The New World (2005) (1 Viewer)

[Kyle_D]

I'll preface this by saying I love Terrence Malick films and consider Badlands and Days of Heaven two of the greatest films of all time...

...but The New World just didn't work for me. I certainly felt transported back to the era and Malick's visuals were, as usual, breathtaking. The movie was an experience and if that was Malick's sole intention, then he succeeded in making the film he wanted to make.

However, the story itself felt hollow and I was never able to get involved emotionally. I've never found the Pocahantas legend all that compelling and was relying on Malick to make it so for me. Unfortunately, he didn't and I was disappointed that the whole movie came across like the crippling third act of The Thin Red Line: overly passive and ponderous without reaching any real catharsis. (BTW, flawed as it is, I still love The Thin Red Line)

Just my two cents and years down the road I'll probably revisit the film to see if maturity lends me any greater appreciation of it.

 

[todd stone]

enjoyed the movie but it started to drag near the end.

 

[TonyD]

the surfer?
www.joshstone.com


saw it last night and thought it was brilliant.

i was memerized for most of the movie.

now as i mentioned my earlier post i was concerned because i went with friends so i didint get to pick the theater.

with about 1 hr 'till the movie was over i could tell people were getting restless.
behind us a couple started getting lovey dovey with each other and they were whispering to each other but it was alittle louder then a whisper.

then as it ended these people loudly uttered "is that bleeping it?"

a-hole.

and it was projected from a top aiming downward angle which i guess is the cause for the top being in focus but the rest of the screen being horribly out of focus.

 

[TheLongshot]

I think he was talking about Joss Stone, the singer:

http://www.jossstone.co.uk/

Jason

 

[DonRoeber]

After reading all there discussions here, my wife and I saw the movie today. I have never seen anything else from Malick, so it was all new for me. I was mesmerized by the cinemetography, the environment and everything else that made you feel like you were there. The story didn't work for us though, it felt kinda weak and hollow. Still, I enjoyed the "experience". I'm hoping the DVD has lots of making of stuff on it, I'm really interested in the making of the film.

 

[Kyle_D]

I doubt it'll happen. Malick is as famous for being a recluse as he is for being a master filmmaker and he refuses to be interviewed or photographed. All of his previous movies are barebones.

There has been talk of a 3-hour cut of the movie being released on the DVD, though, which might give hope to those hoping that an extended version of The Thin Red Line might be released.

 

[JonZ]

"I'm hoping the DVD has lots of making of stuff on it, I'm really interested in the making of the film."

HBO is running their "making of" on The New World this month.

 

[Andrew-V]

I can see why the general public would be confused and disappointed with the film. I'm a huge Malick fan so I knew what to expect.

 

[David Brown Eyes]

wow Kirk could you possibly be more offensive.

I will see this movie on friday or possibly Sat.

 

[Paul Case]

I can't stop thinking about this film. It haunts me in a profound way. In fact, it may end up not being just my favorite film of 2005, but my favorite of the entire decade so far. This film is a breathtaking, unique thing of beauty in the purest Kantian sense.

It'll be with me for a long, long time.

 

[TonyD]

"when Pocahontas saves Smith's life, the Naturals engage in a ceremonial baptism for Smith

wow Kirk could you possibly be more offensive.

I will see this movie on friday or possibly Sat."


people say some strange things on here sometimes without telling what it is they mean.

what was offensive about that remark?

that was what i was thinking too, i saw it as he was being cleansed by the naturals, as they were called in the movie.

 

[David Brown Eyes]

I am a person Tony a human, not a "natural".

 

[Holadem]

--
H

 

[TonyD]

oh ok.
so i guess they didnt refer to the people living there as naturals because they were already there, natively. native americans.

also why was kirk offensive.
it wasnt his word, he was just referencing the movie.

it's a shame you have taken such personal offense to this movie without even seeing it yet.

i didnt think anything about it was anything but beautifl even poetic.

i dont think it was intended to be a history lesson, or ever claimed to be.

 

[Kirk Tsai]

David, the film uses the word "Naturals" to describe the Native Americans. I am using the terms of the film. I'm sorry if you are offended by my comment.

We can argue if Malick is naive in using the term "naturals" in the film, but it's clearly intentional on his part. In fact, this deliberate choice of terms significantly informs my understanding of the film. He is using this idea of America and the Native Americans as representative of the state of nature; or at least that is how the British look at the new continent and its people. Later in the film, after violence has broken out, the colonialists use the word "savages" to describe the Native Americans. To the British characters, nature and savagery are different sides of the same coin--both terms imply a lack of culture, which I think the film soundly rejects.

 

[todd stone]

what was offensive?

 

[David Brown Eyes]

You could not be more wrong there Tony. You see the offical web site for "The New World" makes very strong statements to its authenticity and accuracy. Even to the point of providing downloadable study guides.

Now I will be seeing this movie as soon as a can, probably this weekend or friday.

I am sure it is a beautiful movie but the core story is rotten a myth. I was holding out hope that Malick would do something different with this myth, but from the reviews I have read and the comments made by people on this board. I feel he did what everyone has done before, settled for the myth and did not have the courage or wish to find the truth of the matter. The movie is being marketed to the educational community as fact, and I have a big big problem with that.

Kirk, it is offensive becuase it implies a lack of humanity, like so many others you related to Indian people through film not through reality. If you feel the film rejects that then why enforce what even the film is saying is wrong.

I feel it is important for films that deal with Indian people to be honest and accurate, even if it shows our dirty laundry. There are precious few films that are in the native prespective. Last thing we need is yet another film like The New World that with every word I read is sounding more like a Disney's Pocahontas, just live action, no songs, talking animals, and more artistic.

I will see if my worst fears are realised in a couple days.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I think "natural" implies MORE humanity, but I haven't seen the film yet. Friday is the day, and I am extremely excited. Horner's soundtrack is released tomorrow, by the by.

 

[TonyD]

i saw the website, i still dont see that it claims to be historically true/accurate.
i did see...


"The New World is a sweeping adventure set amidst the first encounter of Euorpean and Native American cultures during the founding of the Jamestown Virginia settlement in 1607.

Acclaimed filmaker Terrence Malick brings to life his own unique interpretation of the classic tale of Pocahontas and her relationships with adventurer John Smith and aristocrat John rolfe.

this woman's remarkable journey of love lost and found takes her from the untouched beauty of the Virginia wilderness to the upper crust of English society as we witness the dawn of a new America."

 

[JonZ]

"I feel he did what everyone has done before, settled for the myth and did not have the courage or wish to find the truth of the matter."

But it has never been done "like this" before.

Im speaking out of ignorance here becuase I dont know the factual history, but is there a factual history besides names and dates?(Pocohantas left for England on such a date and maried John Rolf on such and such a date)Wouldnt everybodys version of these events be conjecture?

See the movie first.

Its a amazing film.


Im still wondering whether Downfall belongs at #1 in my top 10 or The New World. I think theyre the best 2 films Ive seeen since Memento or Requiem For A Dream.

Post edited after reading Tonys post below.