>"More like Knight of Kino, heh"
What did I mean by this?
True patrician kino
was this film about an organization that does this?
>>71014693
What did you meme by this?
>>71014693
>get some of the best actors around
>shoot over their shoulders while they walk around aimlessly instead of acting, dialogue
>add whispering voiceover
pure kino
>>71016948
ikr
>>71014693
>What did I mean by this
Kek
>>71014693
Man, the Knight of Cups thread yesterday was fantastic. Pleb derailers left earlier and there was some great analysis going on. Feel free to dislike the movie, but please give actual criticism, not "it was boring; nothing happened; it was pretentious; Malick sucks".
I may bump with some posts from yesterday if anyone is interested
>>71017114
saved the entire thing.
https://letterboxd.com/knightofcup/film/knight-of-cups/
It's there for everyone to read. I don't know the password since I used a random number generator for it.
>>71017213
Thanks
If aliens landed and said "What is kino ayy lmao?" I might give them this film...or Tree of Life.
1. KNIGHT OF CUPS
2. TO THE WONDER
-quality gap
3. TREE OF LIFE
-quality gap
4. THE THIN RED LINE
5. BADLANDS
6. DAYS OF HEAVEN
Based nuMalick guiding me into the light
>>71017338
I think KoC may just be his best, but TTW was a bit of a misstep. The pacing, or the flow that Malick has mastered seemed to be missing. By no means a bad move, but I'd but it on the other side of the power gap (and would personally move ToL up)
>>71017338
>days of heaven last
kill yourself for even looking ata Malicvk thread
>>71017446
I've stated my issues with Tree of Life in the 2-3 previous threads past the week so I won't bother repeating them.
There's only a bit of a pacing issue in To the Wonder that distracts from the film, but that's about it.
But I really love all of his latest three films very, very much. So the difference isn't as huge. Hell Tree of Life is one of my all time favorites.
>tfw no one, single epic soul journey edited from the footage Malick has shot for Tree of Life, To the Wonder & Knight of Cups exceeding the length of 12 hours.
This feel is a sad feel.
>>71017213
Jesus, nice job
>>71017615
Honestly, even with power gaps, ALL of his films are close in quality, but I agree the latest three are exceedingly wonderful. With the supercut, do you see it including all three stories intertwined? Either, that many hours of Malick would be amazing
>>71018192
I'd see it as a journey of one soul, starting from Tree of Life ending to the freedom passage of Knight of Cups. To me, TTW and KoC always felt deeply autobiographical stuff from him, don't know why - it's ignorant of me to assume it so but that's how I felt. Rick and Neil are the same person more or less.
>>71017546
feets
>>71017213
>tfw my posts are there
I drink you. Now. Now.
>>71018516
>mfw I understand what Malick meant with that, having felt it before seeing the Thin Red Line.
and I'm sorry? if your posts are there, but I used random number generator for the password and deleted cookies so I can't edit it no more.
I just wanted to save it for anyone that wants to read it.
>>71018596
>I understand what Malick meant
I feel I understand too, but I certainly can't say I've experienced it. Have you? And am I not truly understanding it then? I feel my imagination and what I've felt of life so far is enough to at least imagine feeling a relatable way
>>71018871
I've felt the yearn for it and it perfectly summed up my feelings towards love.
![00000.mpls_snapshot_01.16.44_[2016.06.20_02.05.02].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/FMkiZxR.jpg "00000.mpls_snapshot_01.16.44_[2016.06.20_02.05.02].jpg")
>>71019014
but the truth is we can't be that. And that is a crushing realization. Tied to physicality. Alone in death.
>>71017213
>tfw your posts are there
>tfw you helped contribute to insightful, erudite discussion about probably your favorite film ever
This is a very good feel. A very, very good feel. But there are no good analyses without good readers. Thank you brah
yes yes well done Australia well done
HOWEVER
Kind of scared wrt. to Weightless, it comes so soon after Knight of Cups and I wonder if Malick had time to adjust himself to filming a different film so soon after KOC.
more like knight of goofs
roflcopter2
>>71017213
the fuck. that's way more thorough and steeped and specificity than any casual deconstruction needs to be. did you guys write a paper on the film for college or what?
>>71019626
>>70962461
>>71017213
I went into Thin Red Line with am open mind, and aside from Noltes' performance I was bitterly disappointed. How does Line compare to this movie, cause even though I've only seen the one film, I really want to write Malick off as overrated
>>71019726
As a fan of nuMalick (Tree of Life onwards) I was disappointed by The Thin Red Line. Both the Thin Red Line and the New World are still pretty conventional films, more of transitional type of work for him (the philosophy and the writing are more or less trying to achieve same things, but I do not find the camera work inspiring or purposeful in delivering the message he wants to)
It all changes in Tree of Life, I don't know what sort of hallucinogens he took but they worked. Granted ToL has some iffy bits of writing taht weren't present in The Thin Red line.
and if you've seen TTRL only once, it is nearly a 3 hour film so it will be hard to absorb at one sitting, if it is your first Malick film.
Like any other director I'd suggest starting from the beginning.
>>71019660
ok but you don't paraphrase Moore, Deleuze or Plotinus without some pre-planning. Seems more like essay work.
>>71019912
It was more of a personal note for myself for further reading since saving it to computer would mean I accidentally delete it or relying on 4chan archive is risky.
>>71019912
I wrote the Deleuze and Plotinus posts. It wasn't pre-planned. It's just what this film made me think of.
What is Voyage of Time supposed to even be, just extended version of Tree of Life's creation scenes?
Has any reviewer even seen it?
>Will To the Wonder--or TO THE WONDER, as the film's end credits have it--finally dispel the aura of reverence that has settled over the cinema of Terrence Malick? The late creation of an artist can act as an alembic, concentrating and thereby heightening the qualities of his former work, Robert Bresson's L'Argent (1983) being only the most imposing example. And To the Wonder, like Andrei Tarkovsky's Nostalghia (1983) and The Sacrifice (1986) (both of which Malick has drawn from, particularly in 2011's Tree of Life), distills all that is intolerable in its maker's films. Ironically, To the Wonder is positioned as a departure, the first in Malick's oeuvre, aside from a few uneasy sequences in The Tree of Life, to be set in the present day. That apartness--Terry Does Contemporary--serves to reveal that Malick's stylistic traits, previously identified as auteurist signatures, appear too often tics and affectations. What Malick's disciples praise as his ambition and sincerity increasingly registers as feigned naivete, an untoward belief that his fervent romanticism can renew such exhausted tropes as a van Gogh field of sunflowers, a Milton tree of life, a Gauguin South Sea paradise. The unfortunate effect of To the Wonder is to cast a retrospective pall over the director's work, to underscore the tendency in his earlier films to banal symbolism, manufactured rapture, and middlebrow aestheticism.
>>71020214
it's his IMAX BBC Nature doc that everyone's inevitably going to get stoned too.
>>71019726
Very different. Line was his transition from the style in his first two films to what he has now. Definitely watch the first two, Badlands and Days of Heaven, they're straightforward stories impeccably directed.
Now, the style he transitioned into is becoming more and more potent and unique. Definitly watch Tree of Life, I feel it's the moment he fully realized what he wanted to do, philosophically and stylistically, with the medium of film as a whole. Knight of Cups however, is on a whole other level. It abandons all conventions and tells a story both visually oriented and entirely elusive in its meaning. I'd say watch those four (in chronological order) and then you'll have an accurate feel for your thoughts on Malick.
Of course, feel free to revisit Line as is a good thing to do with any film so grand and complex, and feel free to check out New World and To The Wonder if you find you like Malick, or feel his other films are interesting but not quite connecting to you
>>71020163
I think I'll read up on them before I start my eventual 3rd rewatch of his filmography.
>>71020244
i fail to see the connecting lines between tarkovsky and malick
>>71020327
Why didn't people like Pitt's performance in this movie? As a child of a (somewhat) religious, Texan dad, I found it entirely believable. It was clear that he loved his kids, but couldn't exactly figure out how to get that across all the time. I'm one of the people that defends his punishment of the one kid, but I do think he failed to find the balance of strict yet effective parenting, and Pitt portrayed that perfectly
>>71020163
you seen this Jonathan Anderson lecture on the spiritual allusions in ToL anon?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkRvNMH_5Ms
get a letterboxd or blog or something so you can save your deconstructions. It's a bit of a waste just posting stuff on 4chan.
>>71019608
Pretty sure some of the filming started a couple of years ago. There's that youtube video of Terry filming Bale at that Texas music festival, which is where the film is located. Think he filmed Knight of Cups, Weightless, and that third one all close together, and he's been editing them for over a year.
>>71020566
Probably just plebs who think they need to able to *like* like a *character* for something to be *well done*.
He had near flawless performance and portrayal of a clearly troubled father.
>>71020433
They both made fragmented films about their lives, very personal subject matter from their childhood and their adult lives. Their themes are extremely similar, both to spirituality in a non-pedestrian way. Other than that their actual direction and editing are worlds apart.
>>71020813
Yeah and it is the directing and mise-en-scene in both Malick and Tarkovsky films that translate the story to us and I find nothing similar.
>>71020433
both attempt to enrich film-language via elliptical exploration of natural phenomenology, symbols and liquid narratives, which fracture under the weight of memory and subconscious yearnings.
>>71021189
hmm that's bit too reaching, since their directing and mise-en-scene, cinematography is all so different.
but i can see what you mean
>>71021237
they both love using natural elements as symbolic conduits: Tarkovsky with his pools of water, decaying walls and burning houses, Malick with his beaches, shores, deserts. They both have idiosyncratic motifs that recur throughout their work and the movement of their later films are often described similarly (dreamlike, fluid)
Though I suppose as a general rule concerning great filmmakers: differences are more important than similarities.
>>71020936
Yeah, but there's more to a film than that. The fragmented memory presentation of both The Mirror and The Tree of Life are very similar, how many other directors have done something like that? The comparisons are shallow, but the likeness is there in many aspects.
>>71021452
The house gone to shit and the woman standing inside it while it continues to rain is some shit in Mirror. I honestly don't understand much of it, I wrote that weird scene on 'memory mixing up with itself' lmao
>>71017546
>>71018392
always
![00000.mpls_snapshot_00.18.43_[2016.06.20_03.07.42].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/KlDtOMB.jpg "00000.mpls_snapshot_00.18.43_[2016.06.20_03.07.42].jpg")
>>71021493
I think some people would object to an overly dichotomous interpretation of this film, what with every scene representing either a solar, masculine spirituality vs. a lunar, feminine hedonism. Some with no familiarity with these ideas would ask what gender even has to do with this.
But it's not about a gender politics. It really is just a fancy terminology to refer to universal facts of the human experience.
It is what femininity and masculinity represent in their most essential aspects. The lunar pole is the principle of change: consumption, decay, corruptibility, that which is passive in respect to external influences, what is acted upon instead of being the locus of activity itself. This is the world of matter and physicality. This is the All.
The masculine is enlightened activity, what is calm, grounded, dignified, self-possessed. Forget the rad fem shit and you'll understand this is exactly what is meant when someone is told to "be a man".
This is the principle in oneself that overcomes limitation and adversity. It is a transcendental as opposed to a merely physical strength. This is the One/the Self at the center of the All, valiantly braced against the tide of form.
Depression, getting swept away by emotions and desire, is a feminine trait. I think anyone whose experienced something like the bone-deep sadness of someone like Rick would agree with this: you don't have depression, depression has you. It's a monster that digests you and turns you to putty. Recall the last time you let someone get under your skin, or the last time you obsessed over the opposite sex. You conceded your sense of self to them like it was nothing.
In Qabbalah, the primordial feminine is the primordial womb, the mother of life and form, but also, by implication, death.
I thought I was shoehorning these ideas a bit much 'til I remembered this line from Rick when he's playing with those models in his apartment.
>"Life... a Goddess."
But what about the spirituality in the film? It is in nature and shots of the sky, those wide open spaces that engulf and subsume even the most obscure personal sufferings. The sky hangs cold and majestic even over the most raucous party.
I can quote Buddhists, I can quote Hindus, I can quote mystics and philosophers of all stripes and colors to support this point, but I don't think there's a better summation of what it means to be rise above the shit you're going through than this:
>"I ask not for a lighter burden, but for broader shoulders."
>>71014693
>>71017546
D R O P P E D
>>71021850
Rick's not having the burden of world on him, just a quest to get rid of his basic programming though.
>>71021746
>>71021850
Based analyzer at it again
>>71022049
missing his marks though.
>>71021954
But he definitely has a burden, and like the priest near the end says, it connects him to something greater than himself.
Like that getting swallowed by a snake line. Sorry bud, once you're in it, you're in it. The only escape is suicide. You either hang yourself or go THROUGH.
>>71022159
yeah but to think he had burden of world on him, that'd be vanity.
>>71014693
I just don't understand how people love this movie so much.
Malick is one of my favourite directors but I think this is his only mediocre movie. It feels like self-parody most of the time. It's the only movie of his that feels genuinely fragmented and the images didn't feel as though they progressed naturally from one another. I love the way even To the Wonder is able to communicate such a range of complicated emotions through the swirling flow of images but KoC just seemed totally incoherent to me. I also thought it's the only film of his where the narration does actually sound rather superficial and lacking the insightful meditations that characterize all of his other movies.
Someone please explain to me what they love so much about KoC without resorting to Brody's review which is absolutely terrible.
>tfw you love Malick but Knight of Cups didn't strike you emotionally like his other films have
>>71022232
How can it be self-parody when it involves what is essentially ego death and revealing Malick's own life so very much and on a personal level
>fragmented
>progressed naturally
you don't stop and think
maybe that's quite sort of a... the point?
>>71022232
i think being young and lost in the big city or really helps
i used to work at a club at a bad time in my life so all the party scenes, esp that one fucking midget dude coming up to rick and his girl at the vegas party and acting like an idiot, and a fucking drink always in their hand. you just can't stand those fuckers when you got shit on the brain
>>71022350
probably the film that had highest emotional impact on me of all the films i've watched
>>71022350
I know that feel.
I went to see it twice in a theater because I couldn't believe after the first viewing how little impact it had on me.
I also don't care much for the "analysis" that is occurring above in this thread. It's great that those kinds of interpretations can be made and it's good to see that Malick's movies are obviously made with intricate care and attention to detail, but all of the analysis of imagery and the philosophies behind the images mean so little when the movie fails to have any cinematic impact on the viewer. All the cerebral import of the film collapses under the complete lack of any communication from the images themselves on an emotional level and not the interest that comes from being dissected for symbolic meaning.
>>71022515
the symbolism and philosophy is a supplement. there wouldn't be such earnest analysis about this film if the visuals and emotion didn't have such a deep impact on the viewer.
if it didn't resonate with you, though, it didn't resonate with you. thinking about this film intellectually in the moment is the last thing you wanna do
>>71022515
KOC had a huge impact on me, and that was only at a surface level reading, the range of emotions I felt during it and the fantastic climax just did its tricks on me. Second time I watched, I felt something get lighter within me. Dunno lol
All of the above interpretations are made by interpreters, not by Malick. It's just fun.
>>71020163
You don't really have a decent grasp of Deleuze, but I see what you were trying to do.
>>71022733
Where'd I go wrong? Genuinely curious.
>>71022408
I mean the style feels self-parodic. What has been so amazing about Malick's evolution as a filmmaker is his ability to shift his style drastically over the course of his career, on a film-to-film basis. KoC just feels to me like a retread of the stylistic experimentation he pushed from ToL to TTW. Little to me seems to be added.
And yes of course the style is meant to be fragmented but that doesn't mean that anything goes. The style in TTW is fragmentary but as I mentioned before the film still coheres and the images build off of one another in a way that conveys tangible emotions. KoC doesn't feel that way to me at all, the images seem to hardly follow any rhyme or reason that I could detect.
>>71022679
I like analyzing movies in that way too but I guess I'm just being autistic in my inability to understand how other people could be so moved by this movie when I felt nothing, even boredom at times. I guess it's hard for me to believe that Malick made a movie I can't connect with. Maybe the next time I give it a shot I'll feel more.
>>71022915
you can have subjective detachment sure, but to claim it doesn't cohere rings false since everything is in service to a very clear arc of disillusionment and rediscovery.
it's doubly perplexing to me since I think if anything it can appear extremely simplistic and repetitious.
I would like to add that Knight of Cups was a moving experience for me as well. It's a more subtle effect though, there aren't necessarily specific moments that break your heart or fill you with optimism. Instead, the film evokes the feelings of a dream, or memory, and slowly builds emotion until it's all over and that's when I felt how affected I was by the film. I disagree with those who felt no rhyme or reason to it, not that they're "wrong" or they "didn't get it", just that I did see a flow, something I felt he stepped up from TTW.
>>71022915
What about his style is self-parody? This is extension of a style that started in Tree of Life, progressed through To the Wonder to this. Malick has managed to direct scenes with such fervor and energy that it is unrivaled (some of it was in at the later parts of To The Wonder, maybe), youthful even and he is a fucking old dog so all in all it's incredible experience to me. Everything about how he shoots a scene just screams life at me.
Retread? There's so much more movement and even GoPro experimentation that you cannot mistake any of the scenes here, stylistically, to To the Wonders imo.
>KoC doesn't feel that way to me at all, the images seem to hardly follow any rhyme or reason that I could detect.
I can just shrug my shoulders up and tell you earnestly that I had the exact opposite reaction to scenes depicted here. So full of life, energy and so very well reflective of memory and consciousness and how I feel and remember things in my life.
>>71023095
>It's a more subtle effect though
Heh. First time I saw Knight of Cups I couldn't stop being a jaded and cynical little faggot laughing at how ridiculous cologne commercial it was and how anyone could make such film must be a dumb fucking retard. Some story about white rich boy having 'issues' while fucking women and getting dosh.
Then for some odd fucking reason things kept repeating in my mind from the film and I had to watch it again, I literally could not stop thinking about it after laughing at it, how shit it was, and I dropped my edgy guard down and basically did a mini version of ego death? and I was blown away. Ever since I've been changed, for good.
There's some magic in this film.
Legit the only film to ever affect me.
>>71023099
I hope to feel that the next time I go into it. The GoPro scenes were basically the only thing that stood out to me as being a positive step forward in the experimentation Malick was doing. I guess to me the extension wasn't nearly as interesting as you seem to think it was, I didn't find it was much of an extension at all from the style he was pushing in To the Wonder. It seems like a furthering of that style but by a much smaller margin than say the expansion from ToL to TTW. I also don't recall the GoPro experimentation being all that big a component of the movie outside of a few choice moments.
Anyway, some of Malick's movies can take a while to sink in or to lead me to connect with them but this one didn't attain that. I also just felt the story of the disaffected man who goes through a bunch of attractive women while feeling nothing and starts making sense of his life when he finds peace afterwards was a little cliche and uninteresting for someone of Malick's gifts. It felt too much like 81/2 or something in that vein but when that kind of subject matter is paired with Malick's poetical seriousness it starts to sound ponderous and a big laughably self-serious to me.
Anyway, I hope I'll connect with it somewhere down the road but to me it's probably the biggest disappointment of the year along with High-Rise.
>>71023347
what do you mean the only film to ever effect you?
you mean the only movie to ever have an impact on your life or the only movie to move you?
More like
knight of snooze
lmao
>>71023390
the film literally took a wild ride in my consciousness in a way that changed me forever. this is some corny fucking shit i'm writing but this is my honest feel.
after my second viewing i felt like i was lighter and saw the world in a different way
i had seen to the wonder for the first time before watching KoC 2nd time, and I fell in love with To The Wonder (in my first viewing) and decided to give the second chance to KoC with dropping my guard and just letting it wash over me
it worked
>>71023348
There''s a ton more dank angles when you compare TTW and KoC scenes.
KoC have lot more upward or downward angled directing, and like I said I felt the camera moved with more aggression like it wanted to really fucking *search* that meaning
>>71023347
Awesome, thank you for sharing man.
I smoked a blunt to the head and watched this new year's day at like 6 in the morning. Blew me the fuck away. It was everything I wanted it to be from the trailer
>>71017338
Switch Badlands and DoH then reverse the rankings and you have the real list
You ranked his movies purely in terms of eye candy
>>71023844
how the fuck are you guys not putting The New World on that list even?
it's my fave of his
>>71023517
more like
night of sleep
lmao
>>71023844
Because Days of Heaven didn't look drop dead gorgeous? looks better than Tree of Life overall but that don't make me like it more.
That biblican hellfire scene is something else
>>71023840
Didn't even need drugs myself. Just a honest guard drop. Let it all in.
Is mallick the definition of style over substance?
>>71024033
Style IS the substance.
>auteur theory holds that a film reflects the director's personal creative vision, as if they were the primary "auteur" (the French word for "author"). In spite of—and sometimes even because of—the production of the film as part of an industrial process, the auteur's creative voice is distinct enough to shine through studio interference and the collective process.
>>71024077
He's literally the capeshit of intellectualism. Literally nothing happens but damn if it doesn't look good.
>>71024115
if you don't think there are serious ideas being probed in his movies then you are likely not very observant
>>71024115
>Nothing happens.
>>71023943
The extended version was great desu
>>71024077
He meant Malick's movies are really pretty and the effects are well-done but the writing is shit
>>71024179
>but the writing is shit
>mfw Malick trolling threads always turn into long-winded fedora analysis
>>71024220
In everything after New World the writing quality was mediocre
>>71024221
Mallick fans are so easy to trigger
>>71024263
You bore me, I'm going to bed.
>>71024263
you obviously haven't read his screenplays.
>>71024366
I wonder if Malick could make Blood Meridian adaptation, he'd have to take himself to a deep darkness to do it and survive it.
Fucking David Lynch is still depressed and recovering from realization of his beliefs being *wrong*
>>71024404
dem Beatles references tho
>I Am the Walrus
>I Am
>I
>>71023968
I loved koc but I actually kekd
>>71024309
>make a troll post
>Autistic Malick fan gives earnest, long winded response defending his artistic integrity
Like shooting fish in a barrel
>>71024490
but Night of Sleep is factually a good alternative title for the film
>>71024324
Because Bogeyman posting is so intellectual
>>71024363
>you bore me
Pic related
>>71024366
My fucking sides
Anyone else think KoC was horribly miscast with bale as the lead?
>>71019616
lmao this looks BAD
>>71017546
>ywn be her little goy toy
>>71014693
you'd get it if you had actually lived a life worth living, you know, taken risks and had success and failure where anything of value was at stake, instead of being a stupid fucking faggot child
>>71024737
He was pretty good, the first scene is pretty rough tho, the opening scene with him lying down at sand
>>71024447
>David Lynch is still depressed and recovering from realization of his beliefs being *wrong*
What happened, exactly?
>>71021536
Heh. I came here to ensure this was posted.
>>71024737
I actually thought he was great. He didn't have to do much, but he definitely fits the profile of a playboy with wasted potential. He totally seemed like the type of guy that is a natural at parties, and can pull women with ease. But at the same time, he could do so because he was intelligent. He wasn't just rich, or too stupid to do anything else, he just fell under the spell of glamour. To me, Bale portrayed that well, even if he actually didn't have to do much. His presence was believable for that type of person
>>71024404
golden
>>71024815
Because calling someone a "stupid fucking faggot child" in the middle of an online shitfit demonstrates maturity
>>71024815
what's your problem?
>>71023840
I've never gotten high before, but I have a chance to this evening and would like to watch a movie, Tree of Life, Knight of Cups, or Inherent Vice. Any recs? If it helps, I already love all those films, and KoC is the only one I haven't rewatched
>>71024991
dont use mel to try and make your point, dickbreath, mel is NOT on your side
>>71025038
koc i guess
>>71025038
Drive.
Or Equilibrium.
>>71024991
SAVAGE
>>71025038
Tree of Life is the best of the 3
I need to rewatch Inherent Vice though. I only saw it the once and I just thought it was decent.
>>71025080
>he likes Mel Gibson
What did he mean by this?
>>71025038
Knight of Cups if you're talking about those 3 movies. But if you want a poetic, trance-like movie like KoC, check out Samsara. Two hours of gorgeous hi-red nature scenes and cityscapes set to music. I've actually pitched KoC to a friend as "samsara, but with parties." It's got that same cosmic sweep Malick aims for
>>71025350
The Sun submerged in the alchemical, feminine "Waters"
FUCKIN' MALICK
>>71025210
I've seen Inherent Vice four times now, it's hilarious, and I actually have a good grasp on the plot and the intertwining conspiracies. I feel because of this, not too much would be added with drugs, besides more fun overall.
I did enjoy ToL more than KoC the two times I watched it, if nothing else, it affected me more emotionally. That being said, KoC is more complex, so I'm debating which would be more impactful to watch while high
>>71025375
Aight, Knight's probably what I'll go with. I have seen Samsara, but sober
>>71025434
how deep does this film really go
im afraid to go down that rabbit.hole
>>71025471
I saw Tree of Life on acid in a theater once and there was a local reverend who gave a talk about the film afterwards. I'm not religious but he gave a very interesting talk and it wasn't at all preachy. It was actually pretty fascinating to hear a perspective from a religious person about Malick's movies that deal with characters wrangling with a loss of faith and looking for answers in other places.
I think it was one of the most moving experiences I've ever had with a film.
>>71025498
Very few movies make me want to sit with a notepad and dissect, but this movie tops the list. I just want to read philosophy and research stuff like tarot cards and take apart every frame and see what there is to see
>>71014693
this meme has gotten out of hand
>>71025637
Surely you mean the kino meme, because "Knight of Cups is good" is no meme
>>71025655
jesus
>>71025655
And whose the High Priestess? The "wise" stripper who tells him his shit's all in his head. And where does he hear it? In a booze-soaked strip club
Blake:
>"The road of excess leads to the Palace of Wisdom."
>>71025655
why are the waters hedonistic?
>>71025804
because DUDE DEEP WRITING LAMO
>>71025804
In alchemical symbolism the "Waters" refer to the feminine, humid element of Nature. That is, matter, physicality, the body, the source of all desires and drives. It is humid because it is "sticky", it "soaks" your being and makes you impure with foreign elements (like, say, drug addiction, sex addiction, anything outside yourself you feel you need).
The waters also refer to the source of the body and physicality: both the "waters" of the female womb, and even literally the ocean from which all life evolved
>>71025685
Knight of Cups is underrating, but anons are just quoting themselves and asking us what they meant, it's too far
>>71026050
what in the fuck are you talking about?
first off, show me a source for your info here.
second off, why would water being feminine mean that it is representative of the "source of all desires and drives."
third, why would it being "humid" indicate that it would make you impure? why couldn't it soak you and make you pure?
water referring to the waters of the female womb and the source of life would imply the opposite of hedonism.
now again, hook up a source for your blabbering, contradictory bullshit that is serving as a complete misinterpretation of one shot in the film
>>71026178
do you actually believe what you just copy and pasted is an answer to my question about how that other anon could refer to the waters as "hedonistic?"
>>71026522
for the last time, please answer my very simple question. what leads you to the conclusion that the waters in the image you depicted are "hedonistic?" I'm not sure why this is such a difficult communication but you are making it into one.
I am not challenging the paragraph you just posted because it did not even attempt to answer my initial question. Please do so with your next response.
>>71026050
>>71026178
I am now wholly convinced that Malick's writing is a disease
>>71016948
>Chloe
>best
>>71026646
He's just semi-incoherently rambling
Ignore him
>>71017338
1. The New World
2.Knight of Cups
3. Tree of Life
4. Badlands
5. The Thin Red Line
6. Days of Heaven
7. To The Wonder
>>71026829
except no, no it is not. water is used repeatedly throughout the film, just as it is in many of Malick's films.
Look, see this: >>71026522
that was one of your posts. is the water in this image also associated with hedonism? I don't know anon, looks pretty spiritual to me. I mean wow look at that, it's a magnificent, gorgeous piece of nature that Bale is marveling at. is it hedonistic? let me guess what is coming next. that stingray is meant to be an image of imminent threat and it could possibly even be conceived of as a threat of some female sexuality and ultimately hedonism due to its clear symbolism of the wounded female form, yes?
>>71026292
Alchemy is the art of self-purification, of reintegrating the impure human organism with the primordial solar gold. The solar gold is the masculine element that is liberated, transcendent, and self-determined. Nothing determines it, it is the absolute master of itself.
Water is symbolic of the feminine element because it morphs, changes, conforms its shape to whatever container is put in. For those with an excess of the philosophical "Waters" (you're seriously autistic if you think I'm talking about H2O), they are determined by outside forces. Essentially, they are a bitch to their emotions and inherent biological drives. They are not masters of themselves.
Alchemy is the process of restoring this self-mastery. Knight of Cups is about a man trying to raise himself up from a world that only cares about getting fucked up and getting a nut off. A world in the thrall of the "Waters".
You can't be "soaked pure", because to be soaked by implication is to be submerged in an element that is foreign to you (you can't make Water wet, after all). Purity is mastery, impurity is being torn between every which way by your drives and lusts.
>>71027339
not literally every scene with water is symbolic of hedonism you git. but if we got a sun card in a pool, or a man pointing at a sun over the ocean then if you have the necessary background it seems pretty obvious.
>>71022474
The scene with the man at the monastery really got me
>every twenty, twenty-five miles or so, you could feel yourself going back in history
>if you're in a cave, eating nettles, its not so difficult to keep you're life simple...and thats the great attraction of monastery life
>but now I only teach one thing, and that is this moment, pay attention to this moment, everything is there
>>71014693
Tdkr pose
>>71026292
Here are your sources m8. From the Hermetic Tradition: Symbols & Teachings of the Royal Art, considered an authoritative introduction to Alchemy:
>"Nature takes pleasure in itself" and "Nature dominates itself." Here is the possibility of "nature" being desire, abandonment to itself, spontaneity, and identification with self-gratification.
>At the same time it is the possibility of saying no to itself, of manifesting itself as that which acts against itself, that which dominates and transcends itself, to the point of actually making the distinction between that which DOMINATES ("masculine", active) and that which IS DOMINATED ("feminine", passive), in which alone is found the ancient chaotic nature.
>We can also say that in the One the All, the "One" and the "All" now crystallize as two distinct principles. The "One" takes on the meaning of a CENTER that manifests in the heart of chaos (the "All") and affirms itself there as a principle of incorruptible fixity, stability, and transcendence. [This is] ... the Sun. And that which in the originating matter was undetermined possibility, a passive potentiality for any quality, change, or chaotic transformation, is turned into a quite different principle, which in hermetism corresponds to the feminine symbol of the Moon.
>Separated from this Center, this force becomes a blind impulse an savage flood. Its downward direction is the "fall" precisely indicated by the alchemical heiroglyph of the Water principle (an upside-down triangle), under that aspect identical to the Moon.
>If as we have suggested the law of "desire" and of self-absorption is expressed by the descending direction of the symbol for water, everything in the "one thing" that is on the contrary oriented toward the principle of the Sun can be expressed by the ascending opposite direction, that is, flame.
>>71027919
don't bother, plebs gon pleb
