Nice effects though.

Expected more

Admirable film.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

I have never read Heinrich Harrer's book so I have nothing to compare the film to and no way to know to what degree the film has been fictionalized. So I have to rate this film as "a dramatized or fictionalized biographical film".I saw this movie when it first came out in 1997. This is actually the last movie I have ever seen in a movie theater. (Yes it's been that long since I have been to the theater).This is one of those movies I liked better than I thought I would - it was better than the previews lead me to believe. I thought the movie was actually good. It was heartwarming, a bit adventurous, and quite an interesting story.My rating is based on "just a Hollywood film" and not on if it is a perfectly accurate account or true to the book.8/10

'Seven Years in Tibet' tells a story that is truly captivating but focuses it's energy on a character that isn't. We know about Heinrich Harrar, the cold and indifferent Austrian mountain climber who left his pregnant wife to go and climb Nanga Parbat, an extremely difficult peak in the Himalayas. The first hour of the movie deals with his trek with his guide Peter Aufschnaiter (David Thewlis). These scenes are pretty much predictable and the question of why this mountain was so important to Harrar goes unanswered.World War II breaks out and Harrar (Brad Pitt) stumbles into the city of Lhasa, where resides the 14th Dalai Lama.The scenes in this city are captivating. The Dalai Lama is seen as a smiling wide-eyed kid interested in Western culture. He likes this stranger from the west and asks him to build a movie theater. Harrar obliges. We also understand that the Dalai Lama is under threat by China who want this tiny remote land for reasons he can't quite understand.This is an interesting story. So why does the movie spend so much time focusing on the less interesting Harrar? When the movie takes us to Lhasa I was so captivated by it's world that I was hoping that the movie would fill me in on questions about why the Dalai Lama had to go into exile. It is all for naught. Maybe the film should have focused more on the relationship between Harrar and the Dalai Lama and done away with the scenes of his mountain climbing. Those scenes don't establish anything or answer the question of why Nanga Parbat was so important with a war brewing so close to home. 'Seven Years in Tibet' is a misguided effort that has it's focus in the wrong place.

First of all, I wanna say that it is not easy for a mainland Chinese to watch such movie that were strictly banned domestically. Just because the recent protest occurred in Tiananmen Square made me eager to discovering the truth behind the so-called "news". I've heard from my US colleagues that Brad Pitt has been refused to mainland China ever since his acting in this film, and I once told my US friends that the only place I wanna pay for a visit within this country is Tibet and Xinjiang, of course, both are notably "question area" with a great deal of political related conflicts. Tibet, with its beautiful scenery and culture and religious charm, has attracted a lot of people all over the world to see this heaven land, the highest plateau on earth, the closet place to reach the gods in sky. I was amazed by the stunning views in this movie, as well as the mysterious religious-based culture it showed, the ceremonies and the kindhearted people there. And it truly broke my heart when comes to the plots that the liberty troops invaded this holy place and made it as part of people's republic of China. Though without showing the audience too much bloody scenes, the moment that the communist party delegates step on the gorgeous prints the humble monks are praying for, is just like a needle stamp into my brain nerves and I trembled. Furious with such bandits to ruin others' religious belief so easily and without regret, angry about how they are acting and no wonder that so many years has passed, these group of people are just exactly the same as 60 years ago. A lot of officials nowadays are just the way like the delegates in this movie- rude, arrogant, disrespectful, no manners at all. Shame on me, oh gosh. I don't know why the paramount leaders always have this desire to control other race and expand the territory. Those people have their own culture and religious beliefs, they are totally different with Han ethnicity, from head to toe. Why bothers controlling their homeland and trying to brainwash to make everyone like an ethnicity that actually has no religious no beliefs at all? I cannot understand any single one massacre in human history, though I know the saying, every nation is built on blood and tears. And as a result of retrieve Tibet, there are Han Chinese crowd in Lhasa and as a consequence of protests that never stops in Tibetan, there are tons of liberty troops quarter in Tibet autonomous region and can put down every single "counter-revolutionary" riot by military force immediately. I know there are racial discrimination between Tibetan and Han ethnicity nationwide, Dalai lama's expelled from his people and homeland (which is a taboo topic within red China), how situation deteriorates to today is never my or a peace-loving person's wish. Apart from the politics inner depth of this movie, the loving and honesty Tibetans moved me a lot. How I wish this holy place, the reputable nearest city (Lhasa) to heaven, will never ever destroyed by anything from outside world, neither party itself nor Western civilizations. The world needs colorful cultures and races and religious beliefs, thus will leave something valuable to our offspring.

Ever since Ronald Colman raised the bar of expectation by his not so chance encounter with Shangri-La in the 1937 movie rendition of "Lost Horizon", we have been trying to find our way back. Thanks to movies like "Seven years in Tibet", we can focus on the real issues rather than paradise revisited.With the release of the movie version of Heinrich Harrer's "Seven Years in Tibet" we are presented with a different story - one less fairly tale...Jacque Annaud's...film allows us to move away from the fantasy created by "Lost Horizon"... Annaud succeeds in bringing Tibet to life, to make it more human, more real.As much as the story is Harrer's, it seems inevitable that the focus moves away from him and onto the Dalai Lama. The book reads like an outsider looking at things from the outside in. The focus of the book, is all Harrer. Luckily, film has an ability to visualize the books cannot ever provide - a real immediate feel. The movie is everything and it at times almost feels like it will slide into Indiana Jones. However, the power of Tibet saves it. It almost feel like Pitt and Thewlis are out of place. The real stars are the set, the landscape and the Nepalese extras. Filmed everywhere but Tibet, the film does give its western audience a real soft landing, one that they will not get with Scorsese's "Kundun"... Hollywood does need to supply a demand and we demand epic scenes, high priced talent, a sense of the exotic. As if east meets west and the fusion of the two is greater than the sum of the parts. For the attention to detail, I can't help but sing the praises. If you can stomach Pitt's fake Austrian accent, the film is a visual delight. It would be a tempting fantasy to hope that we can preserve it...