The New World Reviews
December 21, 2014
Though it still falls apart a bit in the third act this may be one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen.
December 7, 2014
Um dos Melhores Filmes de Sempre. O são dois novos mundos neste filme, o que o Inglês vai descobrir e aquele que Pocahontas descobre. Ambas as descobertas no centro da palavra "novo", e que distingue o filme de Malick é como firmemente ele se recusa a saber mais do que deveria na Virgínia em 1607 ou em Londres alguns anos mais tarde. Os acontecimentos em seu filme, incluindo as batalhas trágicas entre os índios e os colonos, parecem estar acontecendo pela primeira vez. Ninguém aqui leu um livro de história do futuro é uma experiência sensorial a 3 dimensoes (som, visao e audição)por natureza, e para passar levemente os dedos pelo cabelo de alguém em O Novo Mundo.
June 27, 2007
An uneventful take on Pocahontas. Even Bale can't save this one.
November 11, 2014
I'm hoping audiences come back to this one and realize the many great things about it.
July 6, 2011
A schmaltzy, self-indulgent piece of garbage. Even the Disney version was more effective than this.
January 2, 2008
Although not Malick's strongest work, it's still an amazingly-photographed spectacle with as many sweeping battle scenes as it does the serene navel-gazing poetic nature scenery we've come to expect from Terrence Malick.
|Nguyen Thuy H||
July 26, 2014
"The Vanishing Indians" turns out to be a feel-good love story? No, thanks.
June 20, 2014
Malick has done it again. The New World is one of the best historical dramas out there. Easily the best portrayal of the story of Pocahontas and John Smith ever put on screen; sorry Disney :P. My only complaint about the film is that it really drags in some parts; especially the last 30 minutes. Q' Orianka Kilcher was superb as Pocahontas.
July 9, 2007
Beautiful but boring.
July 15, 2012
Schizophrenic storytelling prevents Malick's visually awe-inspiring take on the settling of Jamestown from being the masterpiece it could have been
March 27, 2014
An overlong and head-scratching romantic drama about the doomed love affair between Pocahontas, a Native American girl; and Captain John Smith, an English explorer - with strong performances by the cast and beautiful cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki.
June 8, 2006
The preview was good. The movie is just too slow.
October 29, 2011
It looks beautiful, but man does the pacing really kill this movie. It's a 2 hour movie that felt like 4, and ultimately doesn't make up for it with its story or characters. Colin Farrell gives a pretty decent performance, as does newcomer Q'Orianka Kilcher, and there are some really good parts here or there, but ultimately that doesn't make up for a movie that feels longer than it should and that ultimately goes nowhere.
February 26, 2014
A very strong start, well thought out character interactions, and consistently good visuals propel this forward to an ending that becomes rather scatterbrained.
March 31, 2013
Terrence Malick is one of my least favourite directors. The reason is that he gives unwanted attention to nature and it's magnificence rather than giving attention to story or character development. I have only seen two other film from Terrence Malick, it is The Thin Red Line (1998), I must confess that it is one of the worst war dramas that I had ever seen in my entire life and the next one is The Tree of Life, another bore fest. Malick was too much interested in describing nature and covering bullets with grass rather than building up a proper story or a climax in The Thin Red Line.
I watched this film with the least expectation. But The New World definitely has a spell binding effect. The three lead actors, especially Colin Farrell gave superb performances. But Farrell's character loses importance as it goes to the end and he soon gets no screen space at all. Terrence Malick's iddiotic narrative explaining the nature stuff takes a huge toll on the film leading it to it's 2 and 1/2 hr running time. Had the script been given to a better director, this film would have been more credential. This film has extreme similarity in its plot to the Disney film Pocahontas(1996) which are based on the same material and the triangle love story also has similarities to Pearl Harbor(2001). Also, what the hell does Christopher Plummer have to do in this film? He is not even in it for five minutes and he appears on top of Christian bale in the cast list.
The climax of the film is extremely muddled and poorly narrated. There are no reference that Pocahontas died in the source material. Watch this film for the visuals and if you like the Malick stuff.
July 6, 2009
STUPIDEST MOVIE EVER!!!!!!!! BORING!!!!!
July 5, 2012
Very good movie. Pretty long, but good story, and phenomenal acting and cinematography.
January 28, 2014
Beautiful cinematography. Relies very little on the spoken word to provide a more realistic telling of the Pocahontas story - don't let your preconceptions with any Disney films turn you off watching this piece of art.
July 17, 2008
I've always been fascinated with the story of Pocahontas and John Smith. Historical inaccuracies aside (nothing romantic occurred between Pocahontas and Smith), the film is beautifully-made. Some may think it's boring and it is pretty slow. There are a few action sequences but, in general, the movie is very quiet and relies on a lot of whispery voice overs from the main characters. Because of the age difference, Kilcher and Farrell mainly play around and cuddle each other in the grass and behind trees. The romance is still believable and there is a feeling of innocence whenever the two are together. Very few words are exchanged between them (because of the language barrier) but the actors' expressions, their shared glances, and the way the director captures their interactions on-screen say enough.
It's a wonderful story and the cinematography is sweeping and gorgeous. This is not a movie that will be enjoyed by mainstream audiences as it will really have nothing to appeal to the "boom-boom-blood-and-guts" crowds. But it is a remarkably beautiful film that showcases a passionate yet innocent love affair set in some of the most breath-taking scenes of nature I've ever seen. Seriously, the way Malick captures nature (trees, water, grass, birds, etc.) makes it appear as if it is another character entirely and there wouldn't be a movie without it. Contrast the images of freedom in "the new world" with the brick-and-stone rigidness of London. You'll feel a sense of anger, injustice and sadness when the settlers begin to convert Pocahontas to their ways in the middle of the film, stuffing her in a tight, boring dress and clunky shoes. But in the final scenes, you are granted some kind of bittersweet relief when Pocahontas dances and twirls happily, innocently next to a pond like earlier. Though the circumstances of the scene is unfortunate, you also see that she is finally free again and that is all that really matters.
Edit: The extended cut is even more wondrous. It includes new scenes and expands on old ones, giving us better incite into the characters and their relationships and more shots of nature. I came out with an even deeper appreciation for this film. Bumped up to an extra half star.
December 31, 2013
I thought the photography was beautiful. Granted the story was a little slow but it was a beautiful film.