The Tree of Life

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 2:43pm

I saw the film this morning and it's going to take me some time to process. I need to see it again this week but as for right now I can only think to describe it in single words.

Beautiful
Ingenious
Slow
Bold
Lyrical
Stunning
Confusing
Pretentious
Masterful
Unforgettable

There was a constant flow of people leaving throughout the film snd after it ended I heard people very vocal about how much they hated it. I can understand their hatred and even sympathize with them. I can't recall a film ever having this kind of an effect on me before. I can say though that this is less a film than it is an actual work of art.
Updated On: 6/5/11 at 02:43 PM

[AC126748]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 5:32pm

I can only describe it in single words, too:

Pointless
Stupid
Inane
Pretentious
Banal
Shallow

Sorry, but I found it to be another retarded excuse for a movie from the eternal nude emperor "genius" Malick.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 5:39pm

And that's what I find so fascinating about it, because part of me sees all of that as well.

[AC126748]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 5:54pm

Possible spoiler:

The creation/dinosaur scenes reminded me of an Ed Wood film, when he would cut in some stock footage that had no relation to anything else happening on screen.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 5:59pm

That's where most people left the theater today. I half expected Oprah to start narrating half way in. It wasn't until later in the film that that 20 or so minutes of the creation of the world started to hit me. Good or bad, I really can't get this film out of my head.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 7:35pm

I'm looking forward to it. Whether I love it or hate it, I'm guessing I'll still be glad I saw it.

What's with Terence Malick going incognito to the Cannes Film Festival, though?

[Calvin]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 9:15pm

Jordan, that's I can totally see where you are coming from, as I found it both captivating and aggravating at the same time. A common theme among the reviews I've read is that the adult Jack parts seem a bit underdeveloped, and I concur. And I found my mind wandering during the creation sequence....but, it was wandering on-topic, if you know what I mean, so perhaps that was the intention?

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 9:33pm

I guess I can see people thinking the adult Jack is underdeveloped but I don't think they'd be thinking that if someone as famous as Penn wasn't playing the role. It was about him but what got him to the point he was at so exploring him as an adult would be pointless since (at least right now I think) one of the themes was what we become out of where we came from. (and of course I'll probably wake up tomorrow thinking it means something completely different). I don't know if that made sense because I'm still trying to analyze it. I'm sure many many theories will be written over the years about it.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 2:48am

I read, Jay Lerner-Z, that Malick is shy and avoids the press.

[pushdabutton]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 8:26pm

I really want to see this movie. Maybe I'll get there next weekend.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 6/7/11 at 7:15pm

It sounds like it might best be seen at 4:20.

[wexy]

Posted: 6/20/11 at 1:30pm

Pretentious
Pretentious
Pretentious


2001 meets Disney dinosaur dinorama meets actors mumbling there lines while I wish a had a tab of acid.
And I like his other films.
When the movie ended at BAM an art house place with art house folks its was dead silent.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/20/11 at 1:37pm

When I first heard about this movie, I wondered if it was attempting to be a modern conceptualizing of "The Skin of Our Teeth."

I haven't seen The Tree of Life yet, but from the trailer I gathered it to have a similar main concept.

Both are allegories, attempting to tell a smaller story of a "modern" family unit, while also telling the entire story of the world, complete with dinosaurs.

Sounds like either I was wrong, or they missed the mark. I wonder how an updating of "Skin of Our Teeth" would play today, especially with VFX, etc. Not that anyone would do that.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/20/11 at 1:53pm

The dinosaurs though, didn't have anything to do with the plot, but more to do with one of the films themes. I can't really make sense of it but I thought it worked.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/20/11 at 2:27pm

Jordan, are you very familiar with The Skin of Our Teeth (Thornton Wilder)?

Are there any similarities at all, or did I just gravitate to that analogy blindly after seeing the trailer?

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 7/7/11 at 3:00am

I dislike when people dismiss films/theatre/books that take big risks and make bold choices as pretentious. It adds nothing to the discussion. Yes, sometimes artists tackle huge themes and don't fully succeed. God forbid artists try to create something transcendent.

I still need to process the film. I was entranced at times, found my mind wandering on topic at others, found myself crying twice. Ambitious and, yes, meandering. And unforgettable. The earth creation segment was what tied it all together for me particularly *SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER* when the dinosaur spared the other dinosaur's life. That affected me quite deeply, don't know why.

Updated On: 7/7/11 at 03:00 AM

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/7/11 at 9:50am

I'm uncomfortable with the growing trend of demonizing people for using terms like pretentious or its analogues to describe films or art or literature. Whenever someone has the sense to disagree with the bonafide opinion of the culture machine/tastemakers, they're automatically branded as stupid or suspicious. There are many people--legitimate critics and lay filmgoers alike--who have seen through the film's artifices. When they make their case, as many of them have, their opinion is just as valid as anyone else's.

Where are the risks? Many of the moves Malick made are derivative--both of other filmmakers and of his own previous films.

[pushdabutton]

Posted: 7/24/11 at 11:46pm

I finally got to see this film today. I am still very confused. Although it was beautifully photographed, I was so bored. Which one of the three children was the one that died at the age of 19? Also, how did he die? I feel like I just didn't get it.

[yodamarie78]

Posted: 7/25/11 at 1:19am

The youngest son is the one who died. I don't remember if anyone ever said how he died, but I saw the movie about three weeks ago so I may have just forgotten.

I found parts of it (especially the creation sequence) problematic, but I also found parts absolutely brilliant and beautiful.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 7/25/11 at 3:28am

I think it's definitely an experience, but ultimately I just didn't find it compelling. I can see how other people do, my boyfriend did, but I was completely unmoved by the whole thing, or rather, when I was moved I'd think "what a beautiful shot" or "that's interesting," but as a whole I felt the characters weren't that intriguing and I couldn't get involved the way I believe I was supposed to (and the way some other people on here felt about it, which I think is completely valid too). I also get that it's not supposed to be a narrative the way we're used to experiencing movies, either way, it didn't do it for me.
Thought Brad Pitt was impressive as he has been in the later years of his career, Jessica Chastain's character was so "pure" and "good" it was very cliched for me, and I actually would have cast another person as the son and cut out even more of the material, the adult portions really dragged the movie for me.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 7/25/11 at 10:34am

Trite family dramatics linked with nothing less than the creation of the universe in the single most pretentious English language film ever made. Nods to Kubrick and Tarkovsky only highlight the banality of Malick's story and methods. All of Malick's worst habits (those whispered voiceovers) are amplified to an unprecedented degree. Basically, take everything that ever annoyed about Terrence Malick, and crank it to 11.

Some radiantly beautiful cinematography, to be fair -- there's no denying the astonishing beauty of the film. And there's no denying Malick's sincerity, clearly this film is a labor of love, a deeply personal film. But the banality of the story (such as it is, and there's not much) and the attempt to elevate it into cosmic dimensions make for some extreme and unintended silliness, and Brad Pitt's unfortunate attempt at a performance doesn't help matters.

Now don't get me wrong. I've got nothing against elevating the everyday into cosmic significance. Some of my favorite works of art are about elevating the everyday into cosmic significance -- Thornton Wilder's OUR TOWN for example does all of that without descending into the overheated inanities of intensely whispered voiceovers like "Father! Mother! Always you wrestle inside me!"

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 2:36pm

Saw it. Didn't like it. Didn't get it. Have absolutely no idea what the point was. I agree that the current scenes were underdeveloped. If they truly were tied to a theme about what we become, then it would have been nice to get some idea of what Penn's character had become. The 60s scenes were the most interesting, but given that they were (I'm only assuming here) memories, there was a lot of stuff brought up and dropped, I was extremely confused about who was what and what happened and why is it important. I'm sure it was intended that way and all intentional, but I wasn't engaged enough to invest in the thought behind it. As soon as it started with the glowing gauze and whispered thoughts, I knew I was in for a LOOOOOOONG ride. The NatGeo scenes were awfully pretty, but seriously eye-rolling. I felt like the title should have been more truthful and simply called, "THIS IS SYMBOLISM". Directed indirectly by Stanley Kubrick. Honestly, I think I'd rather see Eyes Wide Shut again than this.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 2:40pm

Eyes Wide Shut is Kubricks best film. I watch it at least once a month.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 2:46pm

I wish I had known you felt that way before reading this thread.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 2:50pm

Lol.

I think it's extraordinary and am always amazed at te new things I can discover watching it.