A few years ago Ken Burns made a superb documentary film about the Donner experience attempting to get to California. They were part of a rather large group traveling west but at a critical juncture they chose to attempt a more southerly route, one a promoter promised would be a faster route. As it turned out the promoter had never traveled the route and it in fact turned out to be a longer, more difficult route. Add to that an early and severe winter in the Sierra Nevada mountains and the Donner party and several other parties traveling with them were stranded, without enough food to survive the winter, even after their livestock were killed off and eaten.
In preparation for this fictional movie, I viewed that earlier Ken Burns film, which is an excellent historical account, which included still photos and some writings of the original parties.
This movie does not cover any of the early parts of the journey, nor does it cover any parts of the aftermath of the rescue of the survivors. It focuses on the brutal winter and how the men and women resorted to cannibalism to survive.
In line with the bleak subject, and the winter surroundings, the film is color but printed with a very low color saturation, which makes it look like a black and white film with a bit of color. That part works well. However most of the movie is very slow and difficult to endure, and part of that is because of the uninteresting dialog. We get the point that it was difficult for the survivors to force themselves to eat human flesh, and particularly humans they knew. So why did the audience need to watch that on several different occasions?
While the movie has some interesting elements, I found it to be mostly a waste of time. For anyone wanting to know more about the Donner tragedy, the Ken Burns films does that many times better than this movie does. Plus, in this movie we never see any of the Donners, only a short reference to them, encamped a short distance away.
I like Crispin Glover, especially for his early role in "Back to the Future", but here as William Foster I found him mostly annoying. However overall all the actors did well, but the script and direction were not particularly interesting. It was a chore watching the whole 85 minutes.
In preparation for this fictional movie, I viewed that earlier Ken Burns film, which is an excellent historical account, which included still photos and some writings of the original parties.
This movie does not cover any of the early parts of the journey, nor does it cover any parts of the aftermath of the rescue of the survivors. It focuses on the brutal winter and how the men and women resorted to cannibalism to survive.
In line with the bleak subject, and the winter surroundings, the film is color but printed with a very low color saturation, which makes it look like a black and white film with a bit of color. That part works well. However most of the movie is very slow and difficult to endure, and part of that is because of the uninteresting dialog. We get the point that it was difficult for the survivors to force themselves to eat human flesh, and particularly humans they knew. So why did the audience need to watch that on several different occasions?
While the movie has some interesting elements, I found it to be mostly a waste of time. For anyone wanting to know more about the Donner tragedy, the Ken Burns films does that many times better than this movie does. Plus, in this movie we never see any of the Donners, only a short reference to them, encamped a short distance away.
I like Crispin Glover, especially for his early role in "Back to the Future", but here as William Foster I found him mostly annoying. However overall all the actors did well, but the script and direction were not particularly interesting. It was a chore watching the whole 85 minutes.