The New World

User Score
6.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 202 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 40 out of 202

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Nov 30, 2011
    10
    Terrence Malick is a genius and a real artist. Exactly... This film is lighter then The Thin Red Line, but The New World is an amazing philosophical orgasm. Long and slow, even so beautiful and never dull. Colin Farrell is a great actor, but the best was Christian Bale. The script is lyrical, the shot is wonderful. Need more?
  2. aab
    Jan 9, 2006
    10
    The best film of the year,
  3. RichL.
    Apr 1, 2006
    8
    Transcendent moments of beauty shower The New World with a pure joy, not based on explosive plot jolting, but on purity itself.
  4. Giovanni
    Jan 10, 2006
    10
    Pure Art.
  5. frankt
    Jan 3, 2006
    7
    Kudos to master malick for being a distinctive voice in the largely generic choir of american film. i'd rather feel a bit bored for stretches by malick than assaulted by vulgarians like... there are too many to name. the female character could have been handled in ways that would have been more emotionally engaging, without resorting to sentimentality or the usual manipulations, but Kudos to master malick for being a distinctive voice in the largely generic choir of american film. i'd rather feel a bit bored for stretches by malick than assaulted by vulgarians like... there are too many to name. the female character could have been handled in ways that would have been more emotionally engaging, without resorting to sentimentality or the usual manipulations, but she remained too enigmatic for too long. nice recovery in the final minutes, but there was too much fertile ground left fallow. being dislocated from your people, isolated and cast out should result in some drama, not just a change of wardrobe and address. Expand
  6. MitchM.
    Feb 1, 2006
    10
    An utterly mesmerizing, gripping, tragic, beautiful, hallucinogenic experience sitting through this. The film captures some essential truth about the trainwreck that occured when these two disparate cultures collided, and most of it is visual.
  7. KenG.
    Feb 12, 2006
    10
    Beautifully told, beautifully shot, and beautifully acted.
  8. W.Glen
    Feb 3, 2006
    10
    This is a singular work of genius. Brilliantly conceived and executed as only few in the history of movie making have been--it has displaced one from my list of the ten best movies I have ever seen. My full essay critiique would contain only superlatives. The artistry is sublime throughout in all dimensions.
  9. OLuc
    Jun 4, 2006
    9
    Despite misleading advertisingsome akward editing, The New World captivates with it's celestial visual style and it's isolated feel.
  10. MarkW.
    Jan 1, 2006
    10
    Another of Malick's meditations, this time on the birth of a nation and the nature of love. Beautifully scripted, acted, and shot.
  11. DavidA.
    Jan 21, 2006
    9
    I really liked this movie, the only bad thing is that it goes a little slow, but the rest is nearly perfect.
  12. DrewF.
    Jan 21, 2006
    10
    Absolutely beautiful film. Not everyone will like it, not everyone will GET it, but.. Isn't that true of all fine art? Malick is so great at getting fantastic performances out of the most unlikely of sources.
  13. TelyS.
    Jan 20, 2006
    10
    Terrence Malick's use of the medium of film is unconventional and completely unique, and The New World bears the director's unmistakable imprint. As was the case with his past films, The New World kept me breathlessly captivated from the first frame to the last through his incredible use of image and sound. You either get it or you don
  14. StephenZ.
    Jan 22, 2006
    10
    Breathtakingly beautiful, amazing how a film can reimagine history.
  15. Doug
    Jan 23, 2006
    10
    Idlers use the word, "pretentious" to criticize art they're unwilling to investigate or interpret. Pretenious, like bourgeois, is now a dead word. Malick has made no claims of genius; he does not put on airs (though he is a graduate of Harvard and the AFI, a Rhodes Scholar, and a director of four ambitious and interesting movies). In an era of deritative and formulaic films, we Idlers use the word, "pretentious" to criticize art they're unwilling to investigate or interpret. Pretenious, like bourgeois, is now a dead word. Malick has made no claims of genius; he does not put on airs (though he is a graduate of Harvard and the AFI, a Rhodes Scholar, and a director of four ambitious and interesting movies). In an era of deritative and formulaic films, we should not disregard an intelligent, courageous artist as simply "pretentious." Expand
  16. Mark
    Jan 23, 2006
    10
    See the movie for what it's actually trying to do-not what you think it's supposed to be doing. The visuals and the sounds do show you everything you need to know-even though they don't spell it out in words.
  17. Elliott
    Feb 13, 2006
    10
    I can understand how some people would find this film slow, distancing, boring, etc. (though I certainly didn't), but to stamp this film with a '0' review is both inane and ludicrous. Such comments are impossible to take seriously.
  18. AdamBeach
    Feb 1, 2006
    10
    Quietly enchanting, The New World spoke in images. From the virgin landscape of a remote Virginia coastline, to the towering vegetation of a land untamed
  19. Jans
    Feb 2, 2006
    10
    Cinematography, not predictable exposition or an overwrought soundtrack, make the plot move in this film. Slow, quiet, and beautiful; another fine film by Malick.
  20. JohnV.
    Feb 7, 2006
    10
    Terence Malical comes through again, with a film that transends the conventional film experience to bring to our minds and eyes, a visually stunning peice of reflective and challenging cinema.
  21. ChrisM.
    Jun 14, 2006
    10
    the best film of the year. Unfortunately, it's too smart for most.
  22. emma
    Jun 29, 2006
    9
    I didnt understand it as much but, overall it was preety good except for the ending.
  23. HenryW.
    Jul 8, 2006
    9
    Absolutely astonishing, but I'm a big Malick fan anyway - it's something you either get or you don't. It's a deep, thoughtful, meditative film quite unlike anything that's ever been before (except Malick's previous oeuvre), but if you can't stand not seeing a car blow up or someone getting their head kicked in every five seconds it may not be for you. Absolutely astonishing, but I'm a big Malick fan anyway - it's something you either get or you don't. It's a deep, thoughtful, meditative film quite unlike anything that's ever been before (except Malick's previous oeuvre), but if you can't stand not seeing a car blow up or someone getting their head kicked in every five seconds it may not be for you. Inspiring, incredible cinema, Malick is the greatest American filmmaker ever. Collapse
  24. AndrewP.
    Dec 30, 2005
    10
    Malick surpasses himself, a visual feat.
  25. LandonC.
    Jan 1, 2006
    10
    Once again, Terrence Malick uses the setting and plot not as an end but as a means to relate the depth and weight of history and human experience. Devastatingly beautiful. One of the best films I have ever seen.
  26. Wade
    Jan 21, 2006
    10
    Yes it is slow. If you view that as a negative then don't go see this. If you have a passion for cinema, this film is a gift. If you "just like going to the movies", then this film will cure your insomnia. Better to spend your cash on Last Holiday and let true cinema nerds like me take in this masterpiece. Every. Single. Shot...is a work of art unto itself. I even forgot that I hate Yes it is slow. If you view that as a negative then don't go see this. If you have a passion for cinema, this film is a gift. If you "just like going to the movies", then this film will cure your insomnia. Better to spend your cash on Last Holiday and let true cinema nerds like me take in this masterpiece. Every. Single. Shot...is a work of art unto itself. I even forgot that I hate Colin Farrell. Thank you Mr. Malick. I look forward to your next masterpiece a decade from now. Expand
  27. StuQ.
    Jan 21, 2006
    10
    An amzing film. This type of story-telling is very unique, and Malick's artistry and direction create and unforgettable story. Colin Farrell has never been better, and the emotions he conveys, without a word of dialogue---longing, worry, love---show him mastering the craft of acting. This is a movie that must be seen in the theater, no so for the enjoyment of it (like a King Kong), An amzing film. This type of story-telling is very unique, and Malick's artistry and direction create and unforgettable story. Colin Farrell has never been better, and the emotions he conveys, without a word of dialogue---longing, worry, love---show him mastering the craft of acting. This is a movie that must be seen in the theater, no so for the enjoyment of it (like a King Kong), but I believe the big screen is the only way to see this fgilm for what it is. I cannot wait to view it a second time. Expand
  28. JohnM.
    Jan 20, 2006
    10
    Best movie of the year, hands down.
  29. Gozerrulez
    Jan 20, 2006
    10
    The LA weekly rereviewed this movie today and I couldn't agree more. It said, it is not only the film of the year, it is one of the greatest films I have ever seen. I must agree. I saw the original cut, and liked it very much and then, because some friends were going, and I have learned Malicks films get better the more one sees them, this afternoon I watched it again. Strangely The LA weekly rereviewed this movie today and I couldn't agree more. It said, it is not only the film of the year, it is one of the greatest films I have ever seen. I must agree. I saw the original cut, and liked it very much and then, because some friends were going, and I have learned Malicks films get better the more one sees them, this afternoon I watched it again. Strangely enough it was almost a different film. Watching the first one was like watching a magnificent picture, today watching the second cut, it was like being sucked into that painting. This is a film we will talk about for decades to come. the term becomes jaded, but it is a masterpiece. Expand
  30. Kit
    Jan 22, 2006
    10
    Tender and beautiful, unique and inspiring.
  31. BaronJ.
    Jan 22, 2006
    10
    Beautiful, there ain't no other words to describe it
  32. Kathryn
    Jan 23, 2006
    10
    A beautiful, contemplative, textured movie to be absorbed into. From the heart.
  33. AlexA
    Jan 24, 2006
    7
    hey dont really care about the vote... but look at this: «The New World is a sweeping adventure set amidst the first encounter of European and Native American cultures during the founding of the Jamestown Virginia settlement in 1607. Acclaimed filmmaker Terence Malick brings to life his own » Heard of someone called Christopher Columbus ?!??!?! like 115 years before that... hey dont really care about the vote... but look at this: «The New World is a sweeping adventure set amidst the first encounter of European and Native American cultures during the founding of the Jamestown Virginia settlement in 1607. Acclaimed filmmaker Terence Malick brings to life his own » Heard of someone called Christopher Columbus ?!??!?! like 115 years before that... metacritic... u disapoint me, trying to rewrite history Expand
  34. ES
    Jan 26, 2006
    10
    The best film yet from the only genius operating in American cinema since Kubrick died. But this is better than anything Kubrick has ever offered - perhaps the best thing that American cinema has ever offered. This is a masterpiece on the level of Kurosawa's RAN. Obviously, though, Malick is an aquired taste and not for everyone... but whatever objective critical ability I do possess The best film yet from the only genius operating in American cinema since Kubrick died. But this is better than anything Kubrick has ever offered - perhaps the best thing that American cinema has ever offered. This is a masterpiece on the level of Kurosawa's RAN. Obviously, though, Malick is an aquired taste and not for everyone... but whatever objective critical ability I do possess tells me that this is not a film to be underestimated. The subjective part of me wants to call it the finest piece of cinematic art I've yet encountered. In every aspect this film is a stunner. Essential viewing for all filmgoers who profess to take the artform seriously and definately Best Picture material. See it, absorb it, and tell your friends to do the same! Expand
  35. V.Martinez
    Jan 27, 2006
    8
    This movie was different but in a good way. Most people would think it was slow and it was (2.5 hrs). But I liked how it seemed real, like you were there in 1607. I didn't feel cheated, but it did have some nature scenes that could have been cut. The love story part was excellent. Colin Farrell has like 3 lines in the whole movie. The other actors were great.
  36. MiraL.
    Jan 3, 2006
    10
    The best American film of 2005. Unforgettable and transcendent.
  37. TheConundrum
    Feb 24, 2006
    8
    If you are seeking popcorn entertainment, do not go see this film. It is slow, poetic, languid, philisophical -- and enchanting. Most people will be bored (for God's sake don't take kids!), and I wouldn't blame them. But if you're patient and open to truly artistic film-making, then don't miss this thought-provoking epic. The cinematography is magnificent, as one If you are seeking popcorn entertainment, do not go see this film. It is slow, poetic, languid, philisophical -- and enchanting. Most people will be bored (for God's sake don't take kids!), and I wouldn't blame them. But if you're patient and open to truly artistic film-making, then don't miss this thought-provoking epic. The cinematography is magnificent, as one would expect from Terrence Malick. Be sure to see it on the big screen! Expand
  38. BenK.
    Feb 4, 2006
    9
    Nobody makes films like Terrence Malick. Unfortunately Malickian or Malickesque do not lend themselves freely to be used as adjectives. Malick's films are slow, deliberate, picturesque, perhaps the cinematic equivalent to a Henry James novel. A great movie that will only grow in complexity with multiple viewings.
  39. JSS.
    Mar 7, 2006
    10
    An exploration of what it is to have a world, and the plurality of worlds. Brilliant and utterly absorbing.
  40. Stephen
    May 4, 2006
    8
    If The Thin Red Line was - emphatically
  41. Dave
    Jul 10, 2006
    10
    Some understand poetry, and some dont. Malick is a poet and one of the greatest living filmaker's, and in an age when everything in film is hammering us over the head, its nice to see som subtlety and meditation.
  42. MarcelG.
    Sep 25, 2006
    10
    Malick's fertile imagination combines perfectly with his furtive politics; this Pocahontas isn't plucked from her environment. She leads John Smith around by his tail and leaves everybody, audience included, with much to reflect on in this recreation of an old and no doubt tall tale.
  43. PatC.
    Apr 16, 2007
    7
    The style in which the story is told lacks continuity and personality development, resulting in a persistent sluggishness. Yet it is lavish audiovisually, does not impose stereotypes, and draws one completely into the world that was the first frontier of our country. Its technique is wanting, but its heart is in the right place. Not necessarily time well spent, but not time wasted either.
  44. MrnieB.
    Dec 19, 2005
    10
    A trip... stunning.
  45. pm
    Dec 27, 2005
    10
    From the poet Malick, another deep and wise vision of innocence, awe and reverence -- for the sacred human experience that is still possible. Most other films continue to appear superficial and trivial next to his achievements.
  46. Bobby
    Dec 30, 2005
    10
    Malicks new masterpiece is an amazing work of art. Best movie of the year, if not decade. I am still taking it all in...peace son!
  47. aab
    Dec 31, 2005
    10
    The best film of the year,
  48. ML
    Nov 25, 2006
    10
    Lyrical, beautiful and romantic. One of the year's most underrated films. Like a well-written book, this movie transports its viewers (believably) to another world, another time. Chemistry between Smith and Pocahontas believable and steamy.
  49. AaronS.
    Jan 21, 2006
    10
    Now this is 'pure cinema'. A Terrence Malick film is something of a rare event now, but as 'The New World' proves, it's worth the wait. I cannot believe some of the negative reactions this film is arousing from some critics and filmgoers. Has our culture become so 'dumbed down' that a brilliant film like Malick's (deliberately paced and making Now this is 'pure cinema'. A Terrence Malick film is something of a rare event now, but as 'The New World' proves, it's worth the wait. I cannot believe some of the negative reactions this film is arousing from some critics and filmgoers. Has our culture become so 'dumbed down' that a brilliant film like Malick's (deliberately paced and making frequent radical use of sight and sound) gets panned because it's 'too slow', or there's 'not enought plot', or 'it has hardly any dialogue'? Like most of Kubrick's work, Malick has once again fashioned a film that seems to be light years ahead of its time. In a perfect world, this is the kind of film that would earn the attention of Oscars. One of the best films of 2005. Expand
  50. BillyS.
    Jan 23, 2006
    8
    Frame to frame, The New World is pure and simple visual poetry, just sit back and let the Art of Film wash over and sweep you away. As they say, Beauty is in the eyes, not ears, of the beholder, and I, for one, am beholden to the genius of Terrence Malick.
  51. RimaLyn
    Jan 23, 2006
    7
    Poetic and thought provoking. Beautiful cinematography. Lead actress was terrific for a newcomer
  52. EmilyLand
    Jan 24, 2006
    10
    I have to give it a 10 because my friend's daughter plays a bit part as Pocohantas' son (garden scene - you never see her face). It was beautifully filmed and the costumes for the "naturals" were wonderful. This film is not for the average movie goer, but will be enjoyed for many for what it is and not what it should be.
  53. TracyB.
    Jan 24, 2006
    10
    From the beginning to the end a beautiful film- excellent and very moving storytelling.
  54. Lynn
    Jan 28, 2006
    10
    His technique takes you to another place. So finely done and so rich.
  55. RobertC.
    Jan 29, 2006
    9
    I think the production company was just a bit baffled by this film. They, and most certainly the public, to think that this film was going to be a sparringly commercial epic. However, what we have here is a beautiful, narratively-abstract prose that is not truly about the New World, or even the "first American love story", but rather a poetic observation of Pocahontas. At times, it is I think the production company was just a bit baffled by this film. They, and most certainly the public, to think that this film was going to be a sparringly commercial epic. However, what we have here is a beautiful, narratively-abstract prose that is not truly about the New World, or even the "first American love story", but rather a poetic observation of Pocahontas. At times, it is even more vague than that...it seems to be more observative of just love in general, and how it coincided with the true founding of the New America. This is actually a remarkable film with the beauty of nature with the Kubrickian eye...it's a shame that Hollywood was so reluctant to actually release this FILM. Expand
  56. Max
    Jan 31, 2006
    10
    A masterpiece! I've never "felt" a film as deeply as this one. Simply genius. I think those people who are unable to connect with the flow of this film forgot to check their preconceived expectations of what an American historical epic should be. Often revolutaionary pieces of art are not recognized as such by the general public because the public just isn't ready yet. This film A masterpiece! I've never "felt" a film as deeply as this one. Simply genius. I think those people who are unable to connect with the flow of this film forgot to check their preconceived expectations of what an American historical epic should be. Often revolutaionary pieces of art are not recognized as such by the general public because the public just isn't ready yet. This film has the narrative and pacing you'll often find in great foreign films, and it's probably too sophisticated to be appreciated by a large scale American audience. Malick didn't allow this film to become hollywoodized, and thus probably alienated half his audience. Expand
  57. Charles
    Feb 13, 2006
    8
    A meeting of two peoples; on the one hand, implacable cynics who see only the world that is directly in front of them, on the other, the willingly enchanted who revel in the transcendental. These two cultures will most likely meet whilst watching The New World, and maybe even embark on a popcorn war, if the former faction doesn't storm out in protest at the film's langurous A meeting of two peoples; on the one hand, implacable cynics who see only the world that is directly in front of them, on the other, the willingly enchanted who revel in the transcendental. These two cultures will most likely meet whilst watching The New World, and maybe even embark on a popcorn war, if the former faction doesn't storm out in protest at the film's langurous qualities. I too have criticisms of this film; it skims over narrative like an aloof, possibly disinterested bird; one that occasionally sqawks too much (ie: voiceover). Yet despite this, the film is ravishly beautiful, and captures moments of poetic grandeur unrivalled in contemporary cinema. Mallick explores the foundation of America and the clash of cultures in subjective fashion, through the first love, loss of innocence and eventual compromise of a young native girl; his form therfore fits the nature of his enchanting leading, poetic and ephemeral. It is flawed but artfully impressionistic cinema, worthy of your attention. Expand
  58. GavinM.
    Mar 31, 2006
    10
    Absolutely fantastic from start to finish - there is not one single mis-step. The performances are pitch perfect, the score wonderful, and the storytelling is masterful. Its not your typical hollywood popcorn movie (and if this is what you are determined to see then don't go to this movie), but it is still totally accessible. If you allow yourself to slow down to match the rhythm of Absolutely fantastic from start to finish - there is not one single mis-step. The performances are pitch perfect, the score wonderful, and the storytelling is masterful. Its not your typical hollywood popcorn movie (and if this is what you are determined to see then don't go to this movie), but it is still totally accessible. If you allow yourself to slow down to match the rhythm of the movie, you will see one of the greatest examples of the art of film-making in the history of American cinema. Bravo Terrence Mallick! Expand
  59. JGM
    Jul 23, 2006
    7
    All the criticisms you'll read here are accurate: this movie is overlong, thin on plot, often indecipherable, self-indulgent, and generally artsy-fartsy. And yet, one forgives Malik all of this and more in exchange for the gift of the incredible visual feast. Watch any 30 minutes of this, then switch to anything else, and you'll be shocked at how pedestrian, how ugly, most of All the criticisms you'll read here are accurate: this movie is overlong, thin on plot, often indecipherable, self-indulgent, and generally artsy-fartsy. And yet, one forgives Malik all of this and more in exchange for the gift of the incredible visual feast. Watch any 30 minutes of this, then switch to anything else, and you'll be shocked at how pedestrian, how ugly, most of what comes across the screen is. And, it's not about "smarts" but about viewpoint. A film like this has to be approached as you would approach a series of paintings or a symphony, complete with repeating motif and variations on a theme. If you have the temprement to view a 2+ hour work in this way, the visuals will reward. And the art here is all visual: the dialog is sparse and often intentionally muddy. The acting is mostly wooden and beside the point, with the luminous exception of young Ms. Kilcher, who seems to understand and inhabit this character completely. Expand
  60. Aug 26, 2010
    10
    By shear craft and lyrical visuals, Terrence Malick turns a story that we've all hear before into a movie that is unique, cerebral and most of all, refreshing. That isn't to say it's a film that bothers to accustom to everyone's taste - it's about equivalent to watching "Fantasia," where much of the joy of watching comes from a culmination of camerawork, acting and the incredible scoreBy shear craft and lyrical visuals, Terrence Malick turns a story that we've all hear before into a movie that is unique, cerebral and most of all, refreshing. That isn't to say it's a film that bothers to accustom to everyone's taste - it's about equivalent to watching "Fantasia," where much of the joy of watching comes from a culmination of camerawork, acting and the incredible score composed by James Horner (though it could have just as easily been Aaron Copland). Basically, the entertainment isn't served to you on a greasy golden platter - it's meant to be savored as much as it is to be enjoyed. Expand
  61. Jul 29, 2011
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Great plot, great performance, awesome pictures - film that makes you thinking. In this film I find out how important in the movie is silence and how unpopular it is. Great performance of Q`orianka Kilcher, Colin Farrell and Christian Bale gives you much more that can be put in words - for me the whole production is worth watching. Expand
  62. Jun 24, 2016
    8
    Directing of Terrece Malick + cinematography of Lubezki = Masterpiece of visual narrative. Acting is also top class. But screenplay lacks structure, also, I've seen the 172 minute version of The New World, and I must say, that it's almost impossible to watch this movie in one day, without a break. I'd give 7, but cinematography and visuals are too damn good.
Metascore
69

Generally favorable reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 27 out of 38
  2. Negative: 0 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    80
    Malick's magnificent, frustrating epic mixes fact and legend to conjure up a reverie about Pocahontas (Q'orianka Kilcher), her love for Capt. John Smith (Colin Farrell) and her crossing from one culture to another.
  2. This is resolutely a film of the imagination. As with all films in Malick's slim body of work, its imagery, haunting sounds and pastoral mood trump narrative.
  3. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    80
    This is no breathless film fantasy; its pulse is stately, contemplative. But anyone who has keen eyes and an open heart will surely go soaring and crashing with the lovers lost in Malick's exotic, erotic new world.