Essay: Koyaanisqatsi,1982

Blood-red words trickle down the black screen. Koyaanisqatsi. The camera zooms out from earth-colored shadows painted onto a cave wall, revealing humanoid figures that were constructed a long, long time ago. A deep, ancient voice, in tribal euphony, chants, “Koyaanisqatsi…” The screen transitions to a fiery world. Subsidition of smoke and fire reveals metalwork supporting a rumbling rocket. Sparks fly, and the rocket channels smoke and fire into the earth below. The machine, almost heavenly, transcends the frame and is raptured into the sky above. The camera then transports the audience to natural and human landscapes.
Koyaanisqatsi was produced in 1982 and is classified as an American experimental and cult film. Godfrey Reggio and Philip Glass, respectively, directed the film and composed the soundtrack. Ron Fricke oversaw the cinematography. Together, the trio’s leadership produced an odd, esoteric film that is now preserved in the National Film Registry for being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” Fricke utilized slow-motion and time-lapse footage to display America’s natural scenery and the commotion of modern humans. The film contains no dialogue, emitting only the sound of Glass’s iconic music. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koyaanisqatsi#Reception)
The symbiosis between visual and auditory stimuli produce quite a magnificent piece of art. Reggio stated, “If you were looking at a sunset, you wouldn’t ask me: ‘What is the meaning?It would be a stupid question. It could be meaningful. So I have tried to create a meaningful experience in my films. This is the highest value of any work of art, not predetermined meaning, but meaning gleaned from the experience of the encounter.” (https://search.proquest.com/docview/310861725?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=11091) Thus, each person’s interpretation of Koyaanisqatsi is likely different, as the film is able to radiate among different audiences and experiences.
In 1982, Vincent Canby, in the New York Times, described Koyaanisqatsi as “a slick, naive, chic, maddening, sometimes very beautiful movie that, if it were a book, would look great on a coffee table.” He then states, “As non-narrative films go, it is remarkably seductive, but so are the color photographs in the National Geographic.” Canby’s hesitation and inconclusiveness to praise the film extend from his comment that “Koyaanisqatsi is an oddball and – if one is willing to put up with a certain amount of solemn picturesqueness – entertaining trip.” (http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9900efd8123bf937a35753c1a964948260)
Elliot Stein, during the same year, shared similar feelings towards the film. He described, while reviewing films of the 20th New York Film Festival, the “‘it’s been done before’ disappointment that greeted Koyaanisqatsi in New York.” Stein wrote, “The bad taste left by Koyaanisqatsi stems in part from its condescension and its anti-urbanism… Koyaanisqatsi will play better, anyway, in 10,000 years, after the time capsule has been opened and they want to know who we were and what we did to ourselves. They may be sick of life in Monument Valley.”  (The 20th New York Film Festival) Koyaanisqatsi was no blockbuster, and it was left in the dust by other films shown at the festival.
Based on the reviews of the film, Koyaanisqatsi seemed to be highly overlooked during its initial release. Furthermore, from January 1, 2004 to March 12, 2018, Koyaanisqatsi gradually lost interest among the general population based on Google’s statistical analytics. The film has clearly not been appreciated by a wide audience, further shown by its seeming esotericism. Nevertheless, there are critics and individuals today who have rightfully given the film its deserved praise.
The Guardian’s Leo Hickman said, “Koyaanisqatsi’s formula is simple: combine the epic, remarkable cinematography of Ron Fricke with the swelling intensity and repeating motifs of Philip Glass’s celebrated original score. There’s your mood bomb, right there.” He continues, “Personally, I view the film as the quintessential environmental movie – a transformative meditation on the current imbalance between humans and the wider world that supports them” (https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2011/dec/15/my-favourite-film-koyaanisqatsi)
However, the film had no “correct” meaning and no direct intention. This is the beauty of the film. The lack of dialogue allows the viewer to conjure his or her own meaning and his or her own distinct, elemental connection to the film, hinting to Koyaanisqatsi’s potential to radiate among a broad audience. Reggio stated, “It’s meant to offer an experience, rather than an idea… For some people, it’s an environmental film. For some, it’s an ode to technology. For some people, it’s a piece of shit. Or it moves people deeply. It depends on who you ask. It is the journey that is the objective.” Before the release, Reggio even sought to have no title. He truly wanted the film to be uniquely receptive to every viewer.
(https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2011/dec/15/my-favourite-film-koyaanisqatsi)
It seems that Reggio wanted the avant-garde film to be received by the masses, as he tried to reach unmatched ambiguity before releasing the film, which would allow it to adapt to each viewer’s unique background and present its own meaning. Nevertheless, the film brought in only $1.7 million USD in the box office, which, considering inflation, would approximate $4.4 million 2018 USD. Koyaanisqatsi did not receive the widespread recognition Reggio had aspired for.
Despite the underestimated praise of the film, Koyaanisqatsi today is more important than it has ever been before. Thus, the film deserves to be recovered from the nether of lost films and resurge as a warning for future civilization in the face of climate change, globalization, and automation.
Perhaps, the reason for the film’s undershoot is the eery and uncomfortable feeling it instills in the audience. While teaching students at Tsinghua University in China, Jonathan Levine was asked to show a movie that demonstrated American ideologies. He decided to show the Chinese students Koyaanisqatsi. After watching the film, many of the students described their experience as “uncomfortable.” (https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/05/15/koyaanisqatsi-in-china/) Perhaps, just perhaps, the film is too true to be received by the masses, and its eerie imagery deters the weak-hearted viewer.
Although the film depicts natural landscapes and common activities of urban humans, it radiates feelings of unfamiliarity and uncomfortableness. Victor Shklovsky, a Russian formalist, stated that art “ removes objects from the automatism of perception” and that art “makes the familiar seem strange.” Koyaanisqatsi does just that. (https://search.proquest.com/docview/1903800365?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=11091)
The film shows commonplace images and activities. Nevertheless, it instills a feeling of unfamiliarity that prompts the viewer to examine the world around him. It prompts viewers to detach themselves from the trap of modern life, and question the world. Koyaanisqatsi’s power is the rapture of the viewer from his own world to cinematic heavens, allowing him to view the world in deity-like fashion.
Our modern world is plagued with many issues. The world around us is changing at an exponential rate. Technology is the defining characteristic of our species that has risen from Mother Nature’s primal grasp and conceived the facade of modern society. The ultimate lie of the society is the detachment from nature- the notion that we are not productions of natural forces. Koyaanisqatsi eclipses this falsity and shepherds viewers into a distant realm in which they can view the unfamiliar world they occupy.
A flurry of sparks and smoke ushers the rocket off of the metalwork and into the blue sky. The hardware pierces molecules of the atmosphere, combatting the friction of nature’s hold. The deep, ancient voice returns. “Koyaanisqatsi…” Explosions return the rocket to its original state of smoke and fire. The machine hovers to the earth below, spinning, plummeting, repiercing the atmosphere. Ancient humanoids return, etched onto the sandstone. The blood-red words return. White subtext below reads, “Koyaanisqatsi (from the Hopi language). 1. Crazy life. 2. Life in turmoil. 3. Life out of balance. 4. Life disintegrating. 5. A state of life that calls for another way of living.”