Is it a good cinematographic work? Yes. Is it Cinematographic Art? Definitely not.
That is the bland and vacuous portrait of a privileged rich man (played by an autistic Christian Bale) in spectacular locations, visiting and dwelling houses that only can allow a very restricted elite and surrounded by beautiful women (yes, I'm sorry, but in this film women are mere decorative objects), that is, more or less, the same content as perfume ads show at Christmas time.
The performers, that in this case do not act, seem imbued with this strange mystique of being under the orders of this "author" without speech and you can see, while they are on camera, they're thinking "Oh, I'm in this Malick's movie. How cool (and good for my CV)".
Yes, I think it shows that I am one of those who hate Terrence Malick's movies and I think that since "The Thin Red Line" he has been in decline and this film is the scariest of confirmations. Why he doesn't do as Scorsese do that, when he ran out of ideas, dedicated himself to making documentaries about his friends? Why he doesn't do as Coppola, dedicated to their hotels and their wines? Why he doesn't do as Lucas that... (I don't know what he do)? And I'm comparing him with some of the greats of the second part of twentieth century...
Finally, the most interesting of this obnoxious experiment that is «Knight of Cups» are the crepuscular tours across the empty lots of one of the majors film studios, something I would be privileged to enjoy.
That is the bland and vacuous portrait of a privileged rich man (played by an autistic Christian Bale) in spectacular locations, visiting and dwelling houses that only can allow a very restricted elite and surrounded by beautiful women (yes, I'm sorry, but in this film women are mere decorative objects), that is, more or less, the same content as perfume ads show at Christmas time.
The performers, that in this case do not act, seem imbued with this strange mystique of being under the orders of this "author" without speech and you can see, while they are on camera, they're thinking "Oh, I'm in this Malick's movie. How cool (and good for my CV)".
Yes, I think it shows that I am one of those who hate Terrence Malick's movies and I think that since "The Thin Red Line" he has been in decline and this film is the scariest of confirmations. Why he doesn't do as Scorsese do that, when he ran out of ideas, dedicated himself to making documentaries about his friends? Why he doesn't do as Coppola, dedicated to their hotels and their wines? Why he doesn't do as Lucas that... (I don't know what he do)? And I'm comparing him with some of the greats of the second part of twentieth century...
Finally, the most interesting of this obnoxious experiment that is «Knight of Cups» are the crepuscular tours across the empty lots of one of the majors film studios, something I would be privileged to enjoy.