_The New World_ was good. It was everything you would expect a Malick film to be. It was slow, ponderous, beautiful. It's not fair to say it doesn't have a plot, but it is fair to say that that plot could be squeezed into say, a 90 minute movie, rather than a 150 minute movie. But, of course, the plot isn't really the point. It was generally a quiet movie. More focused on movement and sound than dialogue. Why the girl who plays Pocahantas doesn't have any sort of accent is very odd to me, but maybe they thought it would just sound hokey.
In terms of historical accuracy, the sets and wardrobes seem believable to me. Jamestown looks like an awful little hole, full of dirty guys and the insane. That seems right to me. The characterization clearly has no basis in reality. By all accounts, John Smith was really like Colin Farrell in real life: a drunken lout who lied most of the time, but here he's all fucking sensitive and stuff. Vaguely annoying, but since the characters really don't matter, it didn't bother me.
The movie had a lot of wind and crickets and other stuff I like.
I think _The Thin Red Line_ was better b/c I think the fragmented plot of the novel is better served by Malick's style. If the story doesn't follow a logical progression, ten minutes of looking a bug on a blade of grass doesn't really disrupt anything. Since _The New World_'s plot is more linear - Smith lands in America, Jamestown is built, Smith is saved by Pocahantas, Pocahantas is banished, Christianized, meets John Rolfe, etc. - the film seems to meander more.
Either way, if you like Malick go and see it. If you don't, don't.
I'm thinking about making White Russians with coconut milk? Anybody out there try this before?
My favorite moment in _The Big Lebowski_: When Donny asks if the nihilists are going to hurt them, and Walter pats him on the chest and says, "No, Donny, these men are cowards."
6 comments:
amazing how you can like the new world and have me thinking that you're crazy and then turn it all around with your last two sentences. i burst out laughing and my white russian came flying out of my nose at work. actually, that didn't happen but i did laugh on the inside. thanks for the review.
You're welcome.
I was having a conversation in the WC today about how you should just scrap the whole "land claims" thing and write your diss on the great American film genre of "snobs vs. slobs."
I also want a report on your white russian experiment. Sounds pretty good, really.
What other drinks have you mixed up? Of the ones I know of, they fall pretty evenly into the "hit" and "miss" categories. Anything to tip the scales either way?
it's weird that in wisconsin they still call it a "WC". but i guess it's even weirder that you have academic discussions while in the WC.
oh, and yes i'm just joking. lest the midwesterners get the wrong idea....
but tell me more about what films would qualify study in a 'snobs vs. slobs' dissertation. now i'm being serious.
Although we do have weird conversations in the bathroom, WC here meant "writing center". Actually, Tim probably better bathroom conversation stories than I do.
And Tim, once your internet connection isn't fucked up anymore, I think a "snobs v. slobs" post is in order, along with a mixed drink post.
Post a Comment