As with most summers, movies eager to meet the appraising eyes rival and push to be seen, and as such, are put on the chopping block to be dissected for every penny they’re worth, and “Everest” will certainly be no exception.
“Everest”, while providing the viewer with near endless scenery of both breathtaking storytelling and striking imagery, spares no expense as using as much, if not more, drama than your Saturday afternoon soap opera.
Let there be no mistake, the film certainly provides a somewhat factual recount of Jon Krakauer’s original tale of survival on the least hospitable place on Earth… somewhere deep down in the cold crevices of the scriptwriter’s discarded ideas bin.
As one who has consumed both author Jon Krakauer’s “Into Thin Air,” the work that primarily inspired the movie, and now director Baltasar Kormákur’s “Everest,” I doubt I’d be alone in classifying “Everest” as basing itself upon a solid piece of storytelling, with flimsy execution.
It is important to note, however, that “Everest” is not solely based on the book “Into Thin Air,” but a set of factual accounts given by the 1996 survivors revolving around the concept of ‘man vs. mountain’, with Krakauer’s account having most notable presence.
In “Into Thin Air,” the reader is given great detail into the background, personality and humanity of the crew that the movie cannot merely deliver in the 150 minutes it plays with its characters.
This isn’t a new concept. Movies whose source material are books tend to exclude the least pertinent information, and double down on the most exciting and thrilling aspects that will likely appeal to a large audience, and while “Everest” certainly flaunts its masterful visuals, it falls short in explaining why we should even care for the characters in the first place.
If anything, catch this movie on cable television in a few years; as although experiencing this movie in IMAX 3D was a nice touch, it cannot make up for what is overall a forgettable and forced piece of storytelling.