dangerous journey. We then meet some of the climbers as they take the camera crew up the mountain to the summit.This is certainly very uneven and you have to wonder why we didn't get more footage on the mountain since that's clearly the highlight of the movie. I think there's way too much time spent on the history of the mountain and just talking about things that aren't overly interesting. People are going to be coming to this film to see the mountain climbing and when this is happening there's no question that the film is highly entertaining and contains some nice suspense.

Sadly, a film replete with missed opportunities. Many of the other reviewers have nailed it. There are one or two excellent scenes, but the film is basically a New Age take on the expedition...we are supposed to get tuned into the spiritual side of the effort, understanding inner need and dedication. We are supposed to feel one with the mountain and the world.Screw that! This film is a complete failure at helping the viewer appreciate the complexity and adversity involved in the effort. I have to marvel at how this film actually makes the ascent look fairly effortless. The recreations are also a waste of the viewer's time.Not recommended unless the only time you get to see it is in an IMAX theater...and then it still runs a distant second to going a couple hundred miles and seeing some snow yourself. This film is an insult to the mountain climbing community. Or maybe it's an inside joke.This is a 2 on a scale of 10.

IMAX films are designed for screens over three stories tall. So, if you want to see this film, do not watch it on video, watch it in an IMAX theater. I saw Everest on a television, and it was painful to watch. The music was scored to give the audience a sense of the greatness of Everest, but when the screen is so small, it almost seems silly. Also, remember that this film is targeted at all age groups, so do not expect to learn much about climbing.

The film I saw is certainly not the one that deserved to be the most successful IMAX film in history. The film seems boring, with long stretches given to 'surfer' talk by arrogant, not-so-heroic athletes. Macho shouldn't be confused with heroism. Also, why aren't the contributions of the Sherpas (guides and haulers who are Tibetan) shown? Are the filmmakers afraid that the climbers with look like lilies? And finally, when a film gets this much positive criticism and makes a bucket of money, isn't it a bit creepy to learn (in the end credits) that some of the climbing scenes were re-created and shot in the United States? The film is more of a stunt than a valid filmmaking format at this point, and the filmmakers working in it are a long way from Lean or Spielberg.