I am an admirer of Terrence Malick to the extent that I consider him one of the finest filmmakers rubbing shoulders with Andrei Tarkovsky and Stanley Kubrick. He changed the way films were made by throwing the concept of a written script for actors to follow out of the window. He made mother nature a major actor. His earlier films dealt with philosophy, books, religion, science and even arcane pieces of music from faraway lands. 'Song to Song' is a surprising departure from all that. The subject is vapid. Sex and manipulation seem to be the only subjects of discussion, apart from absolutely gorgeous cinematography, which any film of Malick offers.
Malick used to pick up pieces of music with care and place it intelligently within a film. In "Song to song" he does pick up Kieslowski's famous composer Preisner's music but strangely plays bits of it again and again when the music does not add value to the visual, compared to Malick's very intelligent use of music in his past work. Are the editors to blame? Possibly.
Then there is a scene with a caterpillar which will remind cineastes of John Schlesinger's 1967 film "Far from the madding crowd." Malick had borrowed ideas from Tarkovsky in the past and now he seems to recall striking visuals of British cinema.
More amusing for me was that the main credits forgot to add Cate Blanchet's name while her name is indeed included in the longer list at the end.
For me, a Malick admirer, the film was without substance. And why is Malick not using blacks and hispanics in main roles but continually using them in roles that depict them in states of poverty and helplessness? Questions. Questions.
Malick used to pick up pieces of music with care and place it intelligently within a film. In "Song to song" he does pick up Kieslowski's famous composer Preisner's music but strangely plays bits of it again and again when the music does not add value to the visual, compared to Malick's very intelligent use of music in his past work. Are the editors to blame? Possibly.
Then there is a scene with a caterpillar which will remind cineastes of John Schlesinger's 1967 film "Far from the madding crowd." Malick had borrowed ideas from Tarkovsky in the past and now he seems to recall striking visuals of British cinema.
More amusing for me was that the main credits forgot to add Cate Blanchet's name while her name is indeed included in the longer list at the end.
For me, a Malick admirer, the film was without substance. And why is Malick not using blacks and hispanics in main roles but continually using them in roles that depict them in states of poverty and helplessness? Questions. Questions.