A Brilliant Conflict

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

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

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

This starts with a pretty interesting underwater scene but this is not really a nature film. It tries to cover the history of the Arabian peninsula from its creation to the modern world. It uses the device of a main character who is filming his native country with his hand-held camera. It goes bad right from the moment of showing happy smiling kids to create a Disney version of the kingdom. I love travelogues but this one is dictated by the Royal family and it feels very fake. Then it just keep going with fake sets and actors. There is also animation that is reminiscent of a kids educational video. That's what this is. It show the history of the region in the most plain vanilla way. There is no denying the beauty of the vast landscapes and the rolling cityscapes. The Hajj and the humanity around the Ka'aba can be awe-inspiring. For real in-depth information, I would suggest going elsewhere.

I think "Arabia 3D" is worth seeing--even now that it's available without 3D and no longer an IMAX format film. You can get it from Netflix--and I watched it streaming on my television. The only serious problem in viewing it is that a few of the shots look oddly distorted and curved. Perhaps they were intended for an OMNIMAX screen.The film is about the three golden ages of Arabia. The first was when Arabia was rich due to its production of Frankincense during the time of the Roman Empire. The second following the creation of Islam by Muhammad in the 6-7th centuries. And, the film implies that today is the beginning of a new golden age due to the oil riches of the new Saudi Arabia. In many ways, the film comes off like a travelogue as well as a piece of propaganda (positive though it is) for the Saudi government.The film was truly gorgeous. I was fortunate to be able to see it on a 58" TV--and for this film, the bigger the better. However, despite learning a lot from the film and loving the footage, I was really shocked at the shoddy quality of the few CGI sequences that occurred in the movie. I am not exaggerating to say that the work appeared to be from about 1995--though the film was made in 2011! It is very strange that such an expensive and sumptuous film would contain such poor computer generated graphics--but they were quite poor.