This is reported to be not as "good" as Tree of Life. And the females in this one apparently do alot of that twirling about and looking at the sky that Jessica Chastain did in Tree of Life. So that makes me a bit uneasy. For me, Tree of Life had tons of content (loss of innocence, coming of age, father/sons especially in the 50's, how a person feels when they give up dreams of work, dealing with the loss of a child or sibling, seeing death or scarring of a playmate - a peer, how psiritual views change as one matures). There was a good deal of extraneous stuff in the movie, too. Malick takes his time, which can be annoying, but somehow that slow pace seems right for the issues he deals with. But Tree of Life was one of those movies that felt really different for different people.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > Barry, > > Have you seen it yet? I adored Tree of Life and am waiting > > for a theater to get this one in. > > Zooming along on the train at 300+ kilometers per hour, > on my way back to the Netherlands, connected to Wifi > and chatting with one of my housemates real-time in > another window (ah, the wonders of the modern world), > I have to say that I am *not* one of the people waiting > with 'bated breath for the next Terrence Malick epic. > > I *loathed* Tree Of Life. All hat, no cattle. That is > (IMO, of course...all appreciation or non-appreciation > of a film is opinion), it was all visuals, no content. > I won't willingly go out of my way to subject myself > to another of his films again unless Roger Ebert gives > it a thumbs-up. Oooops. Guess I'm gonna miss this one. :-) >
