So why was it called The Tree of Life? I didn't understand that.

Anyone?

>>87555715
because family.. family is like a tree.

>Sneed's tree and pee

Book of Genesis, that's why

>>87555715
doesn't have to have a big encompassing meaning, maybe it just refers to how your upbringing conditions the rest of your life
I can't comment on Jewish lore though so I have nothing to add in that respect

>>87555715
Lol just watched this shite yesterday. Absouletly pretentious, dishonest filmmaking, coming from a huge fan of Badlands and thin red line. This just stank of pure christian nonsense. The scene with the dinosaurs has gotta be the worst looking scene in the whole of cinema. Only pseuds pretend to like this abhorrent flick

>>87557194
>dishonest filmmaking
I would love for someone to be able to explain what this phrase actually means.

I watched it, but it was just so fucking pretentious.

We get it Terry, the tree of life is family and it stretches back like a billion years. Splicing ancient earth footage into your boring family drama doesn't unboring it.

>>87557221

It means Lars von Trier is posting on /tv/ now

>>87557380
More like Lars von TRYHARD am I right?

Am I?

real talk Song to Song is airing in my local soon, is it worht a watch or is it too self masturbatory

>>87559161
It's self masturbatory in the sense that you will find yourself masturbating while watching it.

In all seriousness go see it, a Malick movie in theaters is a special experience.

>>87559161
did you like knight of cups and to the wonder

>>87557221
Dishonest filmmakers are intellectually bankrupt moral whores and charlatans; their films appeal to the modern phenomenon of the 'Pretend Epic' or Pseudo Cinema, often tied to the criticism that "It was a movie that thought it was a film" they have no ideas of their own and are filmed purely to have fancy essays made about them. They obfuscate their lack of insight under a smug impenetrable irony and often contain scenes with disingenuous attempts at depth with characters spouting platitudes that the director takes VERY seriously.
This directly panders to the IMDb reddit sensibility of quote circlejerking since these hacks are masters of the fools wit, "Quipping" (Not to be confused with the marvel co-opting of the word) , it sounds smart, cool and worldly but in reality there's nothing of substance, the Revenant's attempt at spiritualism was cheap and laughable and whilst someone like Malick has considered his philosophy, Inaurritu wears his introspection on his sleeve to give his film a false sense of depth with pathetic sermonising.


Some notably dishonest filmmakers include, but are not limited to

>Mike Leigh
>The Coen Brothers
>Werner Herzog
>James Cameron
>Mel Gibson
>Terrence Malick
>Gaspar Noe
>Clint Eastwood

>>87555715
>So why was it called The Tree of Life
The experiences of life all branch out like a tree, every action you take has a consequence. The director tries to visualize it in something as common and beautiful as a tree.

He states that you experiences and memories always affect you because you're always part of the tree, and no matter how rotten your branch is, there's always a chance for redemption because it might just not be your fault.

>>87559853
meme needs to die

>>87559853
Is this a copypasta or an opinion someone typed for this thread? I'm not going to bother looking it up because the thought that someone could type this much and still fall for the "Reddit boogeyman meme" grinds my gears.

>>87557194
>When you can't even use a meme phrase right
What the pasta describes as dishonest, Malick is the exact opposite of it. How fucking dumb...

How many hours of footage do you think this man has in his home waiting to never get used.

>>87560518
I heard that he recorded three full hours of Billy Bob Thornton narration for Thin Red Line and didn't use any of it. It's actually scary to imagine.