Dak I thought this film was terrific given the information the writers, directors, and actors had to work with. After seeing the film and feeling disappointed in its lack of content, I had to research Annemarie Schwarzenbach. There isn't much first-hand biographical information. Most of what Annemarie Schwarzenbach wrote about her life in her journals was destroyed by her mother for its "vulgar" content. One can only infer what happened on that trip between these women. The movie, once I found this information, is like reading a broken journal. Pieces are obviously missing. Scenes cut just before something important may happen. Long parts of the trip are edited. I think because of this, Journey to Kafiristan is one of my top five favorite movies of all time.

pagrn1 All the reviews I read before seeing this were maddeningly vague as if the writers were trying desperately not to commit themselves. I can't see their problem, 'Journey to Kafiristan' is an outstanding film with two excellent performances from the leads; the cinematography is jawdroppingly good with the landscapes, interiors and close-ups all adding to the poignancy of the narrative; the music is astonishingly unobtrusive yet contributes to the mood and pace of the film. At the centre there is the performance of Jeanette Hain whose extraordinarily expressive face adds so much to the pathos of the situation. I can only guess that the reason this film did not catapult Ms Hain to international prominence is the 'stigma' of the lesbian character as with Patricia Charbonneau after 'Desert Hearts' or Gina Gershon after 'Bound' and 'Showgirls'. Jeanette Hain should be one of the world's most successful actors and directors should sit up and take note! Commercially the labelling of films seems inevitable as target audiences are identified for marketing purposes; but it can serve to reduce the potential audience. 'Journey to Kafiristan' is billed as a 'Lesbian Interest' film but it is much more, it deals with the rise of feminism in Europe in the inter-war period. Both lead characters have transparently fake marriages for convention's sake and exist outside the norm while still using their married status to protect them in dangerous situations. If you're looking for GIRL-ON-GIRL action you would be better off looking elsewhere for while this is a love story it is cerebral and emotional rather than carnal.I cannot praise 'Journey to Kafiristan' highly enough.

Alexander We went to the movie with a group because the play we were going to was cancelled. It is without doubt one of the worst movies ever. It is not that i don't like cult-movies I do. But nothing happens in the film. One does not feel any connection with the characters whatsoever. endless times without dialog. And the car. How do thay carry a huge tent and beds chairs and clothing for every day in that car? It is a two seater! I have to say however the scenery is beautiful, but not in a movie, the director should have made a photoshoot of the movie, so that we could skip about 80 minutes of useless time in with nothing happens anyway. I would not recommend it, as it is a waste of your time

dirkjot I quite liked this movie. From what I read before seeing it, I expected more beautiful scenery. But the Dubinis clearly wanted to show us a psychological journey more than a physical one, so the camera glides over the most picture-perfect hills, ruins etc, only to swiftly return to our actresses. And this, I think, is good: The film could have become a National Geographic style documentary and that would have left the interesting topic of what moves these two very different characters, who are doing something much out of the ordinary in the 1940s.Rather then spell things out for you, the directors choose to hint at feelings, to leave dialogs uncompleted and to move on at the point where you would expect a conclusion to be reached. There are pros and cons to that: There is no preferred interpretation and the actresses can use expressions and body language to suggest much more than could have been put into words (and Jeanette Hain is very good at that). But the film seems to move slowly because nothing unexpected can happen this way and in the end, it all was a bit *too* subtle for me.This said, there are plenty of very moving scenes. Especially the flirtatious side of Annemarie gets well depicted (the dance at the ambassador's house) and at the same time it stays constrained and half-hidden, as you would expect for a woman in that period of time.The real dramatic moment of the film comes near the end, when the women have to part their ways. Even then, things are very quiet and stilted. Is this a flaw of the Dubinis' film or did they want to show an era in which you didn't discuss your most intimate feelings with others? I really do not know the answer, I think the film could have improved from a little more ``say what you mean and say it mean''. But it still ranks as a good 8 on my scale.