Absolutely love nature documentaries and plenty of those made into IMAX short films were quite good and more. As well as that, another big reason to see 'Journey to the South Pacific' to me was the South Pacific itself. It's a beautiful and unforgiving place, not as much as the Antarctic, the Arctic or the African deserts for example (which are also visited a lot more in nature documentaries), while also being fascinating culturally. Which 'Journey to the South Pacific' explores too.

'Journey to the South Pacific' really is not one of the best IMAX/3D short film documentaries. It is interesting enough for the subject matter, which should be explored more in documentaries generally, but a lot more could have been done with it. It is certainly watchable, especially for the production values, but other documentaries go into their subjects in much more depth, are more focused and fare much better in the music and narration. Have generally been impressed by the IMAX documentary short films, but this is one of the few to not do much for me.

Beginning with the good, the production values are exemplary. The Antarctic scenery is a wonder and is as beautiful and unforgiving as ever and spectacularly photographed. The IMAX doesn't cheapen anything.

Did love the animals, with the fish being particularly memorable, and some parts are charming and cute. Cate Blanchett does deliver the narration elegantly and not too over seriously, and the geography was illuminating, learned more about that aspect of the South Pacific than any of my school geography locations.

However, there are significant short comings. There were occasions where the music was nice, but too many times it is really overbearing and it never gels and felt like it was written for something else. While Blanchett's delivery is fine, the narration is far too cutesy and jokey in writing in an attempt to appeal to younger audiences and trying too hard.

Would have liked more of the nature scenes and less of the more human scenes, which did go on for too long and didn't feel real in staging. Pacing is a major issue too, 'Journey to the South Pacific' does try to cram in and cover far too much, which means that the whole thing feels very rushed and severely under-developed. Also wasn't really educated that much outside of the geography, very little here that covers any new ground and it felt over-familiar. Subtlety wasn't a strong suit either, some of the delivery felt too heavy, especially the global message that felt merely there for the sake of it.

Overall, watchable but disappointing. 5/10.

"Journey to the South Pacific" is an American English-language documentary from 2013, so this one is already over 5 years old and it was written and directed by Stephen Judson and of course he got help like so many other times by 2-time Academy Award nominee Greg MacGillivray briefly before his 70th birthday and he is not the only man in charge with said last last, so it is also a bit of a family production. The title makes obvious where this is headed, namely like so many other McGillivray films deep down into the ocean. Like lots of other IMAX productions, this runs for 40 minutes exactly pretty much. And this relatively small running time means that if you want to succeed, you really have to deliver greatg focus and be spot-on from start to finish. Sadly, this one is not. It is a decent documentary with enough emphasis on the beautiful underwater world, but at times the film also loses itself in depicting uninteresting dance rituals of native tribes that add nothing and could have been recorded anywhere else on the planet in another not too far developed country. Also the story line with the boy going on the journey mentioned on the title is pretty cringeworthy. Even if we get so many references like the father talking about how in the old days boys went on long journey and returned as men (what an embarrassing parallel to what his son does), I am pretty sure this was all very much scripted and staged and there was no real journey and even if there was this was certainly nowhere near the level where it would be life-changing for the boy. His narration was also fairly weak. If it worked, then only because of what he said like the hidden second sea horse and not how he said it, but well what can I say, at least he wasn't as unbearable to listen to as his dad. It is not uncommon for IMAX nature documentaries to deliver a mixed narration between locals and one superstar. Streep, Depp and Winslet have narrated already and here we get Oscarf winner Cate Blanchett. She is one of the world's finest actresses without a doubt, but she is not as much of a voice talent as I hoped she would be. Another flaw. Then there is the music and that one really made an impact in both directions, positive and negative. Early on, we hear some beautiful music, very early on right after the film starts, but near the end there was one moment where it was so bad that I almost had to mute the sound because it left a negative impact on the beautiful underwater photography for me. So yeah, the latter is there, not always, but frequently enough for a positive recommendation. These IMAX films arfe never failures, but this one here has more weaknesses than expected. A cautious thumbs-up from me, despite the half-baked environmental message that should have received better focus and emphasis instead of the boy's journey. Go see it. The sea horses, turtles (well the one in the water), not the big poor one surrounded by all these men) and the (other) fish makes it a good enough watch.