This movie was just okay. Ironically, it suffers from a parallel problem with the climate change cause it champions. Although movies about scenery can be beautiful and awe-inspiring, people care most about stories of other people. Yet the story of the two main players in this piece are under-told. We never really get much background on either of them. They're introduced perfunctorily, as though by resume: This guy does this; that guy does that.We do get to see some of their preparation and a bit of the training, mostly for writer/director/star Sebastian Copeland ⎯ in fact, almost entirely for him. But we never really get to learn who they are as people. Sebastian talks a little about his photography background and the fact that climate change is important to him. But it's simply not presented in a very compelling way. There is too much "telling" and not enough "showing".This is true for all of the personal stories. For example, he mentions in narration the problems faced by the Inuit and we do see them briefly, but there is no investigation of their history, or their individual struggles, or anything like that. We are just briefly given a few factual tidbits. Actually, even this part of the movie seemed more about Sebastian than about them. He told us that they blessed him and although that's an honor, it did seem like he was trying to tell us, "Look at how well they regard me!" Perhaps I'm wrong, but the best documentary makers know how to get out of the way when need be and show the stories of other people.There are some technical issues with the filming itself. Other than the formal interviews, every single interior scene is out of focus. There is also a bit of rolling shutter on the outdoor scenes. The latter is no big deal, but the poor focus was distracting for me.Ultimately, the movie is a bit like looking through an acquaintance's holiday photos. The scenes may be stunning ⎯ and they are ⎯ but there is little to truly draw us in to the human element.

"Into the Cold: A Journey of the Soul" (2010 release; 87 min.) retells the preparation for, and then the actual attempt, to recreate the polar expedition of Admiral Keary and his team from 1909 exactly 100 years later. It basically involved a 6 week trek on foot, covering over 300 miles, towards the north pole. As the documentary opens, we are introduced to Sebastian Copeland, the writer-director-photographer-editor and all-around "star" of this movie. We learn a bit of his background and then things start to get serious with the final preparations of Sebastian's and Keith's trek, which Sebastian calls "the Mount Everest of polar expeditions", but as the DVD jacket cleverly points out: "In the last century, fewer than 150 people have made it to the North Pole on foot. By comparison, 77 people summitted Mt. Everest on May 22, 2008 alone", so it's pretty clear which of the two is hardest. To tell you more would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out.Couple of comments: first, the initial 40 min. or so of the documentary are devoted to background stories and preparations for the expedition. So when we finally do get to the actual expedition, I was more than ready for it. I'm happy to say it is very much worth it, and then some. We see Sebastian and Keith dealing with rubble fields, pressure ridges, fatigue, and the cold. Ah, yes, the cold! Temperatures exceed minus 50F at times, just unreal. Second, the footage from the North Pole is nothing short of stunning. And the beauty is that we get to see it in the comfort and warmth of our living room. Third, despite all the fluff about "searching for myself" or "a soul's journey", Copeland has a clear agenda for doing this, and the movie is basically a plea for a renewable and sustainable world. Last but not least, the documentary features a great soundtrack (courtesy of Didier Lockwood), and the occasional song (best of all: Canada's own Besnard Lakes' epic "Like The Ocean. Like The Innocent", which plays over the end titles). Somewhat surprisingly there are no bonus materials of any kind on the DVD (unless you want to call a 2 min. commercial for Copeland's "Antarctica: A Global Warning" book a "bonus feature", as the DVD jacket actually does).I stumbled upon this movie while browsing the documentary section of my local library. So glad that I found this. For another recent documentary with even better jaw-dropping footage, I can instantly and readily suggest you check out "Chasing Ice", dealing with glaciers in Greenland, Iceland and Alaska. Meanwhile, "Into the Cold" is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

This film is in serious need of an edit -- way, way too long and a complete ego trip for the filmmaker. A mere nod to the so much more harrowing Arctic expeditions that went before them and, really, didn't he realize where all that fancy high tech gear they were using comes from? That maybe, just maybe it's our love of high tech causing the problem of climate change the filmmaker preaches against? I bought this movie thinking it would take me to places I would never see in person, but all I saw were young men making endless preparations (boring), finally getting to their starting point, and then walking, walking, walking. The most interesting part were the still photographs, which were included at one point. Like another reviewer said, wait for TV -- save your money.

Sebastian Copeland's disappointing film about his trip to the North Pole on the anniversary of Perry and Henson's first trip there a hundred years before.Visually stunning the film gives a good idea what its like to be alone on the ice. The visuals in this film are amazing and and are the reason the film should be seen.The trouble is that the film is kind of a mess other wise. The film is very much a self love letter to Copeland with narration that is much too purple and self congratulatory. I came to despise the central figure of the film because its all about him.How much is it about him? We get a good look at his life, but at the same time we learn almost nothing about Keith Heger who made the trip with Copeland. Sure he's there, but he's more a body than anything else, its all Copeland. The film also gives almost no background on the original trip of Perry and Henson. It was something that happened and other than a couple of pictures and an odd mention about how they had to walk back and were not helicoptered home (as Heger and Copeland were).There is also way too much talk of climate change. Its clear that there is a problem, but Copeland the director drones on repeatedly about it at every opportunity so that it isn't long before we want to scream "enough". It would be fine if he had managed to work the subject into relevant parts of the narration, but he doesn't with the result it seems out of place. (actually it's like being hit over the head with a toaster).However with all that is wrong with the narrative, there is the images. the images are amazing. The images are the films saving grace. If it wasn't for the spectacular images the film would be a major bust.If you want to see great images that really put you into the arctic you must see this film. Its really clear from the footage that its just Copeland and Heger and no one else. It makes an impression on you that hangs with you in a way nothing else in this film does. (How much better this would have been if Copeland had gone into the Perry and Henson story since he would have single handedly explained what a monumental achievement they had made.) Worth seeing but wait for TV.