The New World - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The New World Reviews

Page 1 of 279
July 24, 2017
A long movie which was hard to follow. Tells the story of Pocahontas and the Virginia Settlement, definitely a story that needs I be filled, but it took me 3 sittings to finish watching the movie.
July 19, 2017
Vacuous pondering with good scenery. I couldn't get through the whole thing.
June 24, 2017
probably the most boring film ever made by man
½ April 24, 2017
Gorgeous cinematography, as usual with Mallick. The length, and unconventional narrative may keep some people away, but the characters, events and locations envelop you in this world and keep you invested. Seems very accurate too.
½ April 17, 2017
Love triangle with a lot of neglect and stupidity....and then death.....of life and of love. The cover of the film is misleading. Movie was hard to follow. Boring. Boring. Boring.
February 23, 2017
A beautiful film with mind-boggling cinematography, great performances, and beautiful direction. The New World is Terrence Malick's best film.
½ January 3, 2017
After finishing "The New World", I was lost with words. Not because the film is bad or anything. But, well...oh damn.

It's been awhile since a movie moved me like this did. With gorgeous landscapes and the undiscovered country had a sense of adventure to it. Visually captivating and a emotionally rich film. This is Terrence Malick at his best. The only director out there that knows and understands the human soul. And Lubezki is the man that presents his vision in the most unique way. Seriously, those two are dynamite.

"The New World" has some many things going on that you can't keep up with it. Not to mention it's 3 hours long and I only found that out after it was over. And quite honestly, I didn't care.
November 2, 2016
Essentially a near 3-hour tourism advert for pre-colonial New England, The New World begins promisingly, with gorgeous visuals, a pensive sensibility and a genuine respect for the Native Americans as they encounter the strangers arriving on their land. The film's most interesting aspect is the difficult interactions between the natives and the colonials, which go through very natural and believable stages, such as suspicion, doubt and inevitable hostility. If the movie had focused on this, it might have been entertaining. But since Terrence Malick is apparently averse to the idea of enjoyment, instead we get trees, water, people walking aimlessly through fields, more trees, more water, people walking aimlessly through towns, even more trees, even more water, and people walking aimlessly through nowhere. Had it been an hour or so shorter, it might have been tolerable, but as it is, it's easily one of the most frustratingly tedious movies ever created. The score sounds like the composer fell asleep on their keyboard, it's beautiful but gratuitous, and Colin Farrell, usually a great actor, turns in one of his dullest performances. Throughout the entire film he wanders about endlessly, looking like a man who's forgotten his lines, and appears to care little about what happens around him. It's such a shame to see an actor with such charisma playing such a lifeless bore. Most of the dialogue is either whispered or mumbled, and since it's a Malick production, everything we learn is communicated through constant narration. The man loves voiceover so much that in some scenes a character will be talking, and narration will be played at nearly the same time. Half the time it seems like the characters are chatting with the narrator. Wouldn't be of much use mind you, since the voiceover tells us what we either know explicitly, or could very easily work out. Basically, the film treats you like an idiot. Watch the first 30-45 minutes, admire its natural beauty, then immediately hit stop, because the rest of it will drive you mad.
½ October 10, 2016
Playful, daring, beautiful and visionary escape back to 1615. Don't expect a action movie, rather a explotion of senses and impressions. A sheer naturalistic beauty of the notion of nature and civilizations clashing together.
½ September 8, 2016
Extended Cut Review: I enjoyed the first half or so of this sweeping epic. The shots of the new world, and the little bits of violence and authenticity add a nice touch of realism. Only after the movie begins to focus on romance does it get bogged down. I watched the 3 hour cut so there was a lot more moping. Also the voiceover was kind of pretentious, among other problems. The movie has the right idea at the beginning but doesn't follow through with a compelling narrative.
September 2, 2016
Apparently Terrence Malick is entering the exclusive club of directors whose the mohrity of movies I don't understand and therefore like. The MVP of this club are for sure the Cohen brothers, but Malick is traling them shortly. I don't understand this need of trying to create aetherial moments for 2+ hours of a movie, and therefore I can't appreciate anything else because it always seems like if I am looking in a dream. But I don't want to look in a dream, I want to watch a movie!!
½ July 27, 2016
I'm a fan of Malick, but the theatrical version is very hard to sit through. Ironically, the recut extended version found on the new Criterion set is miles better at setting up the story and adding context to the breathtaking visuals. From a two star film to an easy 3.5 or even 4 star film. Give it a watch!
May 25, 2016
The New World definitely features Terrence Malick's beautiful imagery, but a lack of intriguing characters and lazy storytelling make the movie a relative disappointment.
May 12, 2016
I give it five stars because I like long slow "operatic," finely shot movies. If you like a straight-ahead story line and lots of events, this definitely isn't for you. If you like Kubrick, this is a must see.

What I mean by operatic is many recurring themes set against beautiful, often melancholy backgrounds--with a mix of heaven and horror--that slowly prime the brain for a gigantic sublime cadence at the end. This is one of those films. And the extended version makes it all the more powerful to viewers like me.
½ May 11, 2016
Typically enchanting cinematography from Emmanuel Lubezki and the hypnotizing sense of natural immersion from Terrence Malick coast us through this story with a fresh viewpoint, but considering its subject matter, it definitely deserved more dialogue or narrative clarity. [Theatrical version]
½ March 25, 2016
It is long and boring, but beautiful.
March 20, 2016
Quite a long film which, to me, seemed to have a lot of flaws and load of things which you sit and say to yourself "That didn't happen". This is like a natural sequel to Apocolypto as it starts at exactly the same place Apocalypto ends. Well made film, but too long and dull.
March 12, 2016
Visually moving and powerfully acted (this is the first time I've ever bought the relationship between John Smith and Pocahontas), but ultimately not quite at home in Malick's style. This feels like someone trying to turn a commercial film into a Malick picture. However, a Malick picture hidden under thin layers of convention is still a Malick picture, and this one is still spectacular.
½ March 5, 2016
Pure art in every sense of the word. Those that complain about the pacing are the same people who would gobble a great meal or chug fine wine. Yes it is unmistakably Malick's style but why change? Relax and enjoy a great experience!
Page 1 of 279