You should try Hidden Meaning again, and Voyage of Time, if you can find it. A Hidden Meaning was really good, and much more of a cohesive story than the films from his burst right after Tree of Life. I get the criticisms of those, and polarizing nature of Tree of Life and others, I happen to like that he can make whatever he wants, because he has a unique vision, and he's made some absolute classics in his first four films (I'd argue for Tree of Life as well), and when he's missed, they are beautiful and wonderfully evocative. The ultimate irony, though, Terrence Malick was consulted on the script for Dirty Harry (among others), and they used some of it for the first movie, but used most of his story for Magnum Force. So, he can absolutely do a compelling story, even one that sells lots of popcorn. Very much looking forward to Way of the Wind.
Not a huge fan of Malick's latest works but I feel OG filmmakers should be left to make whatever self indulgent film they want to without trying to appease audience or box market. I mean they have earned it.
Then the question becomes: When a movie is released to a wide audience, shouldn’t the filmmaker have some degree of consideration for the audience? Otherwise, one can just make home movies. For example, George Lucas said he still intends to make more movies but only avant-garde, experimental films he has no intention of publicly showing.
Thanks for sharing in-depth your takes on Malick, one of the best video essays I've ever seen about his work, congratulations. Agree that his best output (The Thin Red Line, The New World) is when he's at least working within some semblance of a traditional narrative / story structure. Story is ultimately what makes us want to watch a piece of film or listen to a piece of music or read a novel or poem so when you lose that, you are just left when an animated painting or an empty commercial, especially when the characters you're spending time with in his recent projects (inward looking Hollywood types) aren't as empathetic as in the two films mentioned above. I much prefer Linklater's rehearsed approach as The Before Trilogy is one of the most natural, believable and engaging romances but as Hawke said, there are no rules to cinema or art. Would love to see you do a video on what makes S. Craig Zahler's work so unique and refreshing (or even just solely on 'Dragged Across Concrete'). Looks like he's coming back strong with his next directorial project 'The Big Stone Grid' (originally supposed to be directed by Michael Mann) and with Ridley Scott directing his script for 'Wraiths of the Broken Land' both set for next year.
@@KyleCorwith I have watched all his films except To The Wonder and I love his impressionist style. I think that he is able to capture something transcendental through it that wouldn't be possible otherwise. But I also understand why it not might work for many people. It's like if it hits you it gets really deep and if it doesn't it can be frustrating. For me, it hits everytime.
This is a compelling overview. I read an article in Vanity Fair in the early 2000 about Kubrick's process. The writer quotes Kubrick who said that the film director and the novelist have the same duty, to capture what they feel will enhance the drama, that is why he adapted books to movies. I feel Terence Malick is similar in that unlike in a novel he works intuitively but much like a novelist he wants to tell the story of the characters as much as he wants to tell their story in the drama of the environment they are in. Like in A Thin Red Line. The sweeping shots of the hills and the local population singing Christian Songs with Jim Caviezel's character walking past them for example. This makes his scenes memorable. Later it seems atmosphere and the emotional landscape becomes important, much again like a novelist, which for a movie require improv like scenes and close ups of the actors. A novelist will use a narrator to show internal process of a character he does the same. This is a director who is mentally in the editing room as he makes the movie. Nice content.😅
I’ve only seen New World and I hated it because I went into it to see it from a historian point of view. Yes it was beautiful but it was also like a drug induced dream. I feel like it’s a movie you have to be in the right frame of mind to be able to watch and enjoy and appreciate.
Well. I can’t really remember because it’s been so long since I’ve seen it. I can remember that they did do a good job on the Elizabethan clothes. And my husband and I both felt sorry for Pocahontas being introduced to a payre of bodyes and heels on the same day.
These videos for sure suck. Good luck on getting better someday. Hope this is a fun hobby to pass your time while not getting laid and not something to actually work hard on or anything
Your ad hominem attempt says more about you, dude. When you’d like to address the actual subject matter examined in the video and have a civil, mature exchange, you let me know.
Zero content and zero subscribers after twelve years on you own channel… that pretty much says it all. You have no skin in the game and yet post a comment as if you’re some wise, seasoned, armchair sage… which you clearly aren’t.
