"THE TREE OF LIFE"
Film Review by Rébecca Mamane
Terrence Malick’s most recent cinematographic work, the colossal “Tree of Life” (2011), is one of the most visually stunning films to flicker upon the big screen as of late. In “The Tree of Life,” Malick tackles eternal fundamental questions about life with generous means while keeping a safe distance away. As a result, one is left a bit dissatisfied with Malick’s surface exploration of the themes; the film feels like looking at a lake through the window of a train but not being able to stop and jump in. Nevertheless, though Terrence Malick did not quite reach the summit of the metaphysical mountain, he does succeed in bringing out the viewer’s innate existential curiosity.
“What are we to you?” Jack’s voice, in voiceover monologue, can be heard during these childhood memory scenes as he addresses himself directly to the purported imperceptible Creator. Jack, understandably confused with the universe and the events of his life, seeks answers to the important questions. But in this shell of mystery, Malick does not propose answers, but rather, exposes the questions and the distress caused by ignorance. To this effect, the narrative is interrupted by spellbinding sequences depicting the birth of the universe following the Big Bang. These grandiose scenes of colourful nebulas and galaxies, accompanied by Zbigniew Preisner’s cloying “Lacrimosa,” are strongly evocative of Kubrick’s masterpiece “2001,” sweeping the suburban family drama into its proper context as an ever-so-tiny entity within time and space. Though the manifestation of a Creator never takes place, these scenes do have a strong spiritual tone, a tone which is held along until the very end of the film in quiet optimism. Some religious imagery lurks about at every corner; Jack’s excessively romanticised mother could very well be a guardian angel sent from Heaven—at one point she literally lifts off the ground gaping at the life and light around her.
The film follows Jack, a middle-aged man played by Sean Penn in a quasi-surreal glass tower landscape, as he reflects upon his childhood and the significance that his particular life may or may not have held in a universe that may or may not be coldly devoid of all meaning. Much of the film is set in Jack’s childhood life with his two brothers, his tyrannically authoritative yet obliquely-loving father (played by Brad Pitt in a permanent scowl) and his angelic mother. These episodes of childhood life spent in the middle-class suburbs are intercut with lingering poetic shots of nature and light peering through fluttering blinds. Admittedly, some of these shots could have been used for life insurance commercials, but at their best, they do bring about a good feast for thought. We witness this constant questioning, curiosity and admitted ignorance before the universe. There is wonder at the properties of light, the nature of things, and this brings us to really think about what matter and energy are. If matter is a type of compressed form of energy, what exactly is this “energy”? And what is a force? Where does energy/force come from? Such parallels between the natural world and man-made society do also remind us about the absurd dichotomy between our biological place within nature and our psychological dissociation from it.
Following the early life of the universe, we fall back to Earth to behold the evolution of early life forms into complex animals. From cyanobacteria to rapacious dinosaurs, we get a strong sense of connection between family structure and the natural structure, and within both worlds, we witness the same competition, the “survival of the fittest.” This is illustrated quite boldly with the scene between the two dinosaurs: one agonising from its wounds while the other approaches, stomps the dying dinosaur’s head, and surprisingly takes off without causing further harm. This dinosaur confrontation recalls the unstable father-son relationship between Jack and his stern old father. Unfortunately, the dino CGI hinders the film’s organic flow, but we can forgive this offence by the grace of the otherwise astonishing compositions mostly shot in superb 65mm and 35mm film.
The film finishes with a misty sea-breeze of hope; Jack is reunited with his family from the days of yore in a white desert. It is like the realisation of this feeling we get that somehow, we will relive this past of ours that still seems so close.
Malick’s grand film is admirable for its ambitious premise, though he does occasionally fall into saccharine crevasses while not quite reaching the bedrock. 3.75/5
“What are we to you?” Jack’s voice, in voiceover monologue, can be heard during these childhood memory scenes as he addresses himself directly to the purported imperceptible Creator. Jack, understandably confused with the universe and the events of his life, seeks answers to the important questions. But in this shell of mystery, Malick does not propose answers, but rather, exposes the questions and the distress caused by ignorance. To this effect, the narrative is interrupted by spellbinding sequences depicting the birth of the universe following the Big Bang. These grandiose scenes of colourful nebulas and galaxies, accompanied by Zbigniew Preisner’s cloying “Lacrimosa,” are strongly evocative of Kubrick’s masterpiece “2001,” sweeping the suburban family drama into its proper context as an ever-so-tiny entity within time and space. Though the manifestation of a Creator never takes place, these scenes do have a strong spiritual tone, a tone which is held along until the very end of the film in quiet optimism. Some religious imagery lurks about at every corner; Jack’s excessively romanticised mother could very well be a guardian angel sent from Heaven—at one point she literally lifts off the ground gaping at the life and light around her.
The film follows Jack, a middle-aged man played by Sean Penn in a quasi-surreal glass tower landscape, as he reflects upon his childhood and the significance that his particular life may or may not have held in a universe that may or may not be coldly devoid of all meaning. Much of the film is set in Jack’s childhood life with his two brothers, his tyrannically authoritative yet obliquely-loving father (played by Brad Pitt in a permanent scowl) and his angelic mother. These episodes of childhood life spent in the middle-class suburbs are intercut with lingering poetic shots of nature and light peering through fluttering blinds. Admittedly, some of these shots could have been used for life insurance commercials, but at their best, they do bring about a good feast for thought. We witness this constant questioning, curiosity and admitted ignorance before the universe. There is wonder at the properties of light, the nature of things, and this brings us to really think about what matter and energy are. If matter is a type of compressed form of energy, what exactly is this “energy”? And what is a force? Where does energy/force come from? Such parallels between the natural world and man-made society do also remind us about the absurd dichotomy between our biological place within nature and our psychological dissociation from it.
Following the early life of the universe, we fall back to Earth to behold the evolution of early life forms into complex animals. From cyanobacteria to rapacious dinosaurs, we get a strong sense of connection between family structure and the natural structure, and within both worlds, we witness the same competition, the “survival of the fittest.” This is illustrated quite boldly with the scene between the two dinosaurs: one agonising from its wounds while the other approaches, stomps the dying dinosaur’s head, and surprisingly takes off without causing further harm. This dinosaur confrontation recalls the unstable father-son relationship between Jack and his stern old father. Unfortunately, the dino CGI hinders the film’s organic flow, but we can forgive this offence by the grace of the otherwise astonishing compositions mostly shot in superb 65mm and 35mm film.
The film finishes with a misty sea-breeze of hope; Jack is reunited with his family from the days of yore in a white desert. It is like the realisation of this feeling we get that somehow, we will relive this past of ours that still seems so close.
Malick’s grand film is admirable for its ambitious premise, though he does occasionally fall into saccharine crevasses while not quite reaching the bedrock. 3.75/5
No comments:
Post a Comment