I’m definitely in the disappointed camp, but don’t really feel like discussing it. Would rather hear what others think.
No, but the more important thing is to start one’s own Tree of Life thread.
Most threads are not for those who actually saw it, I thought.
I saw it today. I liked it a lot, but it’s still too fresh in my mind for me to appreciate its full scope. I got the feeling that Malick tried to find connections between very large subjects and he hasn’t been totally successful at that. The strong religious component, the history of the universe and the daily challenges and lessons of family life are probably too much to handle on a single film. At least he had the courage to try and embrace all that universe on a single film. The cinematography and composition is, as always with Malick, breathtaking. The music is also masterfully chosen and enhances the impact of the visuals.Besides “2001: a space odyssey” I also found some aesthetic and even formal connections with “Baraka”. In terms of narrative, the film is probably too fragmented for its own good (it affects the pace enormously). Nevertheless it’s a film that is immensly broad in its themes and deserves some time to be digested. I’ll probably understand it more fully in the days to come. For those who, before actually seeing the film, may feel tempted to say its a masterpiece or, otherwise, repel it because it features well-known Hollywood actors, all I can say is leave all that behind and take “The tree of life” for what it is and not for what it could or should be.
I have to say I pretty much agree with you totally.
Perhaps the best “meaning of life” message conveyed to the screen, with Malick’s unique approach of communicating his philosopies via poetry and visuals. Loved the continual worm’s eye shots ascending to the heavens, the metaphors of the candle flame and the ocean and the formation of the Earth and all life on it. Absolutely astounding!
If anyone is interested, the majority of the substantial discussion of this film is here.
Well stated. If we can find some semblance of a connection to the vastness of life in the appreciation of a single moment — be it a child’s smile or a child’s swollen belly from lack of nutrition flashing by on some advertisement — I too think we can applaud an earnest attempt by a filmmaker to find it in a 3-or-so-hour feature.
If anything, I’d leave out much of the Penn finale and not whittle down that overarching attempt at the cosmos (or, at least, give the Penn portion its due as that rumored 4 to 6 hours of cut footage may or may not allow).