Reviews

  • Aug 25, 2021

    Such a beautiful movie. It has no plot, only a series of hauntingly dizzying but sublime shots of the world of a man, a lost man wavering before that dichotomy, the most difficult decision he has to make in his life: the easy mundanity of human warmth, or that suffocatingly lonesome, terribly cold, yet terrifically free path of greatness.

    Such a beautiful movie. It has no plot, only a series of hauntingly dizzying but sublime shots of the world of a man, a lost man wavering before that dichotomy, the most difficult decision he has to make in his life: the easy mundanity of human warmth, or that suffocatingly lonesome, terribly cold, yet terrifically free path of greatness.

  • Apr 25, 2021

    L'opera di Terrence Malick nasce e muore con le sue debolezze, che purtroppo sono troppe per passare in secondo piano. Il film rispecchia in pieno il suo protagonista Christian Bale, è freddo, inespressivo e a tratti vuoto dentro. La fotografia, il montaggio e l'incredibile cast al femminile che gira intorno al protagonista, non bastano a coprire un'asettica storia che purtroppo non viene sfruttata come avrebbe potuto essere. Il progetto primordiale verrà poi sviluppato con "Song to song" con un successo maggiore, a dimostrazione del fatto che l'idea di fondo era molto positiva.

    L'opera di Terrence Malick nasce e muore con le sue debolezze, che purtroppo sono troppe per passare in secondo piano. Il film rispecchia in pieno il suo protagonista Christian Bale, è freddo, inespressivo e a tratti vuoto dentro. La fotografia, il montaggio e l'incredibile cast al femminile che gira intorno al protagonista, non bastano a coprire un'asettica storia che purtroppo non viene sfruttata come avrebbe potuto essere. Il progetto primordiale verrà poi sviluppato con "Song to song" con un successo maggiore, a dimostrazione del fatto che l'idea di fondo era molto positiva.

  • Mar 17, 2021

    A masterpiece of unconventional cinema that can be demanding but that's even more rewarding with each frame of it and every bit of thoughts you get out of it. The milestone of Malick's contemporary trilogy and a masterclass in cinematography and choregraphy. Philosophically poetical, full of meaning, i watched it more than twenty times and every vision brings new images, sense and meaning to it. The other side of the coin of sir Terrence cinema is as great as his others achievements like Days of heaven and the Thin Red Line. A must see that may feel disconcerting for non fans.

    A masterpiece of unconventional cinema that can be demanding but that's even more rewarding with each frame of it and every bit of thoughts you get out of it. The milestone of Malick's contemporary trilogy and a masterclass in cinematography and choregraphy. Philosophically poetical, full of meaning, i watched it more than twenty times and every vision brings new images, sense and meaning to it. The other side of the coin of sir Terrence cinema is as great as his others achievements like Days of heaven and the Thin Red Line. A must see that may feel disconcerting for non fans.

  • Mar 15, 2021

    It's more of an attempt at creating a piece of art than making a movie. It felt like a 2 hour 1980's Calvin Klein ad. Enjoyed the visuals. Glad it was a free rental from my local library. Would have kicked myself if I had spent even a dime on this

    It's more of an attempt at creating a piece of art than making a movie. It felt like a 2 hour 1980's Calvin Klein ad. Enjoyed the visuals. Glad it was a free rental from my local library. Would have kicked myself if I had spent even a dime on this

  • Oct 05, 2020

    A very abstract contemplation of decadence and ennui largely set in Los Angeles.

    A very abstract contemplation of decadence and ennui largely set in Los Angeles.

  • Jul 21, 2020

    As pretentious and boring as can be,

    As pretentious and boring as can be,

  • Mar 31, 2020

    The film tries to pass itself off as complex and refined, but it's just a mess

    The film tries to pass itself off as complex and refined, but it's just a mess

  • Jan 06, 2020

    I loved the.movie. Very good!

    I loved the.movie. Very good!

  • Apr 19, 2019

    I hate this movie. It is the most navel-gazing, pretentious film that Terrence Malick, the director of The Tree of Life (2011), has ever made and that's saying something. The difference with this one is that he doesn't say anything in nearly two hours and leaves us questioning as with To the Wonder (2012) whether he has lost his touch as a director and is now making ghastly, unwatchable films nobody exactly. We spend 118 minutes with a shallow, narcissistic protagonist Rick, Christian Bale, that isn't enjoyably dislikable but very annoying. He spends his days and nights with a parade of scantily clad beauties, Isabel Lucas, Teresa Palmer, Imogen Poots and Freida Pinto. When we get a reprieve from this extended male fantasy it is brief but blissful and this just made me more frustrated with the film because it was clear that these small scenes should have constituted the whole film. Cate Blanchett plays his compassionate ex-wife a doctor who treats burn victims and Wes Bentley and Brian Dennehy play his loose-cannon brother and emotionally detached Father respectively. These two storylines contain tension, comprehensible characters and great acting, something missing from the rest of the film. As with a lot of his other films this is semi-autobiographical and Rick is intended to be similar to the Terrence Malick of the 1970s, a hot-shot screenwriter, Malick worked on early drafts of Dirty Harry (1971, facing a recent divorce and an existential crisis caused by traumatic events from his past. If this was what Terrence Malick was like during that era I would congratulate him for being honest about what a horrible person he was but this does not mean I want to spend hours with this version of him. Instead of being a complicated anti-hero both Rick and Terrence Malick come across as shallow in the way they choose to treat their own â~issues' in this film. This film was shot entirely without a script and this is clear throughout. Why does Malick think this is acceptable? even The Tree of Life featured a nominal screenplay. Through Lubezki's lens everything on screen including Skid Row and a dingy strip club looks impossibly beautiful. But wait, are we not meant to see this beauty as a shallow façade for these empty people looking for genuine emotion in a city that has no desire to provide them with it. It is understood that this is the view we are meant to take but Terrence Malick seems far to seduced by the fake, soul-sucking film industry to really satirize or criticize it in any meaningful way. What is the point of having the best cinematographer currently working poring over every shot in a film if it all amounts to nothing. My biggest issue with the film is it's treatment of women, it is plainly disgusting watching frankly pornographic shots of beautiful young women wandering around half-naked in hotel rooms whilst having no personality or motivation other than pleasing Rick. The exception to this rule, defenders would argue, is Natalie Portman's character who does get her own storyline, she is married and having an affair with Rick, but even she is present to â~save' him and the way that Malick focuses on her extraordinary beauty, with shots of lithe body, instead of the laughable dialogue that Portman is forced to spew shows how little respect he has for his female characters. Malick's early films, Badlands (1973) and Days of Heaven (1978) focus on sexuality as subtly as both Martin Sheen and Sissy Spacek appear fully clothed throughout Badlands and Sam Shepard's sexual desire for Brooke Adams is clouded by his innocence. The women here, other than Blanchett and Portman, are offered no opportunity to craft actual characters, has Malick slowly lost respect for women over time or has this sexism always been underlying? This film is not worth watching under any circumstances, look to Malick's early work to see why he is such a respected director but don't touch this misogynistic garbage parading itself around as meaningful art. It frustrates me that one of my favourite directors could produce something that I regard with such contempt. All actresses involved did not deserve this treatment and it would be much appreciated if Malick would return to more streamlined films in which women are characters instead of objects. The film is deserving of just one star and is lesser than all of Malick's previous works.

    I hate this movie. It is the most navel-gazing, pretentious film that Terrence Malick, the director of The Tree of Life (2011), has ever made and that's saying something. The difference with this one is that he doesn't say anything in nearly two hours and leaves us questioning as with To the Wonder (2012) whether he has lost his touch as a director and is now making ghastly, unwatchable films nobody exactly. We spend 118 minutes with a shallow, narcissistic protagonist Rick, Christian Bale, that isn't enjoyably dislikable but very annoying. He spends his days and nights with a parade of scantily clad beauties, Isabel Lucas, Teresa Palmer, Imogen Poots and Freida Pinto. When we get a reprieve from this extended male fantasy it is brief but blissful and this just made me more frustrated with the film because it was clear that these small scenes should have constituted the whole film. Cate Blanchett plays his compassionate ex-wife a doctor who treats burn victims and Wes Bentley and Brian Dennehy play his loose-cannon brother and emotionally detached Father respectively. These two storylines contain tension, comprehensible characters and great acting, something missing from the rest of the film. As with a lot of his other films this is semi-autobiographical and Rick is intended to be similar to the Terrence Malick of the 1970s, a hot-shot screenwriter, Malick worked on early drafts of Dirty Harry (1971, facing a recent divorce and an existential crisis caused by traumatic events from his past. If this was what Terrence Malick was like during that era I would congratulate him for being honest about what a horrible person he was but this does not mean I want to spend hours with this version of him. Instead of being a complicated anti-hero both Rick and Terrence Malick come across as shallow in the way they choose to treat their own â~issues' in this film. This film was shot entirely without a script and this is clear throughout. Why does Malick think this is acceptable? even The Tree of Life featured a nominal screenplay. Through Lubezki's lens everything on screen including Skid Row and a dingy strip club looks impossibly beautiful. But wait, are we not meant to see this beauty as a shallow façade for these empty people looking for genuine emotion in a city that has no desire to provide them with it. It is understood that this is the view we are meant to take but Terrence Malick seems far to seduced by the fake, soul-sucking film industry to really satirize or criticize it in any meaningful way. What is the point of having the best cinematographer currently working poring over every shot in a film if it all amounts to nothing. My biggest issue with the film is it's treatment of women, it is plainly disgusting watching frankly pornographic shots of beautiful young women wandering around half-naked in hotel rooms whilst having no personality or motivation other than pleasing Rick. The exception to this rule, defenders would argue, is Natalie Portman's character who does get her own storyline, she is married and having an affair with Rick, but even she is present to â~save' him and the way that Malick focuses on her extraordinary beauty, with shots of lithe body, instead of the laughable dialogue that Portman is forced to spew shows how little respect he has for his female characters. Malick's early films, Badlands (1973) and Days of Heaven (1978) focus on sexuality as subtly as both Martin Sheen and Sissy Spacek appear fully clothed throughout Badlands and Sam Shepard's sexual desire for Brooke Adams is clouded by his innocence. The women here, other than Blanchett and Portman, are offered no opportunity to craft actual characters, has Malick slowly lost respect for women over time or has this sexism always been underlying? This film is not worth watching under any circumstances, look to Malick's early work to see why he is such a respected director but don't touch this misogynistic garbage parading itself around as meaningful art. It frustrates me that one of my favourite directors could produce something that I regard with such contempt. All actresses involved did not deserve this treatment and it would be much appreciated if Malick would return to more streamlined films in which women are characters instead of objects. The film is deserving of just one star and is lesser than all of Malick's previous works.

  • Feb 10, 2019

    More nonsensical filmmaking from self-absorbed and vastly over-rated director Terrence Malick. A lot of great talent wasted on an invisible storyline.

    More nonsensical filmmaking from self-absorbed and vastly over-rated director Terrence Malick. A lot of great talent wasted on an invisible storyline.