“The Tree of Life” is a Film that Will Stand The Test of Time
“Are you watching me? I want to know what you are. I want to see what you see.”
Amidst the miracle of life and the beauty of this world, it’s easy to wonder why are we left to experience tragedies and unjust fate, to ask ourselves where God is when we need him the most and to ponder why even the most graceful of this world are made to suffer. In the hugely ambitious and thoroughly unique coming-of-age film The Tree of Life, acclaimed director Terrence Malick meditates on these questions that have haunted the human experience since the beginning of time. If you thought his previous movies were meandering and contemplative, wait until you see this.
Foregoing all storytelling conventions, the film is nearly devoid of a narrative structure but revolves around the all-encompassing struggle between the cruel way of nature and the loving way of grace. At the center of it all is a middle class family in 1950′s Texas which embodies this struggle within. Mr O’Brien (Brad Pitt) is a manifestation of nature, an ambiguous and overbearing figure whose capacity for admonishing his children is only exceeded by his love for them. Embittered by dashed dreams for himself and his family, his stern parenting style reflects his obsession in making sure that his boys will be tough enough for the real world.
On the other hand, Mrs O’Brien (Jessica Chastain) represents no less than saintly grace. Nurturing to a fault, she is constantly doling out playful affection and heard saying things like “unless you love, your life will flash by.” She embraces the world for what it is rather than focus on reasons to be unhappy. All of this is seen through the eyes of the main character Jack who is struggling to reconcile those two opposing philosophies as he grows from a carefree little boy (Hunter McCracken) to an unhappy and lost soul (Sean Penn).
Only his fifth movie in four decades, The Tree of Life is easily Malick’s most spiritual and metaphysical work to date. One that is deeply intimate, perhaps even autobiographical, yet absolutely epic in scope. The film opens with the O’Briens reeling from the loss of one of their sons at the tender age of 19. As the mother mourns her child asking “Lord why? Where were you?” Malick, perhaps taking on God’s perspective (yes that epic), does nothing less than connect this event with the birth of the universe, spending twenty minutes going back all the way to the beginning of time to depict the creation of all things. Perhaps this signifies that God is busy with creating, that even something as unbearable as the loss of a child is all but a tiny speck of insignificance in the grand scheme of things. This is really up to you, the viewer, to make up your mind as to what it all means because the entire film is so open to interpretation.
In this dialogue-less sequence, we watch as nebulae expand, galaxies are created, and fiery planets are formed. Life develops, at first tenuously in cellular form, soon evolving into jellyfish and then dinosaurs, before suddenly skipping back to 1950s Texas as Mrs. O’Brien gives birth to Jack. What ensues is one of the most delightful and lyrical representation of childhood ever put on film. In one moment to the next, Jack goes from a sleeping newborn to taking his first gingerly steps to running on the front lawn. It’s truly fascinating, akin to watching a consciousness progressively coming into being.
“Father. Mother. Always you wrestle inside me”
It soon becomes apparent that most of the movie are Jack’s recollections of his childhood as he ponders his conflicted relationship with his parents and how his mother got through such an unspeakable tragedy. The collection of vignettes mirrors how we remember our own childhood with a tinge of nostalgia. There are those specific moods and moments we recall vividly and others we only remember in broad strokes. Malick isn’t focused on traditional storytelling so much as he is trying to visually replicate the conscious reverie we all experience internally.
Does this all sound overwhelming or even pretentious? Absolutely, I wouldn’t blame anyone who has seen the movie for saying so. To be honest, there is little here in terms of entertainment value and this is a slow and demanding film that will drive some people to be bored to tears. There are moments that are frustratingly inscrutable, maddening even in their seeming incoherence. Malick continues to display his trademark quirks — the whispered voiceover, the constantly motioning camera, the scant dialogue and this lyrical fascination with the natural world, but The Tree of Life is about as impressionistic and experimental as it gets for a semi-mainstream Hollywood movie.
And yet, isn’t any movie that attempts to probe the limits of the human condition going to be deemed preachy and pretentious? This is an incredibly rich and symbolic film that will flood you with emotions. It asks fundamental questions about the meaning of all things and how people decide to live their lives. Why should I be a good person if my father is not? Why are the graceful of this world made to endure pain? Malick isn’t swinging for the fence as much as he is reaching for the Moon and do we truly want it any other way from one of our most visionary filmmaker?
“No one who loves the way of grace ever comes to a bad end.”
This is reflected in the cinematography. They say that every frame of a Malick movie could be a painting, it has never been more true than in this movie. Both he and DP Emmanuel Lubezki are constantly trying to capture the perfect moment, the essence of life itself on film. The beauty of The Tree of Life is beyond words, such a feast for the eyes and the ears that it will move you to the verge of tears. It’s not a stretch of the imagination to think this is the most beautifully shot movie ever made.
On a final note, it seems completely overlooked that Malick is a prodigious director of actors. He knows how to consistently extract the most fascinating performances from his cast despite the most abstract settings and even though his actors have no idea of their place in the big picture. Brad Pitt is nothing short of riveting in the most natural performance of his career, able to be intimidating yet loving in his own odd way as a temperamental man full of life disappointment. Newcomer Hunter McCracken is a revelation, a boy who adores his mother and comes to progressively loath his father as he realizes he is becoming just like him. In a nearly dialogue-free role, Jessica Chastain is angelic (quite literally in one scene) conveying an ethereal grace without words.
Simultaneously flawed and masterful, frustrating and haunting, overwhelming and unforgettable, The Tree of Life is a polarizing work of art, the mark of a singular cinematic achievement that is certain to stand the test of time. It’s a demanding film that will most likely leave you stunned and speechless because words can hardly describe this spiritual experience. You certainly will be searching for answers long after the closing credits.
N/A
(I won’t shortchange you with a grade)
Notes: Rated PG-13 for some thematic material, 138 minutes.
58 Comments
Great write up Castor. I think this film is a gigantic feat of accomplishment. Malick is an amazing artist and philosopher, who’s work is so translucent and a visual marvel. Great, great write up!
Thanks Frank, this was so hard to write because this is such a rich movie one could easily talk about it for days. I will probably keep tweaking the review lol
The temptation is always there when a film is so layered. Writing any review for a Malick film is a daunting task, well done Castor!
And now i am further conflicted as to whether i want to see this or not.
It’s all up to you sir. You could really go in and walk out the door after 30 minutes. Or it could change your life forever. How often can you say that of a movie?
Well, i’m pretty sure my Dad will get this on blu-ray, so i will watch this then
The reason i am conflicted is because the last 2 Malick films i saw didn’t didn’t amaze me(I think they were good movies, i just didn’t love them). And also the comparisons to 2001 don’t really excite, as i didn’t love that one either(it lost me at the end)
But i’m going to give it a chance despite all that.
Lovely review, Castor! “I won’t shortchange you with a grade” … I hear ya, sometimes I feel like I can’t grade a movie either, but your review really makes me intrigued even more. Polarizing isn’t always a bad thing, I’m glad that Malick continues to create a film that is deeply personal to him, regardless of how it would be received.
Did Picasso ever ask his fans how to paint his paintings? Did Victor Hugo ever ask his audience whether to kill Jean Valjean at the end of Les Miserables? Malick is an artist first and foremost.
99% of movies, you can easily tell whether your friends are going to like it or not. With The Tree of Life, I’m entirely clueless whether I can recommend it to you or anybody else. It’s truly a singular piece of art.
Excellent reply Castor. I just loved your passion on Movies by the way you express here.
Excellent write-up Castor. I saw this on Friday night and left the theater in a daze. My friend that I saw it with said afterward, “After all that, I am not sure I really want to talk about it.” So we drove in silence, left to process what we’d just witnessed. I still haven’t been able to get the movie out of my head, had to search online for all the classical pieces used. It is a masterpiece, no question, and undoubtedly the most beautiful movie I have ever seen. And I agree, Hunter McCracken deserves an Oscar, he was incredible.
Phillip, it’s absolutely ridiculous. I have been listening to this in loop ever since I got back from seeing the movie!
I agree that McCracken will deserve Oscar consideration. So does Brad Pitt as well as cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki. Undoubtedly the most beautiful movie I have seen as well…
Excellently written, Castor. It’s interesting that you focus on the characters as much as you do because one of the biggest criticisms I’ve seen of this film is that the characters aren’t anywhere near as lovingly developed as the cinematography and the visuals. You yourself say that Chastain’s role is “nearly dialogue-free” and that the birth-of-the-universe sequence takes up 20 minutes, yet you made a connection between the cosmic stuff and the down-to-earth stuff that hadn’t occurred to me. I’ve been extremely ambivalent about seeing this movie, but I think you might have tipped the balance for me in favor of seeing it.
The characters are mostly archetypal but that’s because Malick only deals in archetypes so it isn’t a drawback at all. There is also something about the way Malick’s actors act that you don’t see in other movies. They don’t really “act”, rather they embody moods and emotions which make everything so much more natural.
This is a movie very much open for interpretation. Only Malick knows the meaning behind it all. He doesn’t strike me as a director who would try to confuse or confound for no reason at all.
I went back and forth wondering what rating I should give the film because it defies all of that. I’m still confused by it and it’s really a film that isn’t like anything out there. Your review is truly spot-on about all of the feelings made about the film. It is at times, frustrating and meandering but it’s also beautiful and overwhelming. There were moments I was in tears not just because of the beauty of the film but also the story. There were stuff that hit home for me about my own childhood.
I hope to see it again when it goes wide. I think we all will need a second take on this film.
It’s a truly incredible and perplexing movie. One moment you are like “WTF is going on???” and the next, you feel like crying because it’s so beautiful and powerful. Indeed, this is a movie that needs to be seen multiple times and even then, I’m not sure I will have any more insight into it.
Great review. This film is so gorgeous (in every way) and is easily my choice for the best film of 2011 so far. Hopefully, when I finally get my thoughts organized (seems to be taking longer than normal on this one) I will have my review up as well.
Looking forward to your take Kevyn. With most movies, everyone seems to be saying the same thing over and over again but I’m truly interested in reading everyone’s opinion on this.
Loved your review. This is perhaps the only movie that I can think of that I absolutely loved but could not fault someone else for hating.
Thanks Jonathan. It’s really quite unique in how polarizing it is, not only amongst people but also within one’s own mind.
I’ll definitely check it out when it goes to wider release. I was hoping to see the IMAX mini movie Malick shot to go along with this movie sometime this year, but looks like he’s still tweaking it.
Yes, you will definitely benefit from seeing it in better quality in AMC (or even IMAX?
). The Uptown Landmark theater leaves a bit to be desired.
Oh I wish this film is shown on IMAX but studio won’t fork over the extra cash to remastered it for the giant screen. Since you enjoyed this film, you’ll have to check out VOYAGE OF TIME, which Malick shot with IMAX cameras and Brad Pitt narrated it. Here’s the link to what’s going on with that film: http://collider.com/voyage-of-time-imax-terrence-malick/92770/
I couldn’t say the part that is obviously taken from “Voyage of Time” was my favorite section of the movie. From my point of view, that’s probably the part where a lot of viewers are going to be left completely behind. It’s magnificent but certainly overlong and tough to decipher in the context of the movie.
Nonetheless, as a documentary, it could certainly be fascinating.
Wonderful review Castor! I have to wait another week to see it here, but I cannot wait!
Thanks Andrew. Looking forward to your insight sir
This doesn’t come out in theatres here in New Zealand until August! God damn it! I’m anxiously awaiting seeing what will surely be a magnificent film.
I’m eagerly awaiting this ….. just two more weeks.
Luckily “Midnight In Paris” comes this weekend – that will tide me over for now.
It’s funny. I was on my way to see Midnight in Paris a second time but we couldn’t find convenient parking where they showed it so we decided to drive over to see the Tree of Life.
I didn’t find it pretentious, perhaps because I actually like Malick a lot. I do think the better word is indulgent. It’s clear there’s a meaning behind what he’s constructing, but sometimes that meaning is simply to evoke questions and not to give answers. I think that’s what will annoy people more than anything, because it’s a film that almost exists to capture of all of life’s largest questions in a little less than two and a half hours.
Certainly a film I will see multiple times.
And, also, I’m glad you refrained from rating this one. I don’t like the idea of rating films like this (or really any film for that matter).
Malick is only a mere mortal just like the rest of us. Can we truly expect answers to the questions he raises? As we discussed on your site, the 20-minute sequence that goes back to the creation of all things felt over-indulgent especially in its length. Nonetheless, I couldn’t state that it was because I still fail to grasp its meaning and the intent behind it.
This film still doesn’t seem to have a UK release date, though after reading your review I hope it is soon. I am glad someone has decided to confront these important questions in a movie because even if it just confuses poeple it will be a huge success as it will get people thinking and debating.
Good news, it just got a July 8 release date!
Can’t wait!!
Great review Castor. You formulate yourself very good on this film. I might actually reconsider my decision to not see it in the cinema. I might give it a go.
Thanks Joel. Tried my best to make justice to the movie but my puny review doesn’t come close.
I’ve got another 10 or so days before it hits Vegas. Have no idea when it will come to the rest of Nevada.
Perhaps it’s due to the fact that Malick’s films rarely seem to have a consistent narrative that I’ve not been a big fan of his. I admit to only having watched “Badlands” in its entirety. I’ve attempted “Thin Red Line” a few times, but just have a hard time with the way he presents the material. Malick is definitely an acquired taste for film buffs. As I get older I start to appreciate the different styles different directors bring to the table. I think I’ll be able to dig Malick at some point, just not yet.
I watched it today (on VHS), and your review pretty much sums up my thoughts exactly. I really liked it, although I did think it was a bit too busy at times with the sporadic shots. I also would’ve liked to have seen the relationship between Pitt and Chastain expanded. Malick eventually explores it, especially after the fight at the dinner table, but I wanted more reasons for such polarizing parenting types to be together.
A question that may contain spoilers for those of you that haven’t watched it. When Jack snuck into the neighbor’s house and stole the gown/threw it in the river, I had no idea what was going on. Thoughts on this scene?
****SPOILERS****
I took it as Jack’s first foray with sexuality and felt so ashamed that he had to get rid of the gown ASAP after he stole it.
Nice review Castor!
I saw this last week and it took me a week to fully digest the wonderful imagery of Malick unnarratives and the depth of all his thoughts! As I’m reading multitude of reviews of The Tree of Life I understand that the points of view and the interpretations of the film are as vast as the elements and the philosophy it develops!
And for those interested here’s the link to my review of the picture: http://cinephiliaque.blogspot.com/2011/06/tree-of-life.html
Great review Castor. I think in AM this is the big review for any film. I hope so. I think you just love the film more than anyone even Malick(LoL). Added this movie on my watching list. Have to see this movie and will share my experience about the movie. Cheers
Thanks Mani, very kind of you. I also think it might be the review I’m proudest of so far. Hope you like the Tree of Life!
Excellent review! Thanks for your comments on my review of Tree of Life. Interesting what you say about the God perspective, how too busy creating to worry about the death of one person-this almost makes God sound like an uncaring figure, but then again how can we complain that God is hiding when he created the wonderful world we live in.
The music score really adds to the experience. Surely will go down as a classic, I think people will still be watching and wondering about this film in 100 years
Indeed, I’m convinced people will be talking about this movie for the years to come. It’s a truly peculiar and unique film so open for interpretation. Perfect for film school study, I shall say
Thanks for dropping by Chris.
> Mr O’Brien (Brad Pitt) is a manifestation of nature
But he plays the pipe organ with such grace
Indeed he does. And that scene with him playing in tune with his son? Magnificent.
Wait this movie is “In DVD?” Crap, I thought I was going to have trouble understanding it beforehand. I still struggle with what to do with movies “On DVD.” Now you throw this movie into the DVD (which I’m betting can only be opened through some secret handshake known only by Malickites – my new nickname for them, like?). I’m so going to be lost
Coooool.
I skipped the review until I’ve seen it (cause I still haven’t), but the N/A? Brilliant! LOL. Now I REALLY want to see it. LOL.
Sounds every bit as trippy as I’ve heard.
A movie that gets better with the more time you have to ponder it. I’ll admit that while the “windows media player theme” evolution scene was playing, I briefly contemplated walking out of the theater thinking it was never going to end. A handful of people actually did. It would have been better had the scene not been so lengthy. Incredible acting by all involved, even Chastain who barely had any lines but was able to convey so very much just by her stance and facial expressions. A very solemn and nostalgic movie.
Did you see this on the bigscreen and then on DVD? How did you find it translated onto a smaller screen .. I’m just wondering whether the gorgeous imagery is depicted on a laptop/tv.
I want to see it again.
No, I haven’t seen it on DVD yet Anna. Looking forward to it though
Ah ok, the on DVD bit fooled me ..
Does anyoen know which son died? Maybe it doesn’t matter.
Also another great acting job by Brad Pitt that no one seems aware of. He has that 1950 – 60 era conflcited father character down pat.
On the last (fourth picture), he is the one Jessica Chastain is hugging. Thanks for dropping by S.
I was confused by that too (the two youngest sons look too alike). So was he the one who was playing the guitar while Pitt was on the organ?
Yes.
Thanks for the fast reply! I have to watch that movie again. It was a bit much to take it all in, in one sitting.
Trackbacks