Like the first one, a hell of an immersive experience and then it finishes and I can remember only tiny fragments of it. But hey, it did what it was supposed to in my opinion.
Damn. I appreciated the unyielding brutality of this. There’s much talk of battling at the gates of hell (the volcano’s gonna erupt, I get it) but the damn world was pretty much the edge of hell back then. Sit back to enjoy your bucolic farm life for a second and some berserker will be shooting you with an arrow.
Of course this film requires two viewings, but I hadn't realized just how much deeper I would experience the film a second time. The first time through, "The Tree of Life" seemed merely like a beautiful surface of jumbled memories and moments, the long childhood sequence the most (perhaps only) substantial part. The second time through, I see how simple the film's ideas are, and how profoundly, almost magically they are conveyed to the audience. I will speak about God…
In the coming weeks it will be fascinating to read all the posts and articles about the exceptional stitching on the emperor's new clothes.
I haven't read the novel, but I've read The Crying of Lot 49 and it feels like Anderson simply transcribed Pynchon's novel onto the screen. A laudable idea, except Anderson fails to translate the written word into cinematic language.
The exposition is the biggest stumbling block with this tactic. The film is primarily exposition. As in,…