ada the leading man is my tpye

Inadvands Boring, over-political, tech fuzed mess

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Kimball Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Richie-67-485852 I am submitting this review for the reader to ponder for themselves the deeper riddle at work within this most worthy viewing. You have a whale who has taken it upon himself to make contact with humans and he does so effectively and efficiently and without effort too. He is no fair weather friend either as he comes and goes and staying faithful to his new found social skills and interactions. The humans involved do the same. Here is where I get a glimpse of what it may have been like before Adam & Eve fell from grace (and order) and from their training to be stewards of all the earth and how animals may have interacted with man quite naturally too before the fall. Ancient DNA is triggered within the viewer to recall how all things would have answered to man and willingly gravitate toward him because of the natural order of things and how we would respond. Today, we have the opposite in effect testifying to the fall of man where animals wisely avoid us. Even so, we make hell for them a reality seeking them out. This was definitely not our true calling but the fallen one of which we pursue without conscience or common sense. The stewards of the earth have gone missing and instead, we have a predator prey dynamic in its place. Now watch this special and consider what I have said. It will become self-evident. Good discussion and reflection here and food for the soul if choose to believe it

jwaugh-ethics "The Whale" is a documentary where its subject material transcends what is otherwise a very middling documentary. I think you can get most of how I feel about the movie from that sentence alone. It is a documentary where everything is on cruise control, the narrator guides you from event to event, people are interviewed and sometimes they cry, there are scenic helicopter shots repeated ad nauseam, and some Native Americans show up to say something vaguely spiritual. This really wouldn't be worth much if the subject matter, an orca named "Luna" trying to make some friends, wasn't so strong. As such, it ends up being more than the sum of its parts.This documentary is the story of an orca that got separated from its family. Very early on we learn from a less zany Ryan Reynolds (as the narrator) that orcas stay with their families for their entire life. Alone, and without social contact, Luna stumbles upon, and makes a home of, a place called Nootka Sound. In this stretch of sea it befriends the locals and draws some controversy, as many have differing opinions on what should be done about this whale. The main tension of the documentary comes from the idea that the orca should be left alone, despite its want for attention. Those who hold this view the orca as a liability or safety concern, and state that it is even detrimental to interfere with this whale's life. The other side of this is that Luna is just trying to make a connection, and it is cruel to deny him that.The documentary does a good job at exploring this bizarre relationship that a community has with this orca. It is touching and sad to see how much it desires attention. The orca will come up to side of boats, and seems to revel in the experience of being gawked at and touched. A lot of the documentary is moving because Luna himself is so surreal, and the interactions between him and everyone is playful and practically human. There is something innately understandable to us concerning the want for companionship. Luna just wants to be friends, and it is heartbreaking because he really does not understand the controversy that goes on around him. You get wrapped in the story so much because of this. This is by far the best aspect of the movie, and it is worth watching because of it.Unfortunately, the documentary itself has a made for TV feel to it. Ryan Reynolds does an OK job as the narrator, but sometimes his lines feel corny and lack substance. Actually, a much better fit for narrator would be Michael Parfit, who is he director of the movie and was also a journalist who wrote about Luna. In his brief speaking moments he would often say things that are more profound and thought provoking than anything Reynolds said in the entire movie. Further, while there is tension in the film concerning the real safety concerns that an orca in habituated waters draws, the documentary remains oddly neutral despite an obvious skew. I wish it made a stand, or an accusation, or anything. There was clearly something wrong with how this was handled by the government, but it is only hinted at through slight frustration. I did not want an attack or a diatribe, but it failed to analyze what went wrong and how it could have been better.Lastly, I am tired of watching a documentary where the narrator will say something vaguely scientific and random pieces of journal or newspaper articles will fly toward the screen, sometimes with highlighted words. It is a stupid effect, and it highlights the fact that this movie is only a little scientific and spends too much time on building Luna up as some sort of mysterious entity, almost mystical. The analogy between Luna and an extraterrestrial is made one too many times. We get it, it's a stranger in a strange land kind of story. So, let it speak for itself and stop beating me over the head with it.To sum it up, "The Whale" is worth watching because the story itself is provoking and rightfully pulls at all of those humanoid emotional strings. It ends up transcending a documentary that, by itself, is rather poorly produced.

jdesando "There's more there than most of my guests." Hotel Owner Cameron ForbesI doubt if there is a more authentic and endearing documentary in recent memory than The Whale, the story of young killer whale Luna, separated in 2003 from his pod and spending six years befriending the folks who live in the Nootka Sound on the west coast of Vancouver Island.The tension that makes this film more like a drama than a documentary is the dilemma of what to do with this unusually friendly Orca, which experts believe will not end up well because of its affection for humans. Or its need for community, judging from its almost constant desire to be seen, heard, and touched. Watching Luna go nose to nose with humans, letting them stroke its tongue, and virtually singing to them is to understand why even a fish and wildlife pro could violate his own division's ban on interaction.The opposing forces seem to arise naturally: those, especially natives, who want nature to take its course and those who foresee doom for the sea creature unless means such as giving him to a sea-world-type park are immediately taken. Intellectually the latter, especially the marine biologists, seem to have the better argument, but the former are powerful when they argue the whale should be allowed to do what it wants.Although most involved are powerless to effect the right solution, the occurrence of communication between humans and animal is carefully noted, an extraordinary example of a bond that seems to be built on both sides' need to understand and communicate with the other.If you see the film, I dare you to deny that you weren't moved by Luna's playing with humans and uncertain about how to solve his fate. For sure you will not remain unmoved.Praise to Ryan Reynolds as the perfect narrator not channeling Morgan Freeman. Most honors should go to filmmakers Suzanne Chisolm and Michael Parfit, who stayed with Luna through it all. Their devotion and love make this one of the most memorable documentaries ever.

chuck-526 I just (December 2011) got back from watching this at a nearby art-house theater. Too bad its distribution seems so limited, as it's truly excellent. It could be used in a school classroom to prompt discussions about what is consciousness and what does it mean to communicate with aliens. In a theater, it can either entertain and delight, or leave viewers with plenty to ponder. Several relationships with the whale are described as far deeper than one would have with a typical pet (a dog for example). Questions around just what it really means to be "friends" with another species are very much in the foreground throughout the film. The photography is stunning. The shots of landscape and water alone would thrill; lots of shots of different boats -both powered and rowed- and of floating logs for lumber and of people -both groups and individuals- come along with the mix too. But that's not all - there are also amazing closeups of whale-human interactions, whale-boat interactions, and more generally the whale under water. Initially I thought they were fancy special effects shots that were filmed only with great difficulty after lots of careful planning. I expected stand-in whales to be used, and was rather discombobulated when the narration made a point of saying every individual whale could be identified by its pattern of spots. But it turns out the shots are not staged or subbed at all; they're just plain real; this really is a documentary. Just the shots of huge decorated native canoes with singing rowers traveling over these remote waters are worth the price of admission. There are the whale sounds too. Sometimes they're featured, presented as listening to hydrophone recordings, clearly underwater. More often they're presented as just a completely natural and unremarkable part of some whale-human interactions, moving seamlessly from underwater to above and back. The journalists who took the pictures are shown almost exclusively in or near boats. So you might expect all the shots to be from boat height. But it's much more varied than that. Somehow there are shots from a great height (did they climb all day, or use a helicopter?) and very long shots along with all the closeups and the underwater photography. Pacing and sequencing are excellent. You won't be gripping the edge of your chair, but you won't stop wishing to find out "what happened next?" either - the experience stays comfortably in the middle. No violence nor blood is ever shown, and the one bit about an injury avoids closeups and goes by quickly. Inevitably different people have different ideas about how to treat the whale. There's more than one idea about how to "be kind". We even briefly see a completely different point of view: that the whale is just plain an unwanted nuisance or interruption and the whole situation should just somehow be made to "go away". The film is scrupulous about _not_ taking sides, about presenting _all_ the different points of view and not commenting on _any_ of them. When a boat trip was described as a "reconciliation", I was initially puzzled about just what had happened to split people so far apart they needed reconciling; the disagreements -although described quite adequately- do _not_ suffuse the feeling of the film. Despite the film's even-handedness, for myself (most likely it's a personal predisposition) I couldn't help concluding that the government bureaucracy had spent an awful lot of money -remaining politically correct at every point- but failed miserably to achieve their big goal of avoiding injury to either humans or animals. Further, it seemed to me they never ever managed to realize they had "egg on their face" and looked awfully silly.