Fox Searchlight Pictures | Release Date: May 27, 2011
6.9
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 604 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
405
Mixed:
79
Negative:
120
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
8
MarcDoyleMay 31, 2011
I went into this film knowing that it was going to be a visual marvel, hoping that I would be able to understand, at least on an intuitive level, what Malick was communicating to us about life, nature, grace, family, etc. Obviously, manyI went into this film knowing that it was going to be a visual marvel, hoping that I would be able to understand, at least on an intuitive level, what Malick was communicating to us about life, nature, grace, family, etc. Obviously, many nuances of the film eluded me, but as an experience, I enjoyed it greatly. Beautiful film, excellent acting by Brad Pitt in particular. It's beyond me that the crowd at Canned would boo this film. In fact, after seeing the film, it strikes me as an embarrassing, juvenile reaction to an important work. Expand
7 of 12 users found this helpful75
All this user's reviews
10
eddie1987Oct 23, 2011
I love it, very stunning movie, actors, amazingly cinematography, I dont know why so much negativity about this movie. I enjoyed this movie. Absolutely magnificent! One of the most visually pleasing aesthetic films
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
opennoiseJul 10, 2011
I perfectly understand why some dislike the movie--it's certainly not for everyone--but for those it works for, including me, I think it's a remarkable achievement. There's not many movies this day that are ambitious as this and succeed asI perfectly understand why some dislike the movie--it's certainly not for everyone--but for those it works for, including me, I think it's a remarkable achievement. There's not many movies this day that are ambitious as this and succeed as poignantly. Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
10
DarkCriticMay 29, 2011
The Tree of Life is amazing! The images are so beautiful and the cinematography scenes are nice that gives wide angle close ups in each scene that the movie journeys to the world of life, earth ,atmosphere, and galaxy. Sometimes the storyThe Tree of Life is amazing! The images are so beautiful and the cinematography scenes are nice that gives wide angle close ups in each scene that the movie journeys to the world of life, earth ,atmosphere, and galaxy. Sometimes the story didn't get the idea that what's this movie is really about? I understand that this movie is trying to focus on those characters and the images that the movie shows, and I feel that this movie gets a lot of intention about things that we knew about the reality. This movie is very quiet, no dialog, no disturbing scenes, and no script, so I easily say that it's beautiful movie that brings good idea of art. Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
1
felbert55Nov 10, 2011
It's not film worthy of review because it's not really a film. The first half-hour is filled with extraordinary cinematography that belongs in a segment of the Discovery Channel's Planet Earth. The rest is unintelligible bizarre nonsense.It's not film worthy of review because it's not really a film. The first half-hour is filled with extraordinary cinematography that belongs in a segment of the Discovery Channel's Planet Earth. The rest is unintelligible bizarre nonsense. It has no "narrative." Like abstract art I suppose those who love it make up something to explain it's meaning. Somewhere in the 6 lines of dialogue Brad Pitt defines "subjective" as something in your own mind that cannot be proved (or disproved) by others. All opinions are subjective and I respect those of others, but it's amazing to me that anyone could call this mind-numbing experience a masterpiece of film making. Imagine if the "acid trip" scene from Easy Rider had been the entire film. That's what this is... just a lot longer. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
MatteoMay 28, 2011
This is for film and art lovers. and it is also a film about being a Man and growing up a boy. Especially the periods of stealing things and destruction that all young boys go through. But it is mostly a master at work posing questions aboutThis is for film and art lovers. and it is also a film about being a Man and growing up a boy. Especially the periods of stealing things and destruction that all young boys go through. But it is mostly a master at work posing questions about the animals that we are and how we make each other feel and how we can be haunted for life by shame for who we are, who are parents are, and the animalistic actions and urges we live with. But we do have a choice to try and love and fight the inner nature of man. And Malick is trying to show how difficult that choice is to make on a daily basis because of how much the cards are stacked against grace and love. To me the ending of forgiveness and connection with the ones we love, nature, and strangers is the answer we all have to find to find peace, and then in that peace, there we can create our own beautiful universe of magnificent architecture. We can be whatever created this universe. He closes it on that bridge. A bridge we must build. Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
9
Christopher_G2Jan 17, 2012
Honestly I don't know if five years from now I'll consider this the next 2001: A Space Odyssey (which compared to this movie is actually straightforward) or if I'll be wondering what the heck I was thinking falling for Malick'sHonestly I don't know if five years from now I'll consider this the next 2001: A Space Odyssey (which compared to this movie is actually straightforward) or if I'll be wondering what the heck I was thinking falling for Malick's pretentiousness. But my feeling right now is that I was enlightened by watching this movie totally unlike anything I've see before. It's one of the most visually astounding films I've ever seen, well acted, and incomprehensible but not in a frustrating way, at least not me. Don't try to understand it all, just absorb it. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
LynDec 26, 2011
The movie is beautiful -- not like "Days of Heaven" or "The English Patient" were beautiful, but like a well-done National Geographic special is beautiful. The opening quotation from Job poses profound questions that aren't really answered byThe movie is beautiful -- not like "Days of Heaven" or "The English Patient" were beautiful, but like a well-done National Geographic special is beautiful. The opening quotation from Job poses profound questions that aren't really answered by volcanoes, waterfalls and dinosaurs. The brothers' relationships are touching, but the mother (Chastain) is such an ethereal presence that she seems almost lobotomized. I was disappointed that the gorgeous cinematography was done in service to mundane spiritual cliches and not in service to a coherent plot. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
1
brewsterJun 5, 2011
I do not know quite where to begin. My wife and I are college graduates, she is an attorney and I have done some graduate work. We read about this movie in the Austin paper on Friday because Terry Malick lives here. A lengthy article whichI do not know quite where to begin. My wife and I are college graduates, she is an attorney and I have done some graduate work. We read about this movie in the Austin paper on Friday because Terry Malick lives here. A lengthy article which only touched on the utter incomprehensibility of this movie. Malick may be a genius in the same way Jackson Pollack was: perhaps once someone tediously explains what you are looking at, you smile, walk away, but still dont get it. If you thought 2001: A Space Odessey was challenging, you are not going to like this. It starts with an overly drawn out Big Bang sequence, contains a dinosaur sequence fresh from Jurrasic Park, and closes with the end of time. I say "closes" because the movie is SO long, you think (and hope) it ends well before it does (several false closes) and then thankfully ends, seemingly five hours later. I wish I were more artistic and etherial and could somehow recommend this movie, which clearly was made for artistic and etherial critics, and those endless Cannes/Sundance/Toronto film festivals for an award. We ordinarily trust Metacritic's critic scores faithfully to attend or not attend movies. This time, ignore them and trust the User Reviews. Expand
17 of 38 users found this helpful1721
All this user's reviews
0
reaeperJun 21, 2011
This movie was trying to be way to 'deep'. All of the drawn out space and dinosaur adventures are pointless, and add absolutely nothing to the movie. The middle portion of the movie- where it is actually comprehensible- is mediocre, butThis movie was trying to be way to 'deep'. All of the drawn out space and dinosaur adventures are pointless, and add absolutely nothing to the movie. The middle portion of the movie- where it is actually comprehensible- is mediocre, but watchable, but add all the unnecessary filler, and you get a crap movie. Anyone who tells you otherwise is trying too hard. Expand
4 of 11 users found this helpful47
All this user's reviews
10
Falling_HammerFeb 5, 2012
Terrence Malick builds life in this film. It is definitely a hard movie to watch and not easy to understand let alone comprehend. When I saw this movie I wasn't enchanted by the beauty of the special effects but by their meaning. It doesn'tTerrence Malick builds life in this film. It is definitely a hard movie to watch and not easy to understand let alone comprehend. When I saw this movie I wasn't enchanted by the beauty of the special effects but by their meaning. It doesn't take a genius to understand it but it takes a graceful person to agree. To sum up, if the word grace has any meaning in your life then you will understand and love this movie, but if you are a closed person not willing to give yourself a new spark in life than this movie will be dull to you. God bless this movie and every one of you. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
5
KogiaJan 28, 2012
Like too many recent films it indulged itself too much and just went on far too long. It is undoubtedly beautifullly shot and I think I kind of liked what it was trying to say, but it's quite unengaging and with that it really drags. ILike too many recent films it indulged itself too much and just went on far too long. It is undoubtedly beautifullly shot and I think I kind of liked what it was trying to say, but it's quite unengaging and with that it really drags. I enjoyed the first hour or so, but by the end the few of us still awake were fidgeting and asking if it would ever end. The beach scene at the end was mawkish and even the beautiful operatic score and natural scenes became tiresome. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
weisbergerJun 26, 2011
Perhaps since this movie made me think "please god let it end" for an hour, it was a religious experience. Otherwise not so much. This was the Hubble space telescope meets pseudo profundity. There is nothing quite so trite as overwroughtPerhaps since this movie made me think "please god let it end" for an hour, it was a religious experience. Otherwise not so much. This was the Hubble space telescope meets pseudo profundity. There is nothing quite so trite as overwrought emotion, and this movie is really trite. With access to the technology necessary it could have been made by a high school student - there wasn't an insight in it that most overwrought 17 yr olds haven't had. I wanted to see what the fuss was about so blew two hours; trust me and don't make that same mistake yourself. Expand
15 of 31 users found this helpful1516
All this user's reviews
0
nomdiploomJul 28, 2011
Shamefully derivative, in love with its own symbolism, and at least 30 minutes too long. First glimpse of eternity---fine, I got it. But after a zillion Hubble shots---would have prefered waterboarding!!
Go back to film school. At least the
Shamefully derivative, in love with its own symbolism, and at least 30 minutes too long. First glimpse of eternity---fine, I got it. But after a zillion Hubble shots---would have prefered waterboarding!!
Go back to film school. At least the costumers got it right.
Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
10
ZeusJun 7, 2011
Absolutely magnificent! One of the most visually pleasing aesthetic films to be made in decades! The film is clearly spiritual and open for interpretation. You will either love or hate this film with passion. At least ... watch the entiretyAbsolutely magnificent! One of the most visually pleasing aesthetic films to be made in decades! The film is clearly spiritual and open for interpretation. You will either love or hate this film with passion. At least ... watch the entirety of the film, rather than giving up 25 minutes into the creation of the world. Expand
7 of 9 users found this helpful72
All this user's reviews
8
txrangersfan72Jun 19, 2011
Not a movie for most, The Tree of Life is an over-dramatic representation of what seems like a personal, spiritual struggle waged by the writer/director, Terry Malick, himself. If you can get through the first 30 minutes, you may be able toNot a movie for most, The Tree of Life is an over-dramatic representation of what seems like a personal, spiritual struggle waged by the writer/director, Terry Malick, himself. If you can get through the first 30 minutes, you may be able to appreciate the entirely-too-dramatic message being delivered. Brad Pitt is as good as I've ever seen him as the father of Jack and his two siblings. Jack, played as an adult by Sean Penn (in a very tiny role for him), is the protagonist (and I believe a representation of the writer/director) and is enduring the lessons and loss every boy, not to mention person, goes through over the course of their lives and trying to make sense of the meaning of life.

The film, like Jack himself, starts off very pessimistic in his beliefs, highlighting the inconsequential meaning and apathetic brutality of nature. It's a very Agnostic, if not Atheist, view. However, it ends with a strong shot of the adult Jack slowly dropping to his knees and succumbing to the complexity and reality of life, praying to some "God" to watch out for us all...until the end of time.

The meat of the story is young Jack learning boyhood lessons, which were almost painful in their accuracy to watch. I found myself squirming from very vivid memories of my own childhood thoughts that mirrored Jack's own a little too similarly. It was this immensely detailed and deep understanding of a growing boy, as well as the deeply emotional and over-dramatic display throughout the movie, that makes me believe this is a personal film for the writer. For people who generally hate these types of films, I would highly dissuade you from watching it. In fact, several people screening the film before me came out demanding refunds and urging people to change films. When I saw it, people clapped and laughed at the end, and not for good reasons. They were glad to see it done and happy to be leaving.

It is definitely a niche film and would only be appreciated by that niche. The style is typical of Terry Malick's, from what I understand, but for Father's Day and already being in a deep funk and contemplative due to the recent cancer struggle of my friend, Wes, it was a very hard film to watch. I came out appreciating it much more than I did while I was watching it. As much as the beginning had me thinking it was a strong liberal, almost anti-religion, agenda, which was coming across as irritating, even though I can appreciate the guts that would have taken, I left thinking anything but and was impressed by its roundabout message of love and spirituality. It's worth seeing once if you have an open mind and 2:18 of patience to let a movie make its point, but as much as I can appreciate it, it took a lot out of me to watch it. I believe I can only do it once.
Expand
6 of 8 users found this helpful62
All this user's reviews
4
wheretomaDec 17, 2011
Always trust the user reviews - 6.4 is not an achievement after 250 reviews and my score will drag it down further. This movie dragged immensely. Of course there is an underlying cosmological message - its named Tree of Life afterall - butAlways trust the user reviews - 6.4 is not an achievement after 250 reviews and my score will drag it down further. This movie dragged immensely. Of course there is an underlying cosmological message - its named Tree of Life afterall - but it gets lost at some point. There is some art here no question but the critics set expectations too high. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
5
nutterjrSep 22, 2011
Winner of the Palm D'or in this year's Cannes Festival it would obviously be a film of undeniable artistic value. The problem is that this film seemed so deep that it became hard to understand. The Greek phrase applies: "What was the poetWinner of the Palm D'or in this year's Cannes Festival it would obviously be a film of undeniable artistic value. The problem is that this film seemed so deep that it became hard to understand. The Greek phrase applies: "What was the poet trying to say here?" Some breathtaking visuals leave an impression, but overall it was not my cup of tea. Expand
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
1
JamesLJun 5, 2011
This is one of the most over rated and underwhelming films in years. It is worst than "The Thin Red Line" . I got the message but I have seen the message delivered in other films. I have also seen the message delivered in a manner that makesThis is one of the most over rated and underwhelming films in years. It is worst than "The Thin Red Line" . I got the message but I have seen the message delivered in other films. I have also seen the message delivered in a manner that makes you give a damn. Malick is a pretentious fraud hiding as an essentialist guru. I feel sorry for him and the casual film goer who will be sucked in by the glowing reviews. A.O. Scott of the NY Times should apologize for his review. Simply a disaster disguised as art! Expand
10 of 23 users found this helpful1013
All this user's reviews
4
cockaigneMay 28, 2011
If you're idea of this movie is watching someone paint for 135 minutes, then dive right in. Granted, it's a beautiful painting, but it's tedious and you'll be relieved when it's finished. Details are irrelevant, this is a 30K feet film thatIf you're idea of this movie is watching someone paint for 135 minutes, then dive right in. Granted, it's a beautiful painting, but it's tedious and you'll be relieved when it's finished. Details are irrelevant, this is a 30K feet film that masters students will toil over for generations. I felt like I had to counterbalance the film with some mind-numbing action flick when I was done. It's not that I don't appreciate the art of film, but I would like some semblance of a plot and a little less whispering. Bravo, but no thanks. Expand
7 of 17 users found this helpful710
All this user's reviews
9
vernApr 25, 2012
The Tree of life is more of an experience than a movie, and a very spiritual one at that. If that sentence alone scares you away from this film, then it is probably not for you. But if you are an open-minded movie-goer, that doesn't mindThe Tree of life is more of an experience than a movie, and a very spiritual one at that. If that sentence alone scares you away from this film, then it is probably not for you. But if you are an open-minded movie-goer, that doesn't mind movies that ask you to think and analyze your own life, chances are you will admire this movie as much as I did. Some people who watch this film will get something completely different from it than what some else does. Whether or not your reaction to this movie is positive or negative depends solely on you, the viewer. It seems like most people who disliked it did not have the patience for it. Patience is one thing you need in order to enjoy this movie. The Tree of Life does not contain your run-of-the-mill movie plot, with typical characters, and typical situations. After the initial "birth of the universe" segment, the movie moves from one reality to another, from one thought to the other, effectively depicting the protagonist's thoughts and memories as they come to his mind as the movie progresses. The gorgeous imagery truly is something to behold, and the beautiful musical score accompanies these images well. I thought about this film for a few days after watching it. It had me analyzing my own life in general, especially my relationships with my mother, my father, my siblings etc. As a whole, The Tree of Life is a movie that truly is greater than the sum of it's parts, and is unlike anything I've seen before. Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
TVJerryJun 20, 2011
The latest from Terrence Mallick continues to solidify his rep as a pompous twit and/or brilliant filmmaker. There's no plot or dialogueâ
3 of 12 users found this helpful39
All this user's reviews
8
scrieciuSep 3, 2011
'' The Tree of Life '' offers a beautiful, heart warming cinematography. Sadly, it is misunderstood by many. This movie is not for everyone. You really have to be interested and mentally prepared before seeing this. The thing is, the director'' The Tree of Life '' offers a beautiful, heart warming cinematography. Sadly, it is misunderstood by many. This movie is not for everyone. You really have to be interested and mentally prepared before seeing this. The thing is, the director (Terrence Malick) used to study philosophy at Harvard University. I like that he decided to use that knowledge to make something different : a way of seeing life in a artistic way. All that in a movie, which makes it so unique. So don't expect this to have an intense story with action. It's a relaxing movie with metaphors (one of the main reason that people can get confused) and you have to be open minded and to have that capacity to go deeper in your toughs (like I said before, being mentally prepared). When was the last time you had a strong feeling inside of you after seeing a movie ? This film is about feeling. That's why this movie can be considered an art. It's like if the director took a poem about life, and made a movie about it. I understand why some people hated it, because they didn't get the picture or simply because they don't like this type of film. If you only like shallow movies with none sense and naked girls, then shut up and go watch a useless, mindless, crappy movie like '' Piranha '' (2010). The music was wonderful and captivating. Also, there were parts when there wasn't dialogue (a few minutes long), just music. It's like if you were at a Opera theater or laying down and listening to the ocean. I enjoyed the way they showed the evolution of the universe. But it wasn't necessary that they showed the dinosaurs. Everybody did a good job acting, even if they didn't had a lot to say. For some reason, I really liked the kids, they were great. I agree that at some point it was boring, but it didn't really bothered me. I was hoping to get an explanation at the end of the movie, so I can understand 100 %. I had to go to wikipedia to read the plot to make sure I got it. So yes, this movie is not for everyone. It's slow and contains a lot of metaphors and was made artistically. It will surely win an Oscar for best cinematography. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
6
Hawkeye_LoriJun 6, 2011
I tried, but this movie failed me in delivering the philosophical message. Way too ambiguous. I appreciated the picture of life growing up in the 1950-60's, which brought back memories (especially of running around in the DDT fog, and howI tried, but this movie failed me in delivering the philosophical message. Way too ambiguous. I appreciated the picture of life growing up in the 1950-60's, which brought back memories (especially of running around in the DDT fog, and how are we alive today?). However, the writer-director just never got me to buy the big picture questions of life that were supposedly under consideration. It gets this high a rating due to the stunning visuals. Expand
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
3
wishmasterSep 16, 2011
Disappointing movie, 10 minutes thought I was watching a documentary wtf.! they did not understand a plot way too rare and really boring ... the only thing salvageable is the excellent cinematography, the soundtrack and sound effects .. theDisappointing movie, 10 minutes thought I was watching a documentary wtf.! they did not understand a plot way too rare and really boring ... the only thing salvageable is the excellent cinematography, the soundtrack and sound effects .. the rest next.! Expand
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
2
DearDearJun 23, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Tree of Life is like watching a drama about a family crash into Koyaanisqatsi. The central narrative is well-acted and poignant at times, but it gets lost in a ponderous muddle of poorly done CGI dinosaurs and stock footage of canyons, waterfalls, and reflections of clouds rolling across glass skyscrapers. Even the score, with its heavy use of woodwinds and choir, could've been composed by Philip Glass. I got the impression Malick was trying to serve up profundities about life, death and the connectedness of everything, but alas, I'm a mere mortal and I couldn't follow this mysterious trail of breadcrumbs. The metaphors are bloated-red-giant-sun-consuming-the-earth kind of overblown. I give the film credit for its beautiful cinematography, but even there it tries one's patience, with pointless slice of life scenes that drag on forever. The film's running time is apparently geological. Save yourself whatever it would cost to see this pretentious mess and buy a can of paint instead. You'll surely find more entertainment in watching it dry. Expand
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
0
RSSJun 10, 2011
I'm sorry -- what is this movie? Don't expect a story or caring about the characters. Good visuals, but lacking reason. I can't remember the last time I wanted to get up and walk out of a movie, but this came close.
11 of 25 users found this helpful1114
All this user's reviews
7
Biff_LomanJul 10, 2011
Had they left out the NASA pictures, the volcanic and prehistoric footage, and the symphonic music, and straightened out the crooked narrative, The Tree of Life would have been a brave, modest film classic about growing up in Waco, Texas inHad they left out the NASA pictures, the volcanic and prehistoric footage, and the symphonic music, and straightened out the crooked narrative, The Tree of Life would have been a brave, modest film classic about growing up in Waco, Texas in the '50s. It would not have been easy to bring off, with the only singular event, the loss of a son in what must have been the Vietnam War. The dinosaurs and the vulcanism would have had to be replaced by further pertinent footage about the events leading up to the son's going to war, along with the terrible aftermath of his loss. Many elements in the story would have had to be fleshed out. Characters besides the father would have had to be developed beyond near mute and emotional simpletons. They would have to have lives and friends and speak up and better explain themselves to each other and to their God. It would have had to be a lot more Bergman and a lot less Kubrick and Antonioni. Malick took the easy way out. He bludgeoned us with Mahler, who will draw tears from a stone gazing at a blank white screen; and he enthralled us with the photographic glories of Hubble's universe. He (and we) would have been better served to dispense with the manipulation and stick to the touchingly simple story he had to tell, of which we got only a beautiful outline. Perhaps it was fear that that story was dated and twice-told that prompted him to go cosmic. But, there is a profound discontinuity between the one realm and the other, and Mahler, the lovely footage, along with painfully trite questions addressed to that God do not begin to adequately bridge it of deflect the viewer's disappointment in the director/author's dodging the real questions. It was a nice try, though. Expand
0 of 5 users found this helpful05
All this user's reviews
0
perfectdOct 2, 2011
This movie goes to far into nowhere. This is a movie you really, really have to try and like. You haver to look for the meaning of what it means. It's better for DVD so you can go back and watch again so you can develop an explaination ofThis movie goes to far into nowhere. This is a movie you really, really have to try and like. You haver to look for the meaning of what it means. It's better for DVD so you can go back and watch again so you can develop an explaination of what the movie is trying to say. To me it's a baffle them with BS movie and not the great film I was expecting. Horrible. Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
7
FDT44Jan 29, 2012
More of an artisitic magnum opus, laden with symphonic fugues and transcendental phenomena, "The Tree of Life" is light-years away from one's conventional cinematic experience. Instead, it exudes an ever- changing amalgamation of family lifeMore of an artisitic magnum opus, laden with symphonic fugues and transcendental phenomena, "The Tree of Life" is light-years away from one's conventional cinematic experience. Instead, it exudes an ever- changing amalgamation of family life (the "movie") and the outlying visual sequences of the galactic cosmos via solar and asterismal alignments, as well as the terrestrial realm, shown in the form of volcanoes, fire, water, grasslands, and pasture. During the medial stretch of the film (about an hour), the latter journey (the visual sequences) will mimic one's experience at a planetarium, or perhaps a viewing of an environmental documentary, minus a top-rate actor's narration; if watching it on television, one might have the strong urge to check the channel. However, during this period, one of the greatest displays of cinematography is displayed, bolstered by powerful orchestral accompaniment, albeit not too aiding in one's attention. Despite such patience that is required from the audience during this time, once the "movie" returns, it is nearly infalliable. The film accurately delineates a 1950's midwestern family, and viscerally captures the everyday, unplanned, mundane life of the time: rough-housing, pre-adolescent boys playing in the grass with their dogs, wrestling in the tall grass pastures, mothers watching intently, arms-crossed to the discretion of their children outside a window, fathers kissing their children and wives on the cheek, brief-case in hand, before a long day's work at the plant, and the aestival sun browning the faces and arms of all under its path. Furthermore, Mallick instills the sense of respect and discipline set forth in the traditional household, "yes, sir," "no, sir." This is brought to life by Pitt, who rivals with his passive, ethereal wife (Chastain) for the respect of his children. The boys respect their father, and it isn't until he is gone (traveling abroad) that they see why. They (the O'Brien boys), especially Jack, prey on the mother's vulneribility: "I can do what I want." Although Jack proves timid amidst his father, out of fear of punishment, we learn he actually respects him, "I'm more like you...than her." Mallick's film is particulary accurate of the time, and easier to relate to, as it has no "carved in stone" plot. The events take place loosely, unrestrained by direction. Instead, the viewer sees an unraveling of normal, real-world events during one summer. Moreover, Mallick also instills the sense of paranoia of the time, as the viewer sporadically hears the sound of whispers, primarily from Jack, who speaks out to the various themes of the film: spirituality, compassion, regret, fear, anger, sadness, and wonder---all elements of everyday life. Also making an appearance is Sean Penn, who plays a middle-aged Jack. Here, we see he is a successful businessman in an unknown field, more-than likely in Chicago, and still reminiscing about his childhood experiences and the loss of his brother. Although his dialogue in the film is sparce, the viewer gains a greater sense of the appreciation he had for his father's efforts to "build" him into a man. Also, Penn's character manifests himself as much more contemplative than his younger self. Just as young Jack is more whimsical (as kids are), his older character breathes a more solemn aura as he now knows what he had lost and is fearful of what is to come. The reemergence of more terrestrial and galactic visual sequences now makes more sense in the film latter-half, particularly with Penn, as it points to the eschatological apprehensions people often possess with increasing age. It's not until the end, that we see older Jack finally at peace with his life and where it stands. Overall, "The Tree of Life," is fervently poetic in substance; gravitas that is never taken lightly. It is a thought-provoking evocation that few will truly appreciate, some will seek to understand, and all will never forget; its gloriously euphoric, but it makes you work for its beauty: hang in there, it's worth it. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
DKayJun 4, 2011
SMart PERSON: I trust in Malick. Thus, I knew this wouldn't be a MOVIE, rather it would be an experience. It is essentially a breathing series of paintings: walking, talking...thinking, that are meant to induce questions to which only theSMart PERSON: I trust in Malick. Thus, I knew this wouldn't be a MOVIE, rather it would be an experience. It is essentially a breathing series of paintings: walking, talking...thinking, that are meant to induce questions to which only the viewer himself can answer. Artistically speaking, Malick has created a stunning piece of cinema, unlike any filmmaker in history. For all mankind's sake, I hope it's not his last.
MASSES: If you're wanting a car crash or going because Brad Pitt is in it...Good luck. With the rest of your life too.
Expand
8 of 11 users found this helpful83
All this user's reviews
2
MukulApr 8, 2013
I want to review this movie but because as I have just finished it,I am extremely sleepy.
I am someone who gets very much intrigued by life and its spiritual meanings-but THIS has bored me to hell.I mean this shouldn't be termed as a movie
I want to review this movie but because as I have just finished it,I am extremely sleepy.
I am someone who gets very much intrigued by life and its spiritual meanings-but THIS has bored me to hell.I mean this shouldn't be termed as a movie at all.It's an philosophical educational ride.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
klausiousJul 20, 2011
It's hard to rate this movie because I spent 2 hours in the theatre waiting for the movie to end, until the last five minutes I found it somehow touching. I mean, the whole symbolism is too much for me (don't get me wrong I like symbolism -It's hard to rate this movie because I spent 2 hours in the theatre waiting for the movie to end, until the last five minutes I found it somehow touching. I mean, the whole symbolism is too much for me (don't get me wrong I like symbolism - that's why I like the last part of the movie), but in this movie it was somehow weird to me. I mean, if somebody ask me if they should see it, I would say "yes, but you have to take a lot of patience, like A LOT!!!" For my part, I think I will never want to see it the second time, even though I agree that it was beautiful, and for those who want to watch it because of Brad Pitt and Sean Penn, you'll be disappointed! Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
10
Brian_McInnisApr 14, 2012
So dreadfully rarely is film let out of its cage. So terribly scarcely is the language of movies used as though it's never been spoken before. This is cinema unbound. Terrence Malick's fifth film is a grand victory of human awareness andSo dreadfully rarely is film let out of its cage. So terribly scarcely is the language of movies used as though it's never been spoken before. This is cinema unbound. Terrence Malick's fifth film is a grand victory of human awareness and stands among the greatest, most fearlessly original and most universal of all films. It explores human experience from the inside, from within its characters' thoughts and sensations. Malick identifies its protagonist as its viewer and assembles a multitude of brief impressions of astounding vividness to act as an analogue of our own collection of memories. Roger Ebert wrote of Charlie Kaufman's great 'Synecdoche New York',

'For thousands of years, fiction made no room for characters who changed. Men felt the need for an explanation of their baffling existence, created gods, and projected onto them the solutions for their enigmas. These gods of course had to be immutable, for they stood above the foibles of men. Zeus was Zeus and Apollo was Apollo and that was that. We envisioned them on mountaintops, where they were little given to introspection. We took the situation as given, did our best, created arts that were always abstractions in the sense that they existed outside ourselves. Harold Bloom believes Shakespeare introduced the human personality into fiction. When Richard III looked in the mirror and asked himself what role he should play, and Hamlet asked the fundamental question To be, or not to be, the first shoe was dropped, and "Synecdoche" and many other works have dropped the second shoe.'

'The Tree of Life' is an other of the greatest of these works. As the years pass, our films seem to be moving deeper and deeper inward. This film attempts to be a mirror. It shows us a life such as our own and asks us to discern what is important in a life, what is good, what is lasting; and what is meaningless noise, what does not last. Kaufman's film also explored the human experience in an unconventional way, but while it had very little compassion and was devoid of wonder, Malick's film possesses those qualities and others in rich abundance.

I love, love, love the way Malick makes movies. He spurns artificial light, films his actors constantly (even when they don't know it), foreswears story-boards, always seeks to captivate fleeting, chance moments; a butterfly alighting on Mrs. O'Brien's hand, thunder flashing in the skies before Pocahontas, an inquisitive baby giving John Smith a kiss. He films and edits what ever and how ever he wants; what ever feels right, what ever is beautiful. He loves open fields, tall grass. He loves twilight and dusk. He loves water. He loves Sol, loves its light shining among plants, among people. He loves flocks of birds, hands holding hands, heads turned upward. He loves things that glow. He nearly always shoots manually; his camera is free. It swings and flutters about Smith and Pocahontas as they embrace. It runs joyously through a forest, peering upward and making Sol beam and dance among the branches and leaves. I am so very grateful there exists such a film-maker as him. I am stunned to learn that Malick himself lost his own younger brother as a young man, for which he largely blames himself, and has borne that guilt and grief for the rest of his life. This explains so much about his films - this one above all - and the depth, meaning and power of it are made so much more profound by this knowledge. 'The Tree of Life' is the product of a tortured man, and what we see in it is not only his philosophical message, but is from his own wounded heart. His own pain is present. We are told artists must suffer for their art, and here Terrence Malick, in his anguish for his little brother he's carried since the late sixties, has made a film which stands among the greatest and most essential of all human art. Jack's vision of the after-life is also more clear in this light; what Malick shows us is not only his belief, but is deeply personally important to him. It is his consolation, his hope.

There's a moment in the film that moves me more than film has ever before moved me. One morning, when the boys wake to find their father has gone on a trip, and they're free to romp in the house and tease their mother with a lizard and for once life is as it ought be with them, they run outside laughing with her as 'Les Baricades Misterieuses' plays, and we hear the mother's prayer for her children - for all that live. 'Help each other. Love every one. Every leaf. Every ray of light. Forgive.'
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
DHEDec 3, 2011
This movie gets my King-has-no-clothes award for the most inexplicably highly rated movie of the year (previous winners: Forrest Gump, Before Sunset). It was basically 2 hours of my life that I'll never get back. I spent the first hourThis movie gets my King-has-no-clothes award for the most inexplicably highly rated movie of the year (previous winners: Forrest Gump, Before Sunset). It was basically 2 hours of my life that I'll never get back. I spent the first hour waiting for the movie to start and the last hour waiting for it to end. Somehow, I made it to the finish, but not without a cost: the wasted effort that went into trying (and I did try) to find even a moment worth watching on any level left me feeling cranky and cheated. The movie did not make me laugh, cry, think, or wonder; it was monumentally unmoving. The spirituality at its core was soaringly sophomoric (not to mention off-putting). If it was meant to serve as a unifying theme linking everything (and by "everything" I mean everything) in a halo of enlightenment, the actual effect was closer to self-parody. I get the set up -- tough-love Dad suppressing his own dreams and trying (yet not trying) to make emotional connections, and the toll his own internal struggle takes on the family -- but there was so little to like about the characters that I found myself hoping the movie gods would drop a large heavy object on the lot of them, much like the eldest son wished the God-god would drop a car on his father. In some ways, the mother, presumably meant to be the sympathetic figure in the story, was the least likable of the lot (good luck with that Grace thing). Or maybe it was the oldest son, molded into a wretched little torturer by the contradictory and capricious demands of his father, that we were meant to empathize with. Whatever; it didn't work. The number 2 (?) son (call him Trust) flickered around the edges accompanied by a general "goodness" vibe, but never quite materialized into a person, and the third son was virtually indistinguishable from the other neighborhood kids. One of the three sons somehow grows up to be Sean Penn, a successful urban professional (architect?) whose stoic middle-distance gaze appears meant to speak wordlessly (literally) to unsettled "issues". It's not quite like I don't have anything good to say about the movie. Brad Pitt was great, as always. (I'd watch him read a phone book; in fact, I'd rather have watched him read a phone book). Sean Penn is always interesting to look at, even if he's not really doing anything. Dinosaurs (yes, dinosaurs) made a brief, but engaging appearance (maybe Malick can use these scenes as starter material for a logically dialog-free movie). And one last thing: If you got rid of all the scenes with people, it would make a halfway decent screensaver. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
8
dubbleqJun 18, 2011
I do not actually believe the character developement or the emotion of the movie deserves an 8. I actually would think those ingrediants deserve a 3. But the visuals were stunning and it was amazing how it showed the way life was formedI do not actually believe the character developement or the emotion of the movie deserves an 8. I actually would think those ingrediants deserve a 3. But the visuals were stunning and it was amazing how it showed the way life was formed millions of years ago. I have also made some inferences about the movie. Firstly, the reason they showed all of outer space and the other galaxies was to demonstrate how small the world was in the scheme of things and how bad things that happen on earth are not as big a deal as they appear. Also, for those who keep saying that they do not like the way religion was involved in the movie, it is actually an anti-religious movie. This is because it showed how lifeforms started and the young Sean Penn character kept on saying "God- where were you?" There were also a ton of negatives in this movie. Such as there being hardly any dialouge and how there was so much suspense to what was going to happen and it ended up just being boring. It was a good movie but I wouldn't reccomend watching it. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
10
alzslo08Jun 12, 2011
Terrence Malick's "The Tree Of Life" was the most anticipated movie of the year for me. I was hoped I'll see something that will leave me wordless. And I saw it. It could be different for every viewer, but you won't be able to describe it.Terrence Malick's "The Tree Of Life" was the most anticipated movie of the year for me. I was hoped I'll see something that will leave me wordless. And I saw it. It could be different for every viewer, but you won't be able to describe it. Performances by Brad Pitt, Hunter McCracken and Jessica Chastain were brilliant. Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
10
asthobaskoroAug 23, 2011
Tree of Life is not for your entertainment. Tree of Life is for non mainstream - patient audiences. Filled with religious and deep-meaning life message , visual treat, touching performance and powerful score make The Tree of Life undeniablyTree of Life is not for your entertainment. Tree of Life is for non mainstream - patient audiences. Filled with religious and deep-meaning life message , visual treat, touching performance and powerful score make The Tree of Life undeniably Terrence Malick's masterpiece. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
8
jimmytancrediDec 19, 2011
The Tree of Life by Terrence Malick is brave and goes to the limit of the philosophical weights always pretentious and complex, through an intricate montage of images and sounds (yes, who knows what Godard wanted to do in terms of narrativeThe Tree of Life by Terrence Malick is brave and goes to the limit of the philosophical weights always pretentious and complex, through an intricate montage of images and sounds (yes, who knows what Godard wanted to do in terms of narrative language in Film Socialisme and failed miserably), we see the beginning and the end of life, from the the macro to the microcosm.

The incredible sequence of 18 minutes following the creation of life in the universe from the Big Bang to the simplest cell in the earth is a catharsis. Uncommon in the todayâ
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
CitizenCharlieJun 21, 2011
I put off seeing The Tree of Life for a few days because I was intimidated by it. Would I be one of the people to â
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
0
DigitalkidMar 10, 2012
Tree of Life is trying so hard to be something deep and symbolic, that it's just ridiculous. Now I see the world with the eyes of a happy innocent child, and then I see miracles of god's creation, and then I see some drama from young man'sTree of Life is trying so hard to be something deep and symbolic, that it's just ridiculous. Now I see the world with the eyes of a happy innocent child, and then I see miracles of god's creation, and then I see some drama from young man's past.. So put it together for god's sake! It's like I saw 100500 art-house movies, so now I can make my own. NO! Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
10
WeAreOneJul 11, 2011
If you know anything about Terrence Malick's previous four films, and enjoyed any of them, then I would expect you to enjoy this film very much. To those who know nothing of Malick's work, I recommend diving right in. You may hate it, butIf you know anything about Terrence Malick's previous four films, and enjoyed any of them, then I would expect you to enjoy this film very much. To those who know nothing of Malick's work, I recommend diving right in. You may hate it, but you also may get caught up in his spell. Is it pretentious? HELL YES. Is it absolutely beautiful cinema that contains images the likes of which have never been portrayed on screen? HELL YES. This film is more an abstract artistic experience than a movie. This is the type of film making I personally love and relish when it comes along, maybe once a year or so. If you consider most art too "artsy", then this is definitely not for you. The only film I can possibly compare this to is 2001: a space odyssey. If that is your type of film, then sit back, and enjoy the ride. Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
0
MorriBeySep 3, 2011
Roger Moore from the Orlando Sentinel review says it all. "Glibly put, this challenging time-skipping rumination is the big screen equivalent of watching that "Tree" grow."
The only good thing is that now i know which reviewer to follow.
Roger Moore from the Orlando Sentinel review says it all. "Glibly put, this challenging time-skipping rumination is the big screen equivalent of watching that "Tree" grow."
The only good thing is that now i know which reviewer to follow. Nothing more to say.
Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
ZachBJun 30, 2011
Visceral. Wondrous. Beautiful. Maddening. It speaks to the inner depths in each of us. Terrence Malick is an artist, and a rare one at that. The best film I have seen in years.
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
5
NJWolfgangOct 24, 2011
Visually stunning. The music is annoying. The black screen used to segregate action is so bad it's more annoying than the music. The script is lacking. Brad Pitt is excellent. Sean Penn is wasted. Chastain is left to do a bad FalconettiVisually stunning. The music is annoying. The black screen used to segregate action is so bad it's more annoying than the music. The script is lacking. Brad Pitt is excellent. Sean Penn is wasted. Chastain is left to do a bad Falconetti impression. I actually shut this off after 90 minutes and then went back and started again hoping to find something redeeming. The scene with everyone walking along the beach finding each other was so contrived it just wreaked of self indulgence. Malik is a man of exceptional talent but this piece is more about his self indulgence than it is his ability to weave a story and paint and mesmerizing backdrop. The most interesting facets was that the film had an overall antiseptic feel about it. The only scene where there was a feeling of discord was the three boys in the deserted house. The DDT scene would only resonate if you had experienced the time when cities did that to eradicate the mosquito issue. Two hours of boredom. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
Baggins_ozNov 5, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I begin by stating that I love cinema that isn't afraid to be different. I love to be challenged. But this film struck me as being self indulgent pretentious film-making at its worst.

There is an outline of good story hidden in there, and one that deserved a far better telling; the story of a family falling to pieces and struggling to hold itself together...and perhaps a chance to explore how a tragedy affects these dynamics.

Instead we are presented with some loosely sketched hints of metaphysics and ruminations on God. There is also an interminable section that follows the birth of the Universe, formation of the Earth and Dinosuar extinction very much like it was lifted from NatGeo (or lifted from Fantasia)...which I struggle to find any link to the story being told. Yes, they were very pretty pictures, but what purpose did they serve?

On the positive side, the cinematography is stunning. There are truly breathtaking images, and even mundane scenes are shot with brilliance.
The acting is amazing the whole cast inhabit the characters they portray. Which is all the more reason I am so dissappointed; this film could have been so much better.
Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
5
harlanpepperJul 8, 2011
The movie is visually stunning, as promised by the gives-you-shivers trailer. The acting is superb. Brad Pitt is flawless. So why the low score? Well, although all of the separate components of this movie are, in theory, good and sometimesThe movie is visually stunning, as promised by the gives-you-shivers trailer. The acting is superb. Brad Pitt is flawless. So why the low score? Well, although all of the separate components of this movie are, in theory, good and sometimes excellent; when combined they become... confusing. I wish Malick had organized the movie a little more logically, so we could all appreciate the beautiful cinematography, the solid acting, and the wonderful story. As it is; it'll leave you frustrated and scratching your head. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
8
MaxTravisJun 12, 2011
â
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
10
BhawkJul 26, 2011
Stunning. Mesmerizing. Powerful. Reflective. Gorgeous.Haunting. The most spiritual experience I've ever encountered in a movie theater and certainly the most innovative film since 2001: A Space Odyssey. Many (if not most) will be bored toStunning. Mesmerizing. Powerful. Reflective. Gorgeous.Haunting. The most spiritual experience I've ever encountered in a movie theater and certainly the most innovative film since 2001: A Space Odyssey. Many (if not most) will be bored to tears, whereas I was glued to the screen and am now in awe of the film's incredibly lingering impact. A shoo-in for Best Cinematography, and likely Oscar nominations for Best Picture, Director, and Editing as well. This film is the very definition of film as art. Grade = A. Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
7
Khunter4382Jan 23, 2012
I suspect this film will forever be underrated and misunderstood. That would be unfortunate due to Pitt's excellent performance as a naturalistic, authoritarian yet loving father trying to raise his boys with his graceful wife. Many scenesI suspect this film will forever be underrated and misunderstood. That would be unfortunate due to Pitt's excellent performance as a naturalistic, authoritarian yet loving father trying to raise his boys with his graceful wife. Many scenes are visually stunning, but the pacing of this film is hard to latch on to. If the film were 30 mins less in duration, the pace would seem more bearable. Though symbolistic overtones and undertones dominate the goal of this film, it is almost as if it can't make up it's mind......documentary or movie? Both portions are equally enthralling, but the juxtaposition of both is hard to digest.....which is why this film won't hit home for the masses as fast as other films do. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
HalfwelshmanJan 4, 2012
I can't criticise The Tree of Life on an aesthetic level - it's a breathtakingly beautiful piece of filmmaking. I can't criticise the performances either - Brad Pitt delivers his best performance in years playing a father of three who favoursI can't criticise The Tree of Life on an aesthetic level - it's a breathtakingly beautiful piece of filmmaking. I can't criticise the performances either - Brad Pitt delivers his best performance in years playing a father of three who favours tough love, and newcomer Hunter McCracken is simply spellbinding as Jack, the eldest son (played by Sean Penn when grown up). I most certainly can't fault the script - Terrence Malick has succeeded in forging a completely believable, utterly compelling family dynamic. What I can criticise is an over-reliance on religious symbolism, pretentious themes, a jarring, overly melodramatic score and a nigh-on incomprehensible final act. When viewed on their own, the stunning sequences documenting the beginnings of life on earth might have worked, and the same goes for the gritty, dysfunctional family drama segments that form the core of the film. When blended together however, these vastly different filmmaking ideas are a little disorientating, and you may find yourself emotionally detached from the film as a consequence. I can't help but admire Malick's courage, and his ambition, and soome elements of The Tree of Life certainly hit the mark, but as a one consistent idea, I can't quite get behind it. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
ImprovisedDec 12, 2011
As is the case with all substantial art, this film's acceptance deviates from the mean--evident by the number of 0/1s and 9/10s on this page. I came into this film with absolutely no expectations. I had not heard nor read one word about it.As is the case with all substantial art, this film's acceptance deviates from the mean--evident by the number of 0/1s and 9/10s on this page. I came into this film with absolutely no expectations. I had not heard nor read one word about it. My dad (father!) left it at my house and I figured I would throw it in the DVD player one Sunday evening after reading the Netflix synopsis. Yes, I did see that it had Brad Pitt and Sean Penn in it, but that meant nothing to me, one way or the other.

I'm afraid to say, for fear of sounding like any other cliche art critic, that what I saw was nothing short of astonishing. ToL is an existential masterpiece.

I'm not sure how anyone can rate this move a 0 or 1 even if it was the most "boring" thing they ever had to sit through. It's as if they went into this movie with expectations that were not fulfilled and have therefore taken it personally. I can understand how this movie might not resonate with everyone, but does it really warrant a 0--as if to say it has no value whatsoever? It seems as if some of these reviews feel the need to overcompensate for reasons that have nothing to do film itself. I'm sorry if someone or some review duped you into this one and you didn't think it was worth your $10, but don't take it all out on the film. I'm pretty sure anyone can honestly find reason enough to give it at least a 3. It's not Troll 2 for crying out loud.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
cylixdemasJul 25, 2011
This film had an incredible amount of potential. Every second of the preview did carry a great sense of intrigue. The reality is that, although one may consider themselves to be artistic, this does not mean that one can claim that their artThis film had an incredible amount of potential. Every second of the preview did carry a great sense of intrigue. The reality is that, although one may consider themselves to be artistic, this does not mean that one can claim that their art is good. The film is hands down beautiful, the acting is incredible, and the concept is straightforward. The film however can not decide what it wants to be. The scenes rely to much on artistic value and throw in very superfluous and archaic metaphysical scenes; accompanied with an historical scene of the origin of the universe. You may conclude that this movie is a horrible malformation of three different movies into one. Expand
5 of 11 users found this helpful56
All this user's reviews
0
adarshJun 4, 2011
Punishingly pretentious. No stable narrative or dialogues. Piece of crap. Terrence Malick really is a very pseudo-intellectual director. I hope this film is a huge failure
10 of 22 users found this helpful1012
All this user's reviews
10
metrocardMay 27, 2011
truly awesome. i saw a packed midnight show in nyc. there was a standing ovation at the end of the film. this could possibly be malick's best... really hope people are affected by this.
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
10
commandersheprdMay 27, 2011
Truly an experience more than a film. Roger Ebert couldn't be more correct in saying it's a type of prayer. This movie really must be seen by everyone, coming out of the theater you will have a completely different take on the meaning of life.
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
3
LISTEN2MEMay 27, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Beautiful to look at but a big snore for big parts of the film. How many exploding galaxies, space blobs, microbes and waterfall shots can you have in one film? The CGI of the dinosaurs wasn't great. Brad Pitt is excellent but you want more of that story later in the 60s and less of the endless creation sequences. The ending is long, tedious and not captivating. Disappointing. Much rather watch Badlands or Days of Heaven again. An excellent visual experiment that doesn't connect emotionally, except in a couple of brief scenes. Expand
2 of 9 users found this helpful27
All this user's reviews
10
Tazmania32May 28, 2011
This film gives you a breath of fresh air from what you're used to seeing dominate the movie theaters these days. It was very eye-captivating, moving, and something we could all relate too. There was one scene that made a couple sittingThis film gives you a breath of fresh air from what you're used to seeing dominate the movie theaters these days. It was very eye-captivating, moving, and something we could all relate too. There was one scene that made a couple sitting next to me reminisce on their own lives, provoking them to caress one another for that split moment. And that's what this movie shows: the importance of every moment in our lives. Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
9
conkerMay 29, 2011
Abstract. Visually stunning. Impressionistic. Made up of memories and dreams. The little things (that too often we take for granted) are what really matters. Definitely not for everyone.
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
1
futurehousesMay 29, 2011
Painful experience, this movie was really bad. The lack of story and important elements turns it into a film in front of which you are bound to fall asleep if not for very strong will power. I'm even reconsidering giving this 1 on 10 ...Painful experience, this movie was really bad. The lack of story and important elements turns it into a film in front of which you are bound to fall asleep if not for very strong will power. I'm even reconsidering giving this 1 on 10 ...
After merely 10 minutes, people were already leaving from the cinema. This movie was a joke. Sean Penn acts two minutes at the beginning and for approximately the same duration at the end. His mention on the film advertisements is a real steal. He doesn't even speak, barely ...
The opening cosmos-creation scenes are interesting, but fairly boring after sitting for 30 minutes in front of them while listening to the snoring of the man at your right (who gave up at the very start).
Well, I do not recommend this feature, which is a very poor one in my opinion.
Expand
3 of 11 users found this helpful38
All this user's reviews
1
metamtamMay 31, 2011
The first 20 minutes are a succession of postcard shots with no consistency and no dialogs. No story telling, people don't talk, they just whisper "god... oh god... please god...". It was so centered on religion that it became both boring andThe first 20 minutes are a succession of postcard shots with no consistency and no dialogs. No story telling, people don't talk, they just whisper "god... oh god... please god...". It was so centered on religion that it became both boring and ridiculous in a matter of minutes. This does not deserve to be called a movie, it only felt like a scam. Even Lost Highway immediately makes more sense than that! Expand
3 of 12 users found this helpful39
All this user's reviews
10
tjqJun 1, 2011
This film is high art. I'm not going to pretend I fully grasped all of the complex symbolism and abstraction, but I left the screening in awe and my wife and I were clearly moved emotionally. Malick pushed the envelope and took a huge risk inThis film is high art. I'm not going to pretend I fully grasped all of the complex symbolism and abstraction, but I left the screening in awe and my wife and I were clearly moved emotionally. Malick pushed the envelope and took a huge risk in making this film. He created a work of art and engaged the viewers in a discussion of grand ideas. One of the few movies I've seen in my lifetime that I can't wait to see again. Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
8
Knicksfan7Jul 15, 2011
This movie was odd, weird and very different and artsy but it was uplifting, inspiring, and beautiful at the same time. Brad pitt was great in this film as he always is. I didnt understand it at most times, but you just have to think and openThis movie was odd, weird and very different and artsy but it was uplifting, inspiring, and beautiful at the same time. Brad pitt was great in this film as he always is. I didnt understand it at most times, but you just have to think and open up your mind and you will understand and enjoy it. 8/10 Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
cannesfanJun 2, 2011
A visual poem, but more. I found myself crying without really knowing why. Just pure emotion. This is a movie I will be seeing AT LEAST 2 more times! Of course, there is a very small percentage of people who may be disappointed there are noA visual poem, but more. I found myself crying without really knowing why. Just pure emotion. This is a movie I will be seeing AT LEAST 2 more times! Of course, there is a very small percentage of people who may be disappointed there are no car chases or robots, but if you're looking for something fresh - unlike anything you've ever seen in the theater - then this film is for you. Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
1
paulaldJun 4, 2011
It is a well-known cinema fact that any movie with both people and dinosaurs can not be good. I wonder how long it took Sean Penn to learn his lines.
1 of 9 users found this helpful18
All this user's reviews
1
JDIAMONDJun 5, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Worst movie ever 20 people got up and left I wish I had and gotten my money back.
What were they thinking............................................................................
Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
10
WPFILMSJun 5, 2011
Malick, who remains in a league of his own as a filmmaker of pure high art, creative and artistic excellence, epic heights of groundbreaking grandiosity, metaphysical transcendence, spiritual awakening, symbolism, and so much more...Tree ofMalick, who remains in a league of his own as a filmmaker of pure high art, creative and artistic excellence, epic heights of groundbreaking grandiosity, metaphysical transcendence, spiritual awakening, symbolism, and so much more...Tree of Life represents his highest note in filmmaking achievement. The performances along with the haunting visual aesthetics, mesmerizing cinematography, production design, editing are a wondrous feast for the eyes but more important remain crucial and vital nourishment for oneâ Expand
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
10
SchlobotnickJun 7, 2011
Is this a movie about a hard-working 1950's father who, ground down by the greed of the rich and the machinations of the patent court, and mooning over having to give up a promising musical career as a young man, takes out his frustrations onIs this a movie about a hard-working 1950's father who, ground down by the greed of the rich and the machinations of the patent court, and mooning over having to give up a promising musical career as a young man, takes out his frustrations on his rebellious eldest son? And those hundreds of hammerhead sharks, are they supposed to represent the greedy rich?

WHO KNOWS?

Or, is this a movie about a lovely, loving, and beloved mother who, mourning over the loss of her eldest (or is it 2nd eldest?) son, questions the benevolence and even the existence of God until, with the aid of two beauteous angelic sylphs, she finally gives up her son to God? And what's with all those swirly astronomical scenes, billowing explosive clouds of gas, and pulsing glowing.... things? Are they supposed to represent her internal struggles with God?

WHO KNOWS?

Or, is it a movie about a boy on the cusp of sexual maturity, confused about the feelings evoked by fleeting glimpses of scantily clad neighborhood women in the heat of the summer, goaded by his neighborhood buddies into acts of cruelty and theft, resentful over the way in which his father treats his mother, his brothers, and himself, resentful of the pressure of guild and remonstrance from his angelic mother, grows up to be, um, either dead or Sean Penn?

WHO KNOWS?

And why did that fleet carnivorous dinosaur, with his paw on the head of the abandoned baby herbivore, decide to saunter away, leaving his putative prey lying there still alive? Wasn't he hungry?

WHO KNOWS?

And about that gigantic, beached, prehistoric sea monster with the deep bloody gash in his side --- was that his head at the end of a huge neck twisting around to view the damage? Or was that the head of some other gigantic prehistoric beast who happened to be wandering by?

WHO KNOWS?

And what were all those slowly twisting spirally thingies? Were they spirochetes?

And was that the birth and death of the universe? And why did they plant that tree? To memorialize the person who had crashed his bike and was flopping in death throes on the grass?

WHO KNOWS?

And was that the Horsehead Nebula?

YES IT WAS!
Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
9
filmtrashreviewJul 15, 2011
The film is a religious avant-garde film trapped inside a narrative story line about a boy who learns the reality of life and faith. Sound confusing? Well it is but that is it's only flaw. Itâ
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
1
FrankDJun 9, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. One of the most pretentious movies I've ever seen, from the film's opening, whispered voice-overs which are virtually incomprehensible to anyone with A+ hearing, to the final, final, final ending when all meet joyfully or joylessly (once again the audience doesn't know what to think and ultimately doesn't care) in Heaven with images and philosophical BS I haven't seen since enduring the pandering, ridiculous, simplistic movie shown at the Mormon pavilion at the 1964 New York World's Fair. Contemplating your navel has been taken to a new low. Last, but not least, what was Sean Penn doing in this movie? Looking for his Maalox and Gas-X? How such an excellent, caring actor and person got involved in this twaddle 'tis a puzzlement. Expand
4 of 12 users found this helpful48
All this user's reviews
1
tomeqJun 11, 2011
Total triumph of form over content. This movie is pathetically obvious, so daub that it hurts. Tons of cheap cliches. Movie just screams on me with obviousness. After 2 and a half hour of movie I was unable to tell what is this movie allTotal triumph of form over content. This movie is pathetically obvious, so daub that it hurts. Tons of cheap cliches. Movie just screams on me with obviousness. After 2 and a half hour of movie I was unable to tell what is this movie all about. One will say - about life. Come on. This kind of story was told several hundred of times. This is neither new or interesting - it is simple as a brick. The worst movies are those that gives you nothing and you come out of cinema with nothing in head. This one is even worse - leaves you distaste and feeling of being cheated. Complete waste of time. Expand
3 of 10 users found this helpful37
All this user's reviews
1
cafewriteJun 11, 2011
Pretentious rambling sporadic self conflagulation lauded by critics too afraid to go against the popular grain. This is one man's random splattering of hubble photographs interspersed with Brat Pitt posing as a real person and Sean PennPretentious rambling sporadic self conflagulation lauded by critics too afraid to go against the popular grain. This is one man's random splattering of hubble photographs interspersed with Brat Pitt posing as a real person and Sean Penn attempting to look thoughtful in cameo shots. The only real actors are the boys left adrift in a plotless story. Save your $ and buy a lottery ticket instead. At least that randomness has a shot at paying off. Expand
13 of 29 users found this helpful1316
All this user's reviews
8
MovieGeniusJun 17, 2011
I would not recommend this film to most people - but if you're up for a VERY non-narrative film (think two and a half hour poem) about life's most serious questions, then you might find Tree of Life (especially the 2nd act) one of the mostI would not recommend this film to most people - but if you're up for a VERY non-narrative film (think two and a half hour poem) about life's most serious questions, then you might find Tree of Life (especially the 2nd act) one of the most beautiful and moving films you'll see this year. Sure, Malick gives us a gorgeous looking (and sounding!) film, but it's the wonderfully human interactions that he captures that will affect you the most. I wish that Malick had focused just a bit more on the structure at the beginning and end to frame the moving second act in a more accessible way to most audiences. Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
10
CivertsJun 13, 2011
Probably is going to be one of the best films of 2011, maybe the best one. Malick has excelled, this movie is a masterpiece, no doubts, the perfect harmony between sound, music, pictures, a great screenplay and good performances.
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
10
eliotwalnutJun 18, 2011
TREE OF LIFE is nothing short of a new film language. Granted, there are predecessors; and Malick's work has been developing towards this film style. But the lyricism of this emotionally driven film editing and deeply personal interiorTREE OF LIFE is nothing short of a new film language. Granted, there are predecessors; and Malick's work has been developing towards this film style. But the lyricism of this emotionally driven film editing and deeply personal interior landscapes is landmark. Behold, a new cinema... Finally. Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
9
antenaJun 16, 2011
First off, if you are looking for a traditional narrative, this is not the movie for you; the film contains probably less than ten pages of actual dialogue. Not all stories have to be told with words alone, and the striking, beautiful andFirst off, if you are looking for a traditional narrative, this is not the movie for you; the film contains probably less than ten pages of actual dialogue. Not all stories have to be told with words alone, and the striking, beautiful and compelling images of this film tell the story of this Texas family quite well. Brad Pitt is especially good in the multi-layered role of the father; there's a quiet intensity to his performance, and the young actors are also good. The Tree of Life is very impressionistic and abstract; it challenges you to follow along and to keep up with it. I haven't seen too many movies recently that I was still thinking about a week after seeing it. I understand that there are some who won't want to make that kind of investment on a weekend movie night. For those that do, the payoff is rewarding. Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
9
hilary25Jun 17, 2011
You dont have to be 'educated' to enjoy this film - a term I use lightly as it felt more like an art fixture - you need to be in touch with the philosophical approach to thought. And that is not meant to sound pretentious, though those thatYou dont have to be 'educated' to enjoy this film - a term I use lightly as it felt more like an art fixture - you need to be in touch with the philosophical approach to thought. And that is not meant to sound pretentious, though those that dont think on that level might believe it to be so. You're either an etheral person or you're not - no judgement. The Tree of Life itself is cinematic thought - Malick's attempt to explore the visual interpretation of your brain trying to make sense of life; yours specifically, in general, in relation to nature and to grace. He used the cinema (his communication mechanism) to explore the meaning of life. I left the theater in thought about humanity - not because of an agenda set by Malick but because the underlying current of the film is to evaluate what happened in life and why or why not we do what we do. Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
10
putneyJun 18, 2011
I'm not the smartest movie goer in the world but I want a film to remove me from the moment, to provoke me, tittilate me, amuse me but absolutely not bore me. To this movie i say "so what". It's a 135 minute boring grind and all the giantI'm not the smartest movie goer in the world but I want a film to remove me from the moment, to provoke me, tittilate me, amuse me but absolutely not bore me. To this movie i say "so what". It's a 135 minute boring grind and all the giant positive reviews of the "legendary" Terrence Malick's new movie make me want to shout "by golly, the emperor's not wearing any clothes so why are all these sycophants singing his praises ?" BFD I say. You can miss this one. I wouldn't even rent the dvd. Wait till you can get it for free at your library. Rating - negative 4 stars. Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
10
cabritaApr 27, 2012
A masterpiece only for hardcore movie lovers. Many will misunderstand it others will be cheated by it and some will view it as another masterpiece from arguably the best director of all time. The first time I viewed it I was not prepared forA masterpiece only for hardcore movie lovers. Many will misunderstand it others will be cheated by it and some will view it as another masterpiece from arguably the best director of all time. The first time I viewed it I was not prepared for it and found it boring pretentious and just a movie full of pretty pictures. However Malick finds a way to evoke a feeling of spirituality and wonder, Could this be one of the best movies ever made in history, maybe. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
RenyJun 19, 2011
Holy crap. I don't know what I just saw, but I want my time and money back. I read the review by "brewster" and ditto everything said in their review. I burst out laughing a few times (uncontrollably, I might add) , but at least managed to muffle it.
6 of 11 users found this helpful65
All this user's reviews
10
movielover1Jun 20, 2011
Due to this movie, I lost 2 hours of my life that I cannot replace. I consider myself to be perceptive, curious and smart however this movie did not spark any of those traits. Several people in the theater left after about 20 minutes.Due to this movie, I lost 2 hours of my life that I cannot replace. I consider myself to be perceptive, curious and smart however this movie did not spark any of those traits. Several people in the theater left after about 20 minutes. Those that remained often groaned as they shifted in their seats. When it was finally over we chatted with many people - all of whom said "what the hell was that???".
I can honestly say that it was probably the worst movie I have ever seen.
Expand
7 of 14 users found this helpful77
All this user's reviews
10
fug1tiveJun 20, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Oh god, what am I doing here? This movie opened slowly at select theaters and we were eventually able to see it. Much of what you will see on the screen is like itunes screensavers with classical music and whispering instead of your tunes. There are two sad dinosaurs, one who crawled out on land too late to avoid being ripped open by hammerhead sharks and another that lays in a river and gets their head stepped on a couple of times by a Barneysaur with a big head and little arms.. Most of the men in this movie are either yelling, violent or deformed and the women are all like angels. The young Sean Penn character sneaks into the neighbor girl's house and apparently gets something nasty on her nightie because he tries to hide it and then throws it in the river. His mom looks mad when he comes home but they don't talk. His father (Brad Pitt) wants him to pick weeds and punch Dad in the face. Brad works in a factory but also travels around the world to sell his inventions and all he brings the kids are some towels he stole from a Chinese hotel. People whisper stuff like "oh god, what am I doing here?" and walk around on a beach in their clothes meeting the characters that played them as kids. If you think this makes no sense, try watching over two hours of it. This movie totally sucked and will be a flop commercially. Don't waste your time or money. Expand
7 of 8 users found this helpful71
All this user's reviews
0
noboxofcandyJun 21, 2011
I couldn't wait for this film to be over. Terry Malik rips off Stanley Kubrick's 2001; Orson Wells' Magnificent Ambersons and several other "Scenes From A Marriage" - like films in producing one giant yawn of an overextended lesson in aI couldn't wait for this film to be over. Terry Malik rips off Stanley Kubrick's 2001; Orson Wells' Magnificent Ambersons and several other "Scenes From A Marriage" - like films in producing one giant yawn of an overextended lesson in a child's coming of age yarn. We see the signs of childhood nature contrasted against the adult world of glass and steel highrises again, and again, and again. So too are the scenes of the domineering father and servile, but repressed, free-spirited wife, bickering again, and again and again. While one can't criticized the level of the acting and the occasionally impressive photography, this could have been made as a silent movie - and by that I mean not even snipets of dialogue cards - for the lack of impact of any verbal communications between any of the characters. Skip this mess unless you're in need of a good two hour's sleep. Expand
5 of 12 users found this helpful57
All this user's reviews
0
RedShoesJun 21, 2011
I am an artist and I consider myself to be very open minded. I am also somewhat a fan of Brad Pitt's acting. Regardless, it did not make me like this film. I was disappointed in the story line and embarrassed for Brad to have his nameI am an artist and I consider myself to be very open minded. I am also somewhat a fan of Brad Pitt's acting. Regardless, it did not make me like this film. I was disappointed in the story line and embarrassed for Brad to have his name associated with this artistic disaster. It was just bad. Scenes were choppy. There was no rhyme and reason to some of the scenes. A flashback in time focused on one particular year in childhood instead of a lifetime. And, we certainly could have done without the 'Jurassic Park dinasour' scenes. In the theatre, throughout the movie, people sitting around me were saying, "I don't get it" and I was thinking the same thing. It was a waste of my money and time. Expand
4 of 10 users found this helpful46
All this user's reviews
8
ranbohemanJun 23, 2011
I left the theatre with so many thoughts and feelngs that I still am digesting it all. I stayed open and consciously refrained from judgement throughout the film. I loved this film; If you were ever a boy especially with brothers and raisedI left the theatre with so many thoughts and feelngs that I still am digesting it all. I stayed open and consciously refrained from judgement throughout the film. I loved this film; If you were ever a boy especially with brothers and raised with a military father like I did, this cut deep. Not only did I feel the pain, I also felt the LOVE, the promise, the awe, the hope, we are here to live and to be apart of this mystery we call LIFE. Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
1
jeroenJun 24, 2011
just, i don't know... I had to laugh by a movie trying so hard to explain why God takes away children. It is because God's creation is so much bigger apparently, we are just a tiny part of it. There are dinosaurs and the cosmos and thejust, i don't know... I had to laugh by a movie trying so hard to explain why God takes away children. It is because God's creation is so much bigger apparently, we are just a tiny part of it. There are dinosaurs and the cosmos and the universe (see Hubble pictures). You know? It was said in the bible to Job. "Where were you when I created the earth, you arrogant **** don't complain". In the end we all go to heaven and then you'll get to see all your loved ones back that have gone. You have to walk through a door that is standing in a desert and if you do then you will find lots of people in white robes that walk barefooted on a beach. Yup, that's them, your long lost ones. Aren't you glad you now know where they've been all that time? It is a very spiritual experience and I gained much insight in life's deeper meaning. Zzzzz..... Expand
4 of 15 users found this helpful411
All this user's reviews
9
TheDaveHimselfJul 11, 2011
First off, I've never seen so many people walk out of a theater during a film, and that's saying a lot. I've seen some real **** So it's safe to say that this movie isn't quite for everybody. I've seen numerous publications try to put thisFirst off, I've never seen so many people walk out of a theater during a film, and that's saying a lot. I've seen some real **** So it's safe to say that this movie isn't quite for everybody. I've seen numerous publications try to put this thing in a box by giving it the "movie" meets "movie" comparison. The best is probably "Stand By Me" meets "2001: A Space Odyssey". If you're interested in seeing this, get rid of all expectations because there simply isn't anything quite like it. Powerful film that tries to place humanity in this existence. The performances are wonderful, and Terrence Malick does exactly whatever divine being made him to do: Show you true beauty. Or, he just did it himself. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
CaitJun 26, 2011
Please, readers, don't listen to anyone who says this film is pretentious. It's challenging, but challenging an audience to think does not imply that a director is flaunting his intelligence. Perhaps those who call it pretentious are doing soPlease, readers, don't listen to anyone who says this film is pretentious. It's challenging, but challenging an audience to think does not imply that a director is flaunting his intelligence. Perhaps those who call it pretentious are doing so as a defense mechanism because they feel they can't understand what the movie is doing. I don't claim to understand everything that it's doing after having only seen it once, but that's quite all right, because I am thoroughly convinced that every shot, every single line of dialogue, every sound has been meticulously and brilliantly placed, and I'm sure that with more viewings the film will further open itself up to me.

The Tree of Life is a masterpiece, but the highly abstract and fragmented style of the film is uncommon in even arthouse films these days, and it's therefore clearly unwelcome. In any case, I implore you to see it, if only to remind yourself what film language is capable of.
Expand
5 of 10 users found this helpful55
All this user's reviews
5
MostlyGamerJun 27, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Wow. I had to create an account and write a review for this one. I really wanted to love this movie, but even with an art video background, I just couldn't do it. As mentioned in other review, the film's cinematography was excellent. I loved the space shots and the micros views of cells. But that's where the good parts end, I nearly burst out laughing when the dinosaurs were briefly introduced. I expected one of them whom was injured to gaze up at the viewers and say "Mother, Father... ". During this scene, one older gentleman ran so quickly down the aisle that he tripped and flew into the nearby wall! (Don't worry he was okay) I didn't want to leave that bad, but the whole movie was very frustrating and condescending. To balance it out, another good element of the film was that you felt like you were a part of the family. But that was also due to the amount of effort on my part, to try and latch on to something, to get my bearings, so I could begin to decipher this hieroglyphs of a film. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
10
thebdmethodJun 27, 2011
Truly an amazing cinematic experience unlike any movie before it. The movie is more like a poem than a narrative. The movie captures moments similar to our human memories. When we think back on our own life's it usually comes with quickTruly an amazing cinematic experience unlike any movie before it. The movie is more like a poem than a narrative. The movie captures moments similar to our human memories. When we think back on our own life's it usually comes with quick impressions and flashes of moments rather then a cohesive story. This is a bran new type of storytelling, congrats to Malick for doing something so obviously human. Expand
5 of 11 users found this helpful56
All this user's reviews
4
DDaveJun 29, 2011
This was like two movies in one. It should have been about 45 minutes shorter. I loved the visually stunning parts in the middle, but by the end of the movie I was saying just end it PLEASE, but they didn't.
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
3
jay215Jun 30, 2011
Indulgent mess of a movie. Had potential but the worse sin is to bore your audience and he did that. The casting of Sean Penn was inexplicable. Brad Pitt was actually not bad, but opportunity missed overall.
2 of 7 users found this helpful25
All this user's reviews
8
raymondJul 1, 2011
I had read a lot about this movie, so I approached it with some hesitation. Having seen Malik's New World and been disappointed I wondered if this would be a big letdown. It turned out to be very different to what I expected. The specialI had read a lot about this movie, so I approached it with some hesitation. Having seen Malik's New World and been disappointed I wondered if this would be a big letdown. It turned out to be very different to what I expected. The special effects, while providing a universal backdrop, moved me less than the human moments captured so lovingly. Indeed, I left the cinema deeply stirred emotionally without exactly knowing why. Some parts of the ending I felt were laboured (though not the final few shots, esp. the flowers), but at the core this film is about love and connection . It left me feeling more connected and touched by a gentle grace. Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
10
lahaineSep 4, 2011
I'm happy to call this Terrence Malick's Magnum opus. The Tree of Life is a thought provoking and symbolic art film; it may even leave one questioning how significant their actions are in the big scheme of things. Malick's audacious directionI'm happy to call this Terrence Malick's Magnum opus. The Tree of Life is a thought provoking and symbolic art film; it may even leave one questioning how significant their actions are in the big scheme of things. Malick's audacious direction paid off, making this not only a challenging piece of work, but also a wonderful viewing experience, from start to finish. Its arresting cinematography and visual effects are abstractly stitched together by master film editors; and its heavenly soundtrack keeps things flowing. Desplat's score was unfortunately demised by its under-use, in the actual film. The most effective and memorable pieces of music came, courtesy of, classical composers from way back. Also, this may possibly be Pitts career best performance, and Chastain illuminates as his submissive wife. I won't jump on the band-wagon and call this the best movie of the year just yet... and its surely not pretentious (as its detractors state); I do believe it will resonate for years to come (as its polar reviews also suggest). I'm looking forward to see how this does next awards season... Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
UglyNUncreativeJul 1, 2011
People tend to love or hate Terrence Malick movies. Typically the reasons people dislike his movies boil down to not really wanting to see one to begin with. Movies follow a pretty tried and true narrative structure, Malick does A LOT ofPeople tend to love or hate Terrence Malick movies. Typically the reasons people dislike his movies boil down to not really wanting to see one to begin with. Movies follow a pretty tried and true narrative structure, Malick does A LOT of mucking around with that formula. The best way I can describe it is it's like watching a book, not a movie; with all a books intransigent internal monologues and descriptions of environments - things which are typically cut down or removed entirely from a movie or simply conveyed in entirely different methods. Between TV shows and movies, we consume a vast amount of the standard structure of movies in any given day, week, month, or life - so you get into a rut of thinking this is the way it's done, because that standardization allows you to quickly consume whatever information is being conveyed in the entertainment you're indulging in. If you're looking for standard fare, you will be greatly disappointed by Malick, find his work boring, disjointed, and/or confusing. It's not that it's necessarily a BETTER form of audio/visual story-telling, it's not that by not getting it, you're somehow an idiot or uncultured, you probably just weren't really in the mood for experimentation is all. That said, once you invest the time to "get" his work, it's immensely gratifying and profoundly moving on a deeply personal level. I personally never watch his films with someone else, it would distract me from my preferred method of digesting the thoughts behind his art. That said... I just got back from watching The Tree of Life and can promise you, if you like his work, you will not be disappointed in the least. It was... a beautiful, wondrous, stunning, awe-inspiring, and moving meditation on the nature of existence. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
0
verybiasedJul 2, 2011
I signed up for the site just to write this review. I've never felt so misled by a Metacritic metascore.

This movie is not intellectual. It is absolute drek. I like nuanced, interesting movies, and this is neither.
6 of 13 users found this helpful67
All this user's reviews
10
9TwistedRosesJul 2, 2011
Terrance Malick has done it. The Tree of Life is a masterpiece to say the least. Although, it is not for everyone, this movie is only for those who enjoy thinking. Not saying you are stupid if you don't like this movie, but it requires yourTerrance Malick has done it. The Tree of Life is a masterpiece to say the least. Although, it is not for everyone, this movie is only for those who enjoy thinking. Not saying you are stupid if you don't like this movie, but it requires your full attention. I have seen the movie twice now and the first time I watched it, i was a little unsure, but let me tell you, when I finished it a second time, I was 100% that is was the greatest movie that I had ever seen. Every shot and every piece of dialogue had a deeper meaning or double meaning. If you enjoy pandering and devouring films, The Tree of Life is the movie for you, and the people that say this movie is despicable and worthless, I doubt i'll be seeing you on that beach. -Respectfully submitted- Expand
4 of 10 users found this helpful46
All this user's reviews
0
dollywizJul 3, 2011
This is on behalf of movielover1 below, who mistakenly gave this a 10 when he/she clearly hated it and meant to rate it a 0, as follows:

movielover1 Jun 20, 201110 Due to this movie, I lost 2 hours of my life that I cannot replace. I
This is on behalf of movielover1 below, who mistakenly gave this a 10 when he/she clearly hated it and meant to rate it a 0, as follows:

movielover1 Jun 20, 201110 Due to this movie, I lost 2 hours of my life that I cannot replace. I consider myself to be perceptive, curious and smart however this movie did not spark any of those traits. Several people in the theater left after about 20 minutes. Those that remained often groaned as they shifted in their seats. When it was finally over we chatted with many people - all of whom said "what the hell was that???". I can honestly say that it was probably the worst movie I have ever seen.â
Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
3
ShayanJul 3, 2011
With 24 hours passed since watching this movie, I feel I can now write a more objective review of this movie.
This movie is a hollywood attempt at artistic sophistication. It's comes off like McDonald's trying to do fine dining, or your
With 24 hours passed since watching this movie, I feel I can now write a more objective review of this movie.
This movie is a hollywood attempt at artistic sophistication. It's comes off like McDonald's trying to do fine dining, or your local bricklayer attempting surgery.
It is laborious, overdone, and so so heavy handed it becomes unbearable. Fifteen minutes into the movie I thought to myself that it reminds me of the style of the "the thin red line" (a movie I really liked and recommend), and found out on metacritic that it is indeed the same director. But this movie lacks the balance of "the thin red line" and looses itself in the bigger picture it tries to portray.
People in the theatre just started snickering toward the final minutes as the endless array of imagery was crudely sequenced together - and this happened in an independent cinema!!
What this film lacked was subtelty and balance. Its a shame because there were ingredients there from which something very special could have been made.
Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
10
SteverinoJul 4, 2011
What a powerhouse of visual effects to open up the mind to creation. The story and acting are just a vehicle to show that family life has progressed to the point where we, as humans, are shown as hard, competitive and brutal. But love andWhat a powerhouse of visual effects to open up the mind to creation. The story and acting are just a vehicle to show that family life has progressed to the point where we, as humans, are shown as hard, competitive and brutal. But love and caring can still bring some attachments worth having....Malick's message is that no matter what happens on earth, God or nature has created this life on Earth without any scientific proof. So, he takes this further by saying there's another world that was also created. He calls it heaven. It's all love there. Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews