So what's the Yea Forumserdict? Masterpiece or pretentious tripe?

calling it “christian filmmaking” is like calling apocalypse now or casablanca war films, missing the point. terry was obviously raised christian but he clearly has a wider notion of the possibilities of god

>the experience of watching it is better than the actual movie itself

Attached: 1558635799454.jpg (1024x1024, 72K)

one of the worst movies ever made
go back

Learn a new comeback for fucks sake

learn something about cinema for fucks sake

epic

Yes i agree. I didn't mean that it's a Christian propaganda. It makes you think about religion at least. I worded it poorly. I guess it's religious filmmaking at its finest. Film exploring concept of religion and God, there are very few of these being made nowadays.

Back to capeshit.

>Soulful christian filmmaking at its finest

Attached: 1542867350457.png (645x729, 174K)

>Back to capeshit.

Attached: SOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.png (785x1000, 261K)

I'm not a Christian. Like i said it explores themes of Christianity and religion. These films are rare nowadays, Silence is another one.

>I'm not a Christian.
HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
EVERY.
SINGLE.
TIME.

It's fucking great, probably the most rewatchable movie this decade.

Nice argument, kike cunt.

i don’t get it

I'm not but i was raised as Christian, you would be too, if you didn't live in some third world Muslim shithole.

>Nice argument, kike cunt.

Attached: SOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.png (1080x1020, 475K)

>These films are rare nowadays
Maybe because it's been overdone to death by now.

The Lacrimosa scene was the most beautiful moment I've seen in cinema.

my girlfriend liked it too
are you a pisces?

lol SEETHING
maybe you should get back to slurping soi and posting about drumpf while being a PROUD atheist like every Malickian cuck

miss me with that zodiac bullshit, i already have a friend who won't shut up about it
i'm gemini

Yea Forums is running low on ammo huh? Is that your best effort?

haha i knew it

Bergman had a different approach to it. Scorsese had a different approach to it. It's always interesting to see directors explore these themes.
Get help.

this thread is a mess like 90% of Yea Forums

>It's always interesting to see directors explore these themes
Not when people have been exploring them for the last 2000 years nonstop. It's about time they gave this shit a break.

Sure in different mediums. Film is something different than a book. Don't worry Malick is coming back this year with the same old religious themes, love, family and lots of grass. This time with a twist. There will be nazis this time.

Attached: Glr1UUzkTKZIwO9.jpg (1000x668, 95K)

>implying there haven't been a shitload of films about religious feefees already

the synopsis is pretty cringe tobehonest
>In this highly philosophical film by acclaimed director Terrence Malick, young Jack (Hunter McCracken) is one of three brothers growing up as part of the O'Brien family in small-town Texas.
>Jack has a contentious relationship with his father (Brad Pitt), but gets along well with his beautiful mother (Jessica Chastain).
>As an adult, Jack (Sean Penn) struggles with his past and tries to make sense of his childhood, while also grappling with bigger existential issues.
sounds like generic hollywood white man bad daddy issues drama and over dramatization of shitty low iq families
i can just see the main character sitting on park bench wallowing in some muh depression scene cause his daddy issues accompanied with low tempo piano music in sad piano mix #210 from youtube.
big cringe hard pass

Get taste.

it's a chick flick, of course it's cringe

Masterpiece

Mental illness is no joke people, just take a look at this guy.

also adding to this the character "Jack" sound like some low test manchild who's not yet overcome his zoomer ways of thinking.
who would want to watch documentary of sorts about literal zoomer and manchild. zoomers being annoying as fuck already not to mention depressed soibois who thinks everything revolves around them.

There were but not enough.
Alright, name some of your favourite films.

only ones who have mental illness or some sort of a mental disorders here, are subhumans such as yourself who praise the "christian themes" of malicks shitty films while not being christians themselves
so like is said
drumpf
soi
stick to that
don't talk about cinema ever again

You sound absolutely retarded. Malick is one of few filmmakers who exclusively cast white actors in main roles. It's not a generic film and it's not white man bad.
Women don't understand this film.

>but not enough
I'm also low test and need my yearly dose of feel good or else I succumb to the existential Angst.

So if you are not Christian you can't praise a film which explores themes of Christianity? Are you genuinely retarded?

this post was either written by a woman or by a castrato

more of a Knight of Kino man myself

Attached: 1543399992580.png (600x400, 256K)

The Birth of a Nationa
Intolerance: Love's Strugle Throughout the Ages
The Rose of Kentucky
Way Down East
Of Human Bondage
Little Lord Fauntleroy
Morocco
The Devil is a Woman
The Scarlet Empress
Beloved Infidel
A Perfect World

>not generic
there's hundreds of films about broken families and white trash and nigger culture and on characters who have daddy issues

So you are a tranny just like Griffithfag?
They aren't white trash.

This family isn't white trash though. They're upper class, you dumb cunt

never said that, because the fact every malick fan is not chrisitan is so blatant
my point was, that if no genuine christian loves malick films then the christianity of said films is probably a tacked on facade he uses to try and establish himself as a filmmaker who explores "serious" subject matter and also to hide the fact that he's a bad director, which can't escape the eye of a keen viewer no matter how much grass he films or how many hours his actors are forced to do voice-over
but a malick fan having problems with reading comprehension isn't surprising

I’m Christian and love all but to the wonder

Terrible movie with some beautiful cinematography.

Tree of life >>>> malicks hacky attempt at a windows screen saver

they're religious white normies so i'd say they're pretty trash. just like you two cock ticklers

>So you are a tranny just like Griffithfag?
no
since most trannies love Malick

tits or gtfo

I'm Christian and I love this film. Malick is not a bad director but an actual auteur, which is quite rare these days. You're clearly not able to appreciate his associative editing and you probably hate Michael Mann, too.

>religious white normies
go back you little cunt
Also, white trash is a defined term and it doesn't apply to the family in any way

>but a malick fan having problems with reading comprehension isn't surprising
Maybe because before that you were just spouting garbage about soi and Trump instead of actually explaining your point like you are doing right now you dumb cunt.
I'm pretty sure that lot of Christians like his films. I don't think he tries to establish himself as anything, those themes were in his work in the past so it's natural that he continues with them. Also it's not a faced since without some knowledge about Christianity you won't understand everything.
>he's a bad director
Why

>Malick is not a bad director but an actual auteur
You say that like a person can't produce bland, saccharine shit with autonomy.

to the wonder is excellent

Kys.
Alright, formerly man.

>I'm Christian and I love this film.
Well this one exception definitely proves the rule wrong!
>Malick is not a bad director
wrong
>an actual auteur,
lol
>which is quite rare these days
every hack that exists these days gets called an auteur, invalidating that meme term even more
>You're clearly not able to appreciate his associative editing
there's nothing to appreciate
and the main reason most bad movies(like Malick's) are bad is terrible editing
>and you probably hate Michael Mann, too.
Blackhat is one of the best movies of this decade

It's a great retelling of The Book of Job.

Lot of Christians love his films. Why is he a bad director then?
>terrible editing
So when someone doesn't go by classic rules of editing, then it's bad?
>Blackhat is one of the best movies of this decade
What are other good films from this decade?

i already explained why, but your reading comprehension problems emerge again with you still denying them so i'll explain again
just a facade means that there's nothing behind the facade
there's no depth, no actual exploration of any of these issues or themes throughout his film
he just introduces them in fringe mannner and dances on those outlines for the rest of the runtime, without ever tackling the problem head on, because he doesn't how to
so then he resorts to his shitty cinematography more apt for some sort of a detergent commercial than a film and embarrassing cuts to prehistoric times and the big bang to distract the audience from his obvious hackery

>no depth, no actual exploration of any of these issues or themes throughout his film he just introduces them in fringe mannner and dances on those outlines for the rest of the runtime, without ever tackling the problem head on
Wrong.
>embarrassing cuts to prehistoric times and the big bang to distract the audience from his obvious hackery
That has thematic relevance in the film. Seems like you have a hard time understanding it.

I feel like i have already discussed something with you but i can't remember right now what was it. Your lack of punctuation and structure of text makes me remember you. I think you were annoying and wrong that time too, otherwise i wouldn't have remembered you.

fpbp

He is an assyrian catholic who never miss the mass

Catholics aren't Christians

>That has thematic relevance in the film. >Seems like you have a hard time understanding it.
really would like to see some explanation as to what the big bang has to do with the lives and problems of a middle class family in rural Texas
except ofc to show how the director of this story doesnt know how to elicit cosmic-like, or any other strong emotions for that matter from the central story so he has to show the audience cgi dinosaurs
>Wrong.
good retort señor r*ddit
> Your lack of punctuation and structure of text makes me remember you.
well it's clear i should watch my punctuation when i post on a malaysian fly fishing forum
a very malickian moving of goalposts which is to be expected from his fanbase

> hasn't read Book of Job
here you go, pleb: youtube.com/watch?v=Sh4FS8OOn3A

>really would like to see some explanation as to what the big bang has to do with the lives and problems of a middle class family in rural Texas
except ofc to show how the director of this story doesnt know how to elicit cosmic-like, or any other strong emotions for that matter from the central story so he has to show the audience cgi dinosaurs
Well, now you have proven that you don't understand this film at all. Back toreddit with you.
I haven't seen the video that the other user posted but if you want to talk about the film then you should read the Book of Job. Seems like the point of the film flew right over your head. I can't even imagine being filtered and exposed as a retard who doesn't know what he is talking about by Malick of all people.

I'm just saying your writing is noticeable and i recognize you.

>Book of Job
lmao

even if i wasn't familiar with the Book of Job, which this hack directly quotes from in his film, i and anybody else for that matter shouldn't have to be familliar with it to appreciate the film
the film, any film should stand on it's on two feet, without the necessity of the viewer to be acquainted with whatever written work that inspired it
>Back toreddit with you.
i've never been to red and dit
i'm sure many malick enthusiasts are there
>I'm just saying your writing is noticeable and i recognize you.
your life must be very exciting if you remember some random person on the internet just by the way he writes
i will forget about you in the next 24 hours, just like i did the first time, if we have ever even argued that is

>nobody realizes it's just a Family of Man knockoff

>really would like to see some explanation as to what the big bang has to do with the lives and problems of a middle class family in rural Texas except ofc to show how the director of this story doesnt know how to elicit cosmic-like, or any other strong emotions for that matter from the central story so he has to show the audience cgi dinosaurs
Nigga, you're retarded and your spacing is fucked up. The film tackles the creation of life on a comic and on an individual level. This also plays into the relationship between Jack and his parents (Father = God / Mother = nature). Besides that the film has moments of pure cinema, like the one where chestaine walks down the street and a butterfly lands on her hand. I get that malick is not for anybody, but your claim that he's a hack, just shows that you don't understand him.

Your criticism was that the religious themes were just a facade, then you proved that you know nothing about Christianity at all and didn't even get the basic symbolism in the film. You can appreciate the film without it, you just need to have some basic comprehension skills, which you so obviously lack. It's not the films fault that you didn't get it, it's your fault. Your criticism is so stupid especially considering your complete and utter retardation.
I'm sure you go to some post operation subreddits very frequently.
>your life must be very exciting if you remember some random person on the internet just by the way he writes
>i will forget about you in the next 24 hours, just like i did the first time, if we have ever even argued that is
It must have been recently, i have a good short term memory.

Not OP but it made me see life as something beautiful and full of experiences through different perspectives. How humans are only a small part of life in the universe. No matter how small we may be, our stories matter because our size and our place in the universe is irrelevant. Each of us is just as important as the universe because even though the universe will continue long after we die, after death from our perspective the universe will no longer exist. I learned to appreciate the time that I have and also to appreciate my family and the people around me.

>Besides that the film has moments of pure cinema, like the one where chestaine walks down the street and a butterfly lands on her hand

Attached: 1564174222291.gif (909x890, 328K)

You clearly can't appreciate pure cinema when it stares you right in the eye

Based

youtube.com/watch?v=zxnGHhEWXbc

Attached: 1560192727816.png (480x343, 51K)

That has nothing to do with how good the film is, that's just how it affected you.

if you have to ask, you'll never know

Top soicore

>all white people
>nice family life
>going to church
>brotherhood
>no flying superheros
>soi
Wrong.

>going to church
Kek
Any capeshit is less estrogen-driven that this film

Sure thing fag.

My grandfather was pissed cause they took it off theaters in Mexico after showing for 3 days. Most people would walk out, one of the clerks at the theater said it was garbage lmao

I've only seen the trailer but I knew right away it would be some 2deep4u tripe

Attached: s.gif (250x179, 131K)

Not much of an accomplishment honestly

what did the mexican intellectual community think about it though?

>Mexico
>people didn't understand it
No surprise there.

Well he's educated and he liked it and so did his circle of friends.
Mexicans just aren't that into gay shit desu famalam

/threadgood post
>he clearly has a wider notion of the possibilities of god
why do you think this? because it doesn't hurt your fee fees?
aleteia.org/2019/06/21/jim-caviezel-gives-an-electrifying-tribute-to-mary/

mexicans have an average IQ of 88. No surprise there.

Caviezel is such a cringelord

An average sure, but most of those low iq folk could never afford to go to a movie. There are lot of destitute people that bring the average down.

>Well he's educated and he liked it and so did his circle of friends.
Good.
>Mexicans just aren't that into gay shit desu
Mexicans in general are absolutely retarded.

>you just don't understand it
>low IQ
literal reddit tier apologetics

the people who don't like it literally don't understand it and have low IQs. It's only a reddit apologetic when pointed towards something middle brow like Rick and Morty.
*tips*

Not really, that one person who criticized it was proven wrong. Other than that there is some meme tier criticism like muh boring and muh bad. Nothing negative that would actually have some thoughts put into it was said so far.

Reddit loves this film apparently

>thinks this oversentimental religious pandering is highbrow
lmao the absolute state of this board
i know, the thread is full of redditors

So what's highbrow then.

It's not religious pandering and nobody is saying that it's highbrow. It's not that complicated but it seems like most people that are criticizing are retarded and they for sure couldn't handle a more highbrow film or are so stupid that they even can't understand the film. It's either it's boring, which is criticism that isn't usually used by people who watch highbrow films. Or it's i didn't get it.

Not him but I think most people "got" the film as it isn't really that hard to get. The problem is that it communicate its themes in such a flimsy and effeminate way that most people (read men) just lose all interest in it.

If you want a good film about religion there are plenty. The Gospel According to Matthew, Andrei Rublev, and Diary of a Country Priest, for example, are all miles above Tree of Life.

I think the film is supposed to resonate with literal boomers, since not if it took place in the 50s. I enjoyed it but it felt kind of bloated. I’ve seen films tackle the complexity of “life” in more concise manners.

Just look at the thread the guy that was arguing against the films didn't even understand the whole creation scene and the connection to the book of Job. I honestly think that 80% of people who criticize the film just don't understand it. That being said the film is not above criticism of course.
>The Gospel According to Matthew, Andrei Rublev, and Diary of a Country Priest, for example, are all miles above Tree of Life.
I disagree but all of those are great. Offret kind of reminds me of The Tree of Life for some reason.

>I honestly think that 80% of people who criticize the film just don't understand it
Well, as I said, they probably lose interest and don't analyze it thoroughly since the film is so feminine in its presentation.

>I disagree
It's not a matter of opinion.

>feminine presentation
What are you even blabbering about?
>It's not a matter of opinion.
It is

I don't know how to make it clearer for you. It's a faggy film that only appeals to women and sissies such as yourself, user.

What's faggy about it

...

You seem extremely insecure in your sexuality, my friend.

There isn't a person with working testicles who would write that sentence.

trips confirm that user insecure

LOL DID TARANTINO DIRECT THIS

Oh yeah, you're a real tough guy. A real man, hmm? Thinking tree has a feminine presentation (whatever that means), totally doesn't bespeak of your insecurities

Trips of truth have spoken. That user is definitely a latent homosexual

If a kid of mine said that I'd break his teeth. Better teethless and saved than a homo in hellfire.
Might be my religious upbringing speaking though.

>Thinking suppressing your sexuality makes it go away
I got news for you, you're gay. Just admit it to yourself.

>Better teethless and saved than a homo in hellfire

amen brother, christ did not die an excruciating death on the cross for us to become queers

>Jesus and John
>David and Jonathan
>not gay
ooook faggot

fuck off kike

Read the Bible nigger

I'm not the one talking about how magical a butterfly landing on a woman's hand was, user.
Well said.

You can't discuss this movie in Yea Forums
It's full of Amerimutts, and the only thing Amerimutts understand about religion is their worship to Disney.

Attached: 1546819354925.jpg (912x707, 134K)

Feet are so sexy. Came to that one.

>I'm not the one talking about how magical a butterfly landing on a woman's hand was, user.
I said it's pure cinema not magical there's a difference. You thought this is somehow faggy and feminine, which shows that you're extremely insecure in your sexuality, because even something like a butterfly seems to threaten your masquerade straightness. Just admit it to yourself user, it's 2019. Noone cares.

>You thought this is somehow faggy and feminine
It is undoubtedly faggy and feminine. You're the only one in denial here, buddy.

pro: the shots of the planets and other cosmic phenomena were one of the most memorable experiences I've ever had in a theatre
con: Mallick's penchant for having characters narrate over the imagery has never worked for me.