As I began to watch this SILENT film, I had the impression of watching a black-and-white home movie--with title cards. However, my first impression was soon dispelled as I became riveted by the documentary—the first documentary ever made for screening in public theaters.This fact, alone, makes Robert J. Flaherty a filmmaking pioneer. But, Flaherty--as revealed by his wife in a short interview, on the same Criterion DVD--was an explorer first and only became a filmmaker long after. While working along the East Coast of Hudson Bay in 1910 for the English explorer, Sir William MacKenzie, Flaherty fell in love with the Eskimos that lived on the barren lands of the unexplored southern coast of Baffin Land. Flaherty wanted to film them to show the world a bit of their lifestyle and culture. His first attempt was a failure in that the film could not be developed on the spot, and when it was taken back to Toronto for development, much was lost and most of what was not lost was burned in a fire. His second attempt resulted in this film, Nanook of the North (1922), developed on the spot and done with better equipment.Flaherty let the Eskimos become involved with the film so this was no 'hidden camera deal.' In fact, some scenes—like the building of the Igloo and the seal hunt--were staged. But then, don't most people know that they are being filmed when documentaries are made of them? One soon falls in love with Nanook, his wife and children, and his extended family as they work, play, hunt, and eat. Unlike civilized society--where almost everything is done for you--these Eskimos, at that time, spent a great deal of their time and activities for survival. Roles were both defined and integrated into their society: good parenting seems totally enjoyable but has its long-range goal too. Children wanted to imitate their parents, and the parents encouraged it. Their dogs were their pets, but they were also totally necessary for their for survival too. Almost all of the Eskimos' food, goods, clothes, homes furnishings, fun, and hunting supplies came out of what they were able to make, find, or hunt in their desolate environment. But, even there, they did trade at the white man's trading post. Flaherty's film went on to become world-famous and probably gave us much of the information--such as building igloos, kissing by rubbing noses, etc--that we have adopted about the Eskimos of that time. Why? Because unlike popular articles written in magazines like 'The National Geographic,' the film brought the people and culture to life for us to see it in action. I also appreciated Flaherty's film making per se. His photography and framing are very good for the time, with both effective long shots and close ups. It is hard to imagine such good work under such limited lighting and environmental conditions. My only criticism of the film is length of the title cards. Since I am a slow reader, I was often forced to set the DVD player on the pause button in order to read the description of each upcoming scene. Nankook of the North is No. 41 on The Top 100 Silent Era Films.

The first feature documentary looks at one year in the life of an Inuit family. Nanook, his wife Nyla, and their son Cunayou inhabit one of the most inhospitable climates in the world. They migrate around to find food, build an igloo in which to spend the night, and sometimes have to separate the sled dogs (or wolves) when the latter get in fights.It's well known that director Robert Flaherty had earlier shot a bunch of footage, only to have it go up in flames, and so he had to re-shoot everything (leading to allegations that much of what appears in the finished documentary is staged). Regardless, this is a truly breathtaking experience. Filmed in northern Quebec on the Hudson Bay, the landscape is almost a character as much as any of the people: barren land and ice sheets as far as the eye can see. Above all, the focus on the Inuit people is fully sympathetic, but not paternalistic. It simply lets the viewer understand the people's way of life, and feel as if s/he is a part of the culture, much like Flaherty later did with "Man of Aran", about life on Irish island.In a TV interview some years after Roberty Flaherty died, his widow Frances noted that people all over the world saw "Nanook of the North". In fact, when Nanook died, it made news as far away as Singapore.Anyway, this is definitely a documentary that you MUST see. To my knowledge, the only other movie that focuses on the Inuit people is "Atanarjuat", spoken in their language.

Movies are illusions. You never know how much of a documentary, whether about peoples or animal life, is really spontaneous, actual or authentically true-to-life, because in most cases, a stationary camera has already been set up (with an accompanying bank of bright lights) to film what takes place in front of it; in addition, careful editing and juxtapositioning of scenes may falsify a real time progression of events. Finally, what is shown is dictated by the purposes of the film makers and hence may be very subjective in terms of what is being displayed and what is omitted, leaving potential questions about whether it is a balanced or full view of what is presented.Here we have one of the first full length documentaries, which is about the lives of Eskimos living in the frozen wastes of the Hudson Bay region of Canada in the early 1920s. The film has the dual reputation of being both amazing in its photography and depiction of typical Eskimo life, and also of its having been totally staged. I come down on the side of it being a great film whether staged or not.To some, certain elements of fakery may be unforgivable: the fact that Nanook used only 'primitive' weapons (knife, harpoon and spear) to catch fish, seals and walrus, when he in fact had knowledge of (or may have used) rifles; or the fact that the person presented as his 'wife' is played by someone not his wife, while his real wife (recognizeable as a woman only due to the baring of her breasts) is present in the film but identified simply as the person 'Cunayou.' A real precedent for Disney's 'True Life' Adventure films of the 50s! None of this matters. All movies are staged anyway in varying degrees. The important parts of any film are its construction and its delivery of content. This film is exceedingly well edited and photographed, such as the vista shots and those of the wind sweeping over the snow after the seal kill. As for the content, let's say Flaherty's purpose was to tell a detailed story of how Eskimos traditonally lived. This is very clearly an excellent document of that.We get great details of how more than one person can fit in a kayak, how to use the force of the tide to reel in a captured walrus, how to build an igloo with an ice window, how Eskimos protect puppies from being eaten by sled dogs, how salmon and seal under the ice can be caught, how Eskimos dress, how they eat raw flesh and cooked meat, how fathers start teaching their young sons from the time they first can stand to learn the art of hunting... well the list goes on and on.Thank for having documented these things, Mr. Flaherty! I watched my rented copy four times. Watching the entire film at one viewing you clearly get the message -- where ever you have born, where ever you are in life, whatever gifts you've been given from your moment of birth, make the most of your environment and what you have --play the hand you've been dealt the best way you can. See the Eskimos ply their skills and make the most of their environment? Can we do no less? I'll give it a 10.Note: On what is another amazing 'Criterion Collection' DVD, there is the super bonus of a full gallery of Flaherty's photographs (these aren't faked!). It has also a great new score (1998) by Timothy Brock and the Olympia Chamber Orchestra which includes appropriately 'chilly wind' type eerie violins during the wind swept overland travel sequence.

Directed by Robert J. Flaherty, this moving feature about the hardships faced by an Inuit family is one of the seminal films of the silent era and brought about his reputation as "the father of the documentary". Although only having spent a few weeks out in the icy wilderness, Flaherty presents us with a series of beautiful vignettes that capture the absolute essence of the daily struggles for survival that Nanook and his people face. The audiences follows them on their long treks in the constant search for food; picking their way over floes and towers of ice in order to catch a fish or hunt seal and walrus. Yet amongst the hardships and privations, Flaherty also allows glimpses of the tenderness and love within the family. The joy of a meal, the warmth of a shelter, the fascinating communal construction of an igloo. The humanity of the Inuits is rendered with heartwarming affection. However, often setting his subjects against the bleak yet stunning vistas of unending snow, Flaherty leaves the audience in no doubt that the environment is as much the star. Some critics argue that Nanook is not a true documentary as Flaherty staged some scenes and directed his subjects. However, these critics are wildly missing the point. Nanook Of the North is as much about the barren landscape that Nanook and his clan wander. At its centre, this film is the age old tale of the battle between man and nature. This is none more evident of the films wonderful final scenes. Caught in a blizzard, the family are forced to find refuge in an abandoned igloo. A happy respite together from the wild storm outside. This scene has been given extra poignancy with the tragic knowledge that Nanook and his family perished in such a blizzard a few months after the film was released. It's a sad footnote to a tremendous film. A masterpiece of film making that inspires and enthrals and, most importantly, celebrates nature, life and humanity.