See it, if only for Lubezki's fantastic cinematography and the wonderful costumes/locations/sounds. The story is also textured and compelling.

This, Batman Begins, and Hustle and Flow were the only new American movies that truly impressed me in 2005.

its a mallick film, what did you expect? something flawed?

I love all his work...well the few things he did

in my opinon the story was horrible! but that is me, well i dont think the story was horrible I just think the way it was presented was boring. I will say though the film looked nice but thats about all I can say about this film.

I absolutely loved the film, which was not something I expected. From the trailers that were showing the year before, I anticipated something horrible.

Probably the first time I could say "minimalist" and "unpretentious" in the same sentence. Yes, it's my first Malick film, and reading on his other ones, I notice they have that same lack of emotional manipulation that tends to frustrate most critics. Quite frankly, that's what I loved about "The New World"-

We get another film about Native Americans and the European Settlers, except this time, they don't try to hammer in a message. Malick is simply telling a story, and a surprisingly simple story- he isn't trying to make a big fat epic or another "Dances With Wolves". Just the story of John Smith, Pocahontas, and later, her historically accurate husband John Rolfe.

Perhaps because I had seen "Memoirs of a Geisha" the day before, but while both had absolutely beautiful visuals, this film never had the dreaded "style-over-substance" that "Geisha" was filled with (I still thought "Geisha" was a decent film, but the over-the-top accents and aforementioned style-over-substance detracted from it). Great visuals and great storytelling melded with each other seamlessly.

If this is still playing at a theater near you, see it! Before you know it, it'll be gone.

"in my opinon the story was horrible! but that is me, well i dont think the story was horrible I just think the way it was presented was boring. I will say though the film looked nice but thats about all I can say about this film."

Watch it again, maybe. The story's presentation was one of the best things about this film. The story itself is a good one, but could easily have been made into garbage with the traditional Hollywood treatment (like every previous rendition). The execution was masterful in The New World.

I was surprised it wasn't nomitated for best editing... actually no I wasn't. It's not academy style editing. Let me start again.

I loved the editing - daring and gentle.

If I were the academy, I would nominate it for editing.

Hell, Deer Hunter won for best editing. Stranger things have happened.

elliott...

Deer Hunter was exceptionally well edited - what's so surprising? (The Academy in the '70s wasn't as weird as it is now)

quote:

This, Batman Begins, and Hustle and Flow were the only new American movies that truly impressed me in 2005.

Hustle and Flow impressed you? I hated it.

It impressed me because it actually exceeded the considerable hype that preceded its arrival in my local theatre - not many other films were better than I expected. Creating something so purely entertaining and immersive is admirable.

quote:

Originally posted by Evan Kubota:
Deer Hunter was exceptionally well edited

**** that, any THREE HOUR movie that leaves an ENTIRE HOUR dedicated to the entirety of a wedding is not well edited. That whole bit would not have lost impact had it been cut down to, maybe, fifteen minutes, if not shorter. I'd seriously like to see someone dedicate a straight full hour of NOTHINGNESS in a three hour movie today and win an Oscar (okay, so Titanic was a straight full three hours of nothingness, but I digress.)
"If the bride or groom spills their wine, it's bad luck." Oooh, I needed an hour to tell me that schmuck was going to die, I caught on to that after I realised they were spending more than five minutes at his wedding. **** that movie pisses me off.
Director Michael Cimino was an overzealous hippie wedding videographer who felt his many years of being bored to tears filming other people's "priceless memories" should be inflicted on to the rest of the world, (all that assuming there was such a thing as wedding videographers back in the day of Deer Hunter, which I don't believe there were, still, come on...)
And, editor Peter Zinner should've been smacked for not having left that **** on the floor where it belonged.
Stupid Deer Hunter, that's the last time I start a movie at three in the morning before checking the running time.

elliott...

On the contrary, I thought the first hour, as a film, alone, about the friends and this wedding were more compelling than the trite and desperate Vietnam and post-Vietnam sequences. In fact I might on certain days be willing to go as far as to calling it one of the best hours in any film of the 70's, if that means anything anyways.

The editing did exactly what it was supposed to - build a challenging, asymmetrical structure. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the Vietnam sequences were "trite," but the way they were treated (character-focused and not given any special status in the narrative) was brilliant and much more interesting than the usual reverence for the war film tropes in the genre.

There aren't many 'war' films where the war is only in part of the film and the protagonist goes home, returns to the battleground, and goes home again...

Evan, I loved Batman Begins but is that really one of the three movies that impresssed you this year?

What about:
Good Night and Good Luck
Munich
Murderball
The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada
Sin City
Layer Cake
Rize
War of the Worlds
A History of Violence (probably canadian, right?)
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
Jarhead
Syriana (which i hated but many liked)
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Match Point

quote:

A History of Violence (probably canadian, right?)

I love the "Canadian" label on this. Although it hurts to know that the best film from last year, which just so happens to be Canadian wasn't even given distribution. So therefore most any Canadian movie you see goes into the crap bucket with the rest of Hollywoodland!

Evan, I loved Batman Begins but is that really one of the three movies that impresssed you this year?

What about:
Good Night and Good Luck

- didn't see it. Clooney is a decent actor in the right role but his simplistic ideology bothers me

Munich

- hated it. Look at my posts on this forum for more

Murderball

- didn't see it

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada

- didn't see it, it's taken a while to get distribution or a DVD release. Also, it was mostly European funded AFAIK.

Sin City

- entertaining but pretty light stuff and forgettable

Layer Cake

- heard it was a cheap Guy Ritchie knockoff, who I'm not that crazy about anyway.

Rize

- never heard of it

War of the Worlds

- you're kidding right?

A History of Violence (probably canadian, right?)

- my other favorite film of the year, but I counted it as Canadian. That's why I didn't mention it.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

- didn't see it

Jarhead

- didn't see it

Syriana (which i hated but many liked)

- blech

Brokeback Mountain

- decent film, somewhat overrated.

Capote

- seemed like pandering Academytrash. Didn't see it.

Match Point

- ditto

My original post said three *American* films that impressed me. That doesn't even necessarily mean the three *best* American films. Of the mainstream theatrical releases, those were the three that exceeded my expectations. I'm always pleased when that happens, and I'm ready to have them exceeded at any time...

I think if you let go of some of your preconceived notions about certain films you might discover that the mainstream has plenty of quality films to offer. I looked at your list of favorite movies and am ignorant of them so i won't comment but i've heard they are all excellent. I think Match Point, Capote, Three Burials, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Jarhead, Rize, Murderball, Good Night and Good Luck would please you.

History of Violence was my number one pick as well so we have that in common but...

Munich was my number two.

Haha oh well.

I actually *like* mainstream movies, if they're good. For example, some of my favorite popular films are Last of the Mohicans and Terminator 2. Don't think Hollywood has put out much to compare to films like that recently.

I only like mainstream films when they are unpretentious and narratively compelling. Nothing irks me more than Oscar bait - even a slight hint of that and I don't feel like watching. Look at "Crash," for example.

Anyway, this thread was about THE NEW WORLD. I thought it was fantastic, and one of the top five American films of the past decade. It's also one of the few American films that can legitimately make a claim to be engaged in cultural and political issues, in the true sense.

the new world was the best film of 2005... everyone i know said it was extremely boring and that they just slept through it, but i could watch it over and over i think the same goes for most filmakers... it was amazing

If by New World, you mean Batman Begins, than yes it was the best movie of 2005.