User Reviews

In Greek mythology, Chronos is said to be the personification of time. Taking that into consideration, you might assume that this would be the longest of the films that Ron Fricke was involved with but actually the opposite is true. Chronos comes in at just under 45 minutes making it a short but sweet trip around some of the world's most beautiful man-made and geological structures.

For those looking for a longer trip as well as more to think about when the film is over, I highly recommend Powaqqatsi at 99 mins, Baraka at 96 mins, and Koyaanisqatsi at 87 mins - but you should probably skip Naqoyqatsi at 89 mins because its the weakest of the Qatsi trilogy. Whereas Naqoyqatsi's seizure inducing mechanical/digital messages drench the experience, Chronos is the exact opposite.

Chronos is sort of a Baraka "lite". This does not have the music of Philip Glass or the socio-political messages, but the beauty on display should make up for it. Additionally Fricke experiments with different exposures and filters (not seen in the other films) to create some striking effects. If you get the chance to see it, definitely take this one for a spin.

Fricke has a new film coming out soon (should be sometime this year) called Samsara which is a sequel to Baraka, and if that doesn't fill the gap you can check out Anima Mundi (by Reggio about animals), Microcosmos (about insects) and Atlantis (by Luc Besson) which is like a scuba dive.

This is a 42-minute different kind of travelogue, showing various places around the world with no narration and, in some cases, speeded-up photography. In other cases - mainly the beginning - it's ultra-slow. To be honest, I like that fast-forward technique far more, such as where you see clouds and shadows moving by quickly. They move by landscapes, famous monuments and other building and even over art work. Other scenes area also run by quickly; usually when people are in the picture.

Later, the speed is accelerated even more. Now people are just a blur. Still later, it's done differently with stop-action-type motion. Filming locations mainly are in the Southwest United States, New York City, Egypt, France and Italy.

A few segments, such as those early ones in Egypt are way too slow but others are beautiful and fascinating. Some of these shots almost look computer-made, but they are real. The movie reminded me of "Koyaanisqati," but this is far better, in my opinion.

There is no dialog in this short film. I've seen this three times and enjoyed it each time, although by now I am bored by the slow scenes. My favorites are ultra-speedy traffic parts. If you are looking something different, check it out.

OK I just watched this movie as an attempt to retrace Ron Fricke's filmography. As I find Baraka to be probably the best of all of my all time favorites, I started to watch Chronos with a somehow pervert feeling : "that cannot be better that Baraka" ... In my opinion it's not, BUT I must immediately add that it's a different approach to the reality he shows us, and in its way it's a masterpiece.

-Clearly the "message" here is an attempt to make the spectator aware of the scale of time and its unstoppable pace, along with the fragility and futility of advanced societies if left ungoverned. It's a difficult challenge to make such a movie in terms of techniques it requires and storyline you may actually tell. On this level he has managed to weave it all perfectly well.

-The technical achievement of making a movie of this level of quality with a low budget, on so many locations, with such a high level of consistency in the takes is just MAD technically speaking.

-This was all made in 1985... It's JUST Unbelievable...

-The work Ficke has accomplished with the dynamics of the light is closer to painting than mere filming. Almost all takes have a profound and aesthetic composition, dealing in it's way with the moment of the storyline. So contrary to what some say, it's not JUST filming locations... There is a second level of composition in these frames. Everything is extremely well demonstrated at the last frame of the movie...

-I do not agree that there is no political meaning in this film. It is in my opinion on a parallel with Baraka. There's quite a large amount of Christianity in it, but I am sure that Ron would have put other religions in the film, if he had had the budget in these ancient times (1985 remember)... He did so in Baraka BTW...

On the downside I must admit that on some aspects the film is difficult.

-First the music. It is certainly composed and played with utmost dedication and all the hard work it requires, but after a first watch, I must admit that I had a bit of a rough time with it. It's still quite detailed and interesting, but it sounds outdated and too heavy in its attempts to bring along the viewer with the pace of the movie... It can be perceived as lacking the delicacy and master-mastering of a soundtrack such as Baraka. My main concern is that some tracks sound too much like some early Jean-Michel Jarre compositions and this is quite painful for a fan like me... Certainly that Jean-Michel Jarre would have been a fine composer for a movie like this, but he may not have been aware of it, or not interested in such projects at that time. Overall the music brings you a bit out of the center but it's quite serious music in itself, I must also say.

-The "technicality" of the movie may at some moments take over the viewer. In a sense it can be perceived as boring if you don't read the light behind the scenes. And it's all quite amazing... I think this film is worth a detailed analysis. Certainly that watching it a second time with commentaries must be a real joy...

Overall this a very interesting Ron Frick movie as it is in a sense a preparatory work of Baraka, but there is so much sense in all the frames, that it is also a marvelous and specific experience. To be watched again....

You have to listen to the commentary track on the special edition DVD to understand this movie. Many scenes were shot not only in time lapse but also with multiple exposures and multiple frame printing. Because of this we are able to view scenes which are not ordinarily recordable on film in places where artificial lighting is not permitted. This is as close as we will ever get to seeing these places without actually being there.

A supplementary featurette also explains the origins of the music and unique instruments which were used to record it.

Critics should bear in mind that this movie was shot in 1985 on a shoestring budget with a home made camera at a time when IMAX was in its infancy. As such it is a staggering achievement and a landmark movie in the history of cinematography.

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.

I was fortunate to see the movie in HD on cable recently. The movie is a bit like Koyaanisqatsi but concentrates more on a aesthetic look and does not transmit a political message. The images are astonishingly beautiful. The use of quick-motion and time lapse is great and give the film a very nice artistic touch. The electronic score composed by Michael Stearns accompanies the corresponding footage very smooth and nicely and adds to the overall atmosphere. If you like movies like Baraka or Koyaanisqatsi this movie is a absolute must-see. The photography and composition of this movie is just mesmerizing and brilliant.

Comparisons between "Chronos" (1985) and "Koyanisqaatsi "(1982) are rather inevitable. Both films were written and shot by Ron Fricke, who also directed "Chronos." (Godfrey Reggio directed "Koyanisqaatsi"). Both films are filled with richly poetic images of pristine natural settings counterpointed with man's intrusion into those settings and the evolution of his civilization. As a great admirer of "Koyanisqaatsi," these commonalities are what drew me recently to watching "Chronos" on HD home video. Unfortunately, the comparisons pretty much end there.

"Chronos" is a much less satisfying undertaking. Not only is it merely half the length of its cult-classic predecessor, but it's less than half the film in terms of ambition and coherent vision as well. Whereas "Koyanisqaatsi" had a strong (some would say heavy-handed) political and philosophical message concerning man's corrupting - even diabolical - impact on the globe, "Chronos" doesn't seem to have much point at all behind its slide show alternation of natural and man-made imagery.

To be fair, the film does clearly communicate the notion that the relatively short history of human civilization has bequeathed many majestically beautiful works of art and other grand artifacts, from awe-inspiring pyramids and cathedrals to the great sprawling cities of the world like New York and Paris. Yet, if the point of the film was in part to redress the extremely negative view of man's "progress" delivered by "Koyanisqaatsi," it just doesn't come across very strongly. And, if re-balancing was the point, then what is the audience supposed to make of the frequent used of accelerated motion that suggests to me not only the passage of time alluded to in the film's title but also that man's course has been too rapid and perhaps reckless? It just doesn't add up.

Like "Koyanisqaatsi," "Chronos" relies entirely on image and music to structure its minimal narrative. Neither film offers plot or character in a conventional sense, but "Koyanisqaatsi" manages nevertheless to forge drama by progressively intensifying the conflict of its man versus nature imagery. "Koyanisqaatsi" also benefits from a much more powerful score and from its Native American titular keyword, chanted repeatedly as a choral expression of the film's simple but abstract theme that indeed "life is out of balance." "Chronos" could definitely have benefited from similar devices to give its imagery thrust and significance.

Instead, "Chronos" is essentially a glorified image music piece. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Many of its images are arresting and some - like the city nightscapes - are breathtaking. Though I think not part of its intent, "Chronos" also offers parlor-game amusement for anyone trying to identify the cornucopia of natural, artistic, and architectural wonders that pour past one's eyes. All in all, the film is a pleasurable but forgettable viewing experience.

Chronos is an interesting movie, it doesn't have any conventional storyline, and no dialogue, it's just really gorgeous imagery and music, which surprisingly was a one long continuous track composed by Michael Stearns which ran throughout the entire movie. I really like how this film was shot, it's mostly Time-Lapse cinematography, which is just footage that is recorded for multiple hours at a time and then sped up to make it look ultra-cool, and the cinematography is just flat-out amazing, and with the locations that they capture, that makes it even better.

As I said in the summary of this review, you might want to slow your brain down before watching this movie, this isn't your typical documentary, like I've stated earlier, there's no dialogue in this film, which might make it a bit boring, I'd actually recommend listening to the commentary on the DVD and Blu-ray releases for this movie so you won't be bored to death, but nevertheless, this is an amazing visual experience, and the only reason I'm giving this a 9 is because it is a bit boring at times, and it's only 42 minutes long, other than that, I'd highly recommend "Chronos".

Ron Fricke's directorial debut, is a mixed bag. While visually stunning and musically haughty, this is nothing new for this type of genre. The genre being the silent-mentary (a film with no dialog that evokes a story or meaning using only images, still and moving, and sounds).

One might remember Ron from his work on Koyaanisqatsi. He was the cinematographer on that movie (also had some writing credits). If one looks closely, you will find similarities in the looks of both movies. There is a repetition of the Grand Canyon fly over and one cityscape scene (done from mostly ground level, where there is a metal sculpture in front of a lit office building at night, with two lit buildings on each side, looking upwards). While there are similarities, there are also major differences between the two.

The differences come from the directors. Koyaanisqatsi (and the other two movies in the trilogy : Powaqqatsi and Naqoyqatsi) flowed from the creative collaboration of Godfrey Reggio and Philip Glass. They imbued their movie with meaning, by combining images and music. The two elements intertwining to the point where you could not separate them. Whatever the "meaning" was left up to the viewer. They could range from "deep rooted messages" to "there was no message at all".

Unfortunately, Ron's directorial debut isn't as good. He definitely does not have a Philip Glass to work with and it shows. One of the weaker elements is the music. The score is symphonic and works well generally, but is very generic sounding. There is very little about it that makes one stir (unless you got a cold draft coming in through the window and someone happens to scratch a blackboard at the same time). The visuals suffer as well. There seems to be little connection between the various places we are shown. Is there a reason we are shown this place or that place in particular ? Hard to tell. It feels more like a guided bus tour, than anything with substance behind it. Ron also seems to overdo the time lapse portions. He uses it in almost every scene. He also seems to have a fascination with the phases of the sun and the movement of sunlight during the course of a day.

Don't misinterpret my critique as dislike. On the contrary, the movie has its merits and its moments. My favorite being the rise of the moon over a city at night, with the fly over and drive through ensuing at blazing fast speeds. I would have probably been better served if I had seen this movie before Reggio's trilogy. It is not as good, but its short length and beautiful imagery is definitely worth a look.

Space, time and matter. While the first might have started at the birth of the universe and the later is created and destroyed everyday, time stands alone. It cannot be undone and if there is anything that can resist time, it is time itself. In this sense time is the most mysterious. Is it even real? Is it only a creation of mankind to explain the beginnings and the ends? In Greek Mythology, Chronos is known to be the god of time. In this sense, Ron Fricke is trying to unite both conceptions of time through vast, open spaces and closed, personal areas. In his film, he tried to put the matter and space in perspective, showing that time had a greater influence.

When it came out, Chronos was considered as a very advanced, an "ahead of its time" kind of movie. The ground breaking Koyaanisqatsi was nearly 5 years old. The technical attributes of the movie were far greater than what could be found in popular, conventional cinema. The synthesized music was relatively new to the world and Michael Stearns was already establishing himself as both a leader and a pioneer in the ambient music department, even creating a particular instrument for the film. And of course, when Chronos came out back then, similar movies were hard to find.

Needless to say: Chronos relied heavily on the overall technology of 80's.

Nowadays, the technical attributes found in Chronos have been beaten by other movies. Music can now be created with complex, yet easy to use programs by using extremely effective computers which can produce an almost infinite number of sounds, effects, etc.. And finally, there are many similar movies nowadays, and we can find time lapse captures everywhere from typical Hollywood movies to televised advertisements.

This now leads people to believe that this movie is unoriginal, lacking depth and that the music is not good. As ironic as it sounds, Chronos is slowly being killed by time itself, whether it be real or not. But that does not mean that the movie is now bad today. Of course, there are obstacles that the viewer must surpass in order to view the movie and to think " Let's compare it to other movies in the 80's ".

When criticizing this movie, many people will compare it to Baraka ( which was made many years later, must I add ) and automatically point out the obvious: It's always the same areas, the music is always the same, the overall "message" is lacking.

Fricke didn't have the budget he had for Baraka. Stearn's music was innovative and fresh at the moment and yes, there is a "message" in Chronos, you just didn't take the "time" to see it.

In Baraka, the message concerning spirituality and humanity is easier to understand for a simple reason: Ron Fricke did it on purpose. The most important religions and areas of the world are shown. The whole movie is made in a way to connect with the entire world. In this sense, Baraka is a movie about the Earth and its inhabitants and what is around and beyond it. You will notice that in Baraka there are things you can easily understand and point out while there are others more obscure themes that you might not even notice.

Chronos is far more complicated for the viewer. While Baraka is still an experimental film, it is not an abstract film. Chronos is both an experimental and abstract film. In this sense, it is way harder for the viewer to acknowledge Chronos to actually have a meaning and to make something out of it.

This shows how Ron Fricke truly is a mastermind when it comes to giving other people the opportunity to come out with their own interpretations of his movies. A short comparison with Geoffrey Reggio ( Fricke's partner ) can be made. While Reggio builds his movies on a specific message which make the viewer think after watching the films, Fricke chooses to make the viewer think while he his still watching. Most viewers will often try to find a meaning to Chronos after watching it or they will try to associate a specific series of scenes.

Of course, Chronos is not as good as Baraka. I believe everyone can agree on this. But everyone should all agree that Chronos was some sort of cinematic homework for Fricke. Not only was it his first own film, but he was also stepping on a different kind of path than Reggio's. He actually found his own path, his own style, a cinematic trademark. And for this originality and advance in film, Chronos deserves to be considered as a good movie. Not the best, but one of the good.

This forty-minute novelty item, directed by the cinematographer of 'Koyaanisqatsi', presents a time-lapse history of Western Civilization, from ancient Egypt to downtown Los Angeles. Like its predecessor the film is essentially a non-narrative travelogue filled with sweeping vistas and arresting images, set to a soaring new-age soundtrack and intended only for the largest movie screen in town. The various landscapes, both natural and man-made, are pleasant to look at, but that's all they are: pretty pictures, a showcase for Ron Fricke's computer operated camera. It's clear from the brief length of the film that Fricke himself realized its limitations; his theme of the transience of humankind compared to its creations is explored only superficially, and relies too heavily on repeated shots of cumulus clouds whizzing over Stonehenge and sunlight passing over the face of the Sphinx.

This film is one of the most exquisite films I have ever seen. It is comprised completely of time-lapse and aerial photography, and is a tremendous accomplishment. Highly recommended for anyone interested in time-lapse photography, cinematography, or film making in general.

HD landscape porn in the same vein as Koyaanisqatsi and Baraka, with the heavy social and environmental themes mostly cut away. Featuring an emphasis on staggering time-lapse photography, plus an understated, excellently-timed ambient score, it's a great way to shut off your brain, kick back and let your entertainment center stretch its legs. The regular, ambitious shifts in locale took me around the world and back in less than an hour, lingering just long enough to trap the breath in my throat with one stunning panorama after another. A spectacular, timeless, moving photo book that makes for terrific light viewing.

A impressed Ron Fricke with his work behind of the marvelous "Koyaanisqatsi" (1983, directed by Godfrey Reggio) decided to make his own effort in displaying magnificent panoramic shots filmed with a time lapse photography in "Chronos". This time he's the director but what's worth of being that if you don't have a concept behind all beautiful scenes? I won't say that everything is thrown in the wind because it's not. It's very impressive in its 45 minutes, in its aerial shots (the ones filmed in Paris being the greatest moment), slow motion and fast forward moments but it doesn't have an idea, a concept that makes us look to the screen and say: that's interesting" or "here's something to learn at".

It is easy to get bored, to get distracted (and I was at few parts) and all. But the major problem is to hearing the music that seems to have a capacity of detonate or explode your earphones, sound systems and similars since the noises, created by a expensive and hard to handle machine, a innovation at the time, is incredibly unlistenable. If Fricke wanted to pick someone and something from Reggio's classic it should have been picking Philip Glass to make the music. I said the same thing about "Baraka", but since I watched this one after "Baraka" I couldn't help but being bothered with the score, while the scenes stuck in your memory, the music must be forgotten in dark sides of your mind.

Gotta love the fact that this film was beautifully restored, and for a film made in 1985 it is really something great. The images on the screen are vivid, unforgettable, dazzling, and everything is so timeless (except for the strange people walking down the rolling stairs, just look at the clothes and their hairstyle) that a careless soul might think that this film was released just now.

Worth a view, and my suggestion is that you look for the other films I mentioned, they're far better than this, but watch this too and if possible make a second view but with the audio off, listening to another soundtrack, choosing a film soundtrack, classic music or progressive rock, anything besides Michael Stearns tracks. 9/10

"The lifetime of a human being is measured by decades, the lifetime of the Sun is a hundred million times longer. Compared to a star, we are like mayflies, fleeting ephemeral creatures who live out their lives in the course of a single day."

Chronos is the personification of Time in pre-Socratic philosophy and later literature. Ron Fricke, who is regarded as the founder of time-lapse, has done a wonderful job. We live and die without realizing that our lives are trapped in a jar. Instead of making an effort to get out of the jar, we continue to practice our daily habits. The routine and falsity of mankind in everyday life is almost making a slapdash effect. Our dependence on technology and constantly trapped between concrete walls cools us from nature. I think we need to think a little bit.

It is really fascinating to watch the works of art of the ancient civilizations, the spectacular nature images accompanied by great music. I was very happy to see the works of ancient Egyptian civilization. You should give Chronos a chance before the Baraka and Samsara documentaries.

This is the first time I see a documentary that has no talking in it. Music is extremely blissful and resonates with every scene we watch. It becomes almost like a whisper when a landscape from nature is presented and gets louder and louder while parts from the urban jungle approach. It shows you almost any corner of the Earth and it does this in such a way that you remain astonished by what you see. It is, indeed, a pleasure to watch and make you feel comfortable and relaxed.

I purchased this movie on blu-ray because it promised great visuals and music. I was also a great fan of a similar movie... Baraka. The movie is very much styled after Baraka, wide angles, very similar shots with cameras set to capture long time passage in each shot. Even some of the scenes were identical (the street with traffic). Whereas Baraka told a great story, juxtaposing nature, man-made environments, spirituality, and horrors of the world in an engrossing fashion and great music, this movie just jumped from shot to shot with no encompassing story, mediocre musical score, and then.... POOF, it's finished! I thought there must be some sort of mistake! History of the world? Half the movie is Egypt and landscape (looks like Arizona, but I didn't bother to check). Seriously folks, this is horrible, rent it if you must, but do not buy it. The filmmakers should be ashamed of themselves for putting this out.

`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.

Summary: Chronos is a work that continues the learnings of the now director Ron Fricke. With a similar concept but now removed from the proposal made in Koyaanisqatsi initially, in the sense that it takes some ideas, but the final vision of the film takes the viewer towards another ending.

This film, whose duration is around 43 minutes could be considered as a first experiment of the director in relation to his vision and previous learning. Something that will later expand in Baraka and eventually Samsara.

Format: Chronos had a Blu-Ray release in 2007. Although it was not as elaborate as Baraka's, the quality leaves nothing to be envied, being extremely clear thanks to its negatives filmed for IMAX. Based on the analyzed extras - unfortunately, it is only compensated with a comment from the director - it is possible to understand more the vision of the director but mainly the techniques used.

Address: Chronos seems to display a clear vision at the address level. The director explores the ideas in a way that does not feel out of place. With the exception of one particular scene, where the transition between one location and another is done in isolation, the direction, vision and style seem clear and well defined.

The way in which the shots are mixed with the sound is given in perfect synchrony and without fear of being wrong, I could say that even music - which may be the best or worst according to the viewer - plays a greater role than Koyaanisqatsi. Here, music, like Chronos - In Greek mythology, was the personification of time, as it is said in pre-Socratic philosophical works. - shows its inevitable advance, impossible to change or alter and accelerating at each step as time, reaching, an exquisite crescendo to the senses. It is in this aspect where the work of Fricke improves considerably in relation to Koyaanisqatsi.

At the directing level, Chronos is a film that surpasses the previous one where Fricke had participation. Its short in duration, however, seems to leave a lot to tell and the visual experience ends very quickly.

Photography: Undoubtedly one of the highest points of this film is photography. Shot in multiple locations in the world, and showing a photograph that does not seem to be in any hurry to transmit the message, Ron Fricke embarks the viewer on a silent journey through many everyday situations or simply take for granted in our day to day . Here or in Hong Kong, collective indifference is a growing evil. Part of what makes this film unique is the use of what is commonly called time lapses. A time lapse is a video sequence - similar to the one shown above - where you shoot for an extended period of time with few frames per second. While traditionally a film is shot at 24 frames per second, a time-lapse could be shot at 1 or 2 frames per second.

At the level of photography it is also worth noting that Koyaanisqatsi shows the first brush strokes of the technique used by Ron Fricke in Chronos but mainly Baraka. We speak specifically of those intensely emotional shots where the focus of photography falls on one or several subjects. The emotion is invisible to the eye, and it falls on the spectator to imagine the emotional moment of it. A little used technique, but also seen in traditional narrative. The clearest example we can mention of this could be Aki Kaurismäki with the well-known Trilogy of Finland. These scenes, although rare in this film, come to tie perfectly the indifference that the Director seeks to transmit through the nearly ninety minutes that the feature film lasts.

Soundtrack: The soundtrack of Chronos is misunderstood at first sight. Also, it could be considered outdated in relation to the standard in soundtracks currently, however, in our opinion, transmits correctly the vision of the director. Through its simple sounds, repetitive and in keeping with the tempo of the work, we are guided to feel more and more. We could even think that feeling of impossibility that comes from listening to some sections of the soundtrack, were made on purpose to more easily reach the message conveyed by the director.

As in the direction, the biggest criticism in this aspect is the culmination of the auditory crescendo, which happens very late in the work and therefore the end is reached very abruptly. A little more space between the start and end of the third act would have helped to appreciate the work more. This, complemented by a greater pacing at the beginning of the first act, would have generated a more uniform experience in terms of the soundtrack.

Narrative: The director takes us on a journey through the past of humanity through those civilizations that populated Greece, Rome, Mesopotamia, etc., as well as exploring the passage of time and its effect on the world - mountains, rivers , the causes, the erosion, the clouds -. Finally, we explore humanity in the last twenty years and experience a unification of emotions by previewing the director's critique. The man, before and now; nature; time. How much time do we have left at this faster pace every day? These and other questions are raised in a critical and abstract way.

It is debatable if the director should guide a little more or not to the spectator, because in the end, in the abstract cinema it is always a possibility. When analyzing Chronos and comparing it with other works by the author such as Baraka, one can not help but accept that the narrative evolved in each treatment. Here, like photography, is one of the highest points.

Uniqueness: Chronos is not the best work in the genre. Neither historically compared to what was before, nor in retrospect compared to what has been produced in abstract documentaries to this day. However, it is a work that feels united by the work of direction, editing and sound and seems to have a clearer vision than others. It is a great first step for the then amateur director Ron Fricke and it takes us without problems to pose the question: how much time is necessary? How much time is enough? and with that message reaches the crescendo necessary to impact the viewer. The biggest criticism that breaks this unit a little is, unfortunately, its first third of the movie. The vision of the director takes a long time to be reflected and transmitted correctly, making that uniformity throughout the work, is not appreciated in its entirety.

Score: 8.1

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.

Not worth renting. It's a time lapse movie in which most of the things time lapsed DON'T MOVE!!! Nearly all of the first 24 minutes are the sun or the clouds slowly sweeping across monument valley or the great pyramids. What the heck? Many of the images were beautiful, and the music is so soothing you will struggle to keep your eyes open, but only 5-6 minutes of the film shows anything interesting. I FAST FORWARDED through most of the fast forwarded sequences, and I still didn't miss anything! Fast things have to move fast! It's pretty sad to make an all time lapse movie and then not take advantage of the effect.

This might be good if you are high, but I watched it sober and was not amazed or impressed in the least.