With a notoriously sparse filmography (five films in thirty eight years), The Tree of Life is Terrence Malick’s fifth feature. ‘It’s unlike anything you’ve ever seen’ is an overused platitude in film criticism. However, The Tree of Life really is unique when it comes to feature length fiction cinema.
Genre has always been something of a loose concept when applied to Malick films. There will be a genre that is more applicable than any other, but his treatment of the genre’s codes and conventions (recognisable features of the genre) negates any serious attempt to make the theory stick. The Thin Red Line (1998) is a war film, yet scenes of warfare are infrequent and the lack of a protagonist to follow is also unusual. Yet, few films capture the beauty and horror of war while making the viewer consider the wider, human consequences. The Tree of Life would best be described as a family drama, yet this does not even begin to summarise this sprawling tour de force of photography and music, with, of course, some family drama thrown in. This is not even a sub-genre or a hybrid. It is even less genre orientated than any previous Malick films. It is a genre unique to Malick, achieved through his incredible ability to juxtapose images with music and the autobiographical characteristics of this story.
Narrative is even more of an opaque concept when applied to Malick films. Narrative theory will tell us that stories follow a recognisable pattern, which allow us to easily follow the story. This is so embedded in cinema that we don’t even notice the familiarity of many stories, yet subconsciously we know when we have moved into the final act of the film and when it is tying things up to come to an end. The Tree of Life follows no recognisable narrative structure. Time is a loose concept in all Malick films, but even more so here. We begin with the death of a nineteen-year-old son, but then never see the son pass the age of ten. The story of the mother is interrupted by a dazzling thirty-minute spectacle recreating the creation of life. The grandness of which adds a greater weight to the personal story of the Texan family. What could loosely be described as the film's chapters are bookmarked by ephemeral shots of dancing colours. In short, this is a film that shakes free the shackles of traditional story telling and delivers an unpredictable narrative with a very relatable story at the heart of it.
Despite its magnificent shots of the natural world shown along side a classical score, the most memorable scenes from The Tree of Life are those of the family and it is this representation of a 1950s Texan family that provide the film with its emotional power. One of Malick's most impressive skills is his ability to communicate three-dimensional characters with little or no dialogue. Therefore, when we see Brad Pitt's patriarch showing his son design sketches and patents and then the next scene him in a courtroom receiving a despondent pat on the back, his character is developed further as an ambitious but frustrated man. This is one of Pitt's finest performances and certainly his best since the fantastic The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007). Opposite Pitt's tough, but loving father is the angelic mother, played by Jessica Chastain. The naturalness on show here is incredible, highlighted by the fact that it is easy to forget about Pitt's celebrity and just accept the representation on offer. The moments captured of the sons as newborn babies, or those of them playing games or causing mischief in the neighbourhood will immediately bring to mind memories for anyone with siblings. The interactions feel so universal, yet at the same time personal, as if we are intruding, or perhaps more accurately, an unseen member of the O'Brien family.
The audience for The Tree of Life is a difficult thing to pin down. Malick fans will surely see the film (they don't know when there will be another), but the indulgence on display here may be too much even for those who admire his previous films. The film will certainly not play to a traditional weekend audience, yet winning this year's Palme D'Or at Cannes will give it a much needed publicity boost and bring an audience eager to see why it won. The film must have been a marketing nightmare as it is outside the key demographic, but realistically only falls into a very small demographic anyway. The most likely audience is one that is extremely cine-literate. To really get the most from Malick's latest an audience will have to put into the film more than they are given. More than most films, The Tree of Life will speak to people on an individual level, each taking away a lasting image, whether it's an exploding volcano or a baby's foot being gently cradled by a new father.
More than anything, The Tree of Life calls to mind the 1982 documentary Koyaanisqatsi, which was a series of well shot images placed alongside the music of Phillip Glass. This documentary had no plot, yet had environmental leanings. Parts of Malick's film feel very similar, yet he has skillfully measured the grandness of such photography and music alongside a family orientated story of tragedy and happiness and the two together create one of the most strikingly fitting films on the subject of life and death.
No comments:
Post a Comment