While there are some really nice things about the movie like some mentioned in the comments above, there are few things which need some more thought.Director has very nicely shown what one can see with 'two eyes' - what lies beyond has been missed. Real art for this movie could have been to show in 2-D, what can not be captured by the camera. Director's camera did catch so many nice moments, pictures, mini- stories - but, failed to see the not so obvious. Word Sadhu is related to Sadhna (meaning practice) - a Sadhu, true seeker of knowledge doesn't need to be a wandered. Staying stationed and seeking truth is very much possible and was entirely missed. The young Sadhu kept wondering thru the cities in search of something without even having a Guru. How could you capture renunciation of a man who still owns a radio and is showing to wear leather boots (if I am not wrong)? Calling Kumbh, a circus is easy - because that is what you see with your eyes. His effort to seek truth / change at Kumbh was limited to talking to other Sadhus. Some very offending scenes have been captured by the director without having much sense towards Hindu tradition of Kumbh. At two points, two sadhus question the cameraman and showing him hands - still the scene has been added in the movie. Seriously, these scenes should have been edited. Also, it is good that story moves fast and therefore, doesn't bore you. However, in a quest to show the western world what is different- some basic movie making pricips have been forgotten. There is no point showing anything different (e.g., pastel in one of the initial scenes), when the Sadhu is talking about philosophy. Audience deserve a chance to digest both the great camera-graphy and the thought-projection - both can not be digested in parallel.Overall, worth a watch and many congratulations to the Director for touching such a difficult topic, with such ease. For next time, go beyond what the two eyes can see. Good wishes.