Robert Altman and Terrance Malick are goated at creating dreamlike environments… probably the closest two filmmakers that get you to that dream esq sensation.
Something cool I learned about Terrance Malick apparently is that he is actually a huge fan of the film Zoolander (2001), and he also quotes the movie frequently on set while making his movies.
Love or hate his films, Malick makes the movies HE wants to make. Studio brass notes and test screening results aren't hijacking his films. Waters, I'm sure, at least respects that. Also, Badlands, Days of Heaven, The Thin Red Line and Tree of Life are bona fide classics.
Something cool I learned about Terrance Malick apparently, he is huge fan of the film Zoolander (2001), and he also quotes the movie frequently on set while making his movies.
John Waters definitely has a point. Many people, when describing Citizen Kane, Lawrence of Arabia, Barry Lyndon, and many other visually rich films seem to stick on the cinematography only, which I actually think doesn't give those movies enough credit. The movies are in part great because of the cinematography, it's not the only thing they have going for them. All 3 of the movies mentioned are not just visual films, but compelling character studies with fantastic performances from the actors. When people discuss movies that happen to be great all around, they should remember that so as to not make it seem like the cinematography is the only thing worth watching it for. Sweet Smell Of Success (1957) and Hud (1963), both shot by James Wong Howe, are also prime examples of this. Yes, James Wong Howe is one of the greatest cinematographers of all time, but Sweet Smell Of Success is also great because of Burt Lancaster and Tony Curtis' tour de force performances, with a compelling story, in addition to the cinematography of New York City. Same with Hud, yes, James Wong Howe's cinematography of the Texas Panhandle is incredible, but so are the tour de force performances of Paul Newman, Patricia Neal and Melvyn Douglas, in addition to the cynical storyline. If a movie deserves praise for all aspects of it, then try not to leave any of them out when waxing lyrical about them.
It's because most people are locating something that they can't quite verbalize, so they chalk it up to the cinematography. It's usually coming from a certain feeling that the film is conveying and of course this mostly stems from the formal aspects, not really the story. And the thing is, the formal elements *are* the narrative in a sense. It all becomes one thing you can't separate.
Paired with an all time great original score by Maurice Jarre and incredible performances by Peter O'Toole, Alec Guiness, Omar Sharif and Tony Quinn. Lawrence of Arabia is rightfully credited by most as one the greatest films of all time. If all someone gets from that story is cinematography, they don't understand it or have the patience to absorb a nearly 4 hour film.
Ill always remember i went to see tree of life the day it came out and it was a full crowd cause its a brad pitt movie and within half an hour every single person except me and the person i was with left. I have mixed feelings on later malick stuff but that was probably my favourite experience at the cinema, watching ppl walk out as the fucking universe was being born on screen.
I'm going to add to the ever-growing list of comments you simply ignore, despite wanting a viewership, asking you to put the sources for your audio in the description. It's not going to belittle your edits or stop people clicking on your videos to cite the places you rip your content from. Cheers.
If you don't know you're not a real movie fanatic. I know where every soundbite is from on this channel and it's maddening that he gets so many views on snippets of greater conversations.
@@RT-qi7rn you're not a real movie fanatic, you're just narcissistic. Real movie fans would say where its from as a form of education for folks, and realise not everyone has had the time to hear literally everything posted on this channel. Some of us actually make stuff with our time instead of pretending to be superior on RU-vid.
@@wc6046 Because I don't agree with them. I'm upset about the content stealing and that it's disseminated to morons like you that don't deserve it. You haven't done the work to dig it up and learn it
Nice of Waters to point out: "maddening" is a quality that can engender love and respect,not usually,but maybe that's why it's so powerful when it lands right. Thanks JW & JWBS
The weird thing about malicks later films is their all about romantic love but they never have any sense of intimacy. I always think about how in lost in translation as the two characters fall in love they gradually get filmed closer and closer together until they finally embrace at the end. Thats what falling in love feels like the gradual lowering of your boundaries until you let someone fully in
I love any artist that just does whatever they want, i might not always enjoy the output personally, hell it took me like six tries to figure out what K Lamar was going for in Mr Morale and the Big Steppers now its one of my favorites by him
The Thin Red Line is a movie I can understand, I haven't seen it in a while but I thought it was a good movie. But after To the Wonder which I also enjoyed, I just got sick of his films. Do you feel the same way about A Hidden Life? I started it but I couldn't finish it. I can't even remember if I've seen Knight of Cups.
@@dreamquesttvit his worst film I've seen of his its really tedious, the tree of life had this compelling family drama along with the spirituality and those things connected together beautifully. I never gave a shit about Jim cavijesus
There is one and only one thing that needs to happen for Terrence Malick's movies to be praised universally by everyone. He needs to start with a script that is at least based primarily and rooted heavily in actual, historical events. Battle of Guadalcanal....perfect...everyone is aware of WWII. So, if we have 10-15min of silent nature footage dropped in at minute 53, we at least know that the heat death of universe won't occur before the next plot advancing scene comes along...as with Knight of Cups, where I couldn't have told you anything about what did, was or was going to happen at any point.
i love all of his films. not only for how beautiful they are but also for being unconventional and always trying to find something to say. "a hidden life" is a film that more people need to see as it is also his most political film to date.
Love John Waters to death but do not like the take of "if you come out of the movie saying that was good cinematography it wasn't a good movie." I know what he's really saying is that if he cinematography is the only thing really propelling a film than it's not a good movie...but even then I disagree - as I feel that incredible technical filmmaking can indeed elevate other mediocre aspects of a film. This is a VISUAL medium after all. It's all subjective, but I loooooove LOOKING at a film I'm watching and noticing camera set-ups, lighting, blocking, etc. This goes for any kind of film - blockbusters, comedies, horror films, arthouse...
I liked all latest Malick movies and never understood why people call them pretentious. You literally turn off your brain like it's some Marvel movie and catch the vibe.
@theghostofhollywoodpast 0 seconds ago I don't think Terrence Malick is even a real person. Honestly, I believe Hollywood concocted him. He's rarely seen in public, with only a few known encounters, like the one with Benicio del Toro, which seemed staged purely for publicity. The man they've painted as Malick-I think he's an actor pretending to be a director. It's strange how they claim he's related to Ben Affleck. I don't see any resemblance or connection between them. The idea that a director goes away for nearly thirty years and then comes back with a slew of screenplays he wants to film seems incredibly convenient. It's almost as if Terrence Malick filming all these movies is a calculated move, especially considering his supposed relation to Ben Affleck, who is said to have co-written Good Will Hunting. I think he might be an actor pretending to be a director, or he's a real director from the seventies who filmed Days of Heaven and Badlands, then either died or was killed, and Hollywood chose to capitalize off his death. It's also possible his image is simply being used while someone else is behind the helm. I know people will call me a conspiracy theorist to control everyone's thoughts, but I find his story to be a bit odd... even the shot of him with Benicio... he seemed a bit out of it... like a homeless wanderer suffering from dementia... somebody who couldn't possibly film the project the Hollywood jugernaut films and packages like advertisement. Malick's enigmatic presence, his sudden prolific output after decades of silence, and the connection to Affleck all point to a larger scheme. Especially since we all know Ben Affleck didn't write Good Will Hunting, nor did Matt Damon-at least not the shooting script. Malick seems like another poser, like Damon and Affleck, pretending to be a director. I could be wrong, but I find certain things fishy, like David Lynch randomly converting over to a daily weatherman from his house shortly after filming Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire, and Lost Highway. Lynch's films often delve into the nature of reality and consciousness, and it's possible he was getting too close to exposing the truth about our existence within a construct. Perhaps Hollywood chose to shut him down, steering him away from filmmaking to prevent him from revealing more about the simulated nature of our reality. All of these are subtle clues about how our simulation works, where reality seems to be blending together. Actors, grips, or filmmakers might vouch for Malick being real, having seen him on set, but he could simply be pretending to direct the films. Someone vouching for him doesn't mean he's the one actually filming these movies. His story is very fishy to me. For every ten people who find my comment amusing, thought-provoking, or at least consider the notion, there will be a single uptight person who tries to gaslight me or make me seem like a kook, a clammoring lunatic... maybe 3 out of 10... Rather than loosening up and considering how actors have background stories... as fake as the persona they project to us... posing as real people when they arent. Hollywood is make-believe, just like some of the characters they create off-camera. I stumbled upon a fascinating decode related to how they blend fiction and reality, suggesting that this is simply a construct-possibly a hologram where Hollywood is merely a dreamscape. It's worth watching, and it's fairly short, like seven minutes.I don't think Terrence Malick is even a real person. Honestly, I believe Hollywood concocted him. He's rarely seen in public, with only a few known encounters, like the one with Benicio del Toro, which seemed staged purely for publicity. The man they've painted as Malick-I'm convinced he's an actor pretending to be a director. It's strange how they claim he's related to Ben Affleck. I don't see any resemblance or connection between them. The idea that a director goes away for thirty years and then comes back with a slew of screenplays he wants to film seems incredibly convenient. It's almost as if Terrence Malick filming all these movies is a calculated move, especially considering his supposed relation to Ben Affleck, who is said to have co-written Good Will Hunting. I think he might be an actor pretending to be a director, or he's a real director from the seventies who filmed Days of Heaven and Badlands, then either died or was killed, and Hollywood chose to capitalize off his death. It's also possible his image is simply being used while someone else is behind the helm. I know people will call me a conspiracy theorist to control everyone's thoughts, but I find his story to be a bit odd. Malick's enigmatic presence, his sudden prolific output after decades of silence, and the connection to Affleck all point to a larger scheme. Especially since we all know Ben Affleck didn't write Good Will Hunting, nor did Matt Damon-at least not the shooting script. Malick seems like another poser, like Damon and Affleck, pretending to be a director. I could be wrong, but I find certain things fishy, like David Lynch randomly converting over to a daily weatherman from his house shortly after filming Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire, and Lost Highway. Lynch's films often delve into the nature of reality and consciousness, and it's possible he was getting too close to exposing the truth about our existence within a construct. Perhaps Hollywood chose to shut him down, steering him away from filmmaking to prevent him from revealing more about the simulated nature of our reality. All of these are subtle clues about how our simulation works, where reality seems to be blending together. Actors, grips, or filmmakers might vouch for Malick being real, having seen him on set, but he could simply be pretending to direct the films. Someone vouching for him doesn't mean he's the one actually filming these movies. His story is very fishy to me. For everything ten people who find my comment amusing, thought-provoking, or at least consider the notion, there will be a single uptight person who tries to gaslight me or make me seem like a kook. Rather than loosening up and considering how actors have background stories, posing as real people, they prefer to dismiss these ideas. Hollywood is make-believe, just like some of the characters they create off-camera. I stumbled upon a fascinating decode related to how they blend fiction and reality, suggesting that this is simply a construct-possibly a hologram where Hollywood is merely a dreamscape. It's worth watching, and it's fairly short, like seven minutes. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fUbWCLFgLps.htmlsi=0N8wjIDvw3Jw41-f
I never understand what Americans mean with pretentious when they talk about artfilms. To me, for example, Marvel movies are pretentious because they are blatant emotional propaganda, shoving the spoon down your throat telling you how to feel, how to live your live, and wat is good or evil. The most pretentious line in cinematic history is: "With great power comes great responsibility." You can't get more pretentious than that.
It’s very easy to be funny when you can’t make art like someone else and make fun of that art ha ha ha no one brings up this guy’s name in the universe of Terrence
Badlands and Days Of Heaven are fucking amazing. He will always have cred because of those, but everything else he's done feels like it was basically made by a different person. A real shitty person.
@@nin114 There's a very obvious evolution from Badlands, to Days to the late 90's mid aughts period, then the 2010's. The language feels extremely connected and if you say otherwise, I don't think you understand much about cinematic craftsmanship.
@@SallyMankus130 In your defense, I had forgotten about Thin Red Line. In my defense everything else beyond those few films felt as though Mallick was trying to capture that same magic, but instead came off as unbelievably pretentious and trite. More so with each passing film. BUT to utter the line "if you say otherwise, I don't think you understand much about cinematic craftsmanship." something tells me you adore those unwatchably pretentious turds.
