The New World

After my second viewing of TNW, this time the extended version, all I wanted to do was play in the woods. I wanted to turn cartwheels and run around on the grass and get all muddy. Or stand high in a tree and gaze into the distance. I now find myself looking at trees, birds, and seeking things like beauty, a more gratifying vision, a deeper awakening. Yes, friends, there were historical liberties taken here, concessions to contemporary tastes evoked in a sappy, sentimental, silly little love storyline the historical truth of which could easily be disproven by those of a rational mind. Such discriminating folk may resent having to watch a couple of beautiful people "scuttle about" in the forest to the hauntings of Mozart's 23rd piano concerto for nigh 3 hours. But for those of us who choose not to be so rational, perhaps we like being non-rational, what a glorious cinematographic ride it was; blessed with a 37 additional magnificent minutes more than the theatrical version.Pocahontas was played by the blissful Q'Orianka Kilcher so comely that it makes the heart ache. Her face blazes like Malick's beloved fire imagery clearer than his unrelenting blue skies. Her feverishly adorning form flows visceral through the landscape like a gazelle in slow motion, like the birds, the rippling water, and the animals in the forest, which, thanks to Mr. Malick's artistic eye, inhabit the film with her. She embodies "form and proportion" to delight the senses and radiates "wit and spirit", so astonishing was she that she "surprised" the sun whenever she came into his presence. Many torments visited upon her during the story all faced with a grace so touching and generosity so uplifting that her promise to herself to find "joy in all she sees" could be a mantra for anyone. A valid question could be how did Mr. Malick draw such a performance?Mr. Malick definitely has something to say and he says it his own way in his own time. We can second guess his choices with every frame. His motives were no doubt artistic and anything worthy of such distinction is entitled to remove us from servile convention and to make us stretch and flex our imaginative muscles. I don't think he made any of his choices lightly but made his decisions resolutely founded upon a clear vision of the story he wanted to tell and the ideas and images he wanted to show us and affect us to think about. It is lamentable that he averages making a movie every seventeen years.Mr. Malick's idea of a "special" effect is the natural light at dusk and dawn, God speaking through birdsong, a tear on the cheek reflected in firelight, fire itself, sunlight reflected through trees, birds in flight, deep blue skies, a water snake, a close up of the human ear. No obligatory explosions, no fake lighting or sets, no blue screens here, no over rehearsed acting but telling the story much through improvised movement and expression frequently, from what I understand, filmed when the actors didn't know he had the camera running. No excess, not a trace.The dialogue is spare and poetic where thoughts sotto voce mingle with what is spoken aloud. When Pocahontas spoke the last time with her uncle in the English gardens, we have the rare privilege of experiencing a conversation in the Algonquin language which articulated a surreal, musical atmosphere. Her last words to Smith, this time in English, fell touchingly like loving teardrops: "Did you find your Indie's, John?" Smith's Reply: "I may have sailed right past them." Their time together in the Virginia woodlands was dreamlike and when recalled in those last few moments they spent together, language wasn't enough to give expression to their memories, across the expanse of time. To recreate such moments, and achieve such an affect through some indescribable medium, where all of the elements of film converge, is why we need people like Terrence Malick.This work is an elegy, one for Pocahontas and the way of life that that for her was decimated. The final few images gently reveal what was lost in her passing; an empty family bed, an Indian spirit guide, a gravestone, a joyous final cartwheel across the grass(in dreams, in death, or real?) accompanied by a soundtrack laced with Wagnerian flourishes. The final image is a visual symphony of river rapids wherein suddenly the music ends and we are left with pure sound; water rolling over rocks for a few suspended moments. This is the music that we lost, the natural music that symbolically died; Pocahontas, our "little wanton," our "playful one" and the way of life she lost, her vanished wildness. "All things die".Poetry is not for everyone nor is classical music. If modern film making had a parallel to the more elevated, less commercial, art forms that aren't as accessible to the modern, for profit tastes, this would be it or at least its beginnings. All honor to you.

First of all, I intend to take issue with Pastor Puritan 27's incredibly ignorant post with regard to the film. There's a blatant xenophobic undercurrent towards Native Americans which belies the entire post. This is exactly what Mr. Malick was trying to steer clear of. I think you missed the whole point of the movie sadly. With regard to historical revisionism, what movie based on a true story doesn't take creative license and certain other liberties? How can you say that not one conversation in the entire film is remotely accurate unless you actually took part in any of them four centuries ago? I think that what Terrence Malick has achieved in this portrayal of the first encounter between the Native Americans and English settlers is as close to authentic as possible. It transports us back to 17th century America and England and evokes a specific time and place more so than any film ever made. Also, how can you say that the Native Americans adhered to pagan idolatry? Quite the opposite. I'm not that well versed in Native American beliefs and I don't mean to overstep my bounds, but I think that they were portrayed beautifully. To these people, everything around them was imbued with a sense of holiness and sacredness. They were truly in tune with nature and formed a symbiotic relationship with their natural surroundings. They knew nothing of possession or jealousy or greed and lived in communal brotherhood and equilibrium with one another --- an idyllic and ideal way of life which was corrupted by us so-called civilized and enlightened Westerners. There is certainly an element of paradise lost at play here. I do agree with one thing you wrote, however, and I quote: "The movie moreover portrays the English settlers as being a bunch of dirty, filthy, confused, and violent hooligans who come to invade the Paradise of the innocent Indians." There's nothing more I can add to that except to say you hit the nail on the head. Aside from being interesting, this juxtaposition is incredibly perceptive and accurate. You look upon the Algonquin village of Werowocomoco under Chief Powhatan, and it is abundantly clear that the people are in absolute harmony with one another and with the land. Then you look upon the fort at Jamestown, and disharmony and internal strife and dissent are the norm. The harsh and undesirable conditions without are a manifestation of blemishes within. Let us not forget that the English settlers were the aggressors who came to invade the land of a pre-existing civilization; and, while the Native Americans had adapted to the land and lived in unison with nature, the supposedly more sophisticated and technologically-advanced Europeans could scarcely survive their first winter abroad (and they wouldn't have if not for the generosity of Pocahontas and the Native Americans). As for the music, anachronism is completely inconsequential. Malick's use of Mozart and Wagner is ingenius. Even though they post date the era in which the film takes place, these pieces are unmistakably European and allow us to see things from John Smith's perspective. When Mozart's Piano Concerto #23 is used for the first time, we see Pocahontas as a mysterious and transcendentally beautiful other, enshrouded by the tall grass. Brilliant stuff. Furthermore, this is undoubtedly the most beautifully shot film of all time. I cannot fathom how some of these shots were actually captured on film. The ensemble acting is top-notch, especially by Q'Orianka Kilcher in her debut. The totality of the film is seen through her eyes. The term "New World" comes to take on three distinct meanings throughout the course of the film: 1) The world "discovered" by the English, 2) The Old World (England) seen through Pocahontas' eyes, and 3) An all-encompassing worldview unique to Pocahontas and Pocahontas alone. Mr. Terrence Malick --- the director of three of the greatest films of all time before this one --- has somehow managed to top himself. I have seen many films in my life, and I can say without any reservations whatsoever that this is the greatest thing ever to be committed to celluloid. This is art of the highest order --- a multi-layered masterpiece that achieves deeper meanings and complexities with subsequent viewings. A spiritual journey of sight and sound unlike any other, "The New World" is the greatest, most beautiful, most important motion picture I have ever had the privilege of watching. Thank you Terrence Malick; you are a true genius.

This is not an entirely accurate depiction of the history of Pocahontas and the preceding events. Its not trying to be. Its an experience, a beautiful piece of art that takes heavy inspiration from the history, and there is nothing wrong with that. I can still enjoy a more romanticized version of events, even if its not entirely accurate to the more unforgiving and harsh truth of what took place.As someone who loved the original Disney princess film i always wished for a live action adaption, and this is the closest thing to that. The extended cut is one of the most profoundly beautiful pieces of cinema i have ever witnessed. Its tragic, beautiful, emotional, and heartbreaking. The actress is absolutely breathtaking and does a phenomenal job at making the audience fall head over heels in love with her. The film delivers on a romanticized, yet tragic story of Pocahontas, the beauty and loss of our connection with nature, and creates a magnificent and emotional journey.I must recommend the extended cut of the film though. There are 3 versions here, but the extended cut is a thing of beauty. The theatrical cut loses 35 minutes of much needed footage, and in doing so loses much of the heart and soul of the film. Had i initially seen the theatrical cut first i honestly wouldnt have cared for the movie. The extended cut however is one of the best experiences i have ever had with a film. Just a wonderful experience, one that all people should see. If the story of Pocahontas intrigues you at all, watch this film, you wont be disappointed.

DVD is new so it's in excellent condition. Film itself was OK, a bit mediocre and long.

I did adore this mini series ! I recommend it !

Lasciando da parte terminologie "tecniche" e sulla qualità audio/video del Blu-Ray™ (non ho visto il film che ho comprato, se non alla TV diverse volte) l'ho comprato per il prezzo, indubbiamente dal mio punto di vista era favorevole. Ho aspettato che abbassasse e mi sono "accaparrato" il film.Per quanto riguarda la storia, è una personale visione della "favola" di Pocahontas e, tra nozioni e ricostruzioni storiche vere (basta cercare sul web per capire l'accuratezza) il regista Terrence Malick (La sottile linea rossa, To The wonder, tra gli altri film) vuole far capire, a chi vede il film, di come avvenne la genesi delle prima Colonie inglesi nel Nuovo Mondo. Il contatto con popolazioni cosiddette "primitive", i tanti "approcci" fatti di sguardi, di silenzi, di tentiativi certe volte non conciliati (ovvio che nè gli inglesi avevano mai visto queste popolazioni, e viceversa).Chi si aspetta azione, avventura e dramma vista dalla "massa" di spettatori rimarrà deluso. Terrence Malick è un poeta dell'immagine, dei silenzi, dei suoni naturali. C'è tutto in questo film, ma scorre lento perchè il tempo è visto da chi è vissuto nel XVII secolo (il protagonista impersonato da Colin Farrell), e ancor più lento è il tempo dei Nativi, le popolazioni che abitarono il Nuovo Mondo millenni prima dei "bianchi". La differenza sta proprio in questo: le popolazioni autoctone sono lì da secoli immemori, sanno come sopravvivere, mentre i bianchi tentano di popolare questa terra selvaggia a forza di stenti, malattie e violenze perpetuate nei confronti dei "locali".In definitiva, sconsigliato a chi non ha pazienza nel visualizzare immagini, pochi dialoghi e molti suoni. Inutile recensire un film se non sapete nemmeno di cosa si tratta!

une merveille