days of heaven 10/10(perfection from malick, his undisputed masterpiece imo)
badlands 9/10(a really good film but doesnt feel as authentically malick has his other films imo, more narrative less existentialism)
the new world 9/10(loose but has some of the most beautiful scenes ever captured, score-as always- is so well used here. one of the most inspired uses of music ever)
tree of life 8/10(great moments and some really bad ones-sean penns scenes mainly, all that crude symbolism) repetative and uneven, plus disjointed. its still malick tho it still looks and sounds beautiful)
the thin red line i have to rewatch, i dont remember it well at all, im sure im gonna love it tho.
had been looking forward to this ever since the awesome trailer dropped. it is very much as the trailer makes it seem. it is very sparse, very atmospheric and very wet and windy. also the cinematography is exquisite. lots of shallow focus and beautiful observation. the film is about the environment and landscape as much as the characters, infact arnold is clearly taking inspiration from malick as well as von trier in equal measure. lets be clear tho, this is sparse, dirty grim stuff and its rooted in arthouse. there is hardley any dialogue and the narrative does not move swiftly, no doubt bogged down in all the mud and wind. i felt sufficiently well weathered after viewing it. as i havent read the book i cannot coment on the quality of the adaptation but i did feel that characters and relationships were underdeveloped. this was all part of andrea arnolds approach to taking any sentiment out and replacing it with sparse/brooding tone. it works and its beautiful but its a bit of a slog, especially as the third act is significantly weaker than the first two.
tree of life has some serious competition for the cinematography oscar.