Her Majesty Matoaka

THE NEW WORLD (2005)

HER MAJESTY MATOAKA

“The Far East has its Mecca ,
Palestine has its Jerusalem ,
France its Lourdes ,
And Italy its Loretto,
But America ’s are only her alters of patriotism;
The first and most potent
Being Jamestown ;
The sire of Virginia ,
And Virginia the mother
Of this Great Republic .”

From a 1907 Virginia Guidebook.

The state of Virginia is preparing for a 2007 celebration of the 400th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown . In January 1607, James I of England sent explorers to the New World . He sent 108 men and three ships. Their sponsor was the Virginia Company. The lead ship of the tiny flotilla was called the Susan Constant. Their charge was to make a settlement, and then search for a water route to the Orient.

After a four month sail, on May 14, 1607, they landed on what would become Jamestown Island on the banks of the James River –about 60 miles from the mouth of Chesapeake Bay . The deep water channel allowed them to moor their ships to trees on the shore. In reality, they were attacked by the Algonquian Indians almost immediately. This event happened 13 years before the pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock.

In 2005, Terrence Malick, the elusive maverick filmmaker came to Virginia to film his movie version of these events, THE NEW WORLD. They shot the film on two sites along the Chickahominy River –a tributary that was a few miles north of the James River . Malick went to great pains to do accurate research for this film. Virtually all the costumes were made by hand utilizing materials that would have been available in the early 1600’s. He made up a team of historians, archeologists, anthropologists, linguists, and experts in the oral history of the Virginia Indian tribes. The movie was shot northeast of Norfolk , and south of Harrisburg . At the actual Jamestown settlement they have a recreation of old Fort James , and a Powhatan village. This site is still an active archeological dig. One can get more information at HistoricJamestown.org. There, also, is a living museum, with costumed interpreters, and this is featured on HistoryIsFun.org.

THE NEW WORLD opens ever so gently, with a voice-over by Matoaka (Q’Orianka Kilcher), also called Pocahantas. Oddly in this film her character is never called Pocahantas. Once or twice, in Algonquian, she is hurriedly referred to as Matoaka. She spreads her buff brown arms, reaching to the sky –to the Mother, and she praises Nature and joys within her life. Little does she know at that moment how much her life will soon change? Malick shoots her and other natives from beneath the water, watching them ripple and frolic like Polynesians in the clear cold waves. There, from underneath the surface, we see several natives pointing excitedly at the bay, at something incredible approaching them. Then to the vibrant strains of Wagner’s DAS RHEINGOLD, as viewers we move like shadows in the breeze flitting amongst the trees on the bluff above the gray bay, watching as the Indian innocents discover the great English ships, three of them, followed by a long boat rigged with sail doing depth soundings.

Then our point of view shifts to the puncheon deck of the Susan Constant, captained by Christopher Newport (Christopher Plummer). We are quickly introduced to members of the crew that will play bigger parts in the pageant to come, scurrying around the deck, hauling down the great sails, and preparing to dock. Next we meet Captain John Smith (Colin Farrell), shackled below decks for what later we find out was insubordination. He pushes his long greasy hair from his face, rattling his wrist chains, as he strains to peek out a square port to glimpse a tiny piece of the landfall and the dark forest looming leeward.

This pivotal moment in American history is well served by Terrence Malick –with the contrived exception of the shackling of Smith. That appears to be artistic license to create more mystique for the character –to illustrate how bravely and calmly he faces the hangman’s noose, with an even and haughty gaze –which later is as a fine literary parallel to the way he handles himself when overpowered and taken captive by the Algonquian Indians. That opening scene is so powerful, so beautiful and stirring; it will be that one scene that will always come back to mind when one recalls the film in the future, like the forlorn Meryl Streep on the seaward side of the Cobb at Lyme Regis –etched in our cinematic cortex like quicksilver pictographs.

Mick La Salle of THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE wrote,” With most movies a shorthand description or a reference to another film is enough to convey a sense of the experience. But Terrence Malick’s THE NEW WORLD is not like any other movie. In its emotional effect and in the ways it makes its points, this motion picture is much more akin to poetry or music. Malick uses cinema in a way no one else uses it; in a way no one else has ever used it. Through elliptical and seemingly oblique methods, he forges moments of staggering emotional power.
Malick realistically depicts the colonists’ arrival, and creates a wistful dream of it; a dream in which we know everything that is to come. He shows us a moment of greatness and also of tragedy –for the Indians that stand there in complete innocence. This is the beginning of everything and the end of everything –and to see it all so distinctly, presented with such a full-hearted understanding of the event in all its meaning, is almost too much to bear. There will be people who will walk into this film cold, and within five minutes find themselves sobbing, without knowing why.”

In the film, Captain John Smith is sent out with a small party of men to find a legendary city, the grand empire of the Algonquian. The King of that Empire was Chief Powhatan. Smith set off with his men and two Indian captives. Colin Farrell as Smith then reads a voice-over narration, droning on as the long boat slides through the dark narrow straits and sometimes wide gray water, paddling further and further up the river. They do find the village, but it is strangely empty –the whole tribe has vacated. Malick gives us no explication for this situation.

In the opening scene of this cinematic epic, the Indian village is partially on the bluff, less than scant miles from where the colonists landed. Yet Smith seemed to have traveled vast distances to arrive there –another inconsistency. Smith’s men begin to dwindle in number. Were they being picked off by the wily hostiles? Later in some tall swamp grass Smith’s captive Indian breaks away from his tether, and the last of Smith’s troop disappears. There is no more logic to these scenes than there would be to the body of a nightmare.

Soon we discover Smith isolated and alone, wandering in what might be a Cypress swamp in knee-deep brackish water. He hears something. He lowers his metal helmet visor and prepares for combat. An arrow suddenly hits him in the right leg, and the attack is on. But the braves seeing how blind he is with his helmet on, burst upon him, and knock him left and right with their war clubs; finally knocking him off his feet. A captive, he is dragged into the Indian encampment, which is now very full of Indians.

John Smith is pushed and shoved and dragged into a huge long house, where he meets the great chief Powhatan (August Schellenberg). Malick plays with the deep shadows, and the shafts of sunlight that penetrate the thatched roof. Braves are screeching and yelling on all sides of him, and many of them push him and bump into him roughly. They fear him, and thumping him and yelling at him shows their bravery. His metal breastplate armor fascinated many of them. Wes Studi as the warrior Opechancanough darted in and out, looking lean and fierce as he spoke Algonquian. Malick often just let the Indian tongues wag without letting us know what was said, sans subtitles; as if the sounds of the words alone could, or should convey their complete meaning. I would have appreciated more subtitles. Great Powhatan seemed impressed with Smith’s bravery, reserve, and calm resignation.

Without warning Smith is shoved roughly to the ground as the howling din of warriors around him erupts. Several powerful Indians hover over him with raised war clubs. One can see in his eyes that he expects to die. Then in a flash a young Indian maiden, the chief’s beautiful daughter Matoaka, throws herself onto Smith, protecting him from the danger and imminent death. The warriors back off, and soon Smith is allowed what appears to be complete freedom to wander about the camp, join in the hunt and the games –and spend countless hours wandering the woods and fields, bending the grass with Pocahantas/Matoaka, the chief’s “favorite” daughter. At some point in voice-over we are told that Powhatan has dozens of wives and hundreds of children, but Matoaka was his favorite. She alone held his heart.

Smith and Pocahantas wander for weeks, teaching each other their language and falling in love. These playful, improvised scenes are lovely, languid, and lengthy --presented in tableau, with the characters mostly speaking in voice-over. During the first viewing of the film I wasn’t sure that the 28 year old Smith and the 15 year old Pocahantas actually had sex, but after the second viewing I felt confident that Malick wanted us to know that Smith was in a dreamlike state, in a blissful captivity, and he certainly did not turn down the opportunity to make love to this curious beautiful creature that cooed at his elbow night and day.

Some felt that these scenes went on way too long, and that they became repetitive and boring. I disagree with such impudent impatience. This was the important point where Pocahantas found her first “true” love, where John Smith had the option to be a “better” man than he had been, to be completely seduced by the halcyon days, the nubile young native girl, and by Nature itself. It represented the cornerstone for many important plot twists to come.

Historically in December, 1607, John Smith’s hunting party was ambushed and most of them were killed outright. He was taken prisoner, and Chief Powhatan was impressed with his reserve and self-confidence. But Smith’s mock “execution and salvation” ceremony was traditional for the Indians. All captives endured and experienced it. Pocahantas’ actions were probably just part of the ceremony. In actuality she was only 11 years old. She and Smith did become friends, but probably not lovers. She would have considered him a big brother, a new special friend, even a father figure. Matoaka frequently visited Jamestown . It was recorded that her “lively” character and poise made her popular.

In the movie, when Smith returned to Jamestown , he had a surly and combative reception from the appointed “President” of the colony, Captain Edward Wingfield (David Thewlis). Thewlis, who is a fine actor, was given very little to do. His Wingfield had been a selfish and harsh taskmaster, and he was assassinated by one of this own men as he prepared to execute Smith on some trumped up charges. It was established that Captain Newport (Plummer) had already returned to England for more supplies and more colonists.

In real history Smith did provide “structural leadership”, and he did help the colony to prosper for two years. When he received a gunpowder wound in 1609, he returned to England –never to return. He instructed others to tell Pocahantas that he was dead, because he wanted her to forget him and move on with her life. So all the dramatic fare of being elected President, and repelling several Indian attacks, and then being usurped himself because he did not want to kidnap Pocahantas was merely cinematic fiction.

That wonderful scene where Pocahantas arrived at the Fort in the dead of winter, bringing food and hope to the colonists may actually have happened. The plot device of the colonists wanting to kidnap Matoaka also actually did happen in history. She was held for ransom. The pendulum mood swings of the colonist’s relationship with the Indians seemed accurate, but still vague. Sometimes a few of them would be friendly and traded with the colonists, and other times the Indians would erupt in violence. They would attack the Fort, or butcher the outlying farmers. During the second year of the Colony, several dozen farmers were killed in an uprising.

The winter that Smith departed for England , nursing his wound, there was real turmoil, famine, and disease in Jamestown . Only 60 settlers survived to spring. In June 1609, Governor Lord De La Ware arrived from England with fresh supplies and more colonists.

The real Pocahantas did live in the settlement. Whether she was actually banished from her tribe, or just chose to do so is not clear. She did convert to the Christian religion and moved into the settlement permanently. She never resided in the Powhatan encampment again. In 1614, when she was about 17 years old, she married tobacco farmer, John Rolfe. Peace and prosperity followed after their wedding. Matoaka/Pocahantas was baptized and renamed Rebecca. The first Africans were brought in as indentured servants in 1619. The Fort at Jamestown was abandoned in 1620. A “New Town” sprouted up to the east of the original settlement. It became the state capitol, and remained so until 1698.

In 1616, Sir Thomas Dale sailed back to England , taking a dozen Algonquian Indians, including Pocahantas/Rebecca, her husband, and her son, Thomas. She actually did become the “toast of London ”, and did have a royal audience with King James I. Whether the King had requested it, as in the movie, is not substantiated. While in England , she did meet with John Smith again. They worked out their emotional differences. She began her voyage home in 1617, but she became ill. It is speculated that she caught pneumonia or tuberculosis. She died at 22 years old and was buried in a small cemetery at Gravesend , England .

Malick playfully twisted the actual history to better serve his film, and the love story central to it. In the movie after saving the colonists, and helping them get through their first winter, Pocahantas overheard her father, Chief Powhatan, planning an attack on the fort. He initially had mandated that the colonists “leave in the spring”. When it became obvious that the settlers intended to stay, he felt it was time to drive the intruders off. She came to warn John Smith. Powhatan takes this action as a direct betrayal, and he banishes his daughter from the tribe. Soon she is brought to Jamestown , but as in many other instances in the film it was not made clear as to the exact circumstances. Was she abducted or kidnapped from some other settlement where she had been staying, and was forced to come to the Fort, or did she just choose to reside there to be near her lover?

The movie John Smith, so burdened with administrative and governing duties, seemed to regard his idyllic month with Pocahantas as merely a dream –and he made no attempt to contact her. She chose to come to him that winter with the supplies. Then, conveniently as a laborer, under a loose colonial house arrest, Smith reconnects with her –and they began to rekindle their romance. In order to facilitate Smith’s eventual departure and return to England , Malick made up the “Royal Order”, summoning him to London , charging him with the responsibility of mounting a new expedition. He was to return to the New World , and search the northern coast for the legendary waterway to the Pacific, and then the Orient. Smith, in history, never captained such a venture. He never returned to North America at all.

In the film, after Smith had been gone for two months, and would have been midway in the crossing, Pocahantas was informed that he was dead, that he had drown in a storm during the crossing. Her grief was gargantuan. It consumed her, and for a time it seemed to immerse her in madness, lethargy, and sloth. Slowly she worked her way through it. It was at this point that Malick had John Rolfe (Christian Bale) declare his intentions to court her. The courtship was gentle, and after a time she began to respond positively. They married, worked on his outlying tobacco farm, and had a son, Thomas.

Time was compressed in the movie, so after Pocahantas found a modicum of happiness in her new life, she overheard some settlement ladies gossiping, and she discovered that John Smith was still alive. She was shocked and excited. She announced to her husband, John, that she could no longer perform conjugal duties, because she “was already married.” Malick uses this moment to have the fictitious Captain Newport (Plummer) inform Matoaka that she was being summoned for a royal audience with King James I. There is a famous painting of Pocahantas dressed in her English finery, probably as she appeared in her audience with the royal family. Malick recreated that outfit and that moment superbly.

Mick La Salle noted that Ernest Hemingway, in his Nobel Prize acceptance speech he was quoted as saying,” To do something truly great, a writer must drive himself far out past where he can go, out to where no one can help him.” Terrence Malick is that kind of writer, director, and artist. He has created a cinematic style analogous only to him and unique in all the world of film. He is not afraid to bore you, anger you, or overwhelm you.

Peter Bradshaw of THE GUARDIAN wrote,” American history is transformed into a dream vision of savagery and grace by Terrence Malick in his humid story of colonial settlers on the Virginia coast in 1608. Malick has a pure fluid cinematic idiom; his expedition into the past is ambitious and glorious. The utopian peace of the Smith-Pocahantas love affair in the wild, elicits from Malick his gift for wordless poetry, a tidal drifting of images and sounds. At his best, Malick defies gravity to float above that narrative road, where most filmmakers are content to walk with such a heavy tread.
Malick’s discoverers reminded me of Keats’ line from his ON FIRST LOOKING INTO CHAPMAN’S HOMER:
Stout Cortez when with eagle eyes,
He stared at the Pacific,
And all his men
Looked at each other
With a wild surmise !
Like Cortez’s men, they cannot come to terms with what they have discovered, and Pocahantas’ calm and wisdom is a contradistinction to their hysteria and ambition, greed and fear.”

Director Terrence Malick has an enigmatic reputation, and he seems to solo in his own piece of the cinema sky. He was born in Waco , TX in 1943. He grew up on a farm, and his nickname was “Sparky”. In college he majored in philosophy. He wrote several reports on the famous German existentialist philosopher, Martin Heidegger.

Heidegger postulated things like,” Thinking is the mortal enemy of understanding. Man’s true nature is revealed in poetry. Poetry eludes the demands of our will. The only way to understanding is through submission, not thinking.”

Malick graduated from Harvard as Phi Beta Kappa. I suspect that if you examined Heidegger’s first famous book, BEING AND TIME (1927), there might be some insight into Malick’s style of filmmaking. As a writer, he consistently favors voice-over narration to actual dialogue. This first person overview can be effective, as in those hard-boiled film noir and detective films of the 30’s and 40’s –or it can, and does create an unreality, a kind of dreamscape. I think the latter is what Malick reaches for. In BADLANDS Sissy Spacek’s character did most of the voice-over narration, and her naiveté and ignorance of the world blunted and lessened the bold violence intact within that tale. In DAYS OF HEAVEN Linda Manz’s vagrant character did most of the voice-overs, and her isolated and outsider persona gave the story some humanistic reasonance. In THE THIN RED LINE, Jim Caviezel and several other cast members did the languid voice-overs, fueling the image of war as unreality at the expense of the destruction of paradise, and the sacrifice of young lives on both sides.

Malick, as a Rhoades Scholar, attended Oxford , pursuing more Philosophy. Then for a time he became a philosophy teacher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology [MIT]. While teaching in the 1960’s, he began to do some free lance writing, mostly journalistic, and often under the name of “David Whitney”. As a journalist he published work in LIFE, NEWSWEEK, and THE NEW YORKER. In 1969 he enrolled in the American Film Institute, and he earned an MFA. During the 1969-70 terms, he directed two short 8mm films. Later he directed a film called LANTON MILLS (1969). It was 12 minutes long and it starred Warren Oates and Harry Dean Stanton [both of which he cast in his first feature film, BADLANDS (1973)].

He wrote a treatment for DIRTY HARRY in 1971, but none of his work was used. As a script doctor he worked with Jack Nicholson on DRIVE, HE SAID (1971). He co-wrote a film script called DEAD HEAD MILES (1972) that set on a shelf for years. He wrote the script for POCKET MONEY (1972). I have watched that limp sad modern Western several times and I can’t get myself to like it. Perhaps if I watch it one more time with the notion that Malick had something to do with the writing, it might color things differently. He appeared uncredited as an actor in that movie, as a “workman”.

In late 1972 he hit his stride, and he wrote, produced, acted in, and directed BADLANDS (1973). In his meager canon of work, this movie is my favorite. He showed such promise, enthusiasm, and verve with that picture –reminiscent of the promise shown by the young Michael Cimino with his DEER HUNTER (1978).

Malick said, regarding BADLANDS ,” I tried to keep the 1950’s to a bare minimum. Nostalgia is a powerful feeling –it can drown out anything. I wanted the film to set up like a fairy tale, outside of time, like Treasure Island . I hoped this would, among other things, take a little of the sharpness out of the violence –but still keep its dreamy quality.”

He spent several years developing his next film, DAYS OF HEAVEN (1978). I have read that originally he wanted Jack Nicholson for the lead, with his second choice being Dustin Hoffman. Then he approached John Travolta. Richard Gere, who eventually was cast in the part, was way down the list. Malick took his film to Cannes , and he walked away with the Best Director Award, and it won an Oscar for cinematographer, Nestor Almendros. Malick was very upset with Paramount , the releasing studio. They, as with so many fine films in the past, butchered it with bad editing, and killed its box office potential with a lackluster marketing campaign. Malick was on edge during this shoot, and during the stress of this production argued a lot with the crew.

Neither BADLANDS nor DAYS OF HEAVEN made money –but the respected critics loved them. Malick felt betrayed and overly hassled by Hollywood . In 1979 he traveled to Paris , doing some research on a war film project that was going to be set in the Middle East ; it was called “Q”.
He stayed in Paris nearly 20 years. He taught philosophy and film from 1979-1994. For much of that time he wore very long hair and a beard. But the great bitch Cinema was not entirely pushed from his artistic consciousness. He had, for instance, written the script for THE NEW WORLD over 25 years ago. He let it set on a shelf, but he kept it in his mind.

During his self-imposed exile in France , he turned down an offer to direct ELEPHANT MAN (1980). He wrote a treatment draft for GREAT BALLS OF FIRE (1989). He was paid for it, but it was never used. He had some collaboration with Matt Damon and Ben Affleck on GOOD WILL HUNTING (1997).

Leonard Matlin wrote,” Terrence Malick is one of the most intriguing figures in recent film history –as much for his long sabbatical as for his striking movie work.”

Something drew him back to the fray, to the Dream Factory in 1997, and he directed THE THIN RED LINE (1998), released a full twenty years after his last feature. It had all the Malick methodology –long shots of nature, voice-over narrations, disjointed sequences, non-linear action, and minimal dialogue. When Malick directed the film, he showed up clean shaven and rejuvenated. What he created was cinematic leagues away from the original filmed version of THE THIN RED LINE (1964), directed by Andrew Marton and starring Jack Warden, and Kier Dullea –a straight forward black and white literal depiction of the famous James Jones novel.

Jim Caviezel, speaking of Malick’s voice said,” It’s a cross between a Texas drawl and Kermit the Frog.”

Hwanhee Lee of SENSES IN CINEMA wrote,” Terrence Malick is an American director whose films can be characterized as radical re-evaluation of the current understanding of cinematic concepts –such as image, sound, character, and narrative. His films are intensely visual, abound in beautiful nature imagery –and they elude explanation.”

James Monaco, an expert on electronic publishing, film, and the media industry, has described Malick’s films,” As mythic in appearance –but he does not impose myth onto reality –rather he deduces myths out of reality. Malick understands myths as “cultural paradigms” that function as a precondition for making sense out of human experience.
Malick’s films are most distinguished for the primacy and beauty and poetry of their imagery, which reminds viewers of the fact that the most primal and direct way in which cinema engages its audience is via the power of images.”

I read where Malick was going to make his “fourth” film about the life of Che Guevara. He wrote the screenplay –but then gave up the project –letting director Steven Soderbergh take it on. So instead he dusted off his old chestnut script for THE NEW WORLD, rolled up his sleeves and went to work. His next project is reputed to be TREE OF LIFE, starring Colin Farrell.

Sarah Green, one of the primary producers for THE NEW WORLD, wrote,” It is the story of our history as Americans, our flaws, good points, virtues, and growing awareness woven through the simplest element of all –that which makes us human –love. It’s a story in which people betray each other, try to get it right, betray each other again –and ultimately learn that there are many truths, and you can only live your own. Every character is sympathetic, and every character is flawed.”

Colin Farrell said,” Malick does a gig and actors come running. You don’t even have to read his script, because the purity of every single movie he’s made is proof enough. Terry’s a sage –he’s got wisdom of years that he hasn’t lived on this planet –and he has gentility which is astonishing, and a ferocity that is amazing. He’s a poet.”

Christopher Plummer said,” I think Terry sees the story as a very real dream. His passion for the land and for this country is a spiritual rather than a scientific one. Terry’s both a dreamer and an intellectual –and also incurably romantic.”

Peter French of the GUARDIAN UNLIMITED wrote,” Now in his early 60’s, Terrence Malick ranks among the cinema’s great poets, up there alongside Griffith, Dovzheako, Ford, and Lean –on the strength of just four movies over a period of 30 years. They are all concerned with man’s transaction with the land, the corruption of innocence, the fable of the expulsion from Eden , and the American propensity towards destructive violence.
Malick’s films have more voice-over commentary and narration, most of it a formal literary kind, than they have dialogue. He might well have been more prolific and popular during the silent era than he is in our prosaic contemporary cinema. THE NEW WORLD will not be to everyone’s taste. You have to adjust to his thoughts and rhythms. But it is a masterpiece, alert and sensitive to the flowing of water, the rippling of forests and field, the texture and smell of newly cut or weathered timber. It is a profound, revealing, and wonderful film about the meeting of two cultures –and the shaping of a new one. And it has a feeling of rare authenticity in its mood, language, and treatment of Native American life.”

Roger Ebert of THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES wrote,” Malick strives throughout his film to imagine how the two civilizations met, and began to speak, when they were utterly unknown to each other. They regard each other in complete novelty –and at times with a certain humility imposed by nature. The Indians live because they submit to the realities of their land, [do I hear the muffled strains of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy?], and the English nearly die because of their ignorance and arrogance.
Malick places nature in the foreground, instead of using it as a picturesque backdrop as other stories might. [As in Abbas Kiarostami’s excellent leisurely paced Persian film, THE WIND WILL CARRY US (1999)]. He also uses voice-over narration by the principal characters to tell the story from their individual points of view.
This is Pocahantas’ story, although the movie deliberately never calls her by any name. She is a bridge between the two peoples. There are two “new worlds” in this film –the one the English discover –and the one that Pocahantas discovers. Both discoveries center on the word “new”. What primarily distinguishes Malick’s film is how firmly he refuses to know more than he should in Virginia in 1607 or in London a few years later. The events in his film, including the tragic battles between the Indians and the settlers –seem to be happening for the first time. No one here has read a history book from the future.
We are surprised to see how makeshift and vulnerable the English forts were, how evolved the Indian culture was –how these two civilizations could have built something new together. In a small way, Pocahantas did. She was given the gift of sensing the whole picture, and that is what Malick founds his film on –not tawdry stories of love and adventure. He is a visionary, and this story requires one.”

From a marketing standpoint, some felt that this film will bore more than it will thrill viewers, and boredom is the death knell at the box office –as word-of-mouth begins to circulate. James Berardinelli of REEL VIEWS wrote,” This film is beautiful to look at, but that should not come as a surprise. Terrence Malick has always been known as a painter who uses celluloid as his canvas. His films breathe and move slowly. Patience is a mandatory trait for those desiring not to be bored. I have not always been a fan of his director’s style. I found THE NEW WORLD, for the most part, to be absorbing, without compromising his style, Malick manages to develop an interesting account, and provide insight into the emotions of the leads. Now if only he had eliminated those voice-overs. He chose to add internal monologues from Smith, Pocahantas, and John Rolfe. Not only are these florid voice-overs badly written, but they are intrusive and hurt the flow of the movie.
THE NEW WORLD is one of those films that viewers will either embrace or will hold at arm’s length. Malick often has that effect. If you are in the mood for something reflective and visually sumptuous, this movie will have you enraptured before the 30 minute mark. But if you are less patient, you will be squirming in your seat. It is beautiful and lyrical and a treat for more than one of your senses. It is a worthy effort, and it is recommended viewing for those who have interest.”

Unlike the Revolutionary War period, which has had dozens of films made about it, Colonial America has heretofore been less dramatic fodder, and has been less represented in cinema. There have been some few films, like all the versions of James Fenimore Cooper’s THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS, in 1911, 1920, 1932, 1936, 1965, 1968, 1971 –and my personal favorite Michael Mann’s film in 1997, with Daniel Day Lewis and Madeleine Stowe; ALLEGHENY UPRISING (1939) with John Wayne, Claire Trevor, and George Sanders; John Ford’s DRUMS ALONG THE MOHAWK (1939), with Henry Fonda, Claudette Colbert, and John Carradine; NORTHWEST PASSAGE (1940), directed by King Vidor, with Spencer Tracy, Robert Young, and Walter Brennan; and PLYMOUTH ADVENTURE (1952), directed by Clarence Brown, and starring Spencer Tracy, Gene Tierney, and Van Johnson. All of these films, with the exception of Mann’s MOHICAN, were standard Hollywood fare. There was really not much historical accuracy. They used many of their hackneyed recycled plots from countless old Westerns, and Hollywood called Colonial cinema “Easterns”.

And then Terrence Malick directed THE NEW WORLD, and suddenly Colonial America is a dream of death and love and flesh and cultures in transition. In his film we are treated to copious amounts of historical accuracy, blended smartly with Malick’s personal poetic and visual style. It is like we are immersed in an epic historical poem, vividly portrayed as imagery, and philosophically portrayed as oral history with divers story tellers sharing their perspective, weaved into a 60’s acid dream, a Kafka short story, in which events slow way down, and the pace of things becomes erratic and logical literary segues are dismissed as tedious and unimportant. We have our sense of smell stimulated; wet moss, maggoty stores, rusty chains, dried fish and venison, well worn leather, firewood drying out, wood smoke, brackish water, and wildflowers. We can hear the wind in those great trees above us, and we witness it dancing on the waters of rivers, bays, puddles, and ponds.

Malick chose to shoot the whole film in natural light, and often then the colors were muted, and tended to cast gray and gray-green into all the edges of the frame. This seemed to depress some viewers. I must admit that when a film is totally reprocessed in the lab, to heighten the color scheme, as in the excellent BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF (2001) –the viewer is treated to a cornucopia of color, much richer and brighter than our own retina registers in our real world –that MGM musical Technicolor feel to things. I’m not sure what Malick was reaching for, perhaps just a more natural tone and ambience. I read that he never strung a cable or cranked up a generator. I noticed with that somber gray flatness generally mantling everything much of the time, it made it that more exciting to notice the deep colors of a campfire, or sunsets or rises, or that golden hour just prior to and following the entrance or exit of Sol.

Mick La Salle wrote further,” Malick lavishes time, experiments with combinations of images, sounds, and voice-over –until unspoken connections and meanings are passed on to the viewer. THE NEW WORLD is a masterpiece. It is also a bit boring. It is dull, then dazzling, dull and then brilliant, dull and then awe inspiring. It lulls viewers into a pleasant trance, and then interrupts that trance at frequent intervals for some of the best filmmaking imaginable –some of it beyond imagination.”

Todd McCarthy of VARIETY wrote,” Malick went to great lengths to achieve authenticity on the production site. Production designer Jack Fisk, costume designer Jacqueline West, and all the others have fashioned a convincing version of indigenous American life 400 years ago that has a gratifying hand-tooled feel to it. When Fort James is first seen, its ugliness resembles a scar on the land.”

James Horner did the film score. He is an extremely accomplished musician, and many of his former scores were quite stirring. I think it unfortunate that Malick chose to glut the score with different strains of Wagner’s “Das Rhinegeld”, and he mandated Horner to repeat it as an incessant motif. It was generally effective used in that manner, but later in the film I longed to hear more original Horner, because I’m aware of what he is capable of creating.

Horner played piano from age 5. He studied at the Royal Academy of Music in London . Later he studied at USC, finally earning a PhD in Music Theory. He began scoring student films for AFI in the 1970’s. Since 1978 he has scored 156 films; quite an accomplishment.

Horner said,” I had no idea who Jerry Goldsmith or John Williams were before I scored Oliver Stone’s film, THE HAND (1981).”

Horner scored THE LADY IN RED in 1979, did a great job on WOLFEN (1981), STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (1982), 48 HOURS (1982, TESTMENT, THE DRESSER, and GORKY PARK in 1983, THE STONE BOY, and STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK in 1984, COCOON (1985), ALIENS (1986), getting an Oscar nomination for that one, then THE NAME OF THE ROSE (1986), Ron Howard’s WILLOW (1988), FIELD OF DREAMS (getting another Oscar nomination), GLORY (winning a Grammy), and IN COUNTRY all in 1989, the light-hearted score for THE ROCKETEER (1991), THUNDERHEART, and PATRIOT GAMES in 1992, SEARCHING FOR BOBBY FISCHER (1993), CLEAR & PRESENT DANGER, and LEGENDS OF THE FALL in 1994, then one of my favorites, Mel Gibson’s BRAVEHEART, and Ron Howard’s APOLLO 13 in 1995, SPITFIRE GRILL, and COURAGE UNDER FIRE in 1996, then James Cameron’s TITANIC, winning an Oscar for it, THE PERFECT STORM (2000), ENEMY AT THE GATES (2001), followed by Ron Howard’s A BEAUTIFUL MIND, WINDTALKERS, and THE FOUR FEATHERS all in 2002, the gritty score for Ron Howard’s THE MISSING, and THE HOUSE OF SAND AND FOG in 2003, TROY (2004). Coming up he has already scored ALL THE KING’S MEN (2006).

Many of his scores contain a wordless female solo voice, like Ennio Morricone often does. Often Horner will use a crashing piano to symbolize genius, like in SEARCHING FOR BOBBY FISCHER, and A BEAUTIFUL MIND. In addition to his many film projects, in the late 1980’s, he composed a classical concert piece, SPECTRAL SHIMMERS. It world premiered with the Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra.

The cinematography for THE NEW WORLD was done by the brilliant Mexican lenser, Emmanuel Lubezki. He was born in Mexico City in 1964, and his friends call him “Chivo”. He started his career as a still photographer, and then majored in film at Mexico National University . His cinematography is noted for its layered quality, emphasizing color, no matter what the scheme. It has been compared to the vibrant Technicolor work of the 1950’s. Terrence Malick made the artistic decision to shoot his film with all natural lighting, so there was no need for cables, electric spots, reflectors, or generators on the set. It must have been a real challenge for Lubezki, who was used to creating a much lusher look. In addition, Malick decided to shoot the entire film on 65mm stock. These days most regard 65mm as fiscally unfeasible. The last film to shoot on 65mm stock was Kenneth Branagh’s HAMLET (1994).

Lubezki has done camera work on 30 films since 1985. He has been the Director of Photography on his last 14 films. His first 8 films were all Mexican, and he started a relationship with directors Alfonso Arau & Alfonso Cuaron. He lensed LIKE WATER FOR CHOCOLATE (1991) and A WALK IN THE CLOUDS (1995) for Arau. He also photographed THE BIRD CAGE (1996), and Tim Burton’s SLEEPY HOLLOW (1999). He did the remake of A LITTLE PRINCESS (1995), the remake of GREAT EXPECTATIONS (1998)[he was nominated for an Oscar for it, and Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN (2001) all for Alfonso Cuaron. In addition he shot ALI (2001), THE ASSASSINATION OF RICHARD NIXON (2004), and LEMONY SNICKET’S: A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004).

Q’Orianka Kilcher played Pocahantas/Matoaka/Rebecca. Her first name is pronounced “Kor-ee-ank-ah”. She was born in Germany in 1990. She is half Native South American. Her first name translates to “golden eagle” in the Incan language of Quechua. Her father is a Quechua-Huachipaeri Indian from the jungles of Peru . Her mother is a Swiss native, who grew up in Alaska . Q’Orianka was raised her first nine years in Peru , and then she relocated to California . She speaks good German.

At some point, I gather, her folks split up, and her mother brought her and her two brothers to live in California . Some say that she used to live in a RV, a motor home, parked down by PERRY’S CAFÉ in Santa Monica . The manager of the Café was kind enough to let them have free parking and free electricity. Q’Orianka was a street performer, a talented singer and dancer, working the streets and beaches in Venice , CA . She landed a small role, at 10 years old, as a little choir member in Ron Howard’s THE GRINCH WHO STOLE CHRISTMAS (2000), and she did one episode of A SMALL WORLD (2002). She managed to get an agent, who tried to get her a part in Steven Spielberg’s TV mini-series INTO THE WEST last year. He called her “an Indian Julia Roberts”. She sang on THE ELLEN DEGENERES show, and has a well trained voice.

She auditioned for Terrence Malick at age 14, and he liked her but the studio executives and the insurance companies were unhappy. To cast an almost unknown teenager, with only one small film role to her credit, in the central and pivotal role in a multi-million dollar production seemed almost absurd to them.

Kilcher said,” I auditioned 20 times, and I didn’t meet Terry until the fifth audition. In order to show my confidence and range, I finally had to belt out a blues tune. Later Colin told me that as an actor, you shouldn’t take yourself too seriously.”

In preparation for her role in THE NEW WORLD, she had constant language practice –both Algonquin and British-inflected English. Originally all the Indians were to speak English, but at the last minute Malick decided to make it more authentic. The native language aspect of the film did bother me. Often Malick would have the Indians speaking Algonquian for several minutes without subtitles. Then almost as an inadvertent after-thought he would flash some subtitles –like just flashing the punch line and not letting us hear the joke. The effect was distracting bordering on maddening. In addition at some point most of the Indians began speaking in English, even in their own village. There was no indication that this was supposed to illustrate that they had learned English, or maybe Malick was just being disjointed and sloppy.

Kilcher said,” The natural lighting and the accuracy of the Algonquin camps made the cameras invisible. When Colin and I wander in the woods, Terry’s voice was our guiding light. “Be the wind, Q’Orianka, be the wind,” he would say. There was a lot of improvising and playfulness.”

Malick got real lucky when he cast his leading lady. Q’Orianka Kicher was brilliant as Pocahantas. She is one of those young girls that are wise beyond her 15 years. This allowed her to portray Pocahantas from age 14 up her death at 22. In those opening scenes her life was mostly play and curiosity. She scampered about like a young doe, slipping through the tall grass and playing tag with the shadows midst the dark forest. Malick had John Smith be a loner, who liked to wander off by himself and stare wistfully at the many wonders about him; the great trees, the river, the sky, and the Indians. Pocahantas would watch him on his solitary forays, and sometimes she would let him see her. She seemed to sense his maverick charisma.

After she “saved” Smith at the ritual, and they were allowed by her father, Chief Powhatan, to wander about, Q’Orianka began to shine. She made that transition from a curious young girl, virginal and pre-adolescent, to a curious young woman –learning English words, stroking Smith’s hair and beard –learning to enjoy the smell of him, and looking forward to his touch and companionship. Some feel that their relationship was only shown to be platonic, paralleling the real life 11 year old Matoaka and the 28 year old John Smith. But with a second viewing, listening more closely to the voice-over narrations, it became very clear to me that their relationship had become physical –that Smith had become her first love, the big one, the dangerous one.

So when Smith was released by Powhatan and he returned to Jamestown –and he soon was re-embroiled in the politics and personal problems within the Fort, he made no attempt to contact her. This disturbed her emotionally. Later, she organized that party to visit the Fort in the dead of winter, bringing fresh food and animal skins; all that was a thinly veiled cover for her emotional need to see Smith again. But she found him standing stunned and unresponsive, shackled by his duties and the death of many of his men, he was a man weighed down, nearly lethargic. Not until the next spring, when she was exiled from her tribe and living in the settlement, and while Smith was stripped of the Colonial Presidency and reduced to menial laborious tasks –only then could he begin to see her clearly enough to begin to rekindle their old relationship.

Malick then chose that point of reconnection to have Smith be summoned back to England by King James I. Why he decided to have one of his cronies lie to her, and tell her he was dead was never logical or clear. I suppose the real Smith realized he was never going to return, and he wanted the very young Matoaka to get over her crush. The reel Smith, who sat long hours staring pensively at the pigeon feather she had given him from her hair, might have felt that he was in no position to take her with him to England, and so it would be “best” for her to think of him as dead, and get over infatuation. Only it was not an infatuation for her, it was truly a love.

So two months into the crossing, when Pocahantas was given the lie, it devastated her. Kilcher broke our hearts with her very realistic grief. She sank into a deep depression, and flirted with madness –doing her own version of Hamlet’s Ophelia. She tramped about the settlement in her night clothes, soaked and caked in mud. She was lost and barely alive. Her first love, her heart was dead, and yet she continued to breathe. Somehow her spirit was resilient enough to survive, to endure. One day she bathed, put on clean clothes, smiled, and began her new life.

When John Rolfe (Christian Bale) began to court her, she was still a wounded animal. His kindness, politeness, and honesty finally won her favor. During my second viewing of the film this is when Kilcher got her hooks into my emotions. She acted brilliantly, with minimal dialogue. Her eyes told it all. She grew up, married, and had a son. She was beginning to be acquainted with happiness.

One day while walking in the settlement she overheard two women discussing John Smith. He was very much alive, and had suffered a failed expedition to the northern territories . When Rolfe approached his sweet wife, and kissed her gently on the neck, she pulled away from him gently, telling him quietly about her emotional plight. She now knew that John Smith was still alive, and she still felt “married” to him. So much so that she no longer could fully honor her second marriage to John Rolfe. Rolfe looked at her and said, barely audibly,” I don’t think you understand what marriage is.”

Enter the ficticious Captain Newport (Plummer), explaining that Pocahantas has been summoned by King James I for a royal audience. Newport captained the voyage back to Britain . His passengers included a dozen Algonquin Indians –and Rebecca with John Rolfe and son Thomas in tow. This gave the fine actor, Wes Studi, the chance to have a few more scenes and lines –which he used masterfully.

Boom –Malick’s four month voyage takes three minutes and suddenly they are walking down a gangplank, and for the Algonquins and Pocahantas, entering the “new” world of 17th century London . As Pocahantas wandered slowly along, all the citizens and street vendors seemed to know who she was. They curtsied and fawned on her in honor of her “native princess” status. How these common folk seemed to recognize her was never shown or explained.

The audience with King James I was handled expertly, albeit the actor Jonathan Pryce did his brief scene in mime, and the King never received a close-up. Kilcher was stunning in her velvet and suede outfit and smart green hat. She was mature, gracious, and beautiful –fully climatized to her corsets and high heeled shoes.

Malick shot England very masterfully, the great estates and their manicured grounds, ponds, palatial colonnades, the huge drawing rooms, the high arched ceilings, and the awesome cathedrals –all seen through her eyes, like Alice through the Looking Glass.

John Smith rode back into the plot. Colin Farrell stood meekly in the hedge-rowed courtyard, having been summoned. Matoaka approached meekly, but within a few moments she fully realized than Smith had been more infatuation than love, that her heart did not feel drawn to his awkwardness and soldier’s stance –finally she was over him. All this was read on the beautiful face of Q’Orianka Kilcher without external diatribe and having only minimal dialogue. We witness another marvelous transition for her character. Rebecca rushes to return to her husband, John, and greets him as a loving spouse. She had exorcised her cupid demons, and had slipped the emotional bonds that Smith had burdened her with for years.

But the real and actual tragedy then descended upon the plot. Rebecca began her voyage home, became ill, and died. Rolfe buried her in England . Most viewers complained that this occurrence dropped upon them much too quickly, and none too genteelly. In one moment she is ecstatic, chasing young Thomas about an English garden, and the very next moment she is in her death bed. She is not even given the opportunity to speak her final lines. Malick had Rolfe utter them in voice-over. This was one time I disagreed with the director. Now Malick cut 20 minutes out of the film after the first preview. Maybe the scene I craved was snipped, and will wait to be shown on the director’s cut DVD. I think that final scene of her tombstone in that silent English coastal cemetery would have had more emotional resonance if Malick had handled the death of his heroine more humanistically, more sensitively.

That stud-come-lately, that rowdy Irishman, Colin Farrell played Captain John Smith. With a minimum of spoken lines he had to convey courage, bravery, confidence, arrogance, ambition, and sexiness. He managed all that competently. He was as good in the part as Malick allowed him to be. We did not really discover or learn much back-story for any of the main characters. They passed through Malick’s movie thoroughly in the moment, hardly in the foreground, mostly as a picturization of the poetry read in the voice-overs. Farrell was allowed to use his own natural Irish brogue in the part, and sometimes especially the poetry readings were a bit hard to follow and fathom. Farrell’s Smith hid his true feelings from Matoaka. We were lulled, as she was, into assuming that he was an honorable, honest, and decent man. What was revealed was an ambitious soldier with political intrigue and adventure on the forefront of his mind.

Malick intentionally had underwritten Smith as a character, or edited out any of the scene segues that might have knit the action tighter together. How could he so easily lose track of all his men during his expedition and journey to find Powhatan? Wasn’t he an experienced explorer and soldier? How long was he held captive in the Algonquin village? As a Captain himself, what was the nature of his earlier insubordination? Was he ever in love, even just a little bit with Pocahantas, or was he just dallying with her until his release? As a seasoned and celebrated warrior, why was he so easily dispatched by the Indian braves in the swamp? Why would he even allow that fictitious twit, Captain Wingfield, to get the drop on him so effortlessly? These and so many other unanswered questions swirled around him like careening aimless maple leaves in the winds of Malick’s mumbled narratives –unanswered and unaddressed. I am not necessarily negative about Malick’s narrative form, just sometimes the content, or lack of it within the voice-overs.

Todd McCarthy wrote further,” John Smith remains grievously underwritten for a “leading” role. One hasn’t a clue as to what drives him, what he might have left behind in England , whether or not he is a trustworthy character with a good heart. Under the circumstances Farrell can’t do much more than interact in an agreeable spontaneous way with his leading lady. Thesps in lesser roles register hardly at all.”

Colin Farrell was born in Dublin in 1976. His Bio claims that he is 5’10” tall. He seems much shorter on the screen. I recall that Alan Ladd’s Bio listed him at 5’8” tall, and he was about 5’3” tall, shorter than Robert Blake. Farrell studied acting at the Gaiety School of Drama in Dublin . He dropped out before he graduated. He just went out and began finding work; an interesting combination of arrogance and luck.

He has had 23 film appearances since 1996. He is a very busy and successful actor these days. He actually has 5 films either to be produced, in post-production, or to be released in the near future. In 1996 he landed a good part on the BBC mini-series, BALLYKISSANGEL. Then director/actor Tim Roth picked him for a small role in THE WAR ZONE (1999). Kevin Spacey saw him in a play in Dublin , and suggested him for a small important role in ORDINARY DECENT CRIMINAL (2000), which led directly to him being cast as Pvt. Roland Bozz in Joel Schumacher’s film, TIGERLAND (2000). That was the first glimpse most of us had of him. For that role he won a Best Actor Award from the Boston Society of Film Critics. One could see and sense immediately the he was an actor on the fast track. I liked him as Jesse James in the lightweight Western, AMERICAN OUTLAWS (2001). [The buzz is that Brad Pitt is presently working on a Jesse James film.] Farrell waltzed through HART’S WAR (2002), staying out of Bruce Willis’ way, and hardly making a ripple. Next he scored a little higher as the antagonist straining to step out of Tom Cruise’s shadow in Spielberg’s MINORITY REPORT (2002). But then old pal Joel Schumacher gave him a great role, Stu Shepard in PHONE BOOTH (2002). Farrell was brilliant in it, but it was not a mega-hit. He muscled his way through THE RECRUIT (2003), with Al Pacino, and S.W.A.T. (2003), with Samuel L. Jackson. He was whacky and wonderfully bizarre as Bullseye, kicking Ben Affeck’s butt in DAREDEVIL (2003). No one saw his Dublin gangster flick, INTERMISSION (2003); his fourth film for that busy year.

It seems that 2004 was his year of gay pride, strutting his bare buttocks as Bobby in A HOME AT THE END OF THE WORLD [There was a scene that was to be included in that film where Bobby stared at his naked body in a stand-up mirror, and it included full frontal nudity. But, it was reported, that Farrell is so well endowed, that it became too distracting for a preview audience, and had to be cut for the premiere. So I guess young Farrell is packing quite a mule below the waist.] , and the ground-pounding world-shaker rump-ravager ALEXANDER for Oliver Stone. In both of these films he played a bisexual character. His fans could not help but notice that he seemed more comfortable kissing the other men in those movies than he did his leading ladies. This has spawned a lot of speculation as to his sexual preferences and identity. For a time, while filming ALEXANDER, he and Jared Leto became “buddies” and they hung out a lot together; and this fueled more rumors. An old rumor still circulates that Kevin Spacey is still in the closet, and that Farrell had to log some time on ye olde casting couch. Farrell’s brother is gay, so maybe he is just very observant and happens to be a brilliant actor. Actually I am a bit surprised and a little miffed that he didn’t show up as one of the ruffian rump rangers in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN (2005).

This year we are all eagerly awaiting his portrayal of Sonny Crockett in MIAMI VICE (2006), with Jamie Foxx as Tubbs –and ASK THE DUST (2006) with the luscious Salma Hayek. He is so good at doing an American accent; it is always strange to see him on an awards show or a talk show sporting a thick Irish brogue. His sister, Claudine Farrell, is his personal assistant. Maybe, since she certainly knows the “truth” about Colin, she will write a tell-all book.

On the plus side of his projected and suspected bisexuality, women just absolutely adore him [as they did Liberace and Richard Chamberlain, by the way]. In 2001 he was married for five months to Amelia Warner; a lovely British actress with 17 films to her credit, who played with Charlise Theron in AEON FLUX (2005). Presently he lives with a beautiful model named Kim Bordeuave, and she gave birth to their son in 2003. They lead a Bohemian existence, proud to be “unmarrieds”, joining the fraternity of a long list of successful Hollywood couples that chose not to embrace the institution of marriage; like Kurt Russell & Goldie Hawn, and Tim Robbins & Susan Sarandon.

When he filmed THE RECRUIT (2003), Farrell said that he was “in awe” of his co-star Al Pacino, but now they “hang out together”. Al Pacino has been quoted as saying,” Colin Farrell is the best actor of his generation.” Farrell sports two tattoos on his left forearm –the words “Carpe Diem” and a black cross (God knows what the symbolism is for the black cross).
His birthday is May 31st, and he shares it with Clint Eastwood.

Farrell said,” Being Irish is very much a part of me. I take it everywhere with me. Now I think working out in a gym for a part is so very boring. I’d rather be sitting in a pub with a few strangers talking shit. Acting allows me to feel things. It kind of buys me “human” experience. I don’t mean that acting is some higher cause –because it’s not –but it does give me a higher awareness emotionally. I certainly do not feel like a big star. I work my ass off. I’m never late. I feel neither the pressure nor the grandeur of my situation, you know.”

His salaries have continued to rise along with his “Star”.
HART’S WAR $ 2.5 million.
THE RECRUIT $ 5 million.
S.W.A.T. $ 8 million.
ALEXANDER $ 10 million.

Todd McCarthy of VARIETY wrote,” The skies surrounding Jamestown in THE NEW WORLD are almost invariably flat and colorless –a condition that unfortunately describes the storytelling and dramatis personae in Terrence Malick’s new picture. While the tale of the first contact between Englishmen and the “Naturals”, as the Brits felicitously refer to the Native Americans, might seem to play to the strengths of the meticulous and unhurried director, actually Malick’s exalted visuals and isolated metaphysical epphanies are ill-supported by the muddled, lurching narrative, resulting in a sprawling unfocused account of an epochal historical moment. The support of Malick’s loyalists notwithstanding, New Line Pictures will have trouble generating more than a modest commercial response.

The film’s impact begins and disappointingly ends with only tactile impressionistic effects. Minimal dialogue, cut down in favor of mostly unilluminating voice-over narration disappoints. Malick can’t seem to get into the heads of any of his characters, and fails to establish a connection for the audience. Explicit exposition may not be Malick’s thing, but the lack of moorings has the predictable effect of leaving most of the viewers adrift in what shapes up as the director’s most literal, albeit not overly didactic depiction of the despoiling of Eden .
Along with the dramatic shortcomings, the pic surprisingly disappoints somewhat on the visual side as well. To be sure, Malick and ace cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki have come up with some arresting original and mobile images. But the combination of the overwhelmingly dull skies with the decision to film entirely without electric lights serves to drain a lot of the color and interest from the frames; especially compared to what Malick achieved in DAYS OF HEAVEN and THE THIN RED LINE.”

Christian Bale played the true-hearted John Rolfe. Who really knows what the actual historical personage was like, but Bale plays him dripping with decency, goodness, common sense, and a willingness to sacrifice for those he loved –who was a former aristocrat, a great father, and a good husband. This was no mean feat, considering that Malick required him to convey these qualities without much actual dialogue. He was allowed a third berth on the voice-over narrative vehicle, and very soon we are treated to him reading Malick’s poetic musings in monotone vibes. Bale as Rolfe stood so quietly, so patiently in the shadows, in the background –that during the first viewing of this film one barely noticed him. But during the second viewing, I watched him more carefully, [I would strongly recommend that a person watch this movie twice, so that they may more fully appreciate the poetry within the voice-over narratives, the subtle and hidden emotions beneath the surface, and the symbolism –like Pocahantas and Smith fronting for Adam and Eve, soon to be expelled from Eden] and within Bale’s calmness, his stillness and reserve –he was acting his butt off. I really like Bale as an actor. He almost always transcends his scripts and delivers a fine performance.

So when Rolfe married Rebecca, I began to appreciate his joy, and it was pleasant to watch those joys get transferred into the routine of his life and his farm. When Rebecca rebuked him because she had discovered that John Smith was still alive, I could feel his silent sorrow. While they were in England , and he allowed her to choose between John Smith and himself –I was pleased to hear her say,” John, my husband, I have found you to be the man I thought you were. Let’s go home.”

Christian Bale was born in Wales in 1974. He was raised in England , Portugal , and California . At age 9 his first role was in a British TV commercial for Pac-Man. He had auditioned with 4,000 other children for the lead role in Steven Spielberg’s EMPIRE OF THE SUN (1987). He received so much press and attention for that role that it really intervened in his “regular” life, and it really bothered him. He had to take two years off just to be a kid again before he returned to the screen as Falstaff’s son in HENRY V (1989), with Kenneth Branagh directing and starring in it, and with Robbie Coltrane as Falstaff.

Enthusiastic again, he trained for 10 weeks to be able to dance in NEWSIES (1992), and SWING KIDS (1993). He has an uncanny ear for accents. He was hand-picked by Winona Ryder for his striking part in her LITTLE WOMEN (1994). Interestingly, he did some voice work on Disney’s animated feature, POCAHANTAS (1995). He was turned down for the role of Robin in BATMAN FOREVER (1995), with Val Kilmer. How ironic that presently he got to play the big guy in BATMAN BEGINS (2005). He is the 7th actor to play Batman, also the youngest, and the only non-American. His natural speech is with a Welsh-British accent, but even for interviews he sounds flawlessly mid-American –unlike Colin Farrell who during his various interviews lets his thick brogue flow over his tongue like Irish whiskey. Bale was cast in AMERICAN PSYCHO (2000), only to lose the role to Leonardo De Caprio, and then when Leo the Great dropped out, Bale was back in the picture again. The sadness about box office appeal versus actual talent is that De Crapio is one fifth the actor that Christian Bale is. [Gosh, am I letting my bias slip in?] Like Farrell, Bale does not like to work out in a gym. He will do it for a specific part, but he won’t like doing it. He dropped 63 pounds from his already buff frame to play the emaciated insomniac Trevor in THE MACHINEST (2004). He is nearly unrecognizable at that weight, more so than the shock of seeing a very thin and emaciated Dennis Quaid playing Doc Holliday in WYATT EARP (2004) for director Kevin Costner; and more so than seeing a super thin Tom Hanks in PHILADELPHIA (1993).

Bale’s had 35 film appearances since 1986. In 1999 he was part of the ensemble cast in A MIDSUMMER NIGHT’S DREAM, and then he played our savior in MARY, MOTHER OF JESUS (1999). He was more than outstanding as the slick vicious Patrick Bateman in AMERICAN PSYCHO (2000). He had a very good Greek accent when playing Mandras in CAPTAIN CORELLI’S MANDOLIN (2001), outshining the stupefied star Nicolas Cage who sported the worst high school attempt at an Italian accent ever put on film. He nearly outmuscled the formidable Matthew McConaughey in REIGN OF FIRE (2002), and felt he did some fine voice work in Miyazaki ’s HOWL’S MOVING CASTLE (2004). He is slated for the BATMAN sequel in 2008.

Christopher Plummer played Captain Christopher Newport so convincingly that he had me turning the pages of history looking for his fictitious character. His voice of reason, his quiet authority, combined with that British tenacity, strengthened his brief scenes. Plummer was born in 1929, and he wears his 77 years comfortably. His first name is actually “Arthur”. I don’t know if his close friends call him Art or not, like Brando was “Bud”, and Rock Hudson was “ Roy ”. He is considered the premiere Canadian/American actor who performs Shakespeare; though in my view Richard Chamberlain could give him a run for his money. In his 46 years career, Plummer has never won an Oscar; an honor he shares with Richard Burton, and many others. He is the great grandson of Canadian Prime Minister Sir John Abbott.

Plummer has won 2 Emmys, and has been nominated 6 times. On stage in theatrical productions he has won 2 Tony Awards for 6 nominations; one for his CYRANO (1974), and one for BARRYMORE (1997). He was supposed to have been a great Iago in OTHELLO as well.

He was married to actress Tammy Grimes from 1956-60, and their daughter, Amanda Plummer, has been a successful actress for decades. He grew up in Quebec . He despises his “insipid” performance in THE SOUND OF MUSIC –he calls it the SOUND OF MUCUS. He started out in Canada doing stage work with his friend, William Shatner [who is now, unbelievably, 75 years old, has reinvented himself, and is going strong on television’s BOSTON LEGAL].

Plummer has had 153 film appearances since 1953. During the golden age of television, he did a number of those live performances, so revered in retrospect, on STUDIO ONE, KRAFT TELEVISION THEATRE, G.E. THEATRE, and THE ALCOA HOUR. His movie debut was in WIND ACROSS THE EVERGLADES (1958). On TV he played Christian in CYRANO in 1955, and then in 1962 on a Hallmark Hall of Fame broadcast he was able to do a fine rendition of Cyrano himself. He completed THE SOUND OF MUSIC in 1965, and he was in OEDIPUS, THE KING (1967), BATTLE OF BRITAIN (1969), THE ROYAL HUNT OF THE SUN (1969), with Robert Shaw, in which Plummer played the Inca chieftain, Atahualpa, and showed us the other side of the picture, illustrating the natives struggles with Francisco Pizarro; played grandiose Wellington in WATERLOO (1970), with the weeping flag-chewing Rod Steiger as Napoleon; played Kipling for John Huston in THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING (1975), with Sean Connery and Michael Caine, in a project that decades before had been slated for Clark Gable and Spencer Tracy; played Herod in the award-winning Franco Zefferilli mini-series, JESUS OF NAZARETH (1977), THE SILENT PARTNER (1978), menacing Elliott Gould; was a stout grand Sherlock Holmes in the fine MURDER BY DECREE (1979), with James Mason as a droll Watson; back to television for THE THORN BIRDS (1983), with Richard Chamberlain, then STAR TREK VI; The Undiscovered Country (1991), with his old pal, William Shatner; Spike Lee’s MALCOLM X (1992), with the dynamic Denzel Washington; the sly detective in DOLORES CLAIBOURNE (1995), with Kathy Bates, TWELVE MONKEYS (1996), with Bruce Willis; then the television remake of ON GOLDEN POND (2001), with Julie Andrews, directed by the play’s writer, Ernest Thompson; NICHOLAS NICKLEBY (2004); played a tanned pedophilic Aristotle in Oliver Stone’s fey epic ALEXANDER (2004), and the heavy old dude, Dean Whiting in SYRIANA (2005).

Another stalwart Canadian, August Schellenberg, played the great chief Powhatan. His is Mohawk and Swiss, and presently lives in Texas . He has a well trained singing voice, and he adores doing musical theatre. He has had 76 film appearances since 1970. He was born in Quebec , like Plummer, and he spoke French in his first 5 films. He was in BEAR ISLAND (1979), with Donald Sutherland, DEATH HUNT (1981), with Lee Marvin and Charles Bronson, RUNNING BRAVE (1983), as father to Robby Benson; played Chomina in the minor classic, BLACK ROBE (1991), was in all three FREE WILLY’s from 1993, with Michael Madsen, IRON WILL (1994), LAKOTA WOMAN (1994), with his present co-star, Irene Bedard, TECUMSEH; The Last Warrior (1995), CRAZY HORSE (1996), and the TV remake of HIGH NOON (2000), with Tom Skerritt.

The very lovely Irene Bedard played Pocahatas’ mother, speaking only Algonquin in THE NEW WORLD. She is half Eskimo and half Cree. She has appeared in 35 films since 1994, starting with LAKOTA WOMAN (1994), and QUANTO; A Warrior’s Tale (1994). She, interestingly, did the lead part voice work in Disney’s POCAHANTAS (1995), with Mel Gibson reading John Smith. She, too, was in CRAZY HORSE (1996), NAVAJO BLUES (1996), TRUE WOMEN (1997), the fine Indie, SMOKE SIGNALS (1998), and Spielberg’s INTO THE WEST (2005).

Terrence Malick filled the cast with several other veteran actors, who were given very little to do. David Thewlis played the jealous twit, Captain Edward Wingfield. He was only expected to scowl, look petulant, and be jealous of all things John Smith –and he conveyed these things well until he was quickly dispatched by one of his own men. He certainly had a better part, and made a stronger impression as a Crusader in KINGDOM OF HEAVEN (2005). The exceptional Native American actor, Wes Studi had a couple of small scenes as the warrior, Opechcanough. One of my favorite Indian performers, he is Cherokee. I hoped that his part in the NEW WORLD would have more substance, or more impact. He was able to convey that “stranger in a strange land” milieu while wandering around London , but he was never allowed to make much of an impression in the Colonial native scenes. After all, this is the actor who leaped off the screen as the Toughest Pawnee in DANCES WITH WOLVES (1990), was incredibly stunning as the surly lethal Magua in Michael Mann’s THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS (1992), played the brave tortured gallant lead in GERONIMO; AN AMERICAN LEGEND (1993), and more recently was excellent in Robert Redford’s PBS productions of two Joe Leaphorn stories, SKINWALKERS (2002), and COYOTE WAITS (2003).

Jonathan Pryce played King James I, but only when the viewer strained their eyes to look under the beard and make-up could we fleetingly recognize the actor who has been brilliant in so many films. I loved his role of Sam in Terry Gilliam’s BRAZIL (1985), and his role in CARRINGTON (1995), with Emma Thompson. John Savage as “Savage”, and Roger Rees as the Virginia Company Representative, both slipped by me, even after seeing the film twice. One reviewer mentioned that John Savage played a demented madman. Perhaps that scene was in the snipped out 20 minutes.

Jeffrey M. Anderson of the SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER wrote,” Terrence Malick’s fourth film rolls across the screen with undulating waves of tall grass and murky water that laps right up to the edge of your seat. THE NEW WORLD can be maddeningly opaque, as when Malick uses his beloved murmuring voice-over poetry readings. But considering the alternative –Hollywood dialogue written to sound as if it were spoken in the 17th century –Malick’s technique proves more than effective; although a second viewing clears things up considerably. To be sure, THE NEW WORLD is the only film in this safe bland movie environment that gets anywhere close to grandiose or daring or foolish. It, therefore, is a welcome act of artistic lunacy, and truly a messy masterpiece that deserves a life well beyond the current awards season.”

I must admit, sometimes Malick’s films take on a History Channel feel to them, where the bulk of information is shared in voice-over narration, and the story is portrayed by no-name actors and reinactors. I like well written smart dialogue written for historical drama, and I would be remiss if I did not admit that with Malick I miss it. Critic Anderson is hollering down the wrong Hollywood hole with his assumptions about such dialogue. Consider Edward Anhalt’s scripts for THE PRIDE AND THE PASSION (1957), and the powerful BECKET (1964), and even JEREMIAH JOHNSON (1972), where we all learned “to watch our top knot”; or the sparkling brilliance of Robert Bolt’s dialogue for LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962), DOCTOR ZHIVAGO (1964), and one of my historical favorites, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS (1966), letting Paul Scofield thrill us and Robert Shaw outrage us; RYAN’S DAUGHTER (1970), and the third remake of THE BOUNTY (1984), with Anthony Hopkins as Blye and a very young looking Mel Gibson as Fletcher Christian. How about Arthur Miller’s several versions of THE CRUCIBLE in 1959, 1967, 1980, & 1996 –or the brilliant collaboration of John L. Bulderston, Christopher Crowe, and Michael Mann for the remarkable THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS (1992), or let’s not forget Dalton Trumbo’s script for Kubrick’s SPARTACUS (1960). I do realize that somehow for Terrence Malick, mere dialogue may be pedestrian or tedious, but I would submit that THE NEW WORLD would have been much more engaging if the dialogue had more substance, and had occurred more often.

It is not a surprise that Malick’s fourth film was not considered a hit by all the critics. The box office numbers are down as well, putting it squarely into the Malick lexicon of mostly critical rave and poor earnings, as with his first three films. He does not seem to make movies for Joe Public. I guess that is part of his mystique, his legend and legacy –so far.

Stephanie Zacherek of SALON.COM wrote,” Colin Farrell and Christian Bale are totally wasted in the superstatic triangular love story. Terrence Malick may not care much for people, but he never met a tree he didn’t like. THE NEW WORLD is a story told in a pantomime of camera angles, in extended long shots of geese flying in formations of tiny dots, in lingering visual meditations on the way the sun has a tendency to twinkle through leafy tree branches.
Occasionally, in this inspired-by-history tale set in the early 17th century Virginia, a human being drifts by, often with uncombed hair and covered in mud and boils. Jamestown in 1607 was not a pretty place. The more fortunate actors are somewhat better groomed, and get to make cogent observations in voice-over (“It was a dream. Now I am awake.”) —many of which are accompanied with lovingly composed camera shots of sunlight dancing on the water ripples, or a skinny dog rooting around in the dirt. This film is a story told largely in pictures –and sometimes they even move.
Malick is often accused of being a genius, and his reputation hovers around him like a noxious cloud. In the galaxy of esteemed filmmakers, he is one gassy planet. Even people who generally don’t like his work –what little there is of it –will still defend his first film, BADLANDS , as a “good” movie –perhaps mistaking Malick’s youthful posturing for an actual point of view.”

I suppose that at some point we all need to weigh in on how we feel about Terrence Malick’s quadrille of films. Is he a poet, a maverick genius, a dark member of a secret intelligentsia that only writes for themselves and a few others –or are his critics and detractors correct when he is labeled as an undisciplined, arrogant, egotistical, out-of-touch pseudo-artist that consistently disregards the use of dialogue in all his films simply because he gravely lacks the talent to write decent dialogue? Perhaps that helps to explain why his treatment for DIRTY HARRY (1971) was never used, or why his finished script for GREAT BALLS OF FIRE (1989) was discarded? Is that why the extant dialogue in both DRIVE, HE SAID (1971), and POCKET MONEY (1972) was oddly non-connective and disjointed, and were peopled with shallow characters that were mostly underdeveloped?

Backing off being the Devil’s advocate for a moment, I have listened closely to his narration voice-overs in all four of his films, and I did find them to be mostly lyrical, poignant, and poetic –but granted sometimes it is a strain on the viewer to connect them to the action of the film. It is like they become asides, or hovering commentary that eclipse the structure of the story, and dwell solely in the mental cathedrals of symbolism within Malick’s fevered mind.

I personally believe that Terrence Malick is a brave and obstinate artist and philosopher, who as a filmmaker is much more the director than writer. Like Hitchcock, he tends to under use or under values his actors, and like Peter Greenaway, he tends to use his camera lens like a camel hair brush, creating enormous iconoriffic detailed tableaus one moment, like the best of Ridley Scott, and stunning –yet miniscule –natural bits of forest, field, and water the next. I am challenged by his films, and I am always eager to view them. His director’s vision, his imagery, his unique stamp of style on every frame –is beyond convention –existing on some other artistic plane. Oddly, by turning down the chance to direct THE ELEPHANT MAN (1988), the task fell on director David Lynch, who is quite capable of creating bizarre original cinema, and yet was willing to direct that film in an unobtrusive straight forward manner. The same could be said for his minor masterpiece, THE STRAIGHT STORY (1999), with the dying Richard Farnsworth and the enigmatic Harry Dean Stanton. Somehow I doubt that Terrence Malick could, or would choose to shift his vision so radically, and just set his esoteric poetry aside, and disregard his immense attraction to all things natural –and actually let someone else write the script. And hell, perhaps he shouldn’t. His films are completely his –even what is left post-editing –and they will never be confused with someone else’s.

Twenty-five years ago I gave some thought to the notions of “discovery” and “freedom”. I considered how society views Nature, and despoils it –how bored our youth have become, my own daughters included, with shimmering vistas of mountain, forest, field, and lake –how for the owners of the New Future, technology has nearly replaced the natural thrill of a sunset, or a storm, or huge waves on a white beach, or a crackling campfire launching embers into a cold night sky choked with stars –and I wrote some free verse to explore this conundrum.

OUTSIDE

Yesterday
I did a foolish thing;
I ventured Outside,
And actually stood on the edge of the infinite,
Beyond the massive Sea of Wrecked Cars ,
Many of which I could not recognize,
Their types and models
Not even in the Great Books.
It was a glittering web of broken chrome chunks
Hanging limply
From high towers of rusted steel.

Bravely,
Foolishly,
I wandered amongst the torn titans,
And to my amazement,
There midst the mangled machines,
Completely hidden from the watcher drones,
I found
A forgotten field;
A dewy glen teeming
With parasites –
And it sickened me.

A noisy stream slashed through
Its clovered center;
Strange colorless water,
Bubbling and rushing over real rocks,
With cold things squirming in it.
I straddled it like a Colossus
And pissed.
It clouded up wonderfully
And became almost tolerable.

Standing
In one quiet corner of the hidden field,
I discovered the strangest thing of all;
A kind of scarecrow,
A man of straw,
Lashed to a stump;
Wearing something non-synthetic,
Odd-looking apparel
That had partially disintegrated.

From behind his thick shoulders of straw,
From within the stump’s blackened char,
A young fruit tree
Had sprouted apples,
I think,
Had grown up all around him;
And now it held him tenderly
Upright;
Their stamian lusty caresses
Producing edible prodigy.
Plump yellow apples hung
From her hair.

Angry,
I bit into one
Of their children
And spit it into the wind.
I crushed the rest
Beneath my steel boots;
Their soft little bodies
Crunched and cracked,
And my soles glistened
With their golden pink pulp.

Suddenly,
As we had been warned,
The actual Sun
Began to flee from the sky;
And you certainly know
How I hate and fear
Any kind of darkness.
So really, I had little choice.
I ripped out the straw man’s chest
And I burned him
All the way back to the South Gates.

Later,
During my deprogramming,
I was told
Never to venture forth again, and
I never shall.
Outside
Is a foul and disgusting place;
Full of shadows and sadness.

Now,
More than ever,
I really do not even begin
To understand
Why so many men
Have fought and died
Just for the right to go there.

Glenn A. Buttkus 1978

When I watched THE NEW WORLD a second time, I found I was much more able to engage emotionally with the characters, especially with Q’Orianka Kilcher’s fantastic performance. She was perfect casting by director Malick. Without her the film would have degenerated into a muddled pastiche of murmured almost-poetry, thrust sadly over overblown disconnected tableaus of Nature. I believe that she became the heartbeat, the living pulse of the picture. With some other young actress, the film would have been still born and inanimate –dead on arrival, more pungent than perfumed. One can hope that the promise she showed in this venture will deepen, and that she has a lot more in store for us in the future. The second viewing helped me to enjoy the subtlety of Christian Bale’s performance, the love in his eyes, the calmness and patience that his character so very quietly conveyed. Artistically, Terrence Malick rates 4 stars for this sterling effort, but I fear that commercially he will be lucky to garner 2½ stars. I have already found myself defending the film to many of my peers and family. How slyly Malick has seduced me, and put me squarely and artistically in his camp; albeit elitist and numbering few.

Glenn Buttkus 2006