To the Wonder (2013) - Directed by Terrence Malick

Terrence Malick’s latest addition to an increasingly prolific canon is this beautifully dark masterpiece. I think it’s in fact Malick’s “darkest” film. Here there is no “grace”, like in Tree of Life, nor is there the comfort of the family bonds, nor is there the spiritual rebirth, as there was in the previous film. Gone also is the pat, matter-of-factness that so characterized his early films, like Badlands and Days of Heaven. Even the uplifting moments found in The Thin Red Line, or The New World are not really there, as what beauty there is seems to be negated by the next disappointment. This is a story of doubt, of loneliness, of longing for something that cannot truly be grasped, and perhaps even more so, the mistrust of one’s one feelings and desires. This is not the same final tone that his other films leave you with. There is something darker here that he is expressing, really for the first time in this way.

Malick’s film involves a few parallel storylines. In one, Neil (Ben Affleck) and Marina (Olga Kurylenko) fall in love in France, where he brings her back to live in his home in the U.S. Soon, their love devolves into a confusing swirl of emotions and dissatisfaction. They split and she returns home. He meets up with Jane, a girl he knew in High School and they have a short fling, and she ends up heartbroken. Soon, Marina returns from France, without her daughter. The Neil and Marina marry and seem to be rekindle the love they once had.....briefly. But, the dissatisfaction creeps back in. In another storyline occurring in the same town, a priest named Father Quintana (Javier Bardem) wrestles and struggles with his faith and his ability to “see” God. He continues to pursue his calling and his work, but his heart is not in it. He is desperate for God to reach out to him.....to prove that he is there. These stories connect and diverge at times, but what is clear to me, is that Malick wants us to appropriate these stories together…..that the search for God's love can feel elusive just as the search for lasting earthly love feels elusive, despite the fact that we keep trying to find both.

If this is a personal story that continues along the lines of The Tree of Life, then things are beginning to appear very biographical for Malick. With the continuation of Christian Theological themes even more present here in To the Wonder, it must make us take stock of The Tree of Life as a direct representation of one man’s spiritual rebirth. I don’t see how anyone can mistake the final sequence for anything other than that, considering the questions and themes that continue to arise here. But if The Tree of Life was Malick’s spiritual rebirth, then To the Wonder, is his spiritual doubt creeping in. Paralleling the spiritual doubt with relational doubt here feels like 2 sides of the same coin, and of in fact the same person. In the film it’s easier to tell these two stories from two separate characters, but my reading of this is that the ideas come from the same being….in this case perhaps Malick.

The expression of isolation, and of the inability to really achieve relational and spiritual intimacy is striking. In one sense, Malick is able to convey an unease through the interior shots in the home, almost reminding me of Nick Ray’s claustrophobic interior design in Bigger Than Life. I swear, when you watch the shaky camera movements and odd points of view shots in the home, there is something disconcerting about modern life, about Suburbia, about the disconnection between our modern life and nature/God. When the camera is outside, it swings smoothly, catches it’s breath and breathes deeply of the earth, grass, and sky. There is a freedom to these shots that feels opposite to the interior shots and this must be purposeful. It is no surprise then that To the Wonder, is Malick’s first film to be filmed in the “present day”. This cannot be a coincidence, as he’s able to project a disconnect between the individual and the other, and between the individual and God, paralleled with a modern malaise that makes suburbia feel like a place where souls go to die. Furthermore, it’s not a coincidence that Affleck’s character is researching pollution by a local factory that appears to be polluting the surrounding area. Basing the film in the present day allows for no sentiment or nostalgia for a more innocent time, like in The Tree of Life, mostly set in the 1950’s. And I think Sean Penn’s modern alienation on display there in those few scenes in that film is also echoed in To the Wonder to a large degree. Malick seems to suggest the only thing that keeps one going is to get “out”. The priest achieves a bit of a reprieve when he leaves the church to go walk the town and find people to help. Others find reprieves when they step out in the fields to bask under the sky. That scene near the buffalo as Affleck and McAdams marvel at the beasts is one of discovery and magic, something that Malick seems to indicate we have lost.

I think Malick is moving into more Bergman-like obsessions around spirituality, although his POV is slightly different than Bergman’s. Malick seems a bit more resigned to “this is the way it is”, rather than barking at God in anger. I actually wonder whether the quest for intimacy and purpose is more related to Bresson’s quiet search for spiritual resolve. Ultimately, though, Malick seems content with continuing to search for God, and to seek his love. At the end of the film, Father Quintana says, "Flood our souls with your spirit and life so completely that our lives may only be a reflection of yours. Shine through us. Show us how to seek you. We were made to seek you." I also wonder whether Malick is working on some sort of trilogy or something. To the Wonder seems like a close cousin to The Tree of Life, and I’m wondering if the next film of his explores similar themes as well. To the Wonder is not an actor's movie though. The actors didn’t leave me with any lingering impression, like Hunter McCracken, Brad Pitt, and Jessica Chastain did in The Tree of Life. There are really no exchanges at all in To the Wonder in fact….even conversations are muted to allow for voiceovers. Emmanuel Lubezki’s tremendous cinematography and the excellent use of musical compositions is astounding though and this makes up for the lack of traditional "acting". Some reviews have complained this film is too “Malicky” for it’s own good. Although I understand that some could see this as nearly self-parody of his own best work, I tend to think he is moving in new directions thematically, and going down darker and deeper paths than he ever has before and I welcome this. Perhaps what many are most uncomfortable with, is the intense spiritual and specifically Christian elements in the film. It cannot be ignored and is a significant key to understanding what Malick is trying to express. To the Wonder will be one of the best films of 2013.

The Tree of Life (2011) - Directed by Terrence Malick

Note: My review contains spoilers so that if you haven't seen the film please read with caution. 


Preface: It has been pointed out by multiple critics and bloggers that the film takes place within the context of Western religion, specifically Christianity. My review and analysis takes place within that context as that is how I have viewed the film and its meaning.

Terrence Malick's newest magnum opus is a gushing, uninhibited look at life and its purpose. It's a nearly 2 1/2 hour film filled with lots of ideas, and it could have easily been hours longer. In plot, the film basically follows the summer experience of a boy named Jack. He has two younger brothers and a father and mother. He lives in a Neighborhood, which is a stand-in for a universal neighborhood of sorts, a place where one plays, learns, experiments, experiences life in all its glories and tragedies but still under the guidance and love of ones parents, so there is a safety net. Later in life, the family is stricken with the news that the middle child has passed away at age 19, from what we do not know. The mother and father clearly have their faith challenged. This is where the early reference to Job in the film's opening passage comes into play. It's also clear that Jack as a grown man, played by Sean Penn, is clearly searching in the void to fill a vacancy in his life. 

Malick’s title, The Tree of Life, references the passages in Genesis 2:9, "And the Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground -- trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." It’s clear that God presented two choices to Adam and Eve and gave them the option of following their own intent, or following the way of everlasting permanence with God. Adam and Eve followed the way of “Nature” and ignored the salvation/tree of life in the garden. This of course leads to the need for grace or salvation following The Fall of Humanity in Christian theology. This is synonymous with the film’s subject matter. I believe the film is basically about the boy coming to the understanding that his parents are fallible, reaching the point in time where he cannot rely on them to be his saviors. He realizes that there is death, that life is finite, that this innocent boyhood will come to an end. His parents try as they might, but they cannot save him through their human love. He has to be saved through his own search. Jack is reminded of this through the behavior of his father and mother. Both love their children but in different ways. The father is a perfectionist and strict disciplinarian but he loves his children and teaches them that they must stand up for themselves. Mr. O'Brien wants so badly to have his children obey him though that he gets frustrated easily and has a temper. The mother is eternally loving, providing comfort, warmth, and grace, but she is meek and not able to convey the strength that the boy needs at times. Jack doesn't find complete solace in either of them and instead tries to find his own way. There's a specific moment where Jack says, "What I want to do, I can't do. I do what I hate." which seems to directly reference a passage from the Bible, Romans 7:19 where Paul says, "For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do -- this I keep doing." It's moments like this where perhaps Malick tips his hand as to where the film's theology and philosophy lie.

There have been many readings and interpretations of the film and the characters. Some might make the assumption that The Father, Mr. O'Brien is a God figure. I can’t go down that path. Mr. O'Brien is clearly not perfect nor without sin and I can't substitute him for God in this way at all. On the flipside, if Malick were making some parallels between Mr. O'Brien and God, making him out to be a strict disciplinarian and domineering figure, then it really wouldn't fit with themes of the film regarding forgiveness and grace. Another point of contention for many, the beach sequence at the end of the film, has been claimed to be the afterlife or heaven. It does not feel like a heaven experience to me in the strict sense. In Christianity, one knows that when believers die, they go to heaven. There is no indication that the Sean Penn character dies. He clearly talks to his Dad on the phone in one instance, so we know his father is not dead either. In the film, he goes in his mind to a place of understanding and where his memories are reconciled to himself. So, I don't believe it's a heaven sequence but a spiritual birth sequence and moment of reconciliation and forgiveness. In fact, it is his moment of salvation or accepting of God's grace. The imagery used and repeated during this sequence is of entering through a doorway, which happens at least twice during this sequence. In the Bible, Mathew 7:7 reads, "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you." Again, Malick's references to biblical passages are more than just coincidental here. 


I think all of these spiritual overtones lead some to feel that this film is heavyhanded (where everyone would know exactly what is being said). I don't think it's heavyhanded, but more a film that is unrestrained. It is unrestrained in its efforts to display the power of creation, the comparison of father and mother, the realization of our speck of existence, childhood and the loss of innocence, the portrayal of salvation. This unrestrained quality gives the viewer a challenge in that one must view it actively. You can't just tune out, but you must meet the film on an equally active level of engagement to appreciate what Malick is trying to say.

There are some troubling aspects to interpreting the film through the lens of western Christianity though. If the film is truly a distillation of Christian themes, why does the creation sequence resemble more of what would be considered The Big Bang? There clearly is chaos in effect during the sequences and furthermore, there is more than a hint of Evolution portrayed through the development of single cells and gradually more complex organisms brought to life. I don't think that creation and The Big Bang are completely mutually exclusive, but traditional evangelical views do not espouse a belief in The Big Bang or Evolution. Does this mean that the interpretation of the film through the lens of Christianity is not valid? I'm not sure. I think it's a troubling aspect, and one I am not clear is reconcilable depending on how one views the remaining of the film.   

Philosophically and spiritually, the film provides a lot to think about. But, as a film experience it holds great power as well. The sequences of childhood are probably some of the best distillations of youth ever put on film. Even the camerawork by Emmanuel Lubezki seems to have the perspective of youth imbued upon it. Everything seems to be regarded with the naïveté and the mischief of a young mind. A window is regarded from the perspective of whether it should be broken with a rock or not. A lizard is not just a reptile to marvel at, it’s something to scare your mother with. This perspective really provides the lens of credibility that the films needs to convey its aura. As for the acting in the film, I'm never one to directly provide much praise to Brad Pitt. But, his performance here really strikes the right notes and is probably his best and most nuanced performance of his career. Jessica Chastain as Mrs. O'Brien also gives a breathless and near wordless performance filled with graceful and stern looks. I'm hoping we see more of her in the future. However, the star of the film is Hunter McCracken as Jack, who steals nearly every scene he's in and is able to carry the emotional weight of the film on his young shoulders. Sean Penn though is not given nearly much to do as the adult Jack and one wonders whether there was a larger plot thread involved at one point in the film's development. 

Outside of the “creation” sequence, most of what follows is similar to other Malick films in terms of its storytelling manner and are familiar to Malick-ites: Mostly wordless sequences involving individuals, distilled to actions or looks, shots of nature to convey mood and tension, and enhanced with musical interludes. All of the middle sequences are just stunning as the poetry of life unfolds in all its beauty and tragedy. However, the structure of the film is deliberately fractured, and at times nearly impenetrable. I think there is evidence of much more storyline involving Sean Penn's adult Jack. In the beach sequence we witness a woman who might be his wife and a girl who might be his daughter, but there is no attempt to explain who they are in this version of the film. There are rumors of a 4-6 hour version in the works, so it's entirely possible that the Sean Penn sequences could contain a great deal more information than we're given in the current version.

The Tree of Life is beautiful, transcendent and spiritual, but so are Malick's other films in different ways. So, I won’t go so far to say it’s his best one. I also will stop short of conveying any sense of this being the most ambitious or important film in multiple decades, as I’ve seen some call it. For me it’s no more ambitious than Lynch’s work, Von Trier's, or Kieslowski’s among others. Malick belongs to a family of filmmakers intent on conveying, in their own way, their outlook and perspective on life and the artistry of conveying it. This film is an important work that demands to be seen and should be seen by anyone interested or believing in film that is capable of grandeur. The Tree of Life is ultimately a challenging, sometimes messy, and rewarding work of cinematic art because of its ability to convey the ineffable of a spiritual journey and life itself through the medium of film. It’s as simple as that for me.

Love Affair, or the Case of the Missing Switchboard Operator (1967) - Directed by Dusan Makavejev

Dusan Makavejev’s cinema, born out of Serbia in Yugoslavia during the 1960’s, is one in which art, social conformity, and even cinema itself comes into question. Coming out of a communist nation, it’s hard to believe these films ever got made, let alone saw the light of day. His insistence on eliminating traditional form and his use of collage and experimentation are all central to the “Black Wave” movement taking place in Yugoslavia in the 1960’s, of which he might be the director with the largest legacy. His most fruitful and accomplished period occurred with his first films, including a fascinating one called Innocence Unprotected (1968), but it's Love Affair, or the Case of the Missing Switchboard Operator that is a superior example of contradiction and provocation.



In Love Affair, or…., Makavejev tells a loosely interpreted story about Izabela (Eva Ras), a switchboard operator, and Ahmed (Slobodon Aligrudic), a vermin exterminator, and their short but tragically passionate relationship. Many of the scenes involving their interaction borrow heavily from the French New Wave and much of the cinema verite going on around the world at the time. What makes this film, and Makavejev’s cinema unique, is his reluctance to stick with one style. He interjects his “story” with documentary-like footage: a discussion and lecture to the audience on sexuality from a sexologist, including historical depictions and artwork on sex, a lecture on criminology and the mindstate of criminals from a criminologist.



This all ends up being tied together through the plot, when we realize that the relationship involves both sex and a murder, and in fact, birth and death. Several times we are introduced to life-giving or life-affirming images: shots of eggs, bubbles, bread dough, the female form, the description of a fetus in utero. These are contrasted with ghastly images of death: blood, corpses, dead rats, an autopsy. When you combine the contradiction of the beautiful with the blood curdling, there is a chilling effect on the viewer.  We’re also shown copious shots of civilian protests as well as some arresting footage of the removal of the church from communist society. Despite the shortness of the film, Love Affair, or… is literally loaded with ideas and images over its 69 minutes that leave an impression and are directly confrontational. It seems like Makavejev provokes the viewer with impressions of stifling socialist viewpoints and personal freedom, lecture versus action, social norms versus personal choices.

What I appreciate so much about the film is how the collage actually works. Much like the cinema of Terrence Malick, Makavejev is reliant on the collage of images and impressions, many contradictory in this case, leading to an overall tone and mood, which ends up creating a sense of purpose. I’m not pretending to know all of what Makavejev was trying to say about cinema, nor Yugoslavian history or politics. I think there’s more here than I mentioned. But, the film works on many levels and is memorable for both how it presents its story and in many cases, how it does not tell the story. Makavejev would go on to make increasingly brazen films in the 1970's, but seemed to have maintained a certain critical balance here. This is an original film from a director with a very unique viewpoint. It strikes me as an underrated and important film from this time period.