Were We Wrong About Malick?

With Pocahontas melodrama The New World, Terence Malick, revered director of Badlands and The Thin Red Line, seems to have come unstuck. Was it always a case of style over substance?

Comment on this feature >

The problem with perfection is there's nowhere to go but down. However rotten Guy Ritchie's last movie may have been, at least the director knows that his next project can't possibly be any worse than Revolver. Pity, then, poor Terrence Malick, the legendary filmmaker whose unbroken run of flawless (if infrequent) directorial outings has put him in a difficult position.

In 30 years, Malick has directed only four films, three of which are widely regarded as masterpieces. From the spine-tingling brilliance of Badlands (which has since been ripped-off and/or "homaged" by generations of imitators like Quentin Tarantino), through to the haunting majesty of Days Of Heaven (in which Richard Gere proved that he really can act), to the war-torn pastures of The Thin Red Line (aka 'Saving Private Ryan for smart people'), Malick achieved a reputation as a perfectionist to rival that of Stanley Kubrick. For those in the know, he could do no wrong. And so it was inevitable that, despite being hailed as "the finest American movie of the year" (the 'Guardian'), Malick's latest offering The New World risked disappointment.

It's with a heavy heart, therefore, that I have to report that, with this earnest updating of the Pocahontas story, Terrence Malick has finally put a foot wrong - or rather, several feet.

Next page •"Malick has achieved a reputation as a perfectionist to rival Stanley Kubrick"