The "Tree of Life" (2011), a cinematic odyssey directed by Terrence Malick, received mixed reviews from critics, but Roger Ebert bestowed upon it a glowing three-star rating. In his review, Ebert praises Malick's ambitious film for its daring scope and haunting beauty, declaring it "a triumphant visionary experience."
Malick's film, an elliptical narrative spanning the cosmos, time, and life, required a tremendous review effort from Ebert. In his characteristic thoughtful manner, Ebert tackled the complexities of "Tree of Life" in his review, published posthumously. Let's delve into Ebert's critical perspective on this divisive masterpiece.
Themes and Narrative Structure
Ebert appreciates "Tree of Life" for its audacious themes and unconventional storytelling. He commends Malick's courage in attempting to depict "the nature of grace, the existence of time, and the mystery of fate and free will."
Ebert acknowledges the film's challenging narrative structure, stating, "It doesn't tell its story head-on, but uses fragments of time and memory to hint at larger events." He admires Malick's approach, labeling it a "bold and brave" attempt to explore life's intangible aspects.
Spanning Cosmic to Personal
Ebert marvels at Malick's inclusiveness, as the film opens with the Big Bang, charts the evolution of the universe and life on Earth, only to zoom in on the Daddos, a 1950s Texas family. Ebert underscores how Malick " сигnects the personal to the cosmic, the intimate to the collective."
Ebert applauds Malick's technique of using voiceovers and non-chronological storytelling to illustrate how memory shapes identity and perception. He asserts that Malick "understands that memory is not about events, but about the emotions they trigger."
Visuals and Aesthetics
Ebert raves about the film's breathtaking visuals, calling it "a symphony of light and color." He lauds cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki for capturing images that are "both scientifically accurate and poetically evocative."
Thematically, Ebert lauds Malick's exploration of spirituality and nature's beauty. He praises the director for using nature as a metaphor for grace, marveling at how "the very inanimate objects in the Tree of Life seem to radiate an otherworldly beauty."
Controversy and Interpretation
Ebert acknowledges the film's divisiveness but championed it as a necessary cinematic risk. He argues, "Art that plays it safe is no more than a warm bath or a potentiator."
Ebert also addresses the controversy surrounding the film's longueurs and enigmatic nature. He defends Malick, stating, "A film like 'The Tree of Life' is not about mere narrative, but about the nature of existence itself. This film is about life, and like life, it is not easily understood, but deeply felt."
Emotional Impact
Ebert posits that while "The Tree of Life" might be interpreted as a religious film, its emotional resonance transcends spiritual beliefs. He writes, "For those ready to engage with it, 'Tree of Life' is capable of profound emotional punch and lingering contemplation."
Ebert believes that Malick's film offers an immersive, transcendent experience that lingers long after the credits roll. He concludes, "It is precisely this spirit that keeps veteran filmmakers like Malick, and reviewer[s] like me, going. After all, isn't cinema the biggest tree of life we know?"