The Tree of Life (winner of the Palme d'Or)

hidinginthebush

e_e wrote: »

People always jump to make the "pretentious" critique, it's such a lazy way of putting down the film. It can be said about anything with the slightest of ambitions.

Find some new adjectives people! :pac:

I thought it was a bumbling mess of a film. I have better things to do with my time then sift through my vocabulary to describe something that felt like a poor quality david attenborough with some God love tacked onto it. [Shrug]

Renn

Ah but you can't really comment on it if you haven't actually bothered to sit through the entire film.

[Shrug]

johnny_ultimate

Whatever criticisms people want to level at it, calling it a 'mess' is ignoring the fact - yes, fact - that it's probably the most lovingly, carefully structured film of recent times.

hidinginthebush

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Whatever criticisms people want to level at it, calling it a 'mess' is ignoring the fact - yes, fact - that it's probably the most lovingly, carefully structured film of recent times.

OK, I'll put it a different way. From reading what you said about the film: you don't remember your childhood as one linear memory, rather just a series of short snapshots, it is dead on. I don't dispute that, I'd go as far to say that the director nailed that aspect. I just don't think that it translates into a very watchable or enjoyable film. I commend the director for giving it a shot and trying to do something different to what you would usually see in a "cinema movie", but I just did not enjoy it. The way the film was shot, sweeping camera shots, muttered conversations, very few scenes lasting more than a few minutes, just made it so tiresome and I found it too hard to enjoy. I thought the "dawn of time" bit in the middle had no place at all in the film (and the poor CGI of the dinosaurs really cheapened the whole clip). I'm not the world's biggest high-brow film buff, but do like watching challenging stuff, but this way just too far.

Renn wrote: »

Ah but you can't really comment on it if you haven't actually bothered to sit through the entire film.

[Shrug]

I've never walked out of the cinema before, despite wanting to do it on numerous occasions, but this nearly encouraged it. There was nothing engaging about the film, I think it was when the mom pointed to the clouds and said to one of the children "that's where God lives", that I decided to whip out the phone, check how long the film was, saw there was over an hour left, so upped sticks. I just couldn't sit through an other hour of that sort of cheese.

Sad Professor

The dawn of time sequence was the best part of the film IMO. I'm hoping there's going to be a director's cut with more of it. If not, hopefully Voyage of Time is still happening.

The film clearly isn't everyone's cup of tea though. Even at my IFI screening there was two walkouts. But for me it was probably the best film of the year. I find it hard to articulate why exactly. I think one probably needs to be in right frame of mind for Malick, which I have been lately.

I'm looking forward to the Blu-ray to see if it holds up on the small screen. But I'm planning to go see it in the cinema again this week while it's still on.

Mickeroo

I'm at two minds whether to head up to Galway to see it or just wait for the DVD

hidinginthebush

Mickeroo wrote: »

I'm at two minds whether to head up to Galway to see it or just wait for the DVD

I'd definitely say see it in the cinema. it is visually stunning

Sad Professor

Yeah, even if you end up hating it, make sure you see it in the cinema. This film was made for the big screen.

e_e

hidinginthebush wrote: »

OK, I'll put it a different way. From reading what you said about the film: you don't remember your childhood as one linear memory, rather just a series of short snapshots, it is dead on. I don't dispute that, I'd go as far to say that the director nailed that aspect. I just don't think that it translates into a very watchable or enjoyable film. I commend the director for giving it a shot and trying to do something different to what you would usually see in a "cinema movie", but I just did not enjoy it. The way the film was shot, sweeping camera shots, muttered conversations, very few scenes lasting more than a few minutes, just made it so tiresome and I found it too hard to enjoy. I thought the "dawn of time" bit in the middle had no place at all in the film (and the poor CGI of the dinosaurs really cheapened the whole clip). I'm not the world's biggest high-brow film buff, but do like watching challenging stuff, but this way just too far.


I've never walked out of the cinema before, despite wanting to do it on numerous occasions, but this nearly encouraged it. There was nothing engaging about the film, I think it was when the mom pointed to the clouds and said to one of the children "that's where God lives", that I decided to whip out the phone, check how long the film was, saw there was over an hour left, so upped sticks. I just couldn't sit through an other hour of that sort of cheese.

Thanks, but I have to question if you knew anything about the film before going into it. You can pretty much decide by reading a plot synopsis (or watching any of Malick's past work) whether it's your kind of film or not, I was really irritated by the amount of walkouts I saw in the second IFI screening I went to. "Pretentious" to me is the go to criticism for somebody who can't be bothered to put effort into engaging with the film, no offense to you hidinginthebush but this is just a general problem I have with moviegoers.

...and to top it all off, I'm still having trouble figuring out why it's getting these reactions from people. The film's intentions are pretty clear and honest from the outset and it's definitely not trying to be something that it isn't.

johnny_ultimate

hidinginthebush wrote: »

OK, I'll put it a different way. From reading what you said about the film: you don't remember your childhood as one linear memory, rather just a series of short snapshots, it is dead on. I don't dispute that, I'd go as far to say that the director nailed that aspect. I just don't think that it translates into a very watchable or enjoyable film. I commend the director for giving it a shot and trying to do something different to what you would usually see in a "cinema movie", but I just did not enjoy it. The way the film was shot, sweeping camera shots, muttered conversations, very few scenes lasting more than a few minutes, just made it so tiresome and I found it too hard to enjoy. I thought the "dawn of time" bit in the middle had no place at all in the film (and the poor CGI of the dinosaurs really cheapened the whole clip). I'm not the world's biggest high-brow film buff, but do like watching challenging stuff, but this way just too far.

Well that's more insightful, thanks It does pain me when people refuse to explain in depth why they liked / disliked a film as it does their argument no favours, so glad to see a more considered post. I'd agree with you on would be the religious element, because I wouldn't agree with Malik's outlook on spirituality (although did find the portrayal of the mother's spirituality interesting). I also can only agree that the childhood scenes were handled wonderfully, and the dodginess of the dino-CGI. But the "dawn of time" is IMO a vital component of the film, illustrating how someone ends up on this Earth in a very poetic manner. And for me the fluidity of the camera was why this film was such a visual marvel: unlike the wide array of 'handheld' films out there, this genuinely felt like the camera was as important a character as anyone else.

But yeah, I do feel this is a dividing movie, although like others I'm surprised fans of Malik were hostile towards it. Opinion is opinion, though, and it's nice to hear arguments that aren't simply boiled down to words like 'pretentious' 'boring' or 'mess'!

hidinginthebush

e_e wrote: »

Thanks, but I have to question if you knew anything about the film before going into it. You can pretty much decide by reading a plot synopsis (or watching any of Malick's past work) whether it's your kind of film or not, I was really irritated by the amount of walkouts I saw in the second IFI screening I went to. "Pretentious" to me is the go to criticism for somebody who can't be bothered to put effort into engaging with the film, no offense to you hidinginthebush but this is just a general problem I have with moviegoers.

...and to top it all off, I'm still having trouble figuring out why it's getting these reactions from people. The film's intentions are pretty clear and honest from the outset and it's definitely not trying to be something that it isn't.

Well I had a vague enough understanding going into it, I try to not read too much about movies before seeing them for fear of spoilers (especially in this case since it had been out for 3 weeks or so before I got the chance to see it), though if I had, granted I probably would have given it a miss (for example if I had have known it was by the same director as The Thin Red Line I would never have gone to see it, the more fool me, eh?). I even asked a friend who is a bit of a film buff his opinion, and he wasn't sure if I'd like it or not. I just saw it as all style and not much substance, I really did try to like it, and some of the visuals were beautiful, but at the end of the day it is just not for me, I think it's a film for the more advanced movie watcher, who are willing to really work at watching a film or see a movie as a piece of art, rather than myself, more of an average joe who wants to be entertained/scared/made laugh when they sit down to watch a film.


Disclaimer: No offense to the aforementioned advanced film buffs, I fully respect appreciating cinema as a form of art, it's just something that I don't do

hidinginthebush

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Well that's more insightful, thanks It does pain me when people refuse to explain in depth why they liked / disliked a film as it does their argument no favours, so glad to see a more considered post. I'd agree with you on would be the religious element, because I wouldn't agree with Malik's outlook on spirituality (although did find the portrayal of the mother's spirituality interesting). I also can only agree that the childhood scenes were handled wonderfully, and the dodginess of the dino-CGI. But the "dawn of time" is IMO a vital component of the film, illustrating how someone ends up on this Earth in a very poetic manner. And for me the fluidity of the camera was why this film was such a visual marvel: unlike the wide array of 'handheld' films out there, this genuinely felt like the camera was as important a character as anyone else.

But yeah, I do feel this is a dividing movie, although like others I'm surprised fans of Malik were hostile towards it. Opinion is opinion, though, and it's nice to hear arguments that aren't simply boiled down to words like 'pretentious' 'boring' or 'mess'!

I know, I was just a little tired and emotional writing yesterday, I've had more time to digest what I saw of it, I'm not a fan of the blunt, one-word arguments myself. Not to mention I was writing on my phone yesterday, which is a frustrating task without a dialing wand to hand thanks for not breaking out the banhammer :pac:

Bullseye1

Is this getting a general release?

hidinginthebush

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Is this getting a general release?

Try here, just select your county

shoutman

Just been to see this.

16 people left the cinema during the first half of this, I don't think they missed anything during the second half.

Personally, I felt it was a truly painful experience, but, no doubt some will herald it as a masterpiece.

jank

I love Malick's films but this was very dissapointing. Like what the **** was the point of the last 10 minutes? And the big bang Scenes?

Think he needs to take a step back and make a film with a scope.

purple_hatstand

Renn wrote: »

I saw an unofficial soundtrack posted on IMDB the other week, this was the track listing if you're interested:

01. Academy Of Ancient Music & Paul Goodwin - Tavener: Funeral Canticle (Excerpt)
02. Zbigniew Preisner - Requiem - Lacrimosa
03. Chanticleer - Tavener: Resurrection in Hades
04. Berliner Philharmoniker & Herbert von Karajan - Respighi: Suite III: Siciliana. Andantino
05. Willcocks, RPO, Royal College Chamber Choir - Holst: Hymn to Dionysus
06. St. Petersburg RTV Symphony Orchestra & Stanislav Gorkovenko - Smetana: Má Vlast: Vltava (The Moldau River)
07. David Zinman, Dawn Upshaw & London Sinfonietta - Górecki: Symphony No.3: Il Lento E Largo
08. Angela Hewitt - Couperin: 6e Ordre No. 5 - Les Baricades Mistérieuses
09. Ainsley - Dutoit - Montreal Symphony Orchestra & Choir - Berlioz_Agnus Dei
10. Patrick Cassidy - Funeral March
11. Roman Rewakowicz - Preisner: Life Lacrimosa - Day Of Tears

http://criterioncorner.tumblr.com/post/6794090621/treeoflifemusic

Dermighty

e_e wrote: »

People always jump to make the "pretentious" critique, it's such a lazy way of putting down the film. It can be said about anything with the slightest of ambitions.

Find some new adjectives people! :pac:

Valid point.

Right I'll elaborate...

You know the scene in American Beauty with the plastic bag floating around in the air? Well this guy just got that kind of image, put dinosaurs in it, put in lots of whispered voiceovers and made a **** movie which won the Palme d'Or.

I didn't mean pretentious in any way other than the literal meaning. This movie was trying to be a journey through time/life which circled around a family whereas what it actually was was a planetarium show, Sean Penn looking like he drove out into the desert, took acid and went for a walk and Brad Pitt giving one of his best performances to date in a movie that just drowned every bit of talent and atmosphere with overly loud orchestral/operatic music and whispered voiceovers (they really, really wrecked my head).

Sad Professor

Have you seen any of Malick's other films, Dermighty?

Laserface

dinosaurs??

spoiler city...damn you all!

johnny_ultimate

Laserface wrote: »

dinosaurs??

spoiler city...damn you all!

Trust us, this isn't the sort of film you can 'spoil'.

Warper

I like alternative films but this is just self-indulgent tripe. This would have been a lot better if it was concised to 10 mins but to have the audacity to make it 2 1/2 hrs long is taking the piss. The worst film i have seen in many a year.

Renn

Anyone catch this in the Screen Cinema? How was it?

Have only been to that cinema once before and could hear the film in the next screen for the duration of the one I was watching - just wondering what it's like these days?

Warper

Renn wrote: »

Anyone catch this in the Screen Cinema? How was it?

Have only been to that cinema once before and could hear the film in the next screen for the duration of the one I was watching - just wondering what it's like these days?

Screen is my fav cinema in Ireland. The sound is fine. Doesnt matter where you watch this film, its still absolutely ****e.

Renn

Well I've seen it already and I thought it was pretty brilliant...but now I'm not so sure after your well put argument!

Sad Professor

What did you think of Malick's other films, Warper?

johnny_ultimate

Apparently Malik is planning to edit together the 'evolution' section with some new footage and throw it into IMAX theatres. Odd!

Fiyero

I still can't decide if I like this film....

Loads of people left during it when I saw it in Cineworld.

But it's not a mainstream film so you'd expect that.

I'm going with..... I liked it..... for now!

Fascinating film.

Renn

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Apparently Malik is planning to edit together the 'evolution' section with some new footage and throw it into IMAX theatres. Odd!

Yeah I heard about that. Maybe it will have enough Penn in it to stop him whinging! Malick has got a few different projects in the works at the moment which makes for a change.

Sad Professor

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Apparently Malik is planning to edit together the 'evolution' section with some new footage and throw it into IMAX theatres. Odd!

Yeah, I mentioned this earlier in the thread. It's a documentary called Voyage of Time and will be narrated by Brad Pitt. It's a separate project that grew out of the effect work on Tree of Life. I'm looking forward to it, especially after seeing Brian Cox's Secrets of the Universe/Solar System series. A shorter, more cinematic take on the beginning and end of the universe, maybe with a few Carl Sagan quotes thrown in, has the potential to be very special.