The Tree of Life

I finally got around to watching Tree of Life even though it just entered its third week showing there. Its reputation preceded it more than any story elements. I knew there were dinosaurs. I knew people were walking out because they were bored. And I knew that it got a very mixed reaction at Cannes. Given that a coworker gives me a hard time for being (paraphrasing) "too plot reliant," I wasn't sure what to expect. I was watching a late show, so at the very least, I was hoping for some fun hallucinations brought on by fighting away the tired. Color me surprised. Not only did I stay awake threw the film (with ease, mind you), but it only started to drag a little towards the end and I found Tree of Life to be intensely emotionally resonant. That's not to say it's a perfect, but I'll get to that below.

The first thirty minutes (maybe longer) is very disjointed. There are glimpses of a family in the '50s(the O'Briens, though I can't recall if that's ever actually said in the film), modern day life, shots of deep space, the aforementioned dinosaurs, microscopic action, and eventually, a narrative forms of a fetus developing then a child and family growing. The first thing that struck me about all of this is the floating camera work, the editing, the use of wide lenses that seem to push the borders of fisheye, and one amazing shadow shot that I'm certain I've never seen anywhere before. There's an intense, ethereal quality about it all and while I don't think the images always cut together smoothly, there's a rhythm and grace to the whole thing that feels like something I've never experienced in a theater. To put forth an old and hackneyed phrase, it felt like the closest expression of "pure cinema" that I've ever encountered. The editing seemed like it was time to an unheard score (and given the use and importance of (classical) music in Tree of Life, I wouldn't be surprised it that was the case. Given the nature of the editing, I can't even imagine how Malick shot the film without having a new set up after five second shots (this film very clearly doesn't subscribe to the notion that a director's hand should not be seen, which is not a knock against the film).

Terrence Malick does a good job of uniting the thematically linked space/dinosaur stuff with the narrative through visual motifs, water being the most noticeable. It isn't much of a reach to justify the existence of these elements in the film. By the time the main narrative kicks in, I was kind of mesmerized by the imagery to the point where I looked at my watch and was stunned that an hour had passed already.

As Tree of Life continues, we follow Jim O'Brien (Brad Pitt) and his three sons and wife (mostly focusing on the eldest son). Here is where the film really sunk its hooks into me. Even though the floating camera gets a little tedious at times and the editing feels a little clunky because it's alway cutting between moving images that aren't really compatible, the way it's all put together draws a picture of one of the most accurate and naturalistic childhood's I've ever seen depicted. Nearly everything that happens when the boys are playing I've either done or know people that have done them. Shoot someone with a BB Gun because they let you? I know people who willingly threw darts at each other. Play in the mist of the DDT truck? I know people that used to ride their bikes in behind the truck while it misted. What's remarkable is how much gets communicated to the audience with almost no exposition. You get to see the idyllic childhood and the harsh father both and there is very little dialogue between characters. It's shown with actions and glances. When there is finally a moment between father and son when emotions are actually expressed, it's incredibly powerful.

Upon further reflection, the film is put together in the manner of memory. Bits and pieces flitting about. Incomplete pictures mixed together. Thinking of it now, it's quite obvious why that is, but there's a lot of mental work that goes into watching Tree of Life that it's easy to miss the obvious. The only time the film slows down is during the Sean Penn scenes and only partially because I really don't care for the guy as an actor (I'd say human as well, but I don't know him). It veers in a direction that was much harder for me to unpack, though having talked with my friend after, I think we made some progress on it.

Tree of Life is long and deliberate, but if you're willing to put the moderate amount of work into it (which really isn't that much), it's an immensely rewarding experience, emotionally and cinematically. Even though I have my issues with the way it was shot and the editing (and Sean Penn), the combine to make something unique. It's rare that I have such a positive physical reaction to a film (see the last time I wrote about a new movie in this space). It's authentic, beautiful, and challenging and should be seen in the theaters. At the very least, it will give you something to talk about.

The Tree of Life Trailer HD - The best free videos are right here