In third form English we are taught how to 'read between the lines'. Now this is a concept which many of us ADD teenagers have a lot of trouble with...it's like every bone in our body does not want to find the deeper meaning in something that seems pretty clear to begin with. Reading between the lines is a skill which I've had to hone in over the past few years and I've actually become semi-good at it. The world seems like a better place once you think about
everything like your looking through a lens that's on 10x optical zoom. You see, I'm a thinker. I think far too much. I believe that every single thing that I do, see or have happen to me has a deeper meaning than what would appear. So yes, it came as no surprise that I genuinely liked Terrence Malick's latest
The Tree of Life. This film is one that requires more than enough reading between the lines - because it is all the deeper meaning which makes the film work. In the 24 hours since I've seen the film, I've thought an awful lot about not only what the film was trying to say, but just about life in general.
I often find myself asking existential questions, but I never thought that anyone would have the courage to make a movie based around human existence. That's what Malick does: shows us a bit about the world we live in and the kinds of people that we all are. What Malick has also done is make a film which is open to many different viewpoints, and the audience can leave the cinema interpreting certain things in their own way.
I don't know whether there is a right or wrong way to interpret
The Tree of Life, and it will probably become clearer to me after another watch, but this is how I got it: Towards the beginning of the film, Mrs. O'Brien (Jessica Chastain) says that there are two ways through life, the way of nature and the way of grace, and that we must choose one. She explains the differing two:
"Nature only wants to please itself. Get others to please it too. Likes to lord it over them. To have its own way. It finds reasons to be unhappy when all the world is shining around it. And love is smiling through all things." and
"Grace doesn't try to please itself. Accepts being slighted, forgotten, disliked. Accepts insults and injuries." Mrs. O'Brien is someone who lives by the way of grace, and comes across as a heavenly, peaceful person. However, Mr. O'Brien (Brad Pitt), is someone who lives by the way of nature, believing that the only way to get through this world is to be fiercer and stronger than others. As a child, their son Jack (played at first by newcomer Hunter McCracken, later by Sean Penn) finds it difficult to choose which path he should take. He toys with both, but then comes to the conclusion that he should follow the way of nature, with twinges of rebelliousness and experimental violence. Through that, we are essentially watching the loss of innocence through growing up - and young Jack's world being put through the perspective of the way of nature.
Now, as I said, there are loads of ways that this film can be interpreted. That is mainly due to the fact that every single scene has more than two meanings, and some of the scenes don't fit with what everything else is trying to say. In the grand scheme of things, this movie is quite messy. Instead of following the conventional path that most movies adhere to, this one adopts an unconventional non-linear storyline. The film opens with the O'Brien's finding out that their son has just died, and from there it zig-zags between the modern day Jack and Jack growing up in the 1950's. In between all of that time, there is a sequence showing the formation of the universe, Sean Penn's character walking through a desert like area and several seemingly irrelevant shots of different things (oh, and dinosaurs, which made perfect sense to me right away). That is not to say that all of what happens in this movie are generally bad, incomprehensible things. As I said, this movie requires a bit of reading between the lines, and I'm positive that every single thing in this movie has a meaning. The problem I have with it all is the fact that it probably makes more sense in Malick's head and in his script. Some of what he was trying to say didn't translate well to the screen.
For the most part, though, this film doesn't have any right to translate well on screen. For some reason, the meaning of life and all of these existential questions aren't the kind that makes for a good film. However, you really have to admire Malick's ambition. It's become the norm to make films just for those with ADD and who need explosions every five seconds. Malick, however, has created something which is as rare as they come. He mixes arthouse obscurity with a Hollywood budget and effects, which makes for one of the oddest marvels the cinematic world has seen in recent years - if ever. Now, I probably can't judge or anything considering that I haven't seen all of the films that every cinephile should have, but this movie is truly one of a kind. It has achieved something that no film has achieved before: provided a poetic and beautiful look at life in general, doing it in the most unconventional way possible. It's a film which is complicated, yet it doesn't waste it's time with expository dialogue. Instead, there is barely any dialogue, with the pictures, the faces, telling the story. The whispered narration, which comes and goes when you least expect it, is there to aid the film through each existential phase. It's also a film that is a visual treat - and that doesn't mean that it's made in 3D.
When the film is not answering questions about the way of nature and the way of grace, it serves as a brilliant coming-of-age drama looking at the dynamics of family and parenting. I think this is mostly due to the brilliant and believable performances from Brad Pitt and Jessica Chastain as the parents, and the three inexperienced child actors who look like they have been acting all of their lives. Pitt's character is one that really angered me in this film, as he is so obsessed with power and the idea of being better than everyone else in order to lead a good life. I did fear him, as he had this quiet stare that was as menacing as it was inviting - he was still a good father who obviously loved his sons, but he kept trying to push his ideals onto the poor kids. Jessica Chastain, the golden girl of the moment, was brilliant in her role as a young mother. Every move she made, every look she gave, was just so motherly...I guess when we see her character floating around beneath a tree it's obvious what we should think of her: a heavenly, guardian-like figure. The three boys, Hunter McCracken, Laramie Eppler and Tye Sheridan all show natural fun in their sun-kissed portrayals of wondrous youth and staying outside until dinnertime. McCracken, in particular, excels with his confused character, showing the battle between grace and nature in his face.
Then there's the small matter of Sean Penn. He doesn't have a leading role, but I do have to say, he adds a lot of the finishing shine to such a movie. His character, mostly silent, except for the narration, wanders through life misguided and still saddened by his brother's death. In his scenes, he can be seen in a normal city, flattened by huge glass sculptures of buildings. All of this artificial beauty is around him and yet he can't be happy. Everything is dark and dreary, as opposed to the sunlit cascades of his childhood. This is yet another thing I picked up from this film - it's also about the disillusion of adult life and what our world has become. I suppose that this isn't a major theme in the film, though.
After the cityscapes and business end of Penn's time on screen, he is seen wandering, aimlessly, just as he would down a street in his city. Except, this wandering provides a gateway to forgiveness and reconciliation. This is just another thing which
The Tree of Life handles. It looks over many things in life, and doesn't particularly teach anyone how to live their life or what the right path to follow is. Instead, it just wants to say a few things about our lives that we probably haven't thought of ourselves. It wants to alert us to the fact that not everything in our lives are as they directly appear.
The Tree of Life is an over-indulgent, sometimes boring, self-absorbed piece of work. That's what it appears to be on the outside. But on the inside, the film is a poetic, beautiful, dazzling, unique, amazing masterpiece. I can immediately predict that this film will be widely loved in the next few decades, and people will remember 2011 as the year that Terrence Malick brought us
The Tree of Life, which was met with polarizing reactions. Then, I'll be able to say that I saw it when I was 16 years old, and it was the first time I'd ever been wholly affected by a movie and realised that films
can do things that films could never do before. It's hard to describe such a film as
The Tree of Life, as there never has been, and probably never will be, a film like it.
THE VERDICT: Beneath its arty veneer, The Tree of Life is a magnificent film about the meaning of life, using brilliant visuals and some minimalistic, yet effective performances. It's not for everyone, but it will be a renowned classic in a few decades time.
What I hoped for:
What I got:
I'd love to say I could give it a rating - but I really can't. I want to give it a full rating, but there are many things I didn't like about the film which could make me give it a low rating that it doesn't deserve. And I just don't feel right about giving it a rating either, so, sorry to disappoint!
