ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Megamind To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

kanjoosthemiser This is my first time watching a movie like this. Some of the shots are quite pretty, mesmerizing, whatever word you want to use; but it's obvious to me why this is the most obscure in its tiny genre of "look at the world" movies. Images like those of the Grand Canyon, Monument Valley, the Pyramids of Egypt, etc., aren't just bland and familiar, they're plain boring, when they're trying so hard to feel awestriking. Shots like the people coming down the escalator or the slow-mo time lapses (oxymoron?) from inside buildings are worse then boring; they're bad, slowing the flow of the movie to a sticky crawl, and demanding you contemplate THEMES and BIG IDEAS and THE NATURE OF THE HUMAN CONDITION ITSELF... instead of showing you beautiful images and having their brilliance, thematic or otherwise hit you naturally. Structurally, it's weak as well. The movie repeatedly juxtaposes approx. ten minutes of plodding, slower images of nature, monuments, sculptures, etc., with three to four-minute long epileptic fits of humanity and the hustle-bustle of life, meant to exhilarate (whereas they really only fail to bore) only to end in something that sounds like an explosion and lapse back into neutral position. The movie doesn't really end, either, in the sense that it "concludes;" it finishes, it dones, it overs. Ultimately I know that this is a style of film I could enjoy if done very well. In that way, I feel much more excited at the prospect of watching Koyaanisqatsi or Samsara than I do at rewatching this movie.

Steve Skafte This is somewhere between documentary and photography. It has neither a script nor actors, and there is no narrator, no interview, and no still images. This is a moving picture, in the purest sense. The major focus is the time lapse cinematography of Ron Fricke, who also serves as director. That, and the soundtrack by Michael Stearns, is the sum total of "Chronos".There are deeper meanings to some, intended and accidental, but I won't cheapen things by speculating on what those are. The main drive is the battle of slow versus fast, city versus nature. Much of the time lapse goes by at what appears to be the same speed, but what moves blisteringly fast in the city seems to go by without change or notice in nature. Only the slow march of shadows is apparent across rocks and old ruins. These passages are full and heavy with the weight of time. They pull like the moon on the tides, dragging you back into long forgotten history. It comes like a slow, shallow breath between trains hurtling down tracks to uncertain destinations, and the bleeding blur of strangers up escalators.I've watched "Chronos" in many different contexts. It's been a relaxing background to the end of a long, tired day, or the full focus of my attention as I appreciate its depth of artistry. At forty-three minutes, it's neither too long to drag or too short to feel cut off. Each time after watching it, I find myself out of place with the speed of things around me. I feel the need to step back and breathe, to run faster, to walk slower. Somehow, some way, "Chronos" changed the way I see time.

ltlrags I wasn't particularly impressed by this movie that has lackluster music and only lasts 40 minutes. Thank God, because I was falling asleep. I makes excellent use of time lapse photography to display the passage of time in the movement of light and shadow, people, water, clouds, etc. Unfortunately, that's all it is.My preference is for its predecessor, the excellent Koyaanisqatsi made in 1983 at 87 minutes and to prove that a sequel can be better than the original, Powaqqatsi made in 1988 running 90 minutes.Try them both.

ralfleeb `Chronos' is a documentary about time. Ron Fricke attempts to give us a different perspective on time by the use of time-lapse and slow-motion film, hence the passage of time and in particular, the consequent impact on earth, our geography, our nature, our culture. We're shown stunningly beautiful time-lapse footage of impressive deserts, stones full of character, steep mountains, restless cities, people hurrying like ants in all sorts of public and individual transportation, timeless Greek architecture, public places of well-known cities in the western world, Mont St. Michel in the Bretagne at low tide, being engulfed with water during the rise to high tide, the old Bazaar in Istanbul flocking with byers and sellers, the Pyramids of Cheops, the Akropolis in Athens, Istanbul's Hagya Sophia, contrasted by baroque churches. It's stunningly beautiful, but where, oh where is the story behind this? It's also difficult to understand how how the visual information relates to the 1980s Jean Michel Jarre style synthesizer music. Once every while there is a crescendo, the pitch of the music rises, the volume rises, oh my gosh, what is about to happen? Nothing. We are lead into these expectations several times of the documentary, and after the third disappointing crescendo the level suspense and anticipation drops to zero. I can't recommend this movie, however check out Baraka, also by Ron Fricke, where he got everything right that is wrong in Chronos.