Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Apr 17, 2007 22:55:31 GMT
The New World Terrence Malick 2005 USA The first English settlers in America find themselves at odds with the Natives, and are saved by the rival king's youngest daughter, who falls in love with Captain John Smith. Exploring the contrast between two civilisations, one free and content at its own introversion, the other curious and explorative, and both primitive in their own way, Malick's beautiful film, a lyrical hymn to the world and an ambitious extension on themes covered in his other three features, never really settles for an established narrative arc: it sort of comes and goes, recycling and hovering upon its own themes; his unique editing style suggests a never-settling atmosphere, a narrative drive which is in a constant state of exposition, of remembrance. Devastating.
|
|
|
Post by bobbyreed on Jun 23, 2008 23:20:16 GMT
The New World Extended Cut: Director Terrence Malick's Epic Starring Colin Farrell, Christian Bale and Christopher Plummer Features More than 30 Minutes of Never-Before-Seen Footage!biz.yahoo.com/bw/080623/20080623006035.html?.v=1BURBANK, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- The New World[/b], Academy Award® nominated director Terrence Malick’s ( The Thin Red Line, Days of Heaven) adventure-filled journey of discovery, will be released October 14 on DVD in a new amped-up Extended Cut[/i]. This edition of the critically-acclaimed, Oscar®-nominated epic recreating the turbulent first days of the new America now features more than 30 minutes of never-before-seen footage, heightening the viewing experience with more battles, more intensity and more visual splendor. Also included is a comprehensive, ten-part documentary – Making the New World – which captures the unique creative challenges filmmakers faced. The New World Extended Cut[/i] will sell for $19.97 SRP. Synopsis[/u] Powhatan tribal people stare in wonder as three ships approach shore. It’s a story every schoolchild knows: the story of Capt. John Smith (Colin Farrell) and Pocahontas (Q’orianka Kilcher). Now, as told by filmmaker Terrence Malick ( Badlands, Days of Heaven, The Thin Red Line) in this extended version with more than 30 minutes of footage unseen in theaters -- it’s a story you never imagined. Working in part from first-hand histories and adding his extraordinary sense of image and human drama, Malick crafts a visceral, spellbinding tale of the Jamestown settlement, of cultures connecting and of deadly consequences when connections fray. Christian Bale and Christopher Plummer also star. Special Features[/u] A comprehensive, ten-part documentary Making the New World capturing the unique challenges of creating this historic epic.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jun 23, 2008 23:47:03 GMT
Sweet. Hopefully the Rolfe/Pocahontas section is fleshed out some.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jun 23, 2008 23:55:18 GMT
more than 30 minutes of never-before-seen footage If that's accurate it must mean this cut'll be more than 30 minutes longer than the original release cut, and so 45 minutes longer than the cut we all saw. Over three hours long. Oh my. I'd like a theatrical run.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Jul 12, 2008 15:01:07 GMT
I'd like a theatrical run. Me too. This is, without doubt, one of the most powerful films I've ever seen. I was just watching clips on YouTube and it brought it all back.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 6, 2008 8:09:13 GMT
I watched this again last night and was entranced by how Pocahontas is filmed when she's alone in a frame. Her movements are incredibly gracious and reminiscent for me (it's kind of a personal thing), and the camera is always in the perfect spot to create as much intimacy for the viewer as possible. Very touching, very powerful.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jan 10, 2009 15:56:31 GMT
There was another earlier thread for this film (from January 2006) with a longer review by Capo, which I repost here: The New World
Director: Terrence Malick
USA 2005 The early seventeenth century; the first English settlers arrive on North American soil. The romance between Captain John Smith and Pocahontas, young daughter of the local chief, is shattered and eventually fizzles when Smith is sent back to England, and the girl, disowned by her father for helping the English settlers, eventually marries John Rolfe, another Englishman. They have a son together, and arrive in England to meet the King.This review contains spoilers.When, midway through Terrence Malick’s The New World, we see Pocahontas, now renamed Rebecca by the English settlers she has been taken in by after her father has disowned her for helping them, exiting her new home clad in high-heels and corset, there is a slight sense of resentment on the audience’s part. Much like the director’s The Thin Red Line (1999), which depicted war as an intrusion on the bliss of nature, this scene marks a turning point in the film, where we as the audience see the inevitable and tragically watch on, knowing that Pocahontas, the young native who embodied the opening half of the film in her free, primitive innocence, is now going to be integrated into a community which sees itself as perhaps more civilised. Tellingly, her husband-to-be, John Rolfe, first hires her to work on his land, benefiting from her labour before falling in love with her; in her original life, she runs gracefully along the tree branches with a chaste curiosity of existence—it is these shots of her, running along the branches while Captain Smith watches her, entranced from below, that immediately resonate the most when we see her in the claustrophobia of high heels. The emotional core of the film, reaching at times a deeply tragic sense of wanting nostalgia, stems from the complexity of the narrative; that Pocahontas has, by the end of the film, distinguished the difference between her true love and her memory of love; the fact that Rolfe (a convincing Bale), perhaps against our wishes (testament to the charm with which Farrell wins us over as Smith), is genuine in his claims of love and marriage; that the consummation of this new affair does, more or less, rule out a rekindled relationship between Pocahontas and Smith. It may have been all too easy to flatten the characters into two dimensions and make it easier for us to accept the new flame; but, when Smith leaves to return to England, there is a gaping hole in the film, an intentional yearning for his character to return at any moment. Much to ours and Pocahontas’ disappointment, he doesn’t. Of course, I must not give the narrative too much credit, for the film is, of course, founded upon historical fact. The myth surrounding the mysterious Pocahontas, covered by Disney in 1995, is a famous one, probably told to every American schoolgirl when she was younger. And indeed, many of the critics’ response to the film approach it as a historical document which gives justice to a tale otherwise romanticised by Disney in the earlier effort; Amy Taublin’s review in Sight & Sound is titled: “Birth of a nation.” Fear not if you’re not up to standards in your history; Malick’s free, fluent direction (the camera is constantly moving in either hand-held or Steadicam) gives the film a sense of sweeping timelessness, in that it could have been shot before Cinema existed, or even sometime in the future; the period setting resembles the best of Herzog efforts, in reaching a contemporary audience without really selling itself as a period piece. Taken as a fictional work of great aesthetic beauty, the film far outweighs its historical interest. The central set-piece to the film, a haunting battle between the native tribe and starving settlers, strongly echoes the battle scenes in The Thin Red Line, with Farrell’s ruminative voice-over (he has thankfully been tamed for this enduring performance) adding a haunting, distracting weight to the powerful violence we see before us, much like the poignant poetry that earlier film reached. The scene doesn’t really seem to begin, nor does it seem to have any kind of dramatic climax; indeed, it comes and goes, and at the same time seems to last forever. It is a subtle, almost magical sense of pacing and texture which Malick has perfected, using long scores of music (James Horner composes the original pieces, with additional, evocative use of Wagner’s Das Rheingold and Mozart’s Piano Concerto No. 23) to underline the emotional crescendo—or rather, the ebb and flow—of the characters’ arcs. Malick’s editing style invites both praise and (cynical?) criticism; Mark Kermode has noted that, when the film is in danger of falling apart, Malick will cut to a scene of nature and relies on it to bring it together again. A rather lazy criticism, perhaps, but if this is the result, I have no qualms. One shot immediately comes to mind: the camera, placed in a rowing boat, floats along a river, with tall grass to either side—again, the resemblance to Aguirre, Wrath of God (1972) is uncanny—and a steady rainfall pattering on the water. The next shot suggests anything but a downpour; only later, we return to shots of rain, even fork lightning at one point. It’s subtle touches like these, a kind of jump-cut which shows the back-and-forth motions and beauty of nature, that mark Malick’s new effort as a distinctively resonating one. CREDITS Director Terrence Malick Producer Sarah Green Screenplay Terrence Malick Director of Photography Emmanuel Lubezki Film Editing Richard Chew Hank Corwin Saar Klein Mark Yoshikawa Production Design Jack Fisk Original Music James Horner
CAST Colin Farrell Captain John Smith Q’Orianka Kilcher Pocahontas Christopher Plummer Captain Christopher Newport Christian Bale John Rolfe August Schellenberg Powhatan Wes Studi Opechancanough David Thewlis Wingfield
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jan 10, 2009 15:58:59 GMT
Discussion continued from here.Yeah but the difference is Angelopoulos' film will be more amazing than any taglines could ever be so he can write what he wants. No one's saying Angelopoulos isn't up himself too, but given that his last film is one of the greatest ever made containing THE most awe inspiring visuals i've ever laid eyes on, he can pull it off. Malick can't because he's unable to tap into his obvious talent while being up his own ass like Theo can. Malick's last film was painfully obvious, superficial, one dimensional, caricatured, so full of itself and completely unobjective. For want of a better word, it was bullshit. Farrell staring into space desperately pretending to act while horridly heavy handed music bashes us over the head and the camera moves into some gorgeous trees as though we can't see them unless Malick shows them to us does not an art film make! Well, nature as a background to a human subject isn't the same thing as nature as a subject itself. So it's not just a question of being able to see the trees. What do you mean by 'unobjective'? The rest of those criticisms are just kind of stock pejoratives, but I don't know what you mean by 'unobjective'.
|
|