Buddha (1936): A slow walk through history

Is it worth your time?

Honestly, it depends on how much you love 1930s cinema. If you're into the slow, deliberate style of stuff like The Goddess, you might find something here. But for most people? It's a bit of a slog. It’s got that dusty, theatrical vibe that feels like it’s being performed for the back row of a very quiet theater.

John Hunt is in it, and he carries that classic, stiff-upper-lip energy. You can tell he’s trying to hold the whole thing together even when the script feels like it’s just wandering around in the woods looking for a point.

The experience

The movie is so quiet. There are moments where you just watch characters stand around in silk robes, and the silence goes on just a little too long. It’s not necessarily bad, but it feels like the director was really afraid to cut away. There's this one scene near a tree that feels like it lasts for an entire afternoon. My coffee went cold just watching it. ☕

It definitely doesn't have the kinetic energy you find in something like Fast Bullets. If you're coming from that world, this will feel like a nap. But there is a weird, strange charm to how simple it is. It isn't trying to be fancy or high-art in a way that feels pretentious. It’s just... there.

• The sets look like they were built yesterday out of cardboard.
• The lighting is either 'too dark to see' or 'brighter than the sun'.
• Some of the dialogue sounds like it was written on a napkin five minutes before filming.

It reminds me a bit of the pacing issues in The Wicked City, but with way less stuff going on. It’s weirdly hypnotic, in a way that makes you think about your grocery list more than the actual plot. But hey, maybe that's the point of a movie about Buddha, right? Just sitting there and thinking about nothing.

I wouldn't go out of my way to find it. But if you’re doing a deep dive into 1936, you could do worse. Just keep a book handy for when the screen goes static for a few minutes.