Three stories - one each from the past, present, and future - about men in pursuit of eternity with their love. A conquistador in Mayan country searches for the tree of life to free his captive queen; a medical researcher, working with various trees, looks for a cure that will save his dying wife; a space traveler, traveling with an aged tree encapsulated within a bubble, moves toward a dying star that's wrapped in a nebula; he seeks eternity with his love. The stories intersect and parallel; the quests fail and succeed.Written by
The film takes place in the 16th century, in 2005, and in 2500. See more »
Tikal is mentioned by the queen's priest, however, it wasn't discovered until the mid 19th century, and the name Tikal ("place of voices") was applied only in the early 20th century by archaeologists. This scene is a novel-within-the-film written by Izzi Creo, whose research may not be perfect. See more »
The entire credits run against a star field background, then at the very, very end there is one final sigh as they fade to black. See more »
The film was originally submitted to the BBFC on 30th June 2006, where it was passed with a 15 certificate. However, on 30th November 2006 the film was submitted again as a "re-edited" international version, with "changes made to reels 2, 3 and 5". This new version runs 16 seconds longer and was awarded a lower 12A certificate. The BBFC's website does not list the specific changes made. See more »
Beautiful visuals, great acting and great direction
There's a lot going for this film. The CGI is exceptional as are the performances. There's beauty in every part from the actors' performances, direction and CGI/visuals.
So why not a higher score?
The message of the film isn't ludicrous but it has been explored before many times. Is death a necessary part of life? Can we conquer it? Should we even be trying? It's not a bad set of questions to ask. But as the film develops you're repeatedly pounded on the head by a weak analogy with a tree of life. When you get to the last twenty minutes of the film the analogy becomes actively irritating.
It's definitely worth a watch. Just don't expect anything hugely thought provoking.
6 of 7 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this