This movie is awful. Why? It's nothing more than a collections of images. Millions of people could do what Malick did in this film, as opposed to making a cohesive narrative. Shoot this, have an actor say that. Too easy. Abstract? It's obscurity is just plain easy to do.
What if one shot here and one line there was different in the movie? It wouldn't make a difference. Malick could've easily reached into a bowl and randomly selected the order of all the scenes. And that's why this movie is awful. YOU could make this movie.
A cohesive storyline take real talent because, when well done, you are drawn into the story and emotionally invested in the characters. Both of which are accomplished with deft writing, directing, and great performances.
I rest my case with the simple statement that a film of this ilk can be seen in most film schools, where you can find those abstract art-house, student films.
What if one shot here and one line there was different in the movie? It wouldn't make a difference. Malick could've easily reached into a bowl and randomly selected the order of all the scenes. And that's why this movie is awful. YOU could make this movie.
A cohesive storyline take real talent because, when well done, you are drawn into the story and emotionally invested in the characters. Both of which are accomplished with deft writing, directing, and great performances.
I rest my case with the simple statement that a film of this ilk can be seen in most film schools, where you can find those abstract art-house, student films.