Quote:
Originally Posted by jw007
Hey Polaroid, another off-topic Criterion post, but I finally saw Knight of Cups last night and I'm still trying to figure out what I watched. It's gotten to a point where Terrence Malick's films are now called "Visual poem art installations".
|
More than anything, I think of
Knight of Cups as a hipster Michelangelo Antonioni film, so to speak. It does not strike me as an overtly cerebral film, but more as a spectacular visual work that serves as a reflecting pool that each of us can observe in different ways in the context of how it applies to our own lives. I get the impression that Malick's
Song to Song will be much of the same.
I reviewed
Knight of Cups in the dedicated thread for that movie, but I'll repost it here...
[Show spoiler]Part of me is inclined to say that Terrence Malick has finally made the movie that his detractors have accused him of making all along, in that it could just be a series of beautiful images and random voiceovers with no substance. I would say that Knight of Cups is a film that must be seen multiple times in order to process the story, but I don't know if there's anything to process, because this is a truly improvisational film where every viewer is free to draw different interpretations.
That said, I like the movie. I somehow related to every "major" character in the film, and I have to give a tip of the hat to Malick for using images without tangible context to evoke my empathy. I could relate to Christian Bale's midlife crisis of sorts, because I often get the feeling that, like the knight of the story referenced by the title, I've lost focus of my fundamental character because of so many diversions around me. Although I'm not a parent, I also get Brian Dennehy's wish for his sons to have a better existence. I identified with Natalie Portman's sense of guilt and responsibility. I also identified with the seemingly carefree wistfulness of a few of the other women in the film.
This movie is basically a reflecting pool from which viewers draw parallels to themselves and their own lives. I guess that all movies are reflecting pools in the same sense, but both the good thing and the bad thing about Knight of Cups is that it makes this so obvious.
If you want to look at beautiful women for two hours, then you're in the right place. We've got Natalie Portman, Freida Pinto, Cate Blanchett, Teresa Palmer, Isabel Lucas, and my favorite, Imogen Poots. They all have this fantastic glow to them as they do interpretive dances around the screen while Bale's character wanders in and out of the frame. Like Malick's To the Wonder, characters are not so much acting here as they are dancing in a ballet, and it's an oddly wondrous thing to watch.
I'm reminded of Michelangelo Antonioni's films starring Monica Vitti, Alain Delon, Jeanne Moreau, and Marcello Mastroianni, where I'm expected to empathize with beautiful people who all won the genetic lottery and who all dress to the nines. The surprising thing is that I actually end up doing so.
Knight of Cups is basically a sensory overload of sunlight Los Angeles buildings, nighttime cityscapes, expensive suits, and gorgeous legs in strappy high heels. I don't love the movie in any concrete sense, but I enjoy the eye candy.
This is not Terrence Malick firing on all cylinders, but I don't think that it's a shallow film either. I recommend, as long as you know what you're getting into.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Just a steal.
Linear Mode
