criterionforum.org

Turning in a cut doesn't mean a thing.

What Malick wants, he gets... he is still in the editing room on The Tree of Life.

That's not a guess, it is a fact.

It won't be in Cannes, not a guess, a fact.

May is now up in the air.

Marketing and sales cannot do a thing because, besides the synopses Malick wrote up for them, it isn't enough for them to do their job.
Distributors are mixed finding one or both cuts they saw to be either:
a. too "abstruse" and not fit for wide distribution
b. can't make heads or tails of the film
c. the best film they have ever seen

However, all agree that Tree is visually arresting, powerful and spellbinding.

I do hope I am wrong on everything, I want to see it as bad as you all do. However, my coping mechanism is just to do other things and not to think about it unless I post an update in the blog.

The fun part will be watching Brad Pitt trying to explain the film come press junket time.

Also bear in mind that Malick edited Thin Red Line up till a week prior to the premiere I believe.
The fact he's doing something similar again should be considered a good thing!

paulmaherjr wrote:May is now up in the air, etc.

So what, I watched Black Swan for nothing?

"He has been working on this project since the ’70s. And we actually have negatives that he shot in the 1970s that we incorporated into the movie."

EDIT: The article disappeared a few hours after being posted yesterday. My apologies.

Guido wrote:"He has been working on this project since the ’70s. And we actually have negatives that he shot in the 1970s that we incorporated into the movie."

EDIT: The article disappeared a few hours after being posted yesterday. My apologies.

Google cached, thanks to Paul Maher, HERE.

Questioned on how a unified look was achieved, Glass remarks that was not something that Malick initially desired. “He preferred the idea of a patchwork quilt. He might shoot something on a Super 8 camera, then an IMAX camera, then on a digital camera, but in space you might have something based on magnetic resonance imaging or infrared photography from the Hubble. Each would have its own character, and that in his mind would lend to authenticity because you weren’t trying to smooth it, shape it and make it conform.”

The article is SOLID F*CKING GOLD, by the way. Two months!

Let's just hope Harold Camping is WRONG

Oh my:

A media outlet expressed a desire in buying the feature on March 8th via an email; I forwarded the request to the studio and waited to see how the negotiations would develop. Half an hour later my contact at the Hollywood studio called to inform me that Little White Lies had posted The Tree of Life: Vision Quest; the website had put my article online without my knowledge and permission and in complete disregard of all those associated with the film. My emails and phone call for Vision Quest to be pulled IMMEDIATELY went unanswered. It was not until the studio intervened that Little White Lies finally removed the piece, having allowed other sites time to pick it up.

Seems that it is confirmed for Cannes, but it's not known if it's going to be in competition.

paulmaherjr wrote:It won't be in Cannes, not a guess, a fact.

Now can paulmaherjr stop scaremongering and pretending to know more than he does?

Wow, that is gorgeous.

Wow, they sure know who they're selling this film to. That's very beautiful. Also: dinosaur sighting! Two stills below the title...

EDIT: Is that poster the first reveal of TwoWaysThroughLife.com, or has that web site been around for a while?

According to Fox Searchlight's Twitter, they just launched that site today. They're also promising "Daily amazing images from the movie!" The poster is indeed beautiful.

Apologies for lowering the tone, but no other words will do...
OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG

JamesF wrote:Apologies for lowering the tone, but no other words will do...
OMG OMG OMG

'Twas a mistake:

Fox Searchlight informs me that the story is not true. Now Brit reviews of the film will NOT spread before the assembled critics see it in the Palais.

Ah, fudgsicle. Serves me right for listening to Empire!

Goddamn if this movie hasn't turned me into a fanboy.

Bracing myself for Brad Pitt's Jar Jar voice.

So, um, it might still premiere in the UK after all:

Empire Online wrote:Update: Following something of a kerfuffle on some American websites overnight, we have double-checked with Icon that this remains the release date, and it is definitely May 4.

Methinks there's going to be a lot of angry negotiations between Fox, Summit and Icon before this date quietly slips away.

There seems to be a lot of excitement building for this film through the media and the internet, and yet I can't help but wonder, is the general public even going to go see the film? Obviously I will, as will a large chunk of the people reading this, but will this make any kind of dent in the public consciousness?

Does it matter? Probably not ... I just wonder if the hype (and the eventual reaction) is going to mean anything to non film connoisseurs. I mean, it's not like a lot of people went to see The New World (only about $12 million, domestically).

That being said, 59 more sleeps.

Pitt and Penn are obviously bigger draws than Colin Farrell. Having said that, anyone expecting Tree of Life to be a blockbuster is a bit of an optimist. Hopefully it will at least do the sort of medium-level business that The Thin Red Line did.

willoneill wrote:There seems to be a lot of excitement building for this film through the media and the internet, and yet I can't help but wonder, is the general public even going to go see the film? Obviously I will, as will a large chunk of the people reading this, but will this make any kind of dent in the public consciousness?

Does it matter? Probably not ... I just wonder if the hype (and the eventual reaction) is going to mean anything to non film connoisseurs. I mean, it's not like a lot of people went to see The New World (only about $12 million, domestically).

That being said, 59 more sleeps.

I was wondering this as well. On paper, The New World was destined to be a huuuuuge blockbuster, but somehow it flopped disastrously (wasn't its release date rescheduling part of the problem? Or was it the constant recutting of it?). I personally adored The New World and find it to be the most accessible to the public of all of Malick's films (though not necessarily his best work imo), so if it that didn't put a dent in the box office, what of Malick's will? I mean, I know Pitt and Penn are bigger draws than Colin Farrell, but the subject matter of The New World is a lot juicier to the mainstream than The Tree of Life's imo.

I expect that the film will end up enjoying a slight crossover appeal with the AICN types, and consequently a backlash will set in among cinephiles and Malick admirers.

It really depends on what the film is like. Anything other than a colossal failure or triumphant achievement would be disappointing. If it's either of these things, it will become one of the most notable cult classics of the 21st Century.

Highway 61 wrote:I expect that the film will end up enjoying a slight crossover appeal with the AICN types, and consequently a backlash will set in among cinephiles and Malick admirers.

I'm expecting more of a backlash from the AICN types when they realize just what kind of film this really is.