Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
GET UPDATES FROM Donald D'Haene
 

If You Couldn't Stand "The Tree of Life," Here's Another Flick to Avoid

Posted: 09/05/2012 3:29 pm

Heads up: Terrance Malick's To The Wonder has just played the Venice Film Festival and is headed our way -- a screening at the Toronto International Film Festival Sept. 6-16.

To The Wonder is a romantic drama centered on a man who reconnects with a woman from his hometown after his marriage to a European woman falls apart.

I've got chills and they're multiplying.

The star, Ben Affleck, isn't helping my trepidation. After seeing the film he told Jeffrey Wells of Hollywood Elsewhere, it "makes The Tree of Life look like Transformers."

Oh boy, I know what that means. It's a daunting task to even attempt to describe Malick's last film The Tree of Life.

A group of us who attended its screening met for coffee after and tried to figure out Malick's version of the origin of time for what felt like an eternity. Much like the movie itself, for it felt like it went on for an eternity, too. That's nothing. I hear the director's cut was 15 hours. A year later I'm still trying to figure this all out.

I know that some people felt the film helped them realize that life is good. I'm glad someone did because I know my group spent two hours and 20 minutes feeling that life is bad. One hundred and 40 minutes that we'll never get back.

We weren't alone. Some audience members at its first screening in Cannes felt bad, too. They didn't need the discussion time my friends and I had to describe our feelings. In fact, they only needed one syllable: "Boo!"

Some critics called the booers animalistic jerks. Booing might be a bit much. I remember I just couldn't stop giggling. The CGI dinosaurs 40 minutes in did it for me. I couldn't help myself: "For Pete's sake!" I cried out loud in the theatre.

"You dragged me to Jurassic Park 5!" said one friend, giving me an elbow. "Ten more minutes and I'm going to 'the washroom!' Talk to you tomorrow."

To critics, I promise you we weren't animalistic or jerks. We appreciated the beautiful cinematography shot by Emmanuel Lubezki, but much of that stunningly imagery accompanied by a soundtrack of angels sung with "joy" I'd seen at an Imax theatre on a screen several storeys high or on a National Geographic special. Frankly I'd rather have heard the productions' voice-overs than the "angelic" music used in The Tree of Life.

Potential viewers of To The Wonder, be warned. Once again audience members booed -- this time in Venice. I don't wonder why.

In the press notes for the film, Affleck himself prepares us: "The film feels to me like more a memory of a life than a literal story in real time of someone's life, the way movies more commonly are. This pastiche of impressionistic moments, skipping across the character's life and moving in a nonlinear way, mirror, in my mind, the way one remembers one's life. It's a little hypnotic and you're a little bit in a daze -- it's more fluid than real life is."

Uh oh! Shades of The Tree of Life all over again. When that film wasn't showing us the formation of life and/or the universe (in what felt like real time!) and instead focused on small-town life in the mid-20th century and one particular family, there were few dialogue-driven scenes.

I'd have paid money to have seen a copy of that script! Why even the child actors at the centre of the tale were not permitted to see the script. They were told roughly what to do or say. Malick wanted everyone to follow their instincts.

Brad Pitt played the father in the film and he explained it this way: "(Malick's) like a guy with a butterfly net waiting for the truth to go by." A hare waiting for a tortoise to speed by is more like it.

Malick rented an entire neighbourhood where they shot the film, dressed it to resemble the '50s, and would have the family linger together on the street, playing on swings, or working in the yard, while he "awaited special moments." A year and half later I'm still waiting.

Pitt's wife in the film, Jessica Chastain, explained that the director tended to steer the camera toward a nearby woodpecker or something else in nature if it interrupted the scene. Instead of ruining the take, that tended to be the thing Malick would rather use.

Oh, brother.

It's not that I want to influence people not to see To The Wonder. It's just that time is precious. I watched The Tree of Life the day after Amy Winehouse died. My only thought was, well, at least that's one movie Amy never had to sit through.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

 

Follow Donald D'Haene on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@TheDonaldNorth

FOLLOW CANADA
Heads up: Terrance Malick's To The Wonder has just played the Venice Film Festival and is headed our way -- a screening at the Toronto International Film Festival Sept. 6-16. To The Wonder is a roman...
Heads up: Terrance Malick's To The Wonder has just played the Venice Film Festival and is headed our way -- a screening at the Toronto International Film Festival Sept. 6-16. To The Wonder is a roman...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 12
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DonaldD
Huffington Post Blogger, Author, Father's Touch
07:19 AM on 09/11/2012
Peter Howell, film critic at TIFF connects the dots between the two films in his review: He says of To The Wonder: It’s a “follow-up to The Tree of Life, parts of which are actually incorporated into this film. Ben Affleck plays an Oklahoma man who finds a woman (Olga Kurylenko) and passion in Paris; their stateside return brings domesticity, regrets and Affleck’s involvement with a woman from his past (Rachel McAdams). And while the angles of this awkward triangle are calculated, the local Roman Catholic priest (Javier Bardem) cries out to God for guidance. Little is explained in the film, much of it operates subconsciously and all of it demands serious study and reflection.”
04:03 PM on 09/07/2012
homo sapiens are aware of this reaction to Malick. what they are not aware of is that there are people on planet Earth who like this shit and smoke it with much pleasure. So these comments ain't the new thing, they are in fact rot, because its been said before and will be said again. thing is that Malick keeps doing it, he keeps on making films and he does it in his style and that style is subje- jesus, i'm being dragged into the argument section of the imdb forum again, eek. so its great you found it boring and slow.

who cares?
09:16 PM on 09/05/2012
Donald, since you spent the time to email me through my own site (www.cinemafunk.com) about this post regarding Tree of Life, I thought I'd give you my opinion.

I'll admit that Malick's films are not for everyone, but I think your analysis of Malick's production process is is dependent on typical American film production. Malick's process, as you illustrated, is meant to find moments that cannot simply be created, but captured at the right moment.

I do believe that your comments are incredibly reactionary and lack the knowledge of deep, close analysis, common place in most HuffPo pieces. If you're interested in reading a real close analysis of the film, using film theory and biographical information, please read my blog post about the film here : http://www.cinemafunk.com/film-criticism/tree-life-revisited.html. Essentially, the clues to the film are all in the first five minutes. The quote and Mrs. O'Brien's voiceover provide enough information to trigger the themes and motifs to take the film from a movie to a work of art.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DonaldD
Huffington Post Blogger, Author, Father's Touch
11:12 PM on 09/05/2012
Your reply, which I really appreciate, totally justifies my column. I think we need to hear more "reactionary voices" not less. I have reviewed in my career over 700 films (I've seen thousands). The average theatre goer cares not about themes, motifs, film theory and bio info, even if I do. They care about what they are getting for their 14$ (and more if it includes babysitting, parking fees). I truly love the thorough responses my column is receiving. This will give more attention to To The Wonder, The Tree of Life and the catalogue of Malick Films including the brilliant Badlands.
07:48 PM on 09/10/2012
I didn't understand the vitriol for tree of life, nor the heaps of praise. I liked portions of it, I liked the style. And I don't see any need for a pseudo-review "warning" like yours. People who saw tree of life and hated it aren't at any risk to see this film, so your bit about $14 makes no sense.

That's where a critical review comes in. If perhaps someone liked or disliked tree of life and this defies those expectations, its up to you to clarify that. Instead, you're preaching to the choir of those who didn't like that film.

So actually - nothing justifies your column. You didn't even see the movie yet you assume its more of the same. You can cite as many anecdotes and OH BOY it sounds like tree of life. UH OH i remember this time when i saw tree of life YIKES it was terrible OH FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

More importantly, it gives more attention to you as you've gone on various blogs/criticisms and crossposted a link to this non-review.

"Potential viewers of To The Wonder, be warned."

Aren't you a potential viewer of To The Wonder, since you've not seen it? At least you've embodied Malick in your hazy, vague impression piece where it is never explicitly stated that YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE YOU ARE "reviewing."

So, great, 700 in your career. I hope you don't consider this one of them!
07:43 PM on 09/05/2012
Great article. In less than a thousand words, you've summed up the lack of substance in the majority of today's film criticism (and perhaps the culture at large). Rather than use your position as a PROFESSIONAL WRITER to shed some perspective on a film that was difficult, ambitious, and perhaps not totally successful (but clearly had a point of view), you dismiss it like a teenage girl (it's like, slow, and I didn't get it, so it sucked). You know, man, it's kind of like your job to know more than your readers and show them why the film didn't work and perhaps elevate the discussion, not simply mirror back the most obvious food blog reactions. (Avoid this director). Be a writer with ideas. Treat your readers with respect. Give us more than just trite observations. Make references to challenging films that did work and show us how they were better than Malick's film. Show us something. And the next time you and your film critic pals get together, collectively decide to scrap that great idea you had to turn film criticism into the judging panel of America's Next Top Model. You can do better work, sir.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DonaldD
Huffington Post Blogger, Author, Father's Touch
08:39 PM on 09/05/2012
Thanks for your thorough comment. Actually we read several substantial reviews by professional reviewers before we chose to attend The Tree Of Life (unfortunately we chose that movie over Midnight in Paris which we saw much later and consider a minor masterpiece in comparison). As you say, they knew more than us readers but in all their wisdom there was not one hint of what was in store for us. Too bad we didn't visit blog reactions, amateur reviews - why even a school girl reaction probably would have better prepared us for this torturous experience. Oh FYI we film critic pals are made up of a retired teacher, technical director, actor, author and an investor...age range - 41-59. I'll stick with our judging Panel aka American's Next Top Model over the majority of film critiques I read. Even critics that I really respect - well, we both know you can't always go by their take. ie. Roger Ebert chose Tree of Life as one of the top best films EVER. Hopefully my column, nothwithstanding its lack of substance will help inform and amuse a potential ticket buyer.
photo
Mastiff
Via ovicipitum dura est.
10:42 PM on 09/05/2012
"Hopefully my column, nothwithstanding its lack of substance will help inform and amuse a potential ticket buyer."

It certainly packs more entertainment than a Terrance Malick movie.
12:11 AM on 09/06/2012
Thanks for your response, Donald. At least we know where you stand, though I personally think you're wasting a valuable platform to generate some meaningful discussion and analysis. That said, here's some ideas for future columns:

1. Un Chien Andalou: 16 Minutes of WTF?
2. Chris Marker: Death by Boredom
3. 2001: A Space Odyssey: Odyssey or Blahdyssey?