I'll quote from an e-mail I sent a friend earlier today:
Well. . . I guess I'd at least have to say that it's the best Terrence Malick film that I've seen. Where as The Thin Red Line and The New World were just boring as shit, this one does have some compelling aspects.
The primary attraction are the visuals. Visually it's a pretty stunning film. In particular there's a 15ish minute sequence near the beginning that deals with the universe and the formation of the world. It is so awesome that I'd say that it's worth watching the movie for that part alone. I'm not even sure how he got some of those shots and it's clear that he went to some pretty crazy fucking parts of the world to gather some of the images.
Narratively, though, I'm just not sure what to think. There IS a story, primarily dealing with the relationship of a boy to his father. But it's not told in a conventional, coherent way. On one hand, you do kind of have a feeling about what is being conveyed, but then on the other you're kind of like, What the fuck is going on here? It doesn't tell a story in the same sense that, say, Zodiac or Jurassic Park (to pick two random examples) tells a story.
So what's the bottom line? I'd say see it. Even during the "narrative" portion of the movie (which is most of it), I found myself confused and wanting the movie to end . . . but also kind of drawn into it and paying attention without a lot of effort. Will I ever watch it again? Probably not. And if I do it will only be as a technical review for the imagery. But I didn't hate it and guess I WOULD throw it into that category of movies that everyone should see once.
Comment