Did anyone actually enjoy watching this? Or is it just circle jerk award bait and >muh artistic over-editing ?
>>64637808
>award bait
Are you serious? It's way too artsy and unconventional to be award bait. Award bait is shit like American Hustle.
>>64637808
this is easily Malick's weakest film and it mostly recycles characters and scenes from his previous films.
>>64637808
I actually enjoyed it and might watch it again sometime, but I see that it has a LOT of flaws and a lot of wasted opportunities. I wouldn't really recommend it to someone else. Better than To the Wonder for me, personally.
Ignore tryhard babbies who keep going "muh terry" who will be in this thread soon.
it was a great deal better than To the Wonder. probably his 4th best film.
>>64637808
why don't you start providing actual criticism instead of buzzwords ?
>>64637808
>Did anyone actually enjoy watching this?
Yes, I sincerely enjoyed watching Knight of Cups. I had a transcendent experience viewing this film. Malick's best. Probably the best interpretation of his philosophy he's ever done. Best imagery. Highly recommended.
It's excellent. Genuine art.
>>64637808
Who the fuck did Malick made this movie for? Am I supposed to relate to those white rich privileged pricks in some deep and meaningful way? Get the fuck out of here with your first world problems and make art adressing real suffering.
>>64640029
I think it's meant to showcase how the human condition and fragility of man pervades even the most priviliged among us, just as it does those who have nothing.
Plus it looks nice
(I've not seen the movie btw}
I love how the genuine discussion of this brilliant film got out of the way as soon as it leaked and now it's just people shitposting about pretentiousness.
Liking Transformers means you have shit taste, and at the other end of this spectrum is modern Malick, and liking him means you have shit taste
>>64640968
im russian sorry for wrong words
malick is still terrible.
>>64641118
spectrum was the right word
he was implying that you're autistic because you might be on the "autism spectrum"
i wouldn't say that, but i definitely don't agree with you at all
>>64641185
i think he was talking about a spectrum of entirely shitty taste. i.e. on one end is michael bay and Transformers for people who just want entertainment, and on the other is terrence malick and the Tree of Life for people who want 2deep4u art films
i still don't agree but i'm pretty sure he was communicating his point properly
>>64641232
u got me correctly.
Malick has never made a bad film. Knight of Cups continues his trend of shedding extraneous plot and narrative to focus on emotions, thoughts and memories brought forward in his trademark fragmented visual and aural style. It, like his other films, is about age old universal themes, in this case the quest for enlightenment and the paradox of beauty. The sermon in the movie says that our now imperfect soul gets a taste of the higher existence it once knew whenever it is confronted with beauty, and so Rick immerses himself in all the beautiful sensual pleasures in the modern Babylon of LA. He is quite literally submerged all the time in ephemeral worldly pleasures, yet he still finds his life empty and devoid of any higher purpose and like his soul longing for a transcendental gratification, he is always by the end again quite literally looking upwards to the heavens for a higher meaning. The movie is an impressionistic retelling of his search for God, the Wonder, nirvana, call it whatever - any metaphysical peak that will give his hollow life meaning. But at the end he realizes that the journey itself is the source for his existential quest, the nourishment for the shadow of perfection his anguished soul seeks.
Knight of Cups is not just any "story" movie, but a sweeping visual symphony of the search for spirituality in an increasingly materialist world.
>>64641291
thats sad.
Felt like a bad self-parody. Maybe he should go back to simple storytelling like in his earlier better films.
>>64641291
How come that when Rocco abuses and degrades and humiliates women there's something so sweet and loving about it? Whenever those other gross porn guys like Max Hardcore or whatever do it it's really disturbing and just seems like an old man abusing a young girl and fucked up ways and I feel dirty after seeing a couple seconds.
When Rocco goes crazy he takes sex to another level as if it were art. Absolute fucking legend.
>its a film about his hatred of hollywood
>circle jerk award bait
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
>>64641616
yeah And i bet its shit on purpose.
>>64641291
>when zack snyder (Sucker Punch) or damon lindelof (leftovers) does it 'he's a hack!'
>when Malick does it: 'HE'S A GOD'.
Total fucking bullshit. If he wants to make music videos, he should just make them. Otherwise, write a fucking story.
>>64641602
Based Rocco understands women need a balance of rough dominance and sensuality
Malick knows it too
Most pretentious film of 2016
>>64639550
This. Fucking hell, Reddit needs to learn the difference. Malick 1000% does not make films for anyone but himself. This is a problem often cited by critics, as they're constantly 'inaccessible' and woefully personal. I'm a big fan and like the idea that I will find my own meaning of a film, but this isn't enough for some people. Basically, Malick is the furthest from award bait.
>>64641753
>Not understanding that you just need to be as handsome as based rocco to do whatever you want to any woman.
Nothing mysterious about it. She'll let you get away with anything.
>>64640945
That's a pretty good way to put it.
>>64639904
Why do I feel such a warm feeling of love towards this man? I've only seen Badlands, DOH, and TTRL, the latter of which is now a favorite, but he just seems so likeable and like the nicest guy. He gets so personal and emotional with his movies and there's something about that that really gets to me and moves me
>>64639592
Retard !! This is Malick's "8 1/2", though. You obviously don't know how to watch cinema.
>>64639658
This film is much more sophisticated story of a man's journey. The story has multiple layers to THAT opposed to "To The Wonder" that deals with LOVE.
>>64648810
I don't know why you capitalized love but it made me think of this
>>64639811
Totally agree with !!! I'm so afraid that people in the industry overlook this level of perfection. The film school around glob especially study this film along side with those master works from the past.
>>64648867
His films of recent have quite simple plot: "Tree Of Life" = Family, "To The Wonder" = Love, & "Kight Of Cups" = A Man. A very simple, yet so deep. You really gotta dig right into underneath of it. What doya mean by a pic you posted ? You were shocked to watch "To The Wonder" ?
>>64649178
>not getting an obvious Simpsons reference
I will pray to Terry for your salvation. Amen.
>>64641843
I think all his stuff prior to TTOL is pretty accessible, at least I enjoyed all of it as a teenager.
There's a very obvious evolution starting with TTOL that has earned him a new reputation of infamy with modern audiences.
![Knight.of.Cups.2015.1080p.H264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_00.38.05_[2016.01.08_22.44.47].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/8z1NJSg.jpg "Knight.of.Cups.2015.1080p.H264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_00.38.05_[2016.01.08_22.44.47].jpg")
How many scenes of Jason Clarke were scrapped in favor of underwater dogs?
what the fuck...
![20160107-070144[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/THopxU5.jpg "20160107-070144[1].png")
i had no idea it was out, remux 2 days old and already a CtrlHD release.
mite b cool
although this hasn't been a great decade for malick 2bh
>>64637808
It's not a film I'd watch again. It was an unusual experience, and I did sort of respect it for what it was- a visual experiment.
>inb4 pretentious faggot
