My favorite film director all his films just take me to another realm. His work says so much about humanity like no other director . I wish to work with him one day .
Falling asleep on ''A Hidden Life''...If you're planing to be a film analyst, you'll have to work on that, or may be join New Rockstar and review mainly Marvel movies. "A Hidden Life'' has a lot of substance it's just slower paced. Very much closer to how things move in real life, going in depth through the struggles of this man who is made to have to make a choice which most of us can't even comprehend. In most movies you know and feel things that just have to happen, because it's a movie. Here things flow naturally. I believe this last movie is Malick's best one as it captures the beauty of everything as he's always shown in his previous works, but here he's actually following the narrative in a great way. There is always in underlying theme of belief, faith, and meaning in his movies, and that also helps with most people steering clear of his movies, not the main reason, although I believe it's fair to mention it. Even if I don't agree with most thing's you've said, art is subjective, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Nicely edited.
Thanks for sharing in-depth your takes on Malick, one of the best video essays I've ever seen about his work, congratulations. Agree that his best output (The Thin Red Line, The New World) is when he's at least working within some semblance of a traditional narrative / story structure. Story is ultimately what makes us want to watch a piece of film or listen to a piece of music or read a novel or poem so when you lose that, you are just left when an animated painting or an empty commercial, especially when the characters you're spending time with in his recent projects (inward looking Hollywood types) aren't as empathetic as in the two films mentioned above. I much prefer Linklater's rehearsed approach as The Before Trilogy is one of the most natural, believable and engaging romances but as Hawke said, there are no rules to cinema or art. Would love to see you do a video on what makes S. Craig Zahler's work so unique and refreshing (or even just solely on 'Dragged Across Concrete'). Looks like he's coming back strong with his next directorial project 'The Big Stone Grid' (originally supposed to be directed by Michael Mann) and with Ridley Scott directing his script for 'Wraiths of the Broken Land' both set for next year.
You should try Hidden Meaning again, and Voyage of Time, if you can find it. A Hidden Meaning was really good, and much more of a cohesive story than the films from his burst right after Tree of Life. I get the criticisms of those, and polarizing nature of Tree of Life and others, I happen to like that he can make whatever he wants, because he has a unique vision, and he's made some absolute classics in his first four films (I'd argue for Tree of Life as well), and when he's missed, they are beautiful and wonderfully evocative. The ultimate irony, though, Terrence Malick was consulted on the script for Dirty Harry (among others), and they used some of it for the first movie, but used most of his story for Magnum Force. So, he can absolutely do a compelling story, even one that sells lots of popcorn. Very much looking forward to Way of the Wind.
This is a compelling overview. I read an article in Vanity Fair in the early 2000 about Kubrick's process. The writer quotes Kubrick who said that the film director and the novelist have the same duty, to capture what they feel will enhance the drama, that is why he adapted books to movies. I feel Terence Malick is similar in that unlike in a novel he works intuitively but much like a novelist he wants to tell the story of the characters as much as he wants to tell their story in the drama of the environment they are in. Like in A Thin Red Line. The sweeping shots of the hills and the local population singing Christian Songs with Jim Caviezel's character walking past them for example. This makes his scenes memorable. Later it seems atmosphere and the emotional landscape becomes important, much again like a novelist, which for a movie require improv like scenes and close ups of the actors. A novelist will use a narrator to show internal process of a character he does the same. This is a director who is mentally in the editing room as he makes the movie. Nice content.😅
Not a huge fan of Malick's latest works but I feel OG filmmakers should be left to make whatever self indulgent film they want to without trying to appease audience or box market. I mean they have earned it.
Then the question becomes: When a movie is released to a wide audience, shouldn’t the filmmaker have some degree of consideration for the audience? Otherwise, one can just make home movies. For example, George Lucas said he still intends to make more movies but only avant-garde, experimental films he has no intention of publicly showing.
@@KyleCorwith A cop out? Really? By who, and of what? I agree that “To The Wonder”, “Knight Of Cups” and “Song To Song” are not his best work. But generally I think the comment is valid, akin to the way the poetry of John Milton or William Blake, and the prose of James Joyce is not coming to you… you have to go to it. If you want to.
I liked Badlands; and I own Days of Heaven on DVD -- and to be honest I have only watched The Thin Red Line twice: Once, each, in the theatre and my DVD copy. I almost got into an argument about The Thin Red Line back when it was released. My defense was how original an anti-war (WW2) movie it is. What do you mean boring? The raid on that bunker wasn't intense enough for you? I would proclaim Jim Caviezel (Private Witt) as the man-child soul of the movie. It is, arguably, his best performance to this day. But, again, no rush to rewatch The Thin Red Line unlike other war movies (or political war dramas) I own from various eras like Gallipoli and The Year of Living Dangerously, to Under Fire and Salvador, to The Big Red One (all from the 1980's) and, of course, Saving Private Ryan (which for some reason I don't own on DVD. Oddly, don't own Schindler's List, either) to William Wellman's (1949) Battleground. Special Mention for Andrzej Wajda and his Warsaw trilogy: A Generation, Kanal, and Ashes and Diamonds from 1955, 57, 58. I've thought about Tora, Tora, Tora, too, the star studded 1970 epic as a movie that should receive more credit. Directed by one American and one Japanese director to get both viewpoints I saw this multiple times on tv before cable and it was very special to see as an 8,9,10 year old ... but I haven't seen Tora, Tora, Tora as an adult. But, consider how different these war movies are made -- well done, but, relatively standard -- compared to The Thin Red Line. So, all this said, I am getting ready to watch The Thin Red Line, inspired by the video. I recall the people from the theatre back in '98, preparing to make bets to help pass the time: "George Clooney is not in this!" "I'm telling you he is in this ... I'll bet you ... I know we are 2 hours in but he is supposed to be in this ...!" About 45 minutes later: "oh no shit ... there he is ... this movie sucks ...!" Which is, certainly, not a reason to dislike a movie, but, if it felt like false advertising ... OK. I have also thought about watching The New World, again. I saw major chunks of it and the girl that played Pocahontas was amazing. Surprised to see very little of Q'orianka Kilcher after The New World. Saw her on The Alienist mini series with Dakota Fanning (late 19th century woman cop helping investigation child murders in NYC, the 1st season). Anyways, I'm not surprised so few comments (28) for Terrence Malick 3 months after this good video by Kyle Corwith. "The problem with Terry ..." "Over writing ... until it's terribly pretentious ..." Christopher Plummer (was in The New World).
@@KyleCorwith I would not say I'm looking forward to Malick's 'take' on Christ but if I do see it maybe I'll watch Knight of Cups which I must admit I did not know existed. By the way I did watch The Thin Red Line for the first time (3rd time total) with subtitles and it helps explain the, otherwise, frustrating narration question of which soldier is talking (narrating). But, Sean Penn's character lost something in the subtitle translation: He actually had some bad lines written for him --- or was it poorly chosen ad libs? His "it's all about Property!" line particularly seemed false after being told he was going to be 'requested' for a bravery medal. Writing this reminds me 'Terry's' movies or so void of humor. I think I'll watch Days of Heaven, now. That outta' brighten up my day😉
@@user-mu9cw8xe4r That’s a very good point actually. Sprinkling in some natural humorous moments between characters would be good. If he were to adhere to making a movie with a clear vision, I could see that happening. Maybe one day.
@@KyleCorwith Terrence Malick is definitely an interesting point of film making conversation. Is he an artistic genius? (I refuse to answer). Like I said, I am going to watch Days of Heaven, again, and I really want to see A New World from beginning to end. From what I've heard of his latest work he seems to be trending in the 'other' (note, I did not say 'wrong') direction. Clear vision may be off his creative radar ... but, maybe Jesus will steer him in a more conventional, story telling line.
Some love him some find him pretentious. I think his best works such as "The Tree of Life", "The Thin Red Line", "A Hidden Life" are worth experiencing if you accept ambiguity and a director who is not looking for answers. Maybe his style is pretentious because we no longer dare to ask existential questions. We pick irony or cynicism over seriousness thus Malick can is out of time and maybe out of touch. However, I would miss the impact of "The Tree of Life" and there is hardly any movie that is able to accomplish something similar. It is clear to me that Malick is a philosopher; an existentialist.
The claim that his method "doesn't allow for intentional art" is profoundly misguided. I respect all your other opinions, because they are opinions, but this claim is misguided by your feelings and framed as an objective statement. Just because Malick's way of shooting is more spontaneous does not mean that his entire filmmaking process being devoid of intentional art. Everyones entitled to an opinion, but your biased rhetoric, like selective appeals to mass critical reception, and the story about you falling asleep during A Hidden Life rub me the wrong way.
@@masonehubbard But the thing that informs my conclusion is the filming process AND the editing. Having a project in editing for half a decade indicates that there isn’t a clear vision.
@@KyleCorwith Clearly his later, increasingly poetic, lyrical, and abstract cinematic form just doesn't click with you, which is totally understandable and valid (As you state, The New World and Thin Red Line were the perfect balance for you, which I can respect!). But I don't think that a project taking long to edit means it doesn't have a clear vision. I think it just means you don't click with the vision, which is ok. I've found great cinematic value in his trilogy of later, more divisive films, which are rich is large themes of hedonism and how modern life affects our relationship to the metaphysical. He just doesn't choose to convey things in an orthodox way, and his own style is clearly identifiable and distinct across all three of these movies especially. Which means that his cinematic vision is probably more defined than your average franchise or blockbuster director.
@@KyleCorwith Even with changing the lead roles or cutting actors out, I don't think that is the most benevolent way to work. However, just because the starting vision is different than the ending vision, doesn't mean it's less clear, it just changed over time. Artistic inspiration can't be put into a box, or always be held to strict rules, or else it wouldn't be art. Appeals against Malick's ways are always based in anti-artistic assumptions.
@@KyleCorwith I have watched all his films except To The Wonder and I love his impressionist style. I think that he is able to capture something transcendental through it that wouldn't be possible otherwise. But I also understand why it not might work for many people. It's like if it hits you it gets really deep and if it doesn't it can be frustrating. For me, it hits everytime.
I’ve only seen New World and I hated it because I went into it to see it from a historian point of view. Yes it was beautiful but it was also like a drug induced dream. I feel like it’s a movie you have to be in the right frame of mind to be able to watch and enjoy and appreciate.
Well. I can’t really remember because it’s been so long since I’ve seen it. I can remember that they did do a good job on the Elizabethan clothes. And my husband and I both felt sorry for Pocahontas being introduced to a payre of bodyes and heels on the same day.
These videos for sure suck. Good luck on getting better someday. Hope this is a fun hobby to pass your time while not getting laid and not something to actually work hard on or anything
Your ad hominem attempt says more about you, dude. When you’d like to address the actual subject matter examined in the video and have a civil, mature exchange, you let me know.
Zero content and zero subscribers after twelve years on you own channel… that pretty much says it all. You have no skin in the game and yet post a comment as if you’re some wise, seasoned, armchair sage… which you clearly aren’t.
“Anyone who gets involved in a Terry film…they know that I may not be in the film or I might be the lead in the film.”
My favorite film director all his films just take me to another realm. His work says so much about humanity like no other director . I wish to work with him one day .
@@Brooklynbaby47 Great aspirations, man. 👍
Falling asleep on ''A Hidden Life''...If you're planing to be a film analyst, you'll have to work on that, or may be join New Rockstar and review mainly Marvel movies. "A Hidden Life'' has a lot of substance it's just slower paced. Very much closer to how things move in real life, going in depth through the struggles of this man who is made to have to make a choice which most of us can't even comprehend. In most movies you know and feel things that just have to happen, because it's a movie. Here things flow naturally. I believe this last movie is Malick's best one as it captures the beauty of everything as he's always shown in his previous works, but here he's actually following the narrative in a great way. There is always in underlying theme of belief, faith, and meaning in his movies, and that also helps with most people steering clear of his movies, not the main reason, although I believe it's fair to mention it.
Even if I don't agree with most thing's you've said, art is subjective, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Nicely edited.
A+
Thank you!
Thanks for sharing in-depth your takes on Malick, one of the best video essays I've ever seen about his work, congratulations. Agree that his best output (The Thin Red Line, The New World) is when he's at least working within some semblance of a traditional narrative / story structure. Story is ultimately what makes us want to watch a piece of film or listen to a piece of music or read a novel or poem so when you lose that, you are just left when an animated painting or an empty commercial, especially when the characters you're spending time with in his recent projects (inward looking Hollywood types) aren't as empathetic as in the two films mentioned above. I much prefer Linklater's rehearsed approach as The Before Trilogy is one of the most natural, believable and engaging romances but as Hawke said, there are no rules to cinema or art. Would love to see you do a video on what makes S. Craig Zahler's work so unique and refreshing (or even just solely on 'Dragged Across Concrete'). Looks like he's coming back strong with his next directorial project 'The Big Stone Grid' (originally supposed to be directed by Michael Mann) and with Ridley Scott directing his script for 'Wraiths of the Broken Land' both set for next year.
Your point about story is spot on. 👍 And as for ‘Dragged’? I think a video may need to happen… 😎
You should try Hidden Meaning again, and Voyage of Time, if you can find it. A Hidden Meaning was really good, and much more of a cohesive story than the films from his burst right after Tree of Life. I get the criticisms of those, and polarizing nature of Tree of Life and others, I happen to like that he can make whatever he wants, because he has a unique vision, and he's made some absolute classics in his first four films (I'd argue for Tree of Life as well), and when he's missed, they are beautiful and wonderfully evocative. The ultimate irony, though, Terrence Malick was consulted on the script for Dirty Harry (among others), and they used some of it for the first movie, but used most of his story for Magnum Force. So, he can absolutely do a compelling story, even one that sells lots of popcorn. Very much looking forward to Way of the Wind.
Holding out hope that ‘Wind’ will regain some of the glory he had earlier in his career.
Cool Video Brother!
After watching the video, I’m surprised how a lot of his language is used mostly in commercial work
He actually did direct a few high profile commercials.
This is a compelling overview. I read an article in Vanity Fair in the early 2000 about Kubrick's process. The writer quotes Kubrick who said that the film director and the novelist have the same duty, to capture what they feel will enhance the drama, that is why he adapted books to movies. I feel Terence Malick is similar in that unlike in a novel he works intuitively but much like a novelist he wants to tell the story of the characters as much as he wants to tell their story in the drama of the environment they are in. Like in A Thin Red Line. The sweeping shots of the hills and the local population singing Christian Songs with Jim Caviezel's character walking past them for example. This makes his scenes memorable. Later it seems atmosphere and the emotional landscape becomes important, much again like a novelist, which for a movie require improv like scenes and close ups of the actors. A novelist will use a narrator to show internal process of a character he does the same. This is a director who is mentally in the editing room as he makes the movie. Nice content.😅
Not a huge fan of Malick's latest works but I feel OG filmmakers should be left to make whatever self indulgent film they want to without trying to appease audience or box market. I mean they have earned it.
Then the question becomes: When a movie is released to a wide audience, shouldn’t the filmmaker have some degree of consideration for the audience? Otherwise, one can just make home movies. For example, George Lucas said he still intends to make more movies but only avant-garde, experimental films he has no intention of publicly showing.
Malick’s films do not come to you, you have to go to Malick’s films.
@@the_black_douglas9041 I like your energy but still seems to be a cop out.
@@KyleCorwith A cop out? Really? By who, and of what? I agree that “To The Wonder”, “Knight Of Cups” and “Song To Song” are not his best work. But generally I think the comment is valid, akin to the way the poetry of John Milton or William Blake, and the prose of James Joyce is not coming to you… you have to go to it. If you want to.
I liked Badlands; and I own Days of Heaven on DVD -- and to be honest I have only watched The Thin Red Line twice: Once, each, in the theatre and my DVD copy. I almost got into an argument about The Thin Red Line back when it was released. My defense was how original an anti-war (WW2) movie it is. What do you mean boring? The raid on that bunker wasn't intense enough for you? I would proclaim Jim Caviezel (Private Witt) as the man-child soul of the movie. It is, arguably, his best performance to this day.
But, again, no rush to rewatch The Thin Red Line unlike other war movies (or political war dramas) I own from various eras like Gallipoli and The Year of Living Dangerously, to Under Fire and Salvador, to The Big Red One (all from the 1980's) and, of course, Saving Private Ryan (which for some reason I don't own on DVD. Oddly, don't own Schindler's List, either) to William Wellman's (1949) Battleground. Special Mention for Andrzej Wajda and his Warsaw trilogy: A Generation, Kanal, and Ashes and Diamonds from 1955, 57, 58.
I've thought about Tora, Tora, Tora, too, the star studded 1970 epic as a movie that should receive more credit. Directed by one American and one Japanese director to get both viewpoints I saw this multiple times on tv before cable and it was very special to see as an 8,9,10 year old ... but I haven't seen Tora, Tora, Tora as an adult.
But, consider how different these war movies are made -- well done, but, relatively standard -- compared to The Thin Red Line.
So, all this said, I am getting ready to watch The Thin Red Line, inspired by the video.
I recall the people from the theatre back in '98, preparing to make bets to help pass the time: "George Clooney is not in this!" "I'm telling you he is in this ... I'll bet you ... I know we are 2 hours in but he is supposed to be in this ...!"
About 45 minutes later: "oh no shit ... there he is ... this movie sucks ...!" Which is, certainly, not a reason to dislike a movie, but, if it felt like false advertising ... OK.
I have also thought about watching The New World, again. I saw major chunks of it and the girl that played Pocahontas was amazing. Surprised to see very little of Q'orianka Kilcher after The New World. Saw her on The Alienist mini series with Dakota Fanning (late 19th century woman cop helping investigation child murders in NYC, the 1st season). Anyways, I'm not surprised so few comments (28) for Terrence Malick 3 months after this good video by Kyle Corwith.
"The problem with Terry ..." "Over writing ... until it's terribly pretentious ..." Christopher Plummer (was in The New World).
Clearly you have an affinity for Malick. Are you looking forward to his next film about Christ?
@@KyleCorwith I would not say I'm looking forward to Malick's 'take' on Christ but if I do see it maybe I'll watch Knight of Cups which I must admit I did not know existed.
By the way I did watch The Thin Red Line for the first time (3rd time total) with subtitles and it helps explain the, otherwise, frustrating narration question of which soldier is talking (narrating). But, Sean Penn's character lost something in the subtitle translation: He actually had some bad lines written for him --- or was it poorly chosen ad libs? His "it's all about Property!" line particularly seemed false after being told he was going to be 'requested' for a bravery medal.
Writing this reminds me 'Terry's' movies or so void of humor.
I think I'll watch Days of Heaven, now.
That outta' brighten up my day😉
@@user-mu9cw8xe4r That’s a very good point actually. Sprinkling in some natural humorous moments between characters would be good. If he were to adhere to making a movie with a clear vision, I could see that happening. Maybe one day.
@@KyleCorwith Terrence Malick is definitely an interesting point of film making conversation. Is he an artistic genius? (I refuse to answer). Like I said, I am going to watch Days of Heaven, again, and I really want to see A New World from beginning to end.
From what I've heard of his latest work he seems to be trending in the 'other' (note, I did not say 'wrong') direction. Clear vision may be off his creative radar ... but, maybe Jesus will steer him in a more conventional, story telling line.
Some love him some find him pretentious. I think his best works such as "The Tree of Life", "The Thin Red Line", "A Hidden Life" are worth experiencing if you accept ambiguity and a director who is not looking for answers. Maybe his style is pretentious because we no longer dare to ask existential questions. We pick irony or cynicism over seriousness thus Malick can is out of time and maybe out of touch. However, I would miss the impact of "The Tree of Life" and there is hardly any movie that is able to accomplish something similar. It is clear to me that Malick is a philosopher; an existentialist.
The claim that his method "doesn't allow for intentional art" is profoundly misguided. I respect all your other opinions, because they are opinions, but this claim is misguided by your feelings and framed as an objective statement. Just because Malick's way of shooting is more spontaneous does not mean that his entire filmmaking process being devoid of intentional art. Everyones entitled to an opinion, but your biased rhetoric, like selective appeals to mass critical reception, and the story about you falling asleep during A Hidden Life rub me the wrong way.
@@masonehubbard But the thing that informs my conclusion is the filming process AND the editing. Having a project in editing for half a decade indicates that there isn’t a clear vision.
@@KyleCorwith Clearly his later, increasingly poetic, lyrical, and abstract cinematic form just doesn't click with you, which is totally understandable and valid (As you state, The New World and Thin Red Line were the perfect balance for you, which I can respect!).
But I don't think that a project taking long to edit means it doesn't have a clear vision. I think it just means you don't click with the vision, which is ok.
I've found great cinematic value in his trilogy of later, more divisive films, which are rich is large themes of hedonism and how modern life affects our relationship to the metaphysical. He just doesn't choose to convey things in an orthodox way, and his own style is clearly identifiable and distinct across all three of these movies especially. Which means that his cinematic vision is probably more defined than your average franchise or blockbuster director.
@@KyleCorwith Even with changing the lead roles or cutting actors out, I don't think that is the most benevolent way to work. However, just because the starting vision is different than the ending vision, doesn't mean it's less clear, it just changed over time. Artistic inspiration can't be put into a box, or always be held to strict rules, or else it wouldn't be art. Appeals against Malick's ways are always based in anti-artistic assumptions.
Great video. Just learned about this guy
Thanks, dude! 😎
Great work 👏
Thank you! Consider following the channel. 😎
Song to Song is the film that made me want to explore his filmography.
Did you get through it all? What are your thoughts?
@@KyleCorwith I have watched all his films except To The Wonder and I love his impressionist style. I think that he is able to capture something transcendental through it that wouldn't be possible otherwise. But I also understand why it not might work for many people. It's like if it hits you it gets really deep and if it doesn't it can be frustrating. For me, it hits everytime.
I’ve only seen New World and I hated it because I went into it to see it from a historian point of view. Yes it was beautiful but it was also like a drug induced dream. I feel like it’s a movie you have to be in the right frame of mind to be able to watch and enjoy and appreciate.
This is true. The right mood is key. Also, I’m curious: How do you think the film did on the historical accuracy front?
Well. I can’t really remember because it’s been so long since I’ve seen it. I can remember that they did do a good job on the Elizabethan clothes. And my husband and I both felt sorry for Pocahontas being introduced to a payre of bodyes and heels on the same day.
His only good film in my opinion was The Thin Red Line. It was spiritual and enlightening, but not to the point of pretentious.
Agreed! Met right in the sweet spot of his career. 🤝
@@KyleCorwith Dude I just spoke to you on another video.
These videos for sure suck. Good luck on getting better someday. Hope this is a fun hobby to pass your time while not getting laid and not something to actually work hard on or anything
Your ad hominem attempt says more about you, dude. When you’d like to address the actual subject matter examined in the video and have a civil, mature exchange, you let me know.
Zero content and zero subscribers after twelve years on you own channel… that pretty much says it all. You have no skin in the game and yet post a comment as if you’re some wise, seasoned, armchair sage… which you clearly aren’t.