- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Themes of Terrance Malick (Tree of Life)-Possible Spoilers
Posted on 6/10/11 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 6/10/11 at 9:30 pm
This movie, out of any I have watched before, requires the most attention of the viewer. From its borderline over done cosmic scenes to its minimalist dialogue, the viewer must pay attention, but not without reward. If the recipient pays close attention noting the philosophy, whether you hold to the dogma or not, the film brings up important and seemingly eternal questions. From the dual nature of man embodied in the mother and father, the idea of love is questioned. Not necessarily in the option to love or not to love, but more in the idea of what someone should love. Now this may be a question that is brought about because I may have looked to into the movie, but does anyone think that this is a reaction to the American Dream? Or the idea of love as proposed by Ayn Rand?
Of course, maybe it's not in anyway related to this idea. Maybe it's only about the problem of evil. Either way, this movie, I can genuinely say, is epic. WATCH IT.
Of course, maybe it's not in anyway related to this idea. Maybe it's only about the problem of evil. Either way, this movie, I can genuinely say, is epic. WATCH IT.
This post was edited on 6/11/11 at 3:28 pm
4
Posted on 6/10/11 at 10:50 pm to drewhowie
That movie sounds extremely deep. Is there any way to describe what this movie is about in a single sentence?
This post was edited on 6/10/11 at 10:51 pm
Posted on 6/10/11 at 11:23 pm to Marciano1
Probably not, but I'll try. It centers around a family in the 50's dealing with death, the loss of innocence and the duality of man. I guess you just have to see it to really have any idea what it is about because it the movie is more of a question than a plot. Don't get me wrong, the plot is important, but it's the ideas and the ways in which Malick presents them that are really what the person should be watching.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 12:02 am to drewhowie
I just saw it as simply nature vs. grace like what was explained in the movie.
Man. I need to think more about this film. I've been avoiding pouring over it. I've given it a good bit of attention though.
It's going to require more than the norm.
Man. I need to think more about this film. I've been avoiding pouring over it. I've given it a good bit of attention though.
It's going to require more than the norm.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 8:31 am to drewhowie
quote:
This movie, out of any I have watched before, requires the most attention of the viewer.
Yeah, the way I describe it is that most movies are passive movies. There is no effort required. You lounge back to be entertained. Malick movies, especially Tree of Life, are very active; they require effort to comprehend, and often times you put the substance of yourself and your ideas where the cracks are, or where the synapses need connecting.
I certainly don't see that as a bad thing. It often frustrates me that people see his elliptical style as a fault. I just can't comprehend how someone so genius can be seen as boring. But then again not everyone has a deeply introspective personality where they enjoy breaking far below the level of superficial entertainments to try and glean the essences of existence. Malick makes art, not escapist fables.
quote:
does anyone think that this is a reaction to the American Dream?
That was definitely hinted at. I don't think it was an explicit theme, but just a motif from Jack's childhood, that self efficiency, hard work, and ingenuity are ideal traits to succeed. And that material wealth was placed on a pedestal by Mr. O'Brien.
quote:
Or the idea of love as proposed by Ayn Rand?
like this?. I would say absolutely. Maybe it wasn't derived explicitly from her definition, because that train of thought is as old as Plato's The Republic. But her definition is as good as any to describe how the dad wanted to raise his children.
This post was edited on 6/11/11 at 8:32 am
Posted on 6/11/11 at 10:11 am to Leauxgan
I love the way you described his style of presentation simply because I wholeheartedly agree with you. Tree of Life is a movie that requires more concentration than the average viewer can muster, but this is not a bad thing. Because of his style, which to some is considerably boring, the viewer has a chance not to only ingest the pictures and words that amble across the screen, but also has time to interpret them. What is so beautiful about this movie is that the depth is like a bottomless well. Like great literary canon, many themes are open to interpretation because of its complete complex nature. Its themes are not however, like some of the worlds great canonical books are, completely relied upon the individual reader, like the accidental meanings in Melville's Moby Dick :). What Malick has to say is purposeful, but still can be applied to a great many situations and people (Ex. Rands idea of love, the films relationship to Kierkagaard)
Posted on 6/11/11 at 10:43 am to drewhowie
I agree with both of you where Malick puts the audience in relation to the film. If anything I felt like I was spinning in a desk chair in the middle of a room and all these pictures and themes were swirling past me. I felt like I was the center of the film, and what narrative there was was easy for me to insert it in my life.
SPOILERS (can we get a tag on the title so we can talk openly??)
The film finally clicked for me when peering at the celestial body and J. Chastain cries out in V.O. "Where are you?" Asking where God is when she talks to him. That was the moment, right there, when I was ready to insert myself into the film. From there on out it was tangible to me.
Questions:
1) Did I see Satan behind that door curtain after the chair was moved out from under the table all by itself (magic)? In front of the open window.
2) Did you see the kid with the burn (who is supposed to be dead) and the kid's reaction to him as the transition from childhood, to adolescence, to adulthood? If not, what did you see it as?
3) Did people freak out when the younger brother stuck his finger in that black tube (looked like a powder horn) when they were indoors? Haha.
SPOILERS (can we get a tag on the title so we can talk openly??)
The film finally clicked for me when peering at the celestial body and J. Chastain cries out in V.O. "Where are you?" Asking where God is when she talks to him. That was the moment, right there, when I was ready to insert myself into the film. From there on out it was tangible to me.
Questions:
1) Did I see Satan behind that door curtain after the chair was moved out from under the table all by itself (magic)? In front of the open window.
2) Did you see the kid with the burn (who is supposed to be dead) and the kid's reaction to him as the transition from childhood, to adolescence, to adulthood? If not, what did you see it as?
3) Did people freak out when the younger brother stuck his finger in that black tube (looked like a powder horn) when they were indoors? Haha.
This post was edited on 6/11/11 at 10:45 am
Posted on 6/11/11 at 11:05 am to Pectus
1. Honestly I don't know who that was or if there was anyone behind the curtain. I remember the chair, but that's about it. It seems it could make sense that the Devil would be there considering that the movie is, among other thing, about the loss of innocence and the way of nature, but I'm not sure.
2. I'm glad this question was brought up because this was something that confused me. Didn't his brother die when he was 19? or was that just my understanding of it? I don't know about this one, needless to say I will be watching this movie again.
3. And Yes! That coupled with that beautiful and ominous music they played was so frightening. I know that I, although it was not a scary movie, was definitely tempted to cover my eyes at that part because I thought that this was where his brother was going to die. Ugh! It made me shudder watching it. That scene and the panty raid scene made me want to cry. It is so strange that something so common should make us so fearful, but I know Malick knew this, that he does not take the loss of innocence lightly and that he laments over its inevitable occurance.
2. I'm glad this question was brought up because this was something that confused me. Didn't his brother die when he was 19? or was that just my understanding of it? I don't know about this one, needless to say I will be watching this movie again.
3. And Yes! That coupled with that beautiful and ominous music they played was so frightening. I know that I, although it was not a scary movie, was definitely tempted to cover my eyes at that part because I thought that this was where his brother was going to die. Ugh! It made me shudder watching it. That scene and the panty raid scene made me want to cry. It is so strange that something so common should make us so fearful, but I know Malick knew this, that he does not take the loss of innocence lightly and that he laments over its inevitable occurance.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 11:19 am to drewhowie
quote:
2. I'm glad this question was brought up because this was something that confused me. Didn't his brother die when he was 19? or was that just my understanding of it? I don't know about this one, needless to say I will be watching this movie again.
I thought that kid was the one that died in the fire.
It's the same kind of story as the one that died in the river.
Loss of innocence is a big theme in this movie.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 11:21 am to drewhowie
Did you know that Malick, before becoming a filmmaker was a student of philosophy and actually had translations of Heidegger published in academic magazines?
Taking that into consideration, Heidegger's most essential aspects of life are: concern, being-toward-death, existence, and moods.
Concern - the ability to care about the self, in relation to phenomena. That's why I think pre-history was displayed, to show the incredible chain of events that led to our very being. How precious and improbable our existence is at all.
Being-toward-death - Knowing that life is finite reinforces the importance of all further decisions. We get the sense in certain moments that children both are frightened and don't understand death (the scenes in which a man is having a stroke, the frog/bottle rocket experiment). Perhaps these instances plant seeds in us as children that we must have a mature understanding of death to live more fulfilling, authentic lives.
Existence - Man is the only creature, that science knows of at least, that can create essences of things and ideas. Self-awareness is the first step toward plumbing the depths of the essences of creation, of establishing unique meanings.
Moods - Reacting to other beings through complex emotional and logical connections. Further refining your sense of self through the influence of others.
Though life is filled with anxiety that the world is not safe and guilt that life is incomplete, humans have a desire to be and define themselves. The pursuit of authenticity is constant.
Malick's films search so sincerely and with great provocation. I think that each of his films are thoroughly Heideggerian (er...without the Nazi ties). And ironically a nuance of his philosophy is to not over-rationalize the world and nature, which is exactly what I'm attempting here. Some things cannot be explained because we lack the instincts and dimensions to understand total reality. But to even arrive at that point enriches Malick movies. Enjoy the pure exerience and revel in making subjective shapes in trying to comprehend what's on screen.
Taking that into consideration, Heidegger's most essential aspects of life are: concern, being-toward-death, existence, and moods.
Concern - the ability to care about the self, in relation to phenomena. That's why I think pre-history was displayed, to show the incredible chain of events that led to our very being. How precious and improbable our existence is at all.
Being-toward-death - Knowing that life is finite reinforces the importance of all further decisions. We get the sense in certain moments that children both are frightened and don't understand death (the scenes in which a man is having a stroke, the frog/bottle rocket experiment). Perhaps these instances plant seeds in us as children that we must have a mature understanding of death to live more fulfilling, authentic lives.
Existence - Man is the only creature, that science knows of at least, that can create essences of things and ideas. Self-awareness is the first step toward plumbing the depths of the essences of creation, of establishing unique meanings.
Moods - Reacting to other beings through complex emotional and logical connections. Further refining your sense of self through the influence of others.
Though life is filled with anxiety that the world is not safe and guilt that life is incomplete, humans have a desire to be and define themselves. The pursuit of authenticity is constant.
Malick's films search so sincerely and with great provocation. I think that each of his films are thoroughly Heideggerian (er...without the Nazi ties). And ironically a nuance of his philosophy is to not over-rationalize the world and nature, which is exactly what I'm attempting here. Some things cannot be explained because we lack the instincts and dimensions to understand total reality. But to even arrive at that point enriches Malick movies. Enjoy the pure exerience and revel in making subjective shapes in trying to comprehend what's on screen.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 11:24 am to Pectus
quote:
2) Did you see the kid with the burn (who is supposed to be dead) and the kid's reaction to him as the transition from childhood, to adolescence, to adulthood? If not, what did you see it as?
This is the only question I can answer confidently. I don't remember the other two instances well enough.
I think the burned boy was actually alive, a survivor of the fire. And his presence served as a loss of innocence, that human beings, though resilient, can be marked for life either physically or emotionally. It could also be a momento mori moment, accepting the awareness of the balance of life and death. Though Jack and his brothers seemed a little hesitant of him at first, he was eventually treated as a normal friend again. I saw him as an acceptance of death.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 11:40 am to Leauxgan
quote:
I think the burned boy was actually alive, a survivor of the fire. And his presence served as a loss of innocence, that human beings, though resilient, can be marked for life either physically or emotionally. It could also be a momento mori moment, accepting the awareness of the balance of life and death. Though Jack and his brothers seemed a little hesitant of him at first, he was eventually treated as a normal friend again. I saw him as an acceptance of death.
I thought he was dead for the longest time until a neighborhood kid looked at him.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 11:46 am to Pectus
Interesting take, and you could very well be right, given the metaphysical conclusion and its injection of unreality.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 11:56 am to Leauxgan
Ok. New scene:
The mother floating around.
Was it to express that the children thought of her as god-like or angelic?
The mother floating around.
Was it to express that the children thought of her as god-like or angelic?
Posted on 6/11/11 at 3:28 pm to Pectus
quote:
Was it to express that the children thought of her as god-like or angelic?
That was my first reaction to it. It surprised me at first but i can't really remember the context to that scene, another reason why i would really love to see it again (preferably on the big screen)
What was everyone's take on the final scene at the beach? I thought it was a representation of heaven, though i'm not entirely sure
Posted on 6/11/11 at 3:46 pm to Pectus
quote:
The mother floating around.
Was it to express that the children thought of her as god-like or angelic?
Wait, whaaa? Was there a particular scene where she did this? Man, I need to go see this again.
quote:
What was everyone's take on the final scene at the beach? I thought it was a representation of heaven, though i'm not entirely sure
It was definitely some form of an afterlife, with strong suggestions of Heaven. I thought it was like the manifest answer to a prayer. Or some mythical moment of reconciliaton where space and time no longer exist (that's why older Jack saw his younger self there) and everyone is at peace with one another.
Posted on 6/11/11 at 5:47 pm to Leauxgan
quote:
Wait, whaaa? Was there a particular scene where she did this? Man, I need to go see this again.
ya it came out of nowhere. she was just kinding of floating and dancing in the lawn
Posted on 6/15/11 at 12:43 pm to drewhowie
Okay, went and saw it again last night.
It was just as good, if not better, the second time around and it was a great opportunity - having bridged the viewings between a month - to settle down focus on other intricacies of the movie rather than having been utterly mesmerized the first time around.
Here's a small smattering of thoughts:
1. Man ... what an intimate, honest portrait of childhood. I feel like he pulled my own personal history out and remolded it in his own image. Not that I lived a tortured upbringing, but the cruelty, innocence, curiosity, etc. felt very authentic.
2. Older Jack/Penn was looking pretty sullen and confused the entire time. After the rapturous ending where everyone came back to one another on the beach, the penultimate scene is Jack finally smiling to himself like he had some small, but profound epiphany. That's basically the gist of what happens after I watch any of Malick's movies.
3. Saw that scene yall were talking about where the mother floats. Also there was a scene when they're asking her if she will die one day, and the scene switches to her body in a glass case in the woods, like it's uncorrupted and immune to nature. Those two scenes combined to make me feel that Malick is clearly promoting her worldview as the most right, or most sacred.
I think, for me personally, only six months into the new year, this will go down as one of my top 10 movies of the decade. It's a masterpiece.
It was just as good, if not better, the second time around and it was a great opportunity - having bridged the viewings between a month - to settle down focus on other intricacies of the movie rather than having been utterly mesmerized the first time around.
Here's a small smattering of thoughts:
1. Man ... what an intimate, honest portrait of childhood. I feel like he pulled my own personal history out and remolded it in his own image. Not that I lived a tortured upbringing, but the cruelty, innocence, curiosity, etc. felt very authentic.
2. Older Jack/Penn was looking pretty sullen and confused the entire time. After the rapturous ending where everyone came back to one another on the beach, the penultimate scene is Jack finally smiling to himself like he had some small, but profound epiphany. That's basically the gist of what happens after I watch any of Malick's movies.
3. Saw that scene yall were talking about where the mother floats. Also there was a scene when they're asking her if she will die one day, and the scene switches to her body in a glass case in the woods, like it's uncorrupted and immune to nature. Those two scenes combined to make me feel that Malick is clearly promoting her worldview as the most right, or most sacred.
I think, for me personally, only six months into the new year, this will go down as one of my top 10 movies of the decade. It's a masterpiece.
Posted on 6/15/11 at 1:16 pm to Leauxgan
This is the most I've been intrigued by a movie in a long long time. I expect to either be floored or disappointed. I have a strong but amateur interest in philosophy. Most philosophical presentations generally either blow my mind or make me think, "what a crock of shite". Hopefully, I get more of the former.
Posted on 6/17/11 at 2:03 am to drewhowie
Dammit. Does anybody know if this film is ever going to make it to Baton Rouge?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News