Malik’s movies are intimate, they are invitations to introspection, he ask questions, and gives you the space to fill the gaps, if you haven’t ask yourself enough questions or you don’t feel confortable with the questions that has no answers, then it’s not for you. His audiovisual lenguage is complex, this movie is full of symbolism, esoteric and exoteric and he draws a parallelism, tarot itself its the journey of the fool, that wanders as Christian does in the pilgrim's progress, and almost all the religions are mith of promise of redemption. Its easy to related to the main character, it’s contemporary, and through him asks what does success really means? is Hollywood selling a fantasy as religions does? Is the pearl the soul? The meaning of life? Questions, questions and more questions, I really admire and respect Malik.
Huge Malick fan. Of the trilogy of To The Wonder, Knight of Cups and Song to Song, this is my favourite. I think watching all those films and catching how they are interconnected is endlessly fascinating.
An exquisite film that I have revisited many times at different stages of my life. The first time I visually examined this film I was clueless and lost but something resonated with me which I have no clue what it is. Mr.Malick left directing for a degree in philosophy and this film just extenuates his philosophical cognizance to the max this existential film is definitely something beyond words beyond language and beyond the barriers us humans have engendered ourselves in. This film is an experience and I can go further and verbally express this isn’t genuinely a regalement getting through the day type of film this is serious art for serious people if someone goes into this expecting a frugal Hollywood (Nolan) type of film you will get nothing out of it. I appreciate your channel and great review! Thank You
Absolutely phenomenal film. Riddled with existential philosophical insight. Malick is reshaping the way I see art itself. The way it moves and speaks, uprooting not only normal expectations of what art & cinema can & should be but also diverting from secular humanist ideological norms that are widely excepted by people I interact with daily. I wouldn’t be surprised if Malick identifies as a Christian existentialist. His artistic expression separates me from a lot of other artistic expressions, often overshadowing other filmmakers because of how profound I find his works to be. I’ve had to spread out each of his films, they’re often too dense to contemplate.
I’ve watched this movie 3 or 4 times - have it on Blu-ray - and you pretty much nailed it in this review. Indeed, it is a movie that deserves multiple viewings in order to understand its approach more fully. The only quality about Malick’s later experimental work I have trouble with is the utter lack of humor - I have yet to find myself chuckling at some moment of comic relief in any of these later works. What happened to the Malick of Badlands?, a beautiful film that, albeit dark, displayed a sharp wit throughout. Even someone as dour as Tarkovsky has moments - rare as they are - that can set an audience chuckling aloud (I’m referring to the moment in Stalker when a phone rings in the middle of The Zone). It’s like, “C’mon, Terry, lighten up a little!”
A captivating movie and one of my favorites from the last decade. I like this it way more than Tree Of Life. Much more realistic and relatable for me. Also the running time is much better than Tree of Life…it doesn’t drone on and on. Great review.
I suppose it takes a certain sort of individual to appreciate Malick films. His films are open philosophical questions. These questions were explicit in the Thin Red Line ('This evil; where's it come from?), but in his subsequent films, these questions are conveyed through the film itself; though imagery and tone. When I watch his films, I feel that question(s). I am sucked into the film because it demands of me an interpretation.
It is termed "an experimental film", so it is one that needs time to be fully absorbed. And since it was shot by Luzbecki, you know it will look spectacular. It is simply "a visual experience".
Great review. I hope you review all Malick's filmography since its one of my favourite directors. His last movie moved me in a way that no other movie has done before.
Terry's a Genius. Once in a generation. Genius. I watched Badlands when I was 8 and thought Genius, He'll be waiting when I'm older because he's a Genius. And he is. In Britain he'd be on the Dole.
yes, he seems to read scripts carefully and create complex characters that are unique to the movie. I think he tends to contribute to the overall artistic goals of each of his movies quite well.
modernist poetry in the form of film & as usual for Malick explores the ontological through the ontic. controversial i know, but this is in his top 3 for me
I have never seen it, the only Cronenberg I have not. One reason is the book. I have read all of Ballard's books. Crash is an appalling and disgusting book that nevertheless is truly remarkable. It provided me with many cultural insights, which is rarely true of any book.) I have never recommended it and yet I've never forgotten it. For that reason, I don't think the movie would do much for me. Do you think it should be watched? any good?
@@LearningaboutMovies well of course it's not everyone's cup of tea. Some love it but some are truly disgusted by it including Francis Ford Coppola, who was so disgusted by the movie that when he was the head of Jury at Cannes, didn't allowed the jury members to award it Palme d'Or, who were in the favour of giving it to crash, so instead they awarded it the special jury award. Well I can't tell that whether you will like it or not it. I will definitely recommend it because personally I think that it's Cronenberg's third best film only behind videodrome and Dead Ringers. It's story and themes can be considered gross by many, but film adaptation is really good. I mean Cronenberg is really one of the best director ever and crash is his one of the finest work so will definitely recommend it. At first viewing I didn't liked it much but recently it has grown over me. When I watched it a few days ago I really thought it is a masterpiece, but again I can't tell that whether you will like it or not. Also I would like you review Titane, this year's palme d'Or winner. Many people doesn't seem to like it, as cars are involved in a weird way or something like crash, but I'm really excited to watch it.
@@LearningaboutMovies Obviously you should watch it. And you should have watched it BEFORE seeing Crash. I saw it in Westwood when it was released. The primary character who has problem is Vaughan, the guy who stages famous car accidents for the excitement of others. So watch it at least once.
Great review! I will definitely try to watch it. Can you do a review on Guns of Navarone please? I am always awestruck by the pure escapist entertainment this movie offers. And to watch the scathing humour of David Niven, the dark mood of Gregory Peck and the brutal animal attraction of Anthony Quinn. The sheer care taken by the director to bring along such a fantastic story! And the cliff ......., the bloody, sheer, murderous cliff. I know your detailed analysis would engage and educate, like always. With love from India Jiten
No matter how many intelligent reviews I see, people continue to miss the cinematic connections. The Dark Knight trilogy. Interstellar...(The PEARL?). First Blood. American Psycho. Mojave. Hotel Artemis. THE STAND. It's coming folks.
the whole filmography of Terrence Malick since the Tree Of Life is so beautifully crafted and Chivo (Lubezki) on the cinematography makes it even better can you do song to song on the next one too???
My three favourite films of the last decade are :- the tree of life, under the skin, portrait of a lady on fire. Have you seen all of them. I would love to hear your thoughts on them.
I haven't seen the last. Many wildly different opinions on it from commenters here on the channel. There's a Tree of Life video on the channel somewhere, just search for it.
I've seen a few Malick films (Days of Heaven, Tree of Life, Badlands) but I've never really gotten into them. I understand he is heavily influenced by the philosopher Martin Heidegger - who I've not read but am aware of some of his ideas, like dasein. It would be interesting to get a better understanding of Malick and Heidegger's influence on his work.
I agree. I've been bugging our resident town philosopher (PhD) who lives two blocks away to lead a Heidegger study group. Malick might say he's got more in common with ancient wisdom literature (Virgil or Solomon) than with something modern, and this is the view I usually take when approaching his films.
@2:57 I thought he was a writer in this film, coming off a big hit screenplay, I was also high as balls on dabs when I watched this so I could be misremembering
Appreciate the breakdown. What about comparing it to the actual tarot cards referenced and astrology. For example, Knight of cups=Pisces hence alot of the oceans and pool scenes.
great idea. some undergrad/grad should write a paper on this. I know nothing about tarot. However, your comment makes me think maybe Malick is a Pisces because of the frequency in all of his films of water themes.
Malick is an acquired taste..'knight of Cups' and 'Tree of Life' are wonderful films..'To the Wonder' is 'watchable' ..didn't care for 'Song to Song'..'Thin Red Line' and 'Badlands' are in a different category..Malick and Michael Mann are 2 of my favorite filmmakers..
I've watched this once, and understood the various themes at play. I came away unimpressed for two reasons. 1) The interactions between the actors are assine, obviously improvised am-dram. 2) Too much of everything, the character arc is completely submerged by the pounding music and digi-cam wonder. I think this whole idea was done much better in "The Great Beauty". But yours is a spirited defense non the less!
reasonable. this prompts me to think about a video on a director's choice of acting styles. Gilliam likes a lot of hamming it up, while Malick prefers that detached feel that quick improvised shooting gives. I would think if you didn't like Malick's direction of actors here, you probably wouldn't like it in any of his movies, other than maybe Badlands.
ouch. hyperbolic, given that Malick has by any standard an amazing eye for cinematography (or he's just great at choosing cinematographers and telling them what he wants, which is the top .001% of photography).
@@LearningaboutMovies Sure, he could have been a good still life photographer, just like my grandpop. But beside that, I think he is the most overrated of the new hollywood directors. Maybe even more so than Michael Cimino.
Malik’s movies are intimate, they are invitations to introspection, he ask questions, and gives you the space to fill the gaps, if you haven’t ask yourself enough questions or you don’t feel confortable with the questions that has no answers, then it’s not for you. His audiovisual lenguage is complex, this movie is full of symbolism, esoteric and exoteric and he draws a parallelism, tarot itself its the journey of the fool, that wanders as Christian does in the pilgrim's progress, and almost all the religions are mith of promise of redemption. Its easy to related to the main character, it’s contemporary, and through him asks what does success really means? is Hollywood selling a fantasy as religions does? Is the pearl the soul? The meaning of life? Questions, questions and more questions, I really admire and respect Malik.
thank you.
Amazing statement and you laid it out so eloquently! Couldn’t agree more.
Huge Malick fan. Of the trilogy of To The Wonder, Knight of Cups and Song to Song, this is my favourite. I think watching all those films and catching how they are interconnected is endlessly fascinating.
An exquisite film that I have revisited many times at different stages of my life. The first time I visually examined this film I was clueless and lost but something resonated with me which I have no clue what it is. Mr.Malick left directing for a degree in philosophy and this film just extenuates his philosophical cognizance to the max this existential film is definitely something beyond words beyond language and beyond the barriers us humans have engendered ourselves in. This film is an experience and I can go further and verbally express this isn’t genuinely a regalement getting through the day type of film this is serious art for serious people if someone goes into this expecting a frugal Hollywood (Nolan) type of film you will get nothing out of it. I appreciate your channel and great review!
Thank You
Wow, how did I not make the connection with Pilgrim's progress? Yes, that absolutely helps me understand this movie better.
arguably he has been doing this theme in most movies. E.g., Private Wit in Thin Red Line; Pocahonatas in The New World.
Absolutely phenomenal film. Riddled with existential philosophical insight. Malick is reshaping the way I see art itself. The way it moves and speaks, uprooting not only normal expectations of what art & cinema can & should be but also diverting from secular humanist ideological norms that are widely excepted by people I interact with daily. I wouldn’t be surprised if Malick identifies as a Christian existentialist. His artistic expression separates me from a lot of other artistic expressions, often overshadowing other filmmakers because of how profound I find his works to be. I’ve had to spread out each of his films, they’re often too dense to contemplate.
I’ve watched this movie 3 or 4 times - have it on Blu-ray - and you pretty much nailed it in this review. Indeed, it is a movie that deserves multiple viewings in order to understand its approach more fully. The only quality about Malick’s later experimental work I have trouble with is the utter lack of humor - I have yet to find myself chuckling at some moment of comic relief in any of these later works. What happened to the Malick of Badlands?, a beautiful film that, albeit dark, displayed a sharp wit throughout. Even someone as dour as Tarkovsky has moments - rare as they are - that can set an audience chuckling aloud (I’m referring to the moment in Stalker when a phone rings in the middle of The Zone). It’s like, “C’mon, Terry, lighten up a little!”
A captivating movie and one of my favorites from the last decade. I like this it way more than Tree Of Life. Much more realistic and relatable for me. Also the running time is much better than Tree of Life…it doesn’t drone on and on.
Great review.
thank you.
I suppose it takes a certain sort of individual to appreciate Malick films. His films are open philosophical questions. These questions were explicit in the Thin Red Line ('This evil; where's it come from?), but in his subsequent films, these questions are conveyed through the film itself; though imagery and tone. When I watch his films, I feel that question(s). I am sucked into the film because it demands of me an interpretation.
thank you.
It is termed "an experimental film", so it is one that needs time to be fully absorbed. And since it was shot by Luzbecki, you know it will look spectacular. It is simply "a visual experience".
I hope viewers go into it with both things in their heads.
Great review. I hope you review all Malick's filmography since its one of my favourite directors. His last movie moved me in a way that no other movie has done before.
I intend to. thank you.
Terry's a Genius. Once in a generation. Genius. I watched Badlands when I was 8 and thought Genius, He'll be waiting when I'm older because he's a Genius.
And he is.
In Britain he'd be on the Dole.
Holy shit. What a video. You did such a good job. You deserve more views
thank you very much.
100% agree with you
I like Christian Bale's performances
yes, he seems to read scripts carefully and create complex characters that are unique to the movie. I think he tends to contribute to the overall artistic goals of each of his movies quite well.
Thanks, I was debating watching this movie.
I’ll be watching it shortly.
Should I watch Tree of Life first? I’ve not seen it. 🤔
If you like Knight of Cups, you should definitely watch Tree of Life. Probably if you like this channel, you should try Tree of Life.
I actually really like this film.
modernist poetry in the form of film & as usual for Malick explores the ontological through the ontic. controversial i know, but this is in his top 3 for me
or expressionist filmmaking that harkens back to the 1920s or earlier!
This movie was unreal loved it
Bale's Character is a screenwriter, not an actor.
What are your thoughts on cronenberg's crash?
I have never seen it, the only Cronenberg I have not. One reason is the book. I have read all of Ballard's books. Crash is an appalling and disgusting book that nevertheless is truly remarkable. It provided me with many cultural insights, which is rarely true of any book.) I have never recommended it and yet I've never forgotten it. For that reason, I don't think the movie would do much for me. Do you think it should be watched? any good?
@@LearningaboutMovies well of course it's not everyone's cup of tea. Some love it but some are truly disgusted by it including Francis Ford Coppola, who was so disgusted by the movie that when he was the head of Jury at Cannes, didn't allowed the jury members to award it Palme d'Or, who were in the favour of giving it to crash, so instead they awarded it the special jury award. Well I can't tell that whether you will like it or not it. I will definitely recommend it because personally I think that it's Cronenberg's third best film only behind videodrome and Dead Ringers. It's story and themes can be considered gross by many, but film adaptation is really good. I mean Cronenberg is really one of the best director ever and crash is his one of the finest work so will definitely recommend it. At first viewing I didn't liked it much but recently it has grown over me. When I watched it a few days ago I really thought it is a masterpiece, but again I can't tell that whether you will like it or not. Also I would like you review Titane, this year's palme d'Or winner. Many people doesn't seem to like it, as cars are involved in a weird way or something like crash, but I'm really excited to watch it.
Cronenberg always is thoughtful and maybe even philosophical, which I appreciate. He and very few others could adapt that novel capably.
@@LearningaboutMovies Obviously you should watch it. And you should have watched it BEFORE seeing Crash. I saw it in Westwood when it was released. The primary character who has problem is Vaughan, the guy who stages famous car accidents for the excitement of others. So watch it at least once.
Great review! I will definitely try to watch it.
Can you do a review on Guns of Navarone please? I am always awestruck by the pure escapist entertainment this movie offers. And to watch the scathing humour of David Niven, the dark mood of Gregory Peck and the brutal animal attraction of Anthony Quinn. The sheer care taken by the director to bring along such a fantastic story! And the cliff ......., the bloody, sheer, murderous cliff.
I know your detailed analysis would engage and educate, like always.
With love from India
Jiten
Thank you. There is a Guns of Navarone video on the channel; just search for it.
Could you do one video on 'a hidden life' - also a beautiful Malick film... 😊
No matter how many intelligent reviews I see, people continue to miss the cinematic connections.
The Dark Knight trilogy.
Interstellar...(The PEARL?).
First Blood.
American Psycho.
Mojave.
Hotel Artemis.
THE STAND.
It's coming folks.
the whole filmography of Terrence Malick since the Tree Of Life is so beautifully crafted and Chivo (Lubezki) on the cinematography makes it even better can you do song to song on the next one too???
yes, I plan to get to him in the next 6-12 months.
My three favourite films of the last decade are :- the tree of life, under the skin, portrait of a lady on fire. Have you seen all of them. I would love to hear your thoughts on them.
I haven't seen the last. Many wildly different opinions on it from commenters here on the channel.
There's a Tree of Life video on the channel somewhere, just search for it.
I've seen a few Malick films (Days of Heaven, Tree of Life, Badlands) but I've never really gotten into them. I understand he is heavily influenced by the philosopher Martin Heidegger - who I've not read but am aware of some of his ideas, like dasein. It would be interesting to get a better understanding of Malick and Heidegger's influence on his work.
I agree. I've been bugging our resident town philosopher (PhD) who lives two blocks away to lead a Heidegger study group. Malick might say he's got more in common with ancient wisdom literature (Virgil or Solomon) than with something modern, and this is the view I usually take when approaching his films.
Amen.....
I think he is supposed to be a writter not an actor, but thanks and congrats for the rest
good correction. thank you.
great review, thank you. 5.7? well the masses prefer marvel super heroes movies, so....
@2:57 I thought he was a writer in this film, coming off a big hit screenplay, I was also high as balls on dabs when I watched this so I could be misremembering
Appreciate the breakdown. What about comparing it to the actual tarot cards referenced and astrology.
For example, Knight of cups=Pisces hence alot of the oceans and pool scenes.
great idea. some undergrad/grad should write a paper on this. I know nothing about tarot. However, your comment makes me think maybe Malick is a Pisces because of the frequency in all of his films of water themes.
@@LearningaboutMovies 🤔🤔🤔 Yes you may be absolutely correct. Gonna find out.
In astrology and tarot water denotes emotions and inner experiences, I think that's why there are so many water scenes in the film...
LAND = BODY AND SOUL
NOURISHED BY
AIR =
BREATH = SPIRIT
AND
WATER = LAW/ TORAH ( INSTRUCTION) OF GOD
Huh. I cut it off after about 20 minutes - wasn’t in the mood. I’ll give it another shot
I think I said that I did the same, the first time I tried it. If you are not in the mood for this kind of thing, you just aren't.
Malick is an acquired taste..'knight of Cups' and 'Tree of Life' are wonderful films..'To the Wonder' is 'watchable' ..didn't care for 'Song to Song'..'Thin Red Line' and 'Badlands' are in a different category..Malick and Michael Mann are 2 of my favorite filmmakers..
Wish Kierkegaard and Heidegger would've been brought up.
I thought he was a writer in the movie
2023 anyone?
I've watched this once, and understood the various themes at play. I came away unimpressed for two reasons. 1) The interactions between the actors are assine, obviously improvised am-dram. 2) Too much of everything, the character arc is completely submerged by the pounding music and digi-cam wonder. I think this whole idea was done much better in "The Great Beauty". But yours is a spirited defense non the less!
reasonable. this prompts me to think about a video on a director's choice of acting styles. Gilliam likes a lot of hamming it up, while Malick prefers that detached feel that quick improvised shooting gives. I would think if you didn't like Malick's direction of actors here, you probably wouldn't like it in any of his movies, other than maybe Badlands.
@@LearningaboutMovies I've only seen this one and Badlands :)
Answer: NOTHING!
ouch. hyperbolic, given that Malick has by any standard an amazing eye for cinematography (or he's just great at choosing cinematographers and telling them what he wants, which is the top .001% of photography).
@@LearningaboutMovies Sure, he could have been a good still life photographer, just like my grandpop. But beside that, I think he is the most overrated of the new hollywood directors. Maybe even more so than Michael Cimino.