Jason Murphy
Well-known member
Malick's a better filmmaker than both Spielberg and Ken Loach. I think it's very fair to say that it's clear from his films and his other work that Malick's thought more deeply and seriously about film form and syntax, and aesthetics in general than both of them. Which is not to say that they haven't thought about it - both Spielberg and Loach have made fine films, and both are talented, but Malick's of a different order altogether. One of the few working filmmakers who could feasibly lay claim to being visionary.
Put another way, I think Badlands, Days of Heaven and Thin Red Line are all better films than anything either Spielberg and Loach have made. Which again is not to say their films are all bad, or aren't works of art (far from it). Just that Malick has them outgunned by far.
Incidentally, I've never seen realism or verisimilitude as being remotely what Malick is interested in. He's much more interested in exploring the world in a transcendent, visionary, poetic way, more akin to some of the concerns of Emerson or Whitman than anything like "kitchen sink" realism.
Put another way, I think Badlands, Days of Heaven and Thin Red Line are all better films than anything either Spielberg and Loach have made. Which again is not to say their films are all bad, or aren't works of art (far from it). Just that Malick has them outgunned by far.
Incidentally, I've never seen realism or verisimilitude as being remotely what Malick is interested in. He's much more interested in exploring the world in a transcendent, visionary, poetic way, more akin to some of the concerns of Emerson or Whitman than anything like "kitchen sink" realism.
