criterionforum.org

It looks like we've finally reached peak Malick.

How is that different from the first trailer?

720p?

Brad Pitt says "the IMAX experience" instead of "an IMAX experience" at the end, so it matches the subtitle. Other than that...?

My bad.

I don't think anyone was criticizing you for posting the link and I'm sorry if it came off that way. Yesterday it did indeed say "Trailer Version II" in its title (it now says "Australian IMAX Trailer") so I think Manny Karp and I were genuinely just confused as to why it would be labeled a second trailer when it appeared to be exactly the same.

New description of the film includes an odd wording:

It is a collage film (like Koyaanisqatsi by Godfrey Reggio) that intends to illustrate the birth and death of an undiscovered universe.

Could be a simple language/interpretation issue, or maybe not.

Cate Blanchett's version now has a trailer.

I think this could be great.

I was never a huge fan of Mallick's feature films (except for the first ten minutes of Tree of Life, goodness gracious). Someone called him the last optimist, but to me he seems more like some sort of "hippie" (sorry), mostly floating around, philosophizing.

But that floating could really work in a documentary like this. I just hope there isn't too much CGI.

Ennio Morricone is doing the score for this, to top it all off.

Sadly, I don't think that's happening anymore. His name hasn't appeared in the credits on any of the trailers or posters released so far, nor is he mentioned in the official press notes, as reported by the Film Stage:

Lastly, although it was reported that Ennio Morricone would be re-teaming with Malick to score the project, his name isn’t found in any credits at this stage. Instead, it looks as if the director worked with sound designer Joel Dougherty to “weave natural and speculative sounds into the film’s universe” and music supervisor Lauren Mikus to “choose a variety of instrumental pieces that evoke the swirling, swelling, creative energy of life at both ends of the magnitude scale.”

Reviews of the long cut are coming in. It seems Blanchett stutters her narration (what there is of it) in an imitation of a cosmically irritated Katherine Hepburn, making a nice change from Malick's usual reverent approach. Let's hope Brad Pitt delivers his lines à la Jeffrey Goines for the IMAX version.

Saw this in IMAX 70mm at the California Science Center in Los Angeles.

It's really getting tough to defend Malick against charges of repeating himself, since this is basically just the "Birth of the Universe" segment from Tree of Life writ large and masquerading as an IMAX nature doc (to the dismay of how many unsuspecting third-graders?). It lacks the context of the ToL sequence, which is what made that so effective, bold, and thought-provoking--it was a wholly unexpected detour in a personal narrative that enriched and was enriched by its more "conventional" surroundings. As a purely visual film, this is astounding stuff, but I think it would probably benefit from having the voiceover stripped out. It's used sparingly, and in a slightly less abstract way than has become the norm with Malick, but it just feels like it's getting in the way of the images most of the time.

The film contains implicit echoes and rhymes of shapes, designs, and shared moments across time that are powerful because of the subtlety with which they're rendered; it's not in-your-face, it's there for you to discover. All told, Voyage of Time probably has a handful of the most astonishing nature images I've ever seen

Spoiler

(POV hatching from an egg, the school of fish vs. the flock of seagulls, the seal feeding...)

and is a true sight to behold in IMAX. But I have a hard time believing the feature-length version will really add much of consequence, unfortunately. The main question I'm left with is, where does Malick go from here? How can he expand and deepen this style to yield more rewarding results? Is he even interested in doing so anymore? Also, what the hell does "Child of the Good" even mean?!

To those who have seen it, to what degree would you say it feels like Malick doing a Qatsi Trilogy-style film about this subject matter? By that, I guess I mean in terms of making a documentation of humanity, earth - and in this case also a lot of natural history, cosmos, etc - with a focus on communicating a mystical, somewhat psychedelic experience via impressive visuals and editing. Does the movie feel at all similar to those films in that regard, because TBH a movie that attempts to show the big bang, images of the cosmos, early life on earth, modern life and future life on earth etc via that cinematography and editing style (which to my eye seems to have influenced Malick's later work, especially in terms of storytelling) is something I always wanted to see since watching the Stravinsky segment of Fantasia as a kid and Baraka as a teen, and as an adult I always figured either Ron Fricke, or Malick were the best living directors to make it. Based on my description/hopes, how close to the mark is VOT based on your impressions? I'm hyped to see this but not sure I wanna get too hyped just yet, because I don't care all that much for most of his post-TOL stuff lol. Then again, the cosmos sequence (even though Iwasn't in tune with the narration) was one of my favorite things I've seen in any recent movie, so, hmmmm....

gfxtwin wrote:Then again, the cosmos sequence (even though Iwasn't in tune with the narration) was one of my favorite things I've seen in any recent movie, so, hmmmm....

If the cosmic segments of Tree of Life did it for you, then you should definitely see VOT. It's not as dynamic as the Qatsi trilogy, but otherwise I would say it fits what you're looking for. And if any film this year demands the big screen, it's this one.

Can't wait to see the feature-length version. Anyone know how many theaters might be screening it?

Get ready folks - there's a third version of Voyage of Time coming in to theaters in... four days?

‘Ultra Widescreen’ Version of Terrence Malick’s ‘Voyage of Time’ Set for Release

The latest cut is without any voiceover, and is in the extreme 3.6:1 aspect ratio. It's made up of shots that worked best in the new aspect ratio, so it sounds like different editing than either of the two previous cuts.

There aren't even screening venues listed yet, just that there will be 21 total. For the life of me, I don't know what the hell they're doing with the last few Malick releases. It's like they go out of their way to bury these films and make sure they'll never make their budgets back.

And then just keep letting him make films despite that

This was playing for six weeks in town and I still didn't bother seeing it and I think Knight of Cups is one of the best of the year so I really don't know but I guess I'm more interested the more strange this gets

Oedipax wrote:There aren't even screening venues listed yet, just that there will be 21 total. For the life of me, I don't know what the hell they're doing with the last few Malick releases. It's like they go out of their way to bury these films and make sure they'll never make their budgets back.

Wouldn't releasing it in three different versions only increase the odds that it could be seen (each release getting a separate rollout in separate venues), thereby increasing its odds of financial success?

Regardless, I mentioned in my thoughts above that I felt the film would be better without voiceover so color me intrigued. Going from IMAX's 4:3 ratio to an unheard-of 3.6:1 ratio is certainly a bold choice...

Ribs wrote:This was playing for six weeks in town and I still didn't bother seeing it and I think Knight of Cups is one of the best of the year

It never played anywhere close to Atlanta (as far as I know... I could have easily missed it, seeing as there's been zero marketing) but I feel similar. I'll gladly go see whatever version of this I actually can, but I'm a lot more excited to see Weightless. Knight of Cups is my film of the year and this project has always felt like a retread of the least interesting section of Tree of Life. That having been said, the new 3.6:1 sans-VO cut sounds like the most promising version yet.

Oedipax wrote:Knight of Cups is my film of the year and this project has always felt like a retread of the least interesting section of Tree of Life. That having been said, the new 3.6:1 sans-VO cut sounds like the most promising version yet.

Knight remains my favorite of the year as well but for me this always sounded like an expansion upon the most interesting section of Tree. I suspect I'll prefer the Blanchett narrated version ultimately though but it will be nice to have a version free of the VO as that does open it up more to our own responses.

If this new aspect ratio just crops from the top and bottom from the previous ratios, I am not sure what is the use.
Unless it expands on the sides..