Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Malick's Tree Of Life -Booed in Cannes

Odd question, did Anti Christ get boo'd? (when it was there) cause if that didn't get boo'd then I'd be worried...
I'm probably one of the few that doesn't think its any sort of art, just plain weird...

Really want to see this Tree of Life but I feel like (given this is my impression from trailers so don't jump) this is the kind of movie I'll need to be in the mood for, thinking it might be for when I'm awake and paying attention, not looking to be lazy and told the story
 
Imran Farouk said:
Odd question, did Anti Christ get boo'd? (when it was there) cause if that didn't get boo'd then I'd be worried...
Click to expand...

The audience rioted while the critics paced the aisles punching themselves in the face... that's why it was nominated for the Palme d'Or.
 
Sigh....

1958 - Paths of Glory: is released, not many pay money to see it, it looses money on first release.
1960 - One Eyed Jacks: Brando fires Kubrick, Brando finishes directing himself.
1961 - Lolita: Kubrick edits to comply with "suggestions" of censors. Kubrick:- " had I known how severe the limitations would be, I probably wouldn't've made the film"

1966 - Dr Strangelove: At the height of cold war/ nuclear fear , Kubrick makes a comedy of the subject. It's released to controversy, one review calling it " dangerously subversive".

1968 - 2001: At the first exhibitors screening there are 241 walkouts. Sir Arthur.C.Clarke " A lot of people didn't get it the first time around and I'm really fond of quoting the MGM executive who said " well that's the end of Stanley Kubick".

1971 - A Clockwork Orange: On release the response in the UK is so vicious Kubrick asks Warner Bros to withdraw the film or he can't live in England. It is not available for public viewing in the UK from 1974 until 2000, after his death.

1975 - Barry Lyndon: Although it won awards in the US it's labelled tedious and boring, it failed at the box office

1980 - The Shining: It was felt that Kubrick strayed too far from Stephen King's story.The mostly negative reviews were offset by great box office.

1987 - Full Metal Jacket: Another hit but it was somewhat overshadowed by Oliver Ston's Platoon which garnered all the plaudits.

1999 - Eyes Wide Shut: Warner Bros preview was enthusiastic, the public mixed, Kubrick:-" My best film ever "

It's not like we hav'nt been here before .... Where's Tom?

Brent
 
Saw it a couple days ago. I'm still confused, not knowing what to think. Images were amazing. Movie too long for my taste. Definitely not a conventional film, you'll have to look for a storyline. The important sentence that makes you (kinda) get the whole movie is like the last one of the movie, which makes the viewing experience - well, different. One thing I really couldn't stand was the constant whispering. Also, it felt as if someone wanted to do art, not a good thing if you notice that if you ask me. At times, it felt staged, a couple of times, the directing of moves (waving hands) was way too obvious and fake. You have a drama surrounding a family, and all of a sudden, you're watching dinosaurs on the screen. Hell I don't know. Can't say I loved it, can't say I hated it. The guy next to me sure didn't like it, he was asleep 10minutes into the movie, snoring...
 
Oh ye of little faith... the Palme D'Or is just the beginning!

Movie opens Friday across the United States. I am halting production of my film in New Mexico to see it. Have not been this psyched about a film, like, ever.
 
Congrats Tom
The reception for this film reminds me of 2001 ..... a film that runs for 137 mins but only has 40 odd mins of dialogue. With both films I suspect you have to go into it for a total experience, ... if you go into it looking for a three act play , you'll emerge lost and dissapointed

Brent
 
Yeah this is what I think needs to be underlined, going in with need for a normal structured movie storyline/experience is probably not a good idea.

I am keeping my mind open on this one, but I will go into it looking for moments of cinematic grace.
 
Copying my own review from dvinfo:


I'm not a super-fan of Mallick, but I liked The Thin Red Line. Didn't like A New World, found it to be a bit pretentious, but maybe I should give it another chance (didn't see the whole movie too).

I went to see The Tree Of Life and I was very mesmerized by the whole experience. I absolutely hated the final 10 minutes, which I thought felt suddenly very cheap and not by the same director who just had me captivated for 2 hours. But the whole first 2 hours felt really intense.

I went to see it a second time yesterday, and I still disliked the ending (even more), and I was a bit more bothered with the whole Christian message that's a bit poundered on. I'm not religious, but the first time the movie felt more spiritual, the second time it sometimes felt a bit more like propaganda for the Christian faith. That being said: very impressive movie.
Visually sooo nice, very nice sound editing, very well acted by everyone, especially the kids. The scenes with Sean Penn could be better, because they feel very flat, but they are needed for the story.
The whole movie felt more of an experience then a narrative movie, but it was an experience that was impressive.
I liked it. I liked the link with the beginning of humanity and the way Mallick films these memories of these children and makes the audience think on their own memories as a child is great and isn't an easy thing to do.

Ow, and I don't think it's everyone's cup of tea. 10 people or so left in the movie theatre yesterday evening (something I rather have then if they would start talking if they're bored).
 
I'm choosing this thread because let's not forget it was booed at it's premiere. I saw it at a bad showing, the projectionist took 20 - 25 mins over start time and rendered the Biblical quote at the start unreadable. Also 15 - 20 mins before the end the projection broke down again. I had a cold and a 4 day snow storm was coming in that night. Christchurch , New Zealand. Here are my initial thoughts.

It is by a fair distance the most mature movie to come out of America in years.

These are some things it is not: "entertaining" , linear , humorous , a story.

These are some things it is: Ambitious , soulful , perceptive , an accumulation.

Mallick's at the top of his game ....... although SK's still better.

Brent
 
"Set in the 1950s, the film tells the distincitively non-narrative story of a family led by a stern father, Brad Pitt, and a beatific mother, Jessica Chastain raising three boys."

Every film is not made for every person. There's lots of films I like that people don't care for. I loved Kick Ass. It was one of my favorite recent films, and it got lackluster reviews.

I can tell you right now, I don't like non-narratives. You need to tell me a story, and it needs to be comprehensible, or I'm not going to be entertained.

And if you do tell me a story, something about a stern father and a beatific mother raising children in the 50's definitely isn't going to entertain me.

Now if you mix those two, a story about raising boys in the 50's AND you make it a non narrative, well you've pretty much guaranteed I'm not going to like it.

But movies are subjective. I can see how someone might be enthralled by such a film. On the other hand, I liked Insidious. That was a really entertaining movie. I like sci fi, horror, action, fantasy, romantic comedies. The non-narrative stuff just doesn't work for me.
 
Yes Eric ... all that you say is true and fair enough. Malick has reached the enviable position of making a full feature that HE wants to make. It says what HE wants to say. Studio execs can't "interfere". This always runs the risk of being ego maniac pretentious "art". Luckily he has had this written on the backburners half his life so it had some sort've grounding to work from.

Schindler's List is probably Spielberg's most mature, award winning film , but it's not my favourite Spielberg film.

@ Joe , as you can see this is one polarising film be warned and good luck.
 
Mostly an excellent film. For those who think Malick can't tell a story, I think this is one of the films that make cinema not just pathetic storywise; most movies are so obvious that everyone used to literature should cry his/her eyes out for boredom. What I really like is the long scenes with imagery of the universe and of wildlife mixed with the scenes from daily life; it gives other filmmakers new room for experimentation in that direction. I was really bothered by the evangelical tone; I had hoped it just reflected the religious attitude of the family, but in the end it almost felt like propaganda. There was one critic who said that Malick is a humourless priest, and here I see his point. Still one of the truely great movies of our time.
 
I can't believe that people are taking the ending of the film as literal. I saw it as a dream.
 
Malick has always had " spirituality" laced in his films, mostly in the form of questions. Here are some excerpts:

Days of Heaven :- " There was people sufferin' in pain and hunger, some people their tongues hangin' outa their mouths". " I met this boy called Ding Dong, he said the whole earth is goin' up in flames , the people that'a been good, they're gonna " exscape" all 'o' that fire but if you been bad God don't even hear you , He don't even hear ya talkin'.

The Thin Red Line :- Whats this war at the heart of nature? why does nature vie with itself? the land contend with the sea .... is there an avengin' power in nature? not one power but two?

The Thin Red Line :- Who are you to live in all these many forms? Your death that captures all. You too are the source of all that's gonna be born.....Your glory, mercy ,peace , truth ,You give calm of spirit ... understanding , courage ... the contented heart.

Propaganda proports to having all the answers , Malick for the most part is asking questions.

I see this film like "2001" as a transfer of thought. With a solid middle "core" ( that illustrates the thought) to aproach hold onto then depart. neither of them are "stories" in the structured sense.

With " 2001" we start from infinity - go to 4 million years ago - go to Floyds trip to moon/ Discovery's trip 18 months later ( the "core") _ The stargate - infinity .

With "Tree" we start at infinity - early forms of life - 50's Texas/ Sean Penn ( the "core") - an understanding - infinity

That's just my take .... so far , only seen it once few days ago

Brent
 
Gotcha Hans , understood and probably a fair enough call.

Brent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top