Why do people even bother making films anymore?
Nothing will ever top this.
If you liked this kino, there's a list of others you should check out too
>>68691656
>>68694188
For the money
>tfw still haven't seen Knight of Cups
>>68694188
Everytime I watch Tree of Life, I get sucked in like with no other movie. I know you're memeing OP, but I've yet to find a film that I feel tops ToLto be fair I'm sure they exist and I haven't seen enough to find them yet, but Tree of Life truly is next level
>>68694188
DUDE CGI DINOSAURS LMAO
Oscar bait shleck.
>waa my daddy was abusive
>waa my mommy was depressed
>waa growing up is hard
>evolution
>How bout that Oscar?
If it spoke to you, fine, I respect the fact your family is terrible and you've had to endure that.
But, in terms of 'film making', it was garbage.
>tfw roon roon and goose is loose won't culminate their 2011-2012 reign into ultimate couple with Malick directing a movie with them as a couple in your lifetime
>the movie will never get released, and they'll never do media tours together
>>68696740
Watch more film, embryo.
>>68696740
Jesus Christ, any movie could be picked down to bare points and meme arrows. I came from a strong family, but still found connection with the story. You know there's more to it than familial relationships, right?
>>68696740
That's a very poor reading of the movie anon.
Watch it again, or stop posting altogether.
>>68696740
The dad wasn't abusive, just strict
>>68697641
This, although I think it's cool how divisive that figure was. When I forced my parents to watch it, my dad thought perhaps the dad should be stricter of the kid was still behaving so awfully. My mom said maybe the kid wouldn't be se bad if the dad wasn't abusive. I'm inclined to agree with my dad, but it's interesting how often times, we see the arguments between the two right as they start, with no background as to who is really at fault. This leaves room for each viewer to fill in the story with their own viewpoints or experiences.
>>68697784
Wow, I'd never gotten anyone's opinions on the parenting styles specifically so I hadn't thought of this. There's so much going on with this movie, it saddens me that people so easily write it off as pretentious.
>>68697564
That's a spot on reading of the movie.
It tried, I'll give it that - and it certainly had it's own kind of childlike dreamy aesthetic it was using. It was a good honest try to make a movie.
At the end of the day, it found the most generic heartstrings it could find
-daddy issues
-sibling issues
-ohno! a death!
-sad mommy
-kids are shitheads.jpg
-and a 100% out of place cut to the big bang, and stellar evolution clipshow to facilitate exactly how sad the mommy is.
Oscar bait. Through the roof. The only thing it could have done better was make the father a closet homosexual
>>68697914
Didn't even get the biblical allegory.
Fuck off pleb.
>>68697914
How is it Oscar bait at all? It would be the most exiremental film to win an Oscar, which is usually given to middle brow shit like Argo and Spotlight.
>>68697914
Name all those Oscar-winning movies that have 15 minute digressions on the evolution of the universe in order to articulate God's answer to Job concerning the problem of human suffering.
>>68698354
The point is you don't need 15 minute sideshows to illustrate Job "Why me!?" bullshit.
The director was just being a pretentious asshole the whole way through.
All you cucks who think this is the pinnacle of film making are everything wrong with the industry.
>>68698675
How are going to write off a movie as pretentious and then claim to know about the film industry and what's "good for it"? You don't have to like Malick, but his vile detractors are dumb as fuck
>>68698675
Why are you so irrationally bitter about this movie?
Did your gf dump you after seeing it or something?
>>68698675
The point of God's answer to Job is that he basically shows instead of tells him. You can't experience that same realization without experiencing what Job experienced. The problem of suffering is the most pertinent question in every religion, so the fact that the movie decides to deal with it in such a lofty fashion is appropriate
I guess this is a Malick thread then.
Anyone else didn't get Knight of Cups? What I got out of it is "despite everything, soldier on", which is kind of weak in comparison to his other films
>>68697012
>>68697012
>there's more to it than familial relationships, right?
thanks for giving examples of what else more to it there was
it was a slice of life about growing up
>>68699096
Nah dude, it's basically the same message as The Great Beauty: religious transcendence is worth more than all of the carnal pleasures combined
>>68699096
Something something Pilgrims Progress.
>>68698354
w-what was God's answer? i forget what happened in the bible
and how did ToL articulate it?
>>68699200
Read the fucking thread, there's plenty there, sorry you require spoonfeeding
>>68699287
>Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation ... while the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Job 38:4, 7
This is literally shown at the start. Basically you're just a human and you can't know shit about the universe. It's a big place, and you see no order there, But God does.
>>68698354
no 1 cares about your christfag bullshit, even among most christians. That's why Spotlight won and Tree of Life didn't
>>68699039
I'm no atheist, but the whole story of Job is bullshit Church propaganda to begin with. A character going through the stages of grief inevitably arrives at bargaining, which includes "Why me?!" The film is in no way helped by a side quest slideshow from NOVA about the mother thinking about her assigned role in life after losing a child.
He wanted to interject some evolution showcase into mainstream film during a time where creationists were screaming at the top of their lungs. It was like a fedora wearing neckbeard was put in charge of storyboarding.
If you removed the big bang scene, the movie is greatly improved.
>>68699207
I thought the point of TGB was that there's no great enlightenment in old age and the revelation itself is the beauty of it
>>68699432
It's more to do with 'why do we feel grief' rather than 'why is there evil the world'.
post top tier malick music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lvBZhXEJXY
>>68699287
Literally the opening text of the movie: 'where were were you when I layed the foundations of the Earth?' God takes Job on a journey through the universe in order to show him that human beings are a tiny, infantisimal part of his vast creation. So asking why life sucks is myopic; it's like a fish asking why everything's wet.
>>68699616
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFkyAD9gS6g
How does Malick manage to have such a patrician taste?
>>68699432
Malick's been writing this movie since the 70s; it's not reactionary anti-creationist propaganda propaganda, that's fucking absurd.
>>68699768
New World is his best movie
>>68699930
that's Days of Heaven senpai
>>68699528
That's not at all what the film explored.
If the movie was asking why humans feel grief, it failed at touching on that subject.
If the movie was asking a question, it's more
"How do we move on in life, carry with us all our grief, and not be ruined forever?"
The whole movie is the asshole brother walking outside of a building, all successful, still carrying the weight of his abusive father, depressed mother, and dead brother.
>>68699869
He wasn't storyboarding a highlight reel of the universe in the 70's. He tacked that shit on.
>>68700054
The volcanic scenes were shot in the 70s you fucking pleb
>>68696505
This.
>>68694248
HAHA IMPRESSIVE VERY NICE
>>68699251
So I should read that, then
>>68700179
Source?
Stock footage doesn't count, grognard.
ooooh, get some son.
>>68700448
plebs man. plebs.
>>68700448
>caring about imdb rating
I don't think you belong here, friend
An infuriatingly pretentious piece of shit.
It's a flick tricking the viewers into thinking they're witnessing something transcendent via lens changes and prolonged shots of clouds.
Top 5 biggest letdowns
>>68700571
I am simply the messenger.
>>68700412
>After making a huge splash with his second feature, the romantic drama Days of Heaven in 1978, Malick laid the groundwork to make a film to be called Q about the formation of life in the cosmos. Toward that end, the director and a small crew went around the world to shoot things such as ice floes in Antarctica, solar eclipses, and microscopic jellyfish along the Great Barrier Reef. After difficulties with the studio backing him, however, Malick backed out of the project and dropped out of the public eye for the next two decades—although by some accounts, he never stopped accumulating footage for Q.
>>68700616
Not only is that disrespectful to a hardworking and sincere man such as Terry, it's offensive to imply that anyone who likes this movie has been tricked; they aren't smart enough to figure things out in their own. Fuck you, approach things with some intelligent thought
