The Tree of Life- Page 2

[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.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 2:53pm

I was always amazed that someone was paid for writing a film score consisting of three notes slowly plunked on a piano.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 2:57pm

Well I think the score really adds to the film. I think Mandy and Patti should make a musical out of it.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 3:01pm

I would pay to see that musical.
I didn't like Tree of Life either. It was one of the biggest disappointments of the year for me. I thought Meloncholia had a similar approach and was the more effective film of the two.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 5:05pm

I started watching on on demand over the holidays and saw about a half hour before I had to get on with my day. 24 hours went by and so did my 24 hours to finish watching the movie without paying for it again.

I've decided it isn't worth repurchasing.

Updated On: 1/3/12 at 05:05 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 1:03am

I'm watching this in tv right now and realized it came out a year ago this week. Curious if people's opinions had changed any over time, since I still find this to be one of the most incredible and bold films ever made.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 1:13am

That's funny, because I'm recording this showing right now. I had it on a dvdr somewhere but I never watched it. I'm not sure when I'll actually get to it, though.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 1:32am

Well, I really found the first half to be a real job to get through (those damn dinosaurs!!!) but I re-watched it for a class and a lot of our class conversation was how this film was about memories and not in the cliched sentimental kind but the technique put into this film to make it feel like you are sorting through a character's memory bank. It is definitely bold and I liked the performances but it is definitely not everybody's film and it does help to see it on a big screen.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 1:40am

The memory part of it is what astounds me. It's the only time I can ever recall a "memory" being put on screen. It's his use of very short (1 - 1/2 seconds) cuts because when we have a memory that's usually all it is, just a snap shot.

But there's oh so much more to it than that. I'm curious what class you watched this in because I knew this would be taught and discussed in schools (just not this soon!)

[strummergirl]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 2:10am

It was a general film class of mostly American/European films (only foreign film was the silent The Passion of Joan of Arc). My college only offers film studies as a minor so there the class had its share of film buffs and people like me who were fulfilling their minor and people who were taking it as their gen ed. or elective. My Professor for this class loved the film (he also quotes Arrested Development and The Room while also showing our class the musical episode for Buffy so he is not this pretentious snob). The moment it was available on DVD, he screened it. I could tell he obsessed over this film because he put together the narrative in his mind (such as reflecting on the death of the son and how Sean Penn's memory possibly stems from his day being on the anniversary) that is not as directly stated. He had to have had several discussions, seen far more times than humanly possible, and read a lot of literature that came out on it almost immediately. It probably smoothed stuff over with some of the group of students who got gobsmacked watching it for the first time.

There is definitely more in the film but I think the memory part is what I really appreciated most about it in its ambition and effectiveness. I think Enter the Void tried this but for all of the criticisms The Tree of Life gets for being pretentious, Enter the Void, while visually stunning, was far more hollow and cliched in its themes and story, imo.

[tazber]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 2:52am

Still love it. I've seen it 3 times now and find it more moving with each viewing.

There is so much to appreciate and discuss.

btw, I thought the dinosaur scene (and the larger creation montage) was stunning and indispensable.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 7:01am

I haven't seen it a second time yet.

But it's still a movie I can't forget. One of the most unusual and extraordinary films in years.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 6:27pm

I thought Meloncholia had a similar approach and was the more effective film of the two.

Absolutely agree and I can't stand Lars Von Trier, but I fell in love with Melancholia. I'll probably never subject myself to Tree of Life again.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 11:25pm

I found Melancholia compelling and Tree of Life incomprehensible and dull. The editing drove me nuts. The relentless use of images anticipating corresponding sound bites or sound bites anticipating corresponding images.

[Luscious]

Posted: 6/3/12 at 11:27pm

I thought both films were like watching paint dry, but with MELANCHOLIA, I wanted to pull my hair out while I was doing it.

[HorseTears]

Posted: 6/4/12 at 3:28am

Nice thread. I saw the film in cinemas last year. The dinosaurs were the only bit that didn't click for me. It was too jarring for me. But I loved everything else. My GOD, those two kids who played the brothers? Where did they find them? What beautiful, subtle performances. I remember having such a strong urge to call my brother after seeing the film. Interestingly, I saw the film with a big group of friends -- 9 of us in total. 6 were boys, 3 girls. The boys all loved the film and talked about how it took them back to their childhoods even if their childhoods didn't exactly resemble Malick's. Interestingly, the three females in our group didn't connect with the film at all. They admired Malick's ambition and the visual majesty of the whole thing, but were left cold. Speaking of the visuals, how could you not celebrate Douglas Trumbull's return to film?

From wiki...

After nearly thirty years away from Hollywood, famed special effects supervisor Douglas Trumbull contributed to the visual effects work on The Tree of Life. Malick, a friend of Trumbull, approached him about the effects work and mentioned that he did not like the look of computer-generated imagery. Trumbull asked Malick, "Why not do it the old way? The way we did it in 2001?"[22]
Working with visual effects supervisor Dan Glass, Trumbull used a variety of materials for the creation of the universe sequence. "We worked with chemicals, paint, fluorescent dyes, smoke, liquids, CO2, flares, spin dishes, fluid dynamics, lighting and high speed photography to see how effective they might be," said Trumbull. "It was a free-wheeling opportunity to explore, something that I have found extraordinarily hard to get in the movie business. Terry didn't have any preconceived ideas of what something should look like. We did things like pour milk through a funnel into a narrow trough and shoot it with a high-speed camera and folded lens, lighting it carefully and using a frame rate that would give the right kind of flow characteristics to look cosmic, galactic, huge and epic."[23] The team also included Double Negative in London, under the supervision of Paul Riddle, who handled the astrophysical aspects of the segment. Fluid-based effects were developed by Peter and Chris Parks, who had previously worked on similar effects for The Fountain.[24]

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 6/4/12 at 7:47am

I saw it five times in the cinema, which is a personal record.

Most of the middle hour now reduces me to a fragile, whimpering puddle of nostalgia and awe.

[Jane2]

Posted: 6/4/12 at 9:02am

The first time I tried to watch it, I could only get through about 15 minutes then took out the screener. After reading so many reviews praising it, I gave it another try and watched it to the end. I thought it was interesting though tedious, but definitely not meriting all the kudos.