It's definitely getting overshadowed by the bigger crowd-pleasing pictures. It's not expected to do much at the boxoffice when it gets a wide release in January.
The New World doesn't really have any real Hollywood stars to draw people in, and the topic isn't a crowd pleaser. The average movie-goer would hate this film, and I can see why New Line isn't really pushing it.
For me, this is a formula for a quality film - as I really dont jive well with what the average movie-goer likes.
Also, Rex Reed gave it a terrible review... which is almost a guarantee that it'll be a great film.
doesn't have any hollywood stars? There's this guy called Christian Bale..you may have heard of him.
He was in this little independent picture called Batman Begins earlier this year.
If the studio doesn't expect a movie to do well, why do they greenlight it in the first place? Bottom line is that money talks and BS walks..Critical acclaim doesn't mean anything to the studios.
I really liked it. I can't say enough about how beautiful this film is, not just the imagery but the interaction among the characters as well.
The girl who plays Pocahantas gives an Oscar-worthy performance.
There are gorgeous, breathtaking shots. Lots of them. I'd say it's better photographed than Badlands and Thin Red Line.
As always in Malick's films, the music does does a great job of accompanying the visuals.
There are, however, some problems with it (Thin Red Line has some problems, too, but it's one of my favorites). The voice-over doesn't work as well as in the others; at times, it is repetitive or difficult to make out.
The way John Smith abandons Pocahantas was poorly handled.
20 or so minutes will be cut for the wide release. I think if it gets cut from the first two-thirds in the right places, it could strengthen the third act and the film overall.
Just saw the 135 minute wide-release cut, and I have to say that this is unquestionably the film of the new century. I can't believe what I just saw. Every aspect of the film is wildly great. I'll be back later with a much more detailed monster of a post, but for now, you Malick fans are going to pee your pants in a big way. In short, it's akin to The Thin Red Line, except with a more personal focus (3 characters only), more complex thematic dynamics (which I don't even fully understand), and it's shot exclusively in natural light, so it has a different visual look from the others. I still consider TTRL his best, but DAMN, does this film ever give that one a run for its money.
It's my top movie of 2005. Glad to read that you loved it as much as I did, Nathan.
I'm dying to see it again and to see how the 135 minute cut flows. But, I'm afraid of seeing it with a bad audience, whereas I had a perfect experience at the Hollywood Arclight. I'll probably wait for the DVDs.
Nobody makes movies like Terrence Malick. There are those who appreciate his films and those who find them pretentious bores. My advice to people bored by Malick - try watching Antonioni
Can't wait to see this tomorrow. First Malick movie I'll see on the big screen