There seems to be a “based on a true story” paradox that persists in filmmaking, and Baltasar Kormákur’s “Everest” is among the many films it’s affecting. The very fact that its characters are real is what makes them fake.
When a film is based on a true story, it can add credibility and realism to an otherwise outrageous story. Knowing the characters in a movie exist or existed in real life can make them seem very real on screen, and attract skeptical viewers.
On the other hand, “true” movies about recent events not only have to consider accuracy in their portrayals of these fictionalized real people, but they must also consider respect. To avoid controversy, filmmakers must appeal to those subjects still alive as well as the families of the recently deceased. Obviously, erroneous or antagonistic portrayals for dramatic effect are off-limits, but subjective accounts of true events often elevate real, flawed humans to a level of false heroism that detracts from the story.
“Everest” tackles this difficult situation and tells the story of the Adventure Consultants summit team, a group of amateur climbers trained and led by a smaller group of professionals who in 1996 set out to the top of Mount Everest. Jason Clarke leads the ensemble cast as New Zealander Rob Hall, leader of a group that includes proud Texan Beck Weathers (Josh Brolin), humble mailman Doug Hansen (John Hawkes), sole woman and experienced climber Yasuko Namba (Naoko Mori) and journalist Jon Krakauer (Michael Kelly).
In addition to those on the mountain, Emily Watson plays base camp manager Helen Wilton, and Keira Knightley plays Hall’s wife Jan Arnold. Both women do an admirable job, but they have little to do other than ugly-cry — as ugly as Knightley’s beautiful bone structure can allow, anyway — over the radio or telephone as they receive news of the disaster off the mountain.
Similarly, Robin Wright plays such a small role as Beck’s wife Peach Weathers that it could be considered a cameo. However, she manages to create more of a character than almost any of the main players can while providing comic relief at the same time.
Most of the film follows the Adventure Consultants as they train for 40 days prior to the attempted summit, and as they climb to the top and face, as those familiar with either the story or film’s trailer know, a massive storm. The preparation phase, though not as exciting as the actual climb and storm survival, is crucial, as it also prepares the audience for the incredible conditions to which these extreme hikers subject themselves.
“The human body is not meant to survive at the cruising altitude of a 747,” Hall says at the beginning of the film. And soon, the audience sees why — hypothermia, frostbite, lack of oxygen, blistering winds and incredible physical exertion are only a handful of the risks climbers confront. With the threat of death around every corner, “Everest” is less a story about surviving the storm on the mountain and more about surviving the mountain itself.
Simply put, there seems to be no good reason to climb this mountain. When Krakauer asks the climbers why they do it, they say, “Because we can.” Though they elaborate slightly, the bottom line is still the same. Obviously, humans should not climb Mount Everest. But they can, so they will.
If this seems like a flimsy motivation to subject oneself to immense discomfort and near-death, it is. However, the “why” is not important in “Everest” — the audience is here for the spectacle of the “how.” From the comfort of our cushioned theater seats, we do not risk life and limb to see the beautiful scenery of Nepal, and the scenery is, indeed, beautiful.
In an IMAX theater, one might think that they are watching a National Geographic documentary. Much of the film was shot on location near the mountain, leading to the thought that these adventurous souls climbed Mount Everest so that the audience does not have to.
Though the views and suspense are spectacular, the story of “Everest” is lacking. Despite the actors’ best efforts, most of the characters are one-dimensional — probably due to the “true story” paradox.
Jake Gyllenhaal’s character’s Russian co-guide, of the rival company Mountain Madness, explains early in the film that there is no real conflict between the men climbing Everest, and all conflict is between men and the mountain. This is a dead-on description of the film’s plot, which lacks any supporting battle between its flat characters. Even the competition between rival companies is brief and hardly registers.
Despite this, “Everest” is a perfectly acceptable escapist thriller. Indeed, with such gorgeous images and such brutal conditions, “Everest” might not convince anyone to attempt the summit, but the thrill of the film satisfies one enough to feel almost as if they have made it to the top.
Correction: An earlier version of this review stated that Jake Gyllenhaal played the Russian guide.
Jake Gyllenhaal’s role as Scott Fischer was NOT a “laid-back Russian co-guide.” Scott Fischer was the expedition leader of the Mountain Madness team, while Rob Hall was the expedition leader of the Adventure Consultants team. At a certain point the teams sort of decided to throw in their lots together and summit together on the same day. But they had separate expedition leaders.
On top of that, both expedition leaders in turn had hired more than one of their own team guides, and also each expedition leader had hired their own cadre of Nepalese Sherpas. Scott Fischer (as played by Jake Gyllenhaal) hired more than one guide, with his “lead guide” being a superb Russian Kazakh high-altitude climber named Anatoli Boukreev, who was reared in the brutal Soviet system of high-altitude alpine training. In the film, the role of Boukreev was played by the Icelandic actor Ingvar Sigordsson.
It is the real-life Anatoli Boukreev who gave us the line, “The last word will always belong to the mountain,” which could be the epigraph tagline for this film.
Sorry for this mix-up, but I promise you I did know this. My article was edited for length, and the editor- who had not seen the film- combined a lot of the information in my paragraphs to streamline the piece. Evidently, mistakes were made. Thank you for pointing out this error and for the correction!