The Journey to Kafiristan (2001) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
A Story about the Middle East by People who Never Left Germany
SheykAbdullah19 March 2006
The movie's storyline is pat and quaint. Two women travel through the middle east and discover themselves. Unfortunately, if you are looking for a movie about the middle east and central Asia this is absolutely terrible.

The producers of the film either did no research or were unbelievably lazy when filming it. To begin with, and most glaringly incorrect, the Nuristanis, as they were known in the thirties, and indeed since the 1890s and their forceful conversion by Abdul-Rahman Shah of Aghnaistan, were not nomads. In fact they have not been nomads since the Aryan invasions of central Asia over three milenia ago.

Second, the city that is filmed as Tehran is not Tehran, which is understandable, however the geography of the area around the city could not be more strikingly DIFFERENT than the city of Tehran, which is surrounded on all side by a large mountain range, which predominates all of the cities views.

Third, Persian, despite the fact it is spoken in Iran and Afghanistan, is never heard in movie. When there are native speakers who do not speak in German they speak in Arabic. The 'Persian' guards at the border, in fact, say to each other 'Ma hadha rujal' (This is not a man) and not 'in mard nist' as it would be in Persian. Also, the love song between the Indian princess and one of the main characters is obviously in Spanish. While talking in the garden one of the main characters says that the Quran uses the words 'Ferdos' and 'jehaan' and makes some reference to drugs afterwords. These words certainly never appear in the Quran as they are Persian for Paradise (indeed, Ferdos and Paradise are very distant cognates between our languages) and 'World' respectively, though Jehaan is admittedly close to 'Jehennan' which is hell in Arabic. When they encounter the nomads in the desert the language spoken is also Arabic, this despite the fact that there are NO native speakers of Arabic in Iran and Afghanistan and its use is primarily religious, with some use in education at that time.

When they are stopped in Iran before they reach the Afghan border the people they encounter are wholly unlike any Iranian group. Their tents are typically bedouin with carpets decorating the walls and a high profile. In Iran it is also extremely uncommon for people to wear Turbans unless they are a cleric. The language spoken is clearly Arabic from the initial greeting of 'Ahlan wa Sahlan.' When they do reach Kabul the desert they find themselves in is sandy, totally unlike the rock dirt that is found in the arid parts of the Hindu Kush mountain range. There is an absence of the light green scrub that covers the ground in the summer and spring. The area is also not wholly consumed by the extreme mountains of the mountain range that won its name, The Indian Killers, because of its difficult and limiting ground.

In short, the story line is the only thing in this movie that holds any water and it is still weak and common place. It lacks any real draw to it, being merely the tale of two women trying to learning about themselves as they get to Nuristan, however, even that is still-born and no real development is felt, leaving the characters in the end just where they were in the beginning and nothing has changed except that world war two has broken loose. In short, this is a really bad movie that I would have rated at one star except for the good footage of Bedouin and the deserts of the Levant, even if they are misnamed.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
fails to make impression
shashemi1430 September 2007
All I can say is, before watching the movie I did not have a hint indication who Annemarie Schwarzenbach was or what was her life story..and I have to confess that the movie was hardly a help to reach these data.. and even it was not successful to persuade me to do some research by typing few words on google website; however, all I can say is that the actress Jeanette Hain was great with her mute facial expression she really played well and showed a deep depression mental status, as it is in real.

After all , based on the script the movie has happened in turkey and Tehran as well as Afghanistan.. but believe me I am familiar with the area , it was all about an Arabic desert in morocco.. Turkish people and persian people are completely different in face and culture as well as in language which is not arabic..

I suppose for making a film like this- documentary type- a thorough research about all these minor elements is mandatory..
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A very nice psychological road movie
philip_vanderveken19 July 2005
When the movie started and after reading the title, the first thing that I was thinking was: Where could Kafiristan possibly be situated? I really didn't have a clue and I didn't think that it had something to do with the language. I know German and since my own language (Dutch) is very close to it, I was convinced that it wouldn't be a country or a region that we use a completely different name for. But than again, this was only one of the many mysteries about this movie...

"Die Reise nach Kafiristan" tells the story of two women who decide to travel together by car to Afghanistan in 1939, but each is in pursuit of their own project. Annemarie Schwarzenbach is an author who wants to find out more about herself and Ella Maillart is a Swiss ethnologist who has traveled the entire world to meet and study new tribes and people. Both women have a completely different nature and there is only one thing that really bonds them: Their eternal restlessness and the urge to leave the world of politics and a possible war behind them. But history keeps catching up and they never really can escape.

I'm convinced that many people will not like this movie and if I'm honest, neither did I in the beginning. The reason for that is quite simple. This movie isn't some easy entertainment that offers at least one solution to every question that it asks. No, the makers of the movie have decided to stay very vague by only giving you a hint of what they are trying to say. Dialogs are left uncompleted and sometimes the women don't even speak at all, feelings are never really expressed, but are always present and obvious for the viewer who wants to see them... That's of course not something that you will see in every movie and it sure takes some time to get used to.

After a while I really started to like this movie. The landscapes look nice, but they are only there to emphasize the feelings of desolation and complete isolation. In my opinion you have to try to see the beauty of the touching psychological 'landscapes'. It's in their minds that the women go through deep valleys and over high mountain tops as their feelings sometimes clash, but are very parallel at the same time. I know that sounds a bit weird, but that's about the best explanation I can give to it. I guess you just have to watch it for yourself to fully understand what I mean.

As a conclusion I would like to say that this is a very nice psychological road movie that will be loved most by an audience who is used to watch 'alternative' cinema. Don't try this movie when you are only used to watch Hollywood blockbusters, because you just will not like it then. Personally I'm quite used to watch this kind of movies and I must say that this is definitely one of the better in the genre. It's too bad that it sometimes was a bit slow, but I still give it a 7.5/10.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Why did't they just make a photoshoot?
arengelink25 November 2003
We went to the movie with a group because the play we were going to was cancelled. It is without doubt one of the worst movies ever. It is not that i don't like cult-movies I do. But nothing happens in the film. One does not feel any connection with the characters whatsoever. endless times without dialog. And the car. How do thay carry a huge tent and beds chairs and clothing for every day in that car? It is a two seater! I have to say however the scenery is beautiful, but not in a movie, the director should have made a photoshoot of the movie, so that we could skip about 80 minutes of useless time in with nothing happens anyway.

I would not recommend it, as it is a waste of your time
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Excellent Film
cowboy053012 May 2007
I thought this film was terrific given the information the writers, directors, and actors had to work with. After seeing the film and feeling disappointed in its lack of content, I had to research Annemarie Schwarzenbach. There isn't much first-hand biographical information. Most of what Annemarie Schwarzenbach wrote about her life in her journals was destroyed by her mother for its "vulgar" content. One can only infer what happened on that trip between these women. The movie, once I found this information, is like reading a broken journal. Pieces are obviously missing. Scenes cut just before something important may happen. Long parts of the trip are edited. I think because of this, Journey to Kafiristan is one of my top five favorite movies of all time.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The worst Lesbian movie I've ever seen!
alisonnic24 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Usually I love Lesbian movies even when they are not very good. I'm biased, I guess!

But this one is just the pits. Yes, the scenery and the buildings are beautiful, and there is a brief but beautiful erotic interlude, but otherwise this movie is just a complete waste of time. Annamarie alternates between sulking and getting high/stoned/passing out on whatever drug or booze is handy, and Ella inexplicably puts up with this abominable behavior through the entire movie. At no time are we given any insight into why this is so, or even why Annamarie is so depressed and withdrawn.

If there had at least been some kind of closure in the (potentially romantic? we don't even know!) relationship between the two, there might have been some kind of satisfaction. But although Annamarie at one point asks Ella "why do you love me?" Ella doesn't even acknowledge this. It's never really clear whether this is anything more than an (ill-behaved) Lesbian on a boring road trip with a straight woman.

Even the interactions between the two women and the local people they meet on the journey, which could have been lively and informative, are instead flat, tedious and mostly incomprehensible.

There is one good joke in the movie, although I'm sure it was unintentional. The women travel in a two-seat Ford coupe with a middling sized trunk. Yet when they set up camp, they have an enormous tent, cots, sleeping gear, and even a table, chair, and typewriter! On top of that, when they board a ferry, we see piles of luggage, presumably theirs, presumably also carried in the little Ford's trunk!

And through the entire film, we never see one gas station, or anywhere that looks like it would actually have any place to buy gasoline. Mostly they travel through endless miles of desolate desert. So where did they get fuel?

There may not be too many Lesbian films out there, good or bad, but there are plenty that are better than this, and very few that are worse. Leave this one in the rack.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A poorly researched film with factual errors.
dehqaan20 July 2008
Whatever the merits of the film, it is poorly researched. As others have pointed out, the movie shows locals in Iran speaking in Arabic, rather than Persian. That is enough to lose credibility for anyone who has the slightest knowledge of the area or the country. The landscape could not be more different from the actual.

Other factual errors: A train is shown to be operating in Afghanistan, while Afghanistan does not have railways. The Turkish ambassador is wearing a Fez (the red hat), whereas the Fez was banned by Turkey much before the time in which the movie is set. The Turkish ambassador's daughter is actually dressed as an Indian, and Indian classical music is playing in the background in many scenes. I suppose the filmmakers meant to show an exotic woman, and sari was what they decided would make her exotic.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Mostly forgettable road movie
Horst_In_Translation3 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Die Reise nach Kafiristan" is a German-language film from 2001, so this one had its 15th anniversary last year already. It was written and directed by the Dubini Brothers from Switzerland and it is maybe their most known work. This may have to do with the time when the film is set or the real people references, but also a main reason could be that some people mistake the Barbara Marx credited as a writer here for the very famous recently deceased American show girl of the same name. Anyway, this 100-minute film is about two women traveling through Iran for very different reasons, personal and professional, and they decide to travel together to make things easier for both of them. The film is set during the 1930s and that time and area certainly weren't very suitable for women back then. Then again, is it anymore suitable today? The two protagonists and their endeavors existed in real life too, which makes the film slightly more interesting, not too much though. I honestly think lead actress Hain is/was stunningly beautiful, but never a really gifted actress. As for Petry, I don't think I have seen her in enough roles to make a definite statement. But in here she is equally forgettable as Hain. This is a major problem because the two characters are supposed to have a love affair, but the actresses had very little chemistry with each other. They are also the only known names in terms of the cast. Even gigantic German film buffs like myself will probably not recognize any other names/faces. This is one reason why the supporting characters / side plot also did not add any spice to the film. Oh yeah and if they really love each other as they want us to believe (not really historically proved either), then the ending is also not really making sense. Real love trumps personal goals and missions, also during a time when homosexuality was frowned upon. The filmmakers' attempt near the very end to add important historical context to the film (the radio report) felt rushed and for the sake of it. Not very much about this film is working to be honest, the only aspect I somewhat enjoyed are the beautiful sceneries and cinematography. Obviously far from enough for over 1.5 hours. Watch something else instead.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Wonderful road movie
Luuk-226 January 2003
This film is probably not to everyone's taste. Yes, it is slow, yes, the plot is paper thin, but ... it is a film to day-dream about, it transports the willing viewer to far-away lands on a wonderful journey made by two women on the eve of WWII. The exteriors provide a nice backdrop to the inevitable journeys of self-discovery of the two protagonists. The fact that the tension between tends to stay below the surface is never fully expressed only adds rather than distracts from the interest. In fact, I would say the subtle way in which possible storylines are suggested rather than made explicit only enhances the movie, and this is reinforced by its lack of closure. Strongly recommended.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
very subtle but good
dirkjot10 February 2003
I quite liked this movie. From what I read before seeing it, I expected more beautiful scenery. But the Dubinis clearly wanted to show us a psychological journey more than a physical one, so the camera glides over the most picture-perfect hills, ruins etc, only to swiftly return to our actresses. And this, I think, is good: The film could have become a National Geographic style documentary and that would have left the interesting topic of what moves these two very different characters, who are doing something much out of the ordinary in the 1940s.

Rather then spell things out for you, the directors choose to hint at feelings, to leave dialogs uncompleted and to move on at the point where you would expect a conclusion to be reached. There are pros and cons to that: There is no preferred interpretation and the actresses can use expressions and body language to suggest much more than could have been put into words (and Jeanette Hain is very good at that). But the film seems to move slowly because nothing unexpected can happen this way and in the end, it all was a bit *too* subtle for me.

This said, there are plenty of very moving scenes. Especially the flirtatious side of Annemarie gets well depicted (the dance at the ambassador's house) and at the same time it stays constrained and half-hidden, as you would expect for a woman in that period of time.

The real dramatic moment of the film comes near the end, when the women have to part their ways. Even then, things are very quiet and stilted. Is this a flaw of the Dubinis' film or did they want to show an era in which you didn't discuss your most intimate feelings with others?

I really do not know the answer, I think the film could have improved from a little more ``say what you mean and say it mean''. But it still ranks as a good 8 on my scale.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A Masterpiece
pagrn129 August 2005
All the reviews I read before seeing this were maddeningly vague as if the writers were trying desperately not to commit themselves. I can't see their problem, 'Journey to Kafiristan' is an outstanding film with two excellent performances from the leads; the cinematography is jawdroppingly good with the landscapes, interiors and close-ups all adding to the poignancy of the narrative; the music is astonishingly unobtrusive yet contributes to the mood and pace of the film. At the centre there is the performance of Jeanette Hain whose extraordinarily expressive face adds so much to the pathos of the situation. I can only guess that the reason this film did not catapult Ms Hain to international prominence is the 'stigma' of the lesbian character as with Patricia Charbonneau after 'Desert Hearts' or Gina Gershon after 'Bound' and 'Showgirls'. Jeanette Hain should be one of the world's most successful actors and directors should sit up and take note! Commercially the labelling of films seems inevitable as target audiences are identified for marketing purposes; but it can serve to reduce the potential audience. 'Journey to Kafiristan' is billed as a 'Lesbian Interest' film but it is much more, it deals with the rise of feminism in Europe in the inter-war period. Both lead characters have transparently fake marriages for convention's sake and exist outside the norm while still using their married status to protect them in dangerous situations. If you're looking for GIRL-ON-GIRL action you would be better off looking elsewhere for while this is a love story it is cerebral and emotional rather than carnal.I cannot praise 'Journey to Kafiristan' highly enough.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed