Author Topic: The New World  (Read 28772 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Gold Trumpet

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 5630
  • Respect: +31
Re: The New World
« Reply #210 on: February 14, 2006, 10:31:40 PM »
0
wow this thread was reaching for a new low and I think it's been found.

I'll disagree for one reason. What Mutinyco said really made me laugh hard. I think Pete has elevated himself to become one of the best posters on the board. Much love to Pete. But Mutincyo really got me to laugh hard and its just Mutincyo being Mutinyco.

ShanghaiOrange

  • Director
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
  • Respect: +5
Re: The New World
« Reply #211 on: February 14, 2006, 10:37:15 PM »
0
You gotta at least qualify that shit with a winky face or rolly eyes or something.

Anyway! Seriously guys, The New World was great. It was not the best movie ever, but it was very enjoyable. It was like Barry Lyndon or something. If you didn't like it, that's fine! If you did, that's great too!

Also, here's an anagram of mutinyco: I'm Tiny Cunt

This thread is over now.
Last five films (theater)
-The Da Vinci Code: *
-Thank You For Smoking: ***
-Silent Hill: ***1/2 (high)
-Happy Together: ***1/2
-Slither: **

Last five films (video)
-Solaris: ***1/2
-Cobra Verde: ***1/2
-My Best Fiend: **1/2
-Days of Heaven: ****
-The Thin Red Line: ***

pete

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 5303
  • freakin huge
  • Respect: +94
    • my site
Re: The New World
« Reply #212 on: February 14, 2006, 10:42:38 PM »
0
Hmmm...

I don't recall saying anything to Pete, so his swipe at me is a little odd.

Suffice... Pete, of the two of us, you're the one with the Herzog quote as your signature. I'm the one who met him, filmed an interview, and generated several thousand hits from the encounter.

Remember your place.


whoa, you have a WEBSITE?!  What's that like?  A thousand hits from something someone else said and done!  That must feel better than chocolate.
Oh yeah, and between two of us, you have St. Joe in your quote, but I'm the one who fucked him in the ass.  So remember your place as well.  And speaking of remembering, do you remember that time when you tried to pull the same shit in the napoleon dynamite thread and then you got owned so bad that you quitted the board (probably generating all that clicking on your website) for a few months?  'Cause I do.
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.”
- Buster Keaton

mutinyco

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 1476
  • Respect: +2
    • http://www.crossoverfollowing.com
Re: The New World
« Reply #213 on: February 14, 2006, 10:45:51 PM »
0
Interesting. Pete fucked a dead man.

I knew he was freaky, but that's pretty out there. Did you rake your dick on his crooked British teeth, too?
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

hedwig

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Lazy bones ain't got no time to waste away
  • Respect: 0
Re: The New World
« Reply #214 on: February 14, 2006, 10:51:57 PM »
0
that was the most pathetic comeback i've ever seen, mutinyco. please stop trying. and speaking of fucking dead men, i think that's an apt metaphor for this thread. it's been killed and hijacked so many times, this is just becoming cyber-necrophelia here. how many times, i say, HOW many times can you fuck a dead thread?!

mutinyco, SHUT UP.

people who saw The New World and actually want to discuss it, and do away with these idiotic insults -- people who are interested in discussing the CONTENT of the film: SPEAK UP.

mutinyco

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 1476
  • Respect: +2
    • http://www.crossoverfollowing.com
Re: The New World
« Reply #215 on: February 14, 2006, 10:56:32 PM »
0
Hedwig, put down the glass pipe for a moment. Read back a page.

modage, man, if you fail to see something that a lot of people see on this here board, and fail to convince anyone that your point of view is valid, then just walk away, man.  It's not worth raising the stakes and getting irrelevant with a generic attack on people liking slow movies.  I was thinking of jumping in to defend it but man, lets just drop the madness while it's still somewhat relevant to the movie.  We've all been jumped on this here board because of our taste.  I had my Lost in Translation thing and MutinyCo's wrong about pretty much every movie.  It's cool man, why don't we all wait until a latter time when pride is not such a big factor anymore to debate this out?  You insist that you're right, and that should be good enough.  I know I'm right about the Lost in Translation thing and I've got Chris Doyle on your side.  And you, I'm sure you'll find someone for your cause.  Maybe Chris Nolan will hate it.  Lets just cool our heads collectively.  If we keep on going, first of all, the argument will only grow more absurd as we pull out our third fourth seventh most valid points, and also the cheap shots will run more amoke.  There is just no need to get there, for now.  You're a good guy and you don't deserve it.

Furthermore, I'd suggest the bulk of this thread has been written by people who loved the movie. And because Mod didn't he was getting a bit of flack for it.

But be caureful. He'll fight you!
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

polkablues

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 5739
  • Baby, you got a stew goin'.
  • Respect: +434
Re: The New World
« Reply #216 on: February 14, 2006, 11:02:04 PM »
0
I haven't seen it yet, but I'm totally going to now.  A) Because I loved Thin Red Line, and B) Because I want to know which side of this West-Side-Story-style dance fight we've started up I should be on.

Mostly 'cause I loved Thin Red Line.

Here's my question: in the pantheon of Malick's work, where does everybody think New World falls?  Rehash of previously trod themes?  Bold new vision?  Midget snuff porn?  Somewhere in between?

Discuss.
The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong in the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these you can be sure it will kill you too but there will be no special hurry.

killafilm

  • Script Supervisor
  • ***
  • Posts: 359
  • Respect: 0
Re: The New World
« Reply #217 on: February 15, 2006, 03:10:41 AM »
0
It was like Barry Lyndon or something.

This really struck me for some reason.  Maybe because Mod doesn't love Barry Lyndon either.  And I know you enjoy some 'slow' movies.  Which doesn't seem like the right way to put it.  Ghostboy or whoever mentioned how The New World has a 2001 cut every five minutes I think really summed up why those who love the movie, really love the movie.  For myself at least it really was an experience.  I was more than able to get sucked into it all and just let it hang over me. 

I kinda find it odd that someone who totally enjoys The New World would not enjoy Last Year At Marienbad.  I think both movies owe a lot to their cinematraphy and editing for setting the mood.  Somehow similar... stretching though.  And as far as giving the movie slaw since it's from Malick, what if it was a first time directors movie? It would be George Washington all over again, with people calling it the great Malick movie Malick never made.   


©brad

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4242
  • Respect: +80
Re: The New World
« Reply #218 on: February 15, 2006, 07:43:33 AM »
0
I haven't seen it yet, but I'm totally going to now.  A) Because I loved Thin Red Line, and B) Because I want to know which side of this West-Side-Story-style dance fight we've started up I should be on.

hahah, me too.

Gamblour.

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +8
Re: The New World
« Reply #219 on: February 15, 2006, 07:44:17 AM »
0
polka, I'd say it's the first time a film has ever transcended time and space and actually gone back to 1607. The more I think about it, the more I want to see it again. In the scope of his oeuvre, though i've only seen part of Days of Heaven, can I say that it's a less narrative, more minimalist type of Thin Red Line, and in that way it's progressive for him because he doesn't rely on voice overs so much as visuals? It's less verbal poetry, more visual poetry. Which might go back to Days. Hm i need to rewatch every Malick movie.

And killa, I'm only sort of lovin TNW. Last Year at Marienbad....man, I think Hiroshima mon amour is such a better film, Last Year I will have to give a second chance. Malick has hints of hope and utter elation in his music and editing, while Last Year is nothing but pity and sorrow.

Can we get back to the music? This film had the best score I think I've ever heard. Of course there's no oscar love. But I've never sat during a film and been so aware of the music in the best of ways. Not at all like I'm aware of Resnais' music. His scores are so bad, especially Night and Fog and Last Year.
WWPTAD?

Sunrise

  • Screenwriter
  • **
  • Posts: 207
  • Respect: 0
Re: The New World
« Reply #220 on: February 15, 2006, 08:31:36 AM »
0
I haven't seen it yet, but I'm totally going to now.  A) Because I loved Thin Red Line, and B) Because I want to know which side of this West-Side-Story-style dance fight we've started up I should be on.

Mostly 'cause I loved Thin Red Line.

Here's my question: in the pantheon of Malick's work, where does everybody think New World falls?  Rehash of previously trod themes?  Bold new vision?  Midget snuff porn?  Somewhere in between?

Discuss.

Polka, I came to The New World as a Malick admirer and enthusiast of The Thin Red Line. It will be interesting to see how you respond to the new film. It's obvious by now that I am an ardent supporter of The New World. I can't get it out of my head. But it has been tough for me to articulate exactly why.

Spoilers

Gamblour and others have commented on the nearly silent nature of the movie. Malick sprinkles voiceover at odd and inspired moments throughout, but it is drastically different from The Thin Red Line's nearly constant voiceover (where Line's voiceovers move from one character to another, New World stays with Kilcher, Farrell and Bale). The New World's diminished use of dialog (and voiceover) certainly makes it his most ambitious work in that Malick substantially relies on visuals to tell his story. While all of his films contain incredible beauty, it is The New World's reliance on its images that places it at or near the top for me.

In addition to this visual reliance, I agree with Gamblour that the film's music is inspired. The crescendo of Wagner at the beginning, especially at the end, and I believe at least one other time toward the middle of the movie, gave me chills. Overall, the music (score and soundtrack) enhance the visuals expertly. One other comment is the sound design. Several moments stand out for me, including the opening credits, when Smith is captured by the Naturals (you know what it's like in that helmet), any scene with one of the large ships (you can feel the wood creaking, expanding, and bending), and the attempted siege of the fort (especially enjoyed those moments of total silence during the battles).

End Spoilers

I realize this is more of a list of reasons why I love the film and not an articulated analysis. A true analytical approach to film of this kind may require many viewings. My thoughts, I suppose, are related more to the experience and enjoyment I received from it. To your original question, although I don't know if this is a ranking of Malick's films, The New World now stands alongside The Thin Red Line as my favorite. It hasn't quite eclipsed it yet...but I've seen Line many more times.

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11874
  • Respect: +367
Re: The New World
« Reply #221 on: February 15, 2006, 09:36:32 AM »
0
Pete can take it.
it's pathetic that you would dish it.

B) Because I want to know which side of this West-Side-Story-style dance fight we've started up I should be on.
i wouldn't call one person a side.

mutinyco

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 1476
  • Respect: +2
    • http://www.crossoverfollowing.com
Re: The New World
« Reply #222 on: February 15, 2006, 11:16:08 AM »
0
Yeehaw!!!!!
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10402
  • Respect: +286
    • Floating Heads
Re: The New World
« Reply #223 on: February 27, 2006, 12:44:04 PM »
0
Title: The New World
Released: 9th May 2006
SRP: $27.95

Further Details:
Warner Home Video has officially announced The New World which stars Colin Farrell, Christian Bale and Christopher Plummer. This Terrence Malick directed film will be available to own from the 9th May, and should set you back around $27.95 in total. The film itself will be presented in 2.40:1 anamorphic widescreen, along with both English Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround and 2.0 Surround tracks. As far as we know, the only extra features will be a sixty minute making of documentary, and the theatrical trailer. 
http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/the-new-world.html
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Pozer

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 2240
  • Respect: +34
Re: The New World
« Reply #224 on: February 27, 2006, 01:10:11 PM »
0
I can't wait 'til you get it on DVD and say:
 
so i rewatched (The New World) tonite.  i liked it.  :oops: :doh: :ponder: :yabbse-undecided:
« Last Edit: February 28, 2006, 09:39:56 AM by The Artist Formerly Known As »