Malick

Honestly...I'm just kinda getting sick of his shit.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=GxADJT86-zs&feature=youtu.be
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Terrance Sneedlick

I TURNED THE WHEAT FIELDS INTO PICKLES, LUBEZKI
IT'S MALICKLE RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICK

Just rewatch his first two on repeat.

I mean, fuck.

Song to Song was the exact same thing that fucking Knight of Cups was which was the exact same thing that fucking To the Wonder was which was the exact same thing that fucking The Tree of Life was which was the exact same thing that fucking The New World was.

I mean, fuck. Dude. Come on.

I mean, don't get me wrong, of course I'm gonna see Radegund but fuck.

>Song to Song was the exact same thing that fucking Knight of Cups was which was the exact same thing that fucking To the Wonder was which was the exact same thing that fucking The Tree of Life was which was the exact same thing that fucking The New World was.

...

HE SOLD OUT!!

youtube.com/watch?v=GxADJT86-zs&feature=youtu.be

YIKES

this is great

Listen, I'll admit that Natalie Portman was in all her smokeshow glory in Song to Song, but for the love of God, how much of this exact same shit can you take?

maybe, just maybe, it's not all the exact same shit and you're just a retard? just something for you to ponder of course.

Sure, I'll ponder it smart ass. Right after you give me your explanation for why it's not all the exact same shit? You fucking retard.

I mean, I'm still curious how you think they're the same movie over and over, especially the new world. It's just Malick's unique method of film and story telling. He has developed a particular style, especially over the last 3 movies, which you might not care for but it's not the same thing over and over. Each one of his movies has it's own qualities and story. If your problem is with the style and the cinematography then I can understand that it's just not your thing. But if you're too daft to comprehend a movie with little to no exposition and you instead blame the movies then that is completely your fault.
I'm not going to go over each movie individually because that is enough for an essay. Can you explain in more detail what exactly you disliked about them?

How was To the Wonder the exact same thing as Tree of Life you big dummy?

Same movie, faggot. Your explanation said absolutely nothing. It is the exact same movie going back to The New World. The exact same. Fuck off, retard.

I'll agree that Song to Song, Knight of Cups and To The Wonder are pretty much the same movie. Tree of Life and the New World have many technical differences that clearly set them apart.

However, Knight of Cups is kino

>Knight of Cups
>The New World
>Song to Song
>Tree of Life
>the exact same
Holy shit you're retarded. Go back to a bladerunner thread or wherever you came from.

I always think this picture is of Will Forte when scrolling past it.

lol. Fake fag. Let me guess, you're starting your second semester freshmen year and "hurr durr oh gosh malick". Fuck off dipshit. Defend yourself and say something intelligent or fuck off.

t. literal brainlet

>t. guy who has said absolutely nothing

Yes because you've contributed so much to the discussion calling me faggot and retard but can't explain what makes the movies "the same". I barely even understand what you mean especially because you brought the new world into this which has little in common with the other 4.

i would be really happy if he went back to less disjointed movies. i think the thin red line was his best film, the perfect mix of his style and a somewhat cohesive traditional plot.

Now you've proven you're an honest to God, retard. I have stated, explicitly, I think every single one of these movies is the fucking same and they're shit. You insisted they are not. It is on you to tell me why they are not shit if they are, indeed, so not shit that anyone who's not a retard would understand how amazing they absolutely are, as you have so stated heretofore in this thread.

No the burden of prove always lies with the accuser. You've never been in court, have you?

you need to relax, who cares, he doesn't have to agree with you. you seem too tightly wound to be able to enjoy some terry flicks.

*proof*

I was denigrating Malick. You accused me of being a brainlet. Therefore, ergo, vis-a-vis, concordantly, you are the accuser. State your case why Malick's last 5 fucking movies have been good.

>I MADE A CLAIM WITH NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO SUPPORT IT NOW PROVE ME WRONG
We don't even know what you're talking about because you haven't explained yourself at all. Try using your words user! You can do it!

i think you have a point post tree of life.

Shut up, pussy.

To the Wonder is the only one I have left to watch. I liked Knight of Cups and thought Song to Song was trash.

Okay. I would agree with this.

Cause I liked em

this is genius, thank you for this

>people are finally getting tiresome of his style
finally. I mean he's good, but its become a gimmick and entry level mongs are just saying muh kino.

that said, I really liked The New World. its probably my favourite of his BUT I watched it twice maybe 10 years ago (and I fear if I watch again I'll think its shit)

for me it was the opposite
i watched it when it first came out and wasn't impressed
then i watched the final cut a year ago and absolutely loved it

What shit

his style has evolved and changed though. it's more accurate to say people don't like the fragmented, conceptual, overly symbolic and often esoteric nature of his more recent films. but then i'm sure there's also plenty of people out there who love to float along with them and try to interpret them in their own personal way.

have any of you seen voyage of time yet? i loved it and also hated it.

For me, its terry/goose

>who is it for you user?

i saw the 90 minute cate b. one
i loved it
what didn't you like about it

Dude. Sure, you can be fragmented, conceptual, overly symbolic, and often esoteric. If anyone's earned it, it's probably Malick. But I don't have to fuckin like it. If I wanted to watch a sophomore's character study, I'd head down to the local theater on Tuesday for the $2 matinee rented by the local college.

His next film is back to a more traditional narrative with a historical subject and a different cinematographer. I adore ttol and ttw but with koc and sts it became really stale. 4 semi autobiographical films in a row with the exact same improvisation style and lubezki always doing the same thing, the lack of more ambitious subject matters and historical settings unlike doh, ttrl or tnw... I get that he is getting old and was releasing frustration from not having been able to make many movies in a long time and they're still good films but I'm glad he's challenging himself for the next one.

i saw that cut as well. as much as i love cate blanchett's voice, some of the shit she says was just like... i dunno, too fanciful to not be distracting, in a bad way, at least for my taste. some of her lines were fine and good for keeping my mind focused on the substance of the film, the wonder of existence, but i can't help but feel like i'd have liked it a lot more if there was a cut that had none of the handy cam footage and no narrator, just soundscapes and music, uninterrupted beauty, like a directors cut of that universe formation sequence in tree of life.

yeah, that new one has me excited, not even knowing that he would be going back to a more traditional structure, the fact that there's no A-lister in the cast that will be doing some awkward "is this what you want, terry?" scenes will be refreshing.