The tree of life


I didn’t hate it, but I didn’t particularly like it either, and this is coming from a person who loves every other Terrence Malick film!

It was a beautifully shot film. Malick seems to have totally abandoned narrative, dialogue and actors performance, in favour of his distinct visual style: Images of pastoral, bucolic, nature, and people running around, like it’s the Garden of Eden. But, because there is no story, this style started to grate. It felt clichéd to me. In fact, old Malick films do it better, because their variation between static dialogue scenes and these moments, give the films more visual and stylistic texture.

Here, there is a constant use of tight steady-cam shots following characters around, spinning around them. The edits jump cut fragments together: moments of silence and looks, hands on backs, ignoring any hint of a conventional dialogue scene. Choral music is plastered over everything and voices whisper little bits of voice over.

There is a half hour digression that takes in the creation of earth and includes some terrible CGI dinosaurs. It is pretty clichéd, a mix of 2001, Fantasia and Walking with Dinosaurs, and look the dinosaurs have morality! At this point my mind began to wander and I asked myself: if these dinosaurs are part of this story, why aren’t they all jump cuts and steady-cam’d up?

I thought the story, or to be more precise the conceit, was self-indulgent and made no sense whatsoever. I simply didn’t understand the logic of it. I know it was all about Life and Spirituality but that doesn’t mean you can’t throw in a few narrative hooks to pin it on and make it more logical. For example:

If it was about Sean Penn remembering his fifties childhood, because his brother died. Then his brother’s death in the now should spark that story. Or the break up of his marriage or his mum or dad dying or something. That kind of thing make more narrative sense and gives some reason for the present day story.

If it’s just about a Sean Penn remembering his life, then why does he remember the beginning of time and a load of dinosaurs? Then a summer when he was ten. It’s a pretty strange selection of life memories: a load of stuff that never happened to you, and one summer. If he was thinking about all this because of the death of his brother, ten years later, wouldn’t he remember that time too and his reaction to the death, not just his parents reaction?

Basically the film isn’t about that Sean Penn character at all. It’s the director’s vision of his childhood played out by actors. A Hopper-Wyeth, Fifties, Pastoral, America and I don’t mind that, just please give me a little bit of story to hook it to . Otherwise I might as well just be watching Malick’s home movies.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: