JinRoz For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

L Rodrigues SPOILER ALERT I am not even all the way through watching the movie, and I know it will be a struggle to finish it. Too many holes in the plot and too many glaring errors.The Korean climber who slips and falls dies in the movie... he actually survived with relatively minor injuries. Then, the climbers are all almost always depicted without their oxygen masks. Yes, I know it's only a movie, but that critical detail was annoying beyond forgiveness.I found the dramatization of the deaths of Andy, Doug, Scott, and Rob to be melodramatic at best and disrespectful at worst. The book speaks of Beck having hallucinations of being at a beach with his wife - then the movie shows Rob having that dream right before his phone call to his wife. The movie turns Krakauer from the role of participant/survivor to someone who almost seems to be the only one interested in any rescue attempts. Certainly he has expressed his survivor's remorse, but the movie misrepresents his actions on May 11.Don't waste your time with this movie... read the book - then read "The Climb" by Anatoli Bourkreev.

paul2001sw-1 The ethics of mountain-guiding are always difficult: you pay a guide to take care of you, but on the hill, you can ultimately only be responsible for yourself. At extreme altitudes, the position is even more obscure: the fees are enormous, but can you really pay a man to die for you? Pat Littlejohn, the fine British climber who I once paid to guide me in the Alps, told me he did not believe in guiding at 8000m. 'Into Thin Air' is a film based on a true story of one occasion when high-altitude guiding went desperately wrong, and several climbers died in one day, including two expedition leaders. The film is relatively sympathetic to New Zealander Rob Hall, although he broke his own golden rule about the time to turn around. American Scott Fisher comes across as more of an egotistical fool. The exploits of Anatoli Boukreev, the senior guide who survived (until another climbing accident a year later) but who was much criticised for his behaviour (including in the book on which this film is based), are less featured.Since this film was made, of course, 'Touching the Void' has set new standards for mountain movies. That film eclipses this one in several ways: the less melodramatic rendering of events; the use of real interviews with the participants (instead of the ponderous voice-over we get here); a better invocation of the true viciousness of mountain conditions; and not least the superior storyline and dignity of its characters. But that is to judge 'Into Thin Air' by very high standards. It still manages to tell effectively a gripping and tragic story; and is sobering viewing for all of us who love high places.

Jim Kelly Although the account on which this film was based has been criticized for implications by Krakauer as to where and upon whom blame for the disaster should fall, the movie falls short of the sense of camaraderie, the overwhelming sense of wonder (albeit the film's greatest asset is the location/sets/cinematography), and the intense sense of loss and tragedy of the book.The acting is slick and rather true to the book, but the casting (anyone remember Shooter from Happy Gilmore and Peter Horton's character from Thirtysomething?)makes it more than a little hard to believe, especially if you have already read the book; it did not measure up to the characters I had "created" for myself while reading Krakauer's account. The "made for TV" type breaks were a bit "TV-esque" as well.If you have not done so already, read the book. Or if you have seen the film, read the book. No film script can compare with the perspective, description and detail found within Krakauer's honest and humanistic account of the 1996 Everest disaster.

crzymnky2590 This movie is a disgrace to everyone who was on the mountain in May of 1996. After reading Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer then watching the movie I can say that the movie is almost nothing like the book. The movie paints Scott Fischer as a reckless person, determined to get his people to the top no matter what, makes for great story telling, unfortunately for this movie completely false. He was a very experienced climber and knew the risks of climbing. Fischer did care about his people and did not take unnecessary risks. He wanted his people to get down alive instead of dying on the mountain. Anatoli is painted as a person who doesn't care about anyone but himself, if he only cared about himself then why did he risk his life to save the people he did. Rob is some cautious noble person in this movie, while he was cautions he did not argue with Fischer in the book as he did in the movie. Worst of all is Jon himself. What two bit actor did they hire to play him?! He was terrible, not to mention Jon was not awake at the time the people were dying. He had gone back to the tent and slept throughout the night. He never was on the radio and if I remember correctly camp 4 did not have a radio, but rather they tried to get one from the South African team but were unsuccessful. So Hall was talking to base camp instead. Krakauer was not awake and was not a player in the climax of the book. This is the most disrespectful thing in the entire movie. This movie was a rushed movie and was made simply to make money off of a horrible tragedy.