I HAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTEEEEDDDDD it.

Im REALLY interested in the period, but the movie was not.

Crappy sappy voice overs spouting poetic horseshit.

Give me a nuts and bolts story of the EARLY settelers...its a shame, because whoever was the technical consultant really knew what they were doing.

ALOT of the aspects of the time was right (except the whole, Pocahontas saved John Smith's life)

Amazing that she was 14

Sounds just like The Thin Red Line....who directed that?

...oh wait

Considering that I wasn’t a fan at all of “The Thin Red Line”, I approached “The New World” with some trepidation. I watched it last night and was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. I’m motivated enough now to revisit Malick’s “The Thin Red Line” and see if my thoughts on it will change; I am a much different viewer now than I was back when it first came out (I saw it when it first released in theaters). I’m wondering if I had seen “The New World” back then, perhaps I might not have liked it either.

With that out of the way, the appeal of this film comes in more of an unconventional way (stating the obvious I suppose for devotees of Terrence Malick). From the beginning as it started to envelop me, I felt reminded of something I’d seen before but I couldn’t quite recall. After a while it hit me…..the documentary ”Koyaanisqatsi”….keep in mind that I’ve only seen a very small early portion of that film so maybe I’m mistaken in connecting the two but – right or wrong – that is what sprung to mind. My connection being that “The New World” especially for the opening third is all about images but perhaps even more than that is the experience those images create when supported by James Horner’s classical score. The music in this opening section is key to its success and as a viewer – even though film should perhaps be more about image than sound – I felt like I was at a classical music performance with visual images being projected in the background as an enhancement & secondary stimulus. What I’m getting to is that this film creates an “experience” for one as a viewer and that is why I feel it is deserving of significant praise. While there was interest on my part in the narrative element, it was secondary in appeal. I can’t say that the film held any measurable intellectual or emotional appeal for me…..though I was surprised by how affecting I found the closing few minutes. But again….I don’t think this film was about having that sort of more traditional appeal. “The New World” was more about a sort of sensory treat to your eyes and ears…it was filled with artistry and fine craftsmanship in filmmaking….cinematic poetry for your soul.

I thought the opening third was the strongest and truly transported you to what it might have felt like to land ashore in that day and age. Likewise, a short segment towards the end is equally brilliant and serves as a different-but-the-same bookend to the opening. This first third is representative of the film’s title; the movie slowly transforms as it unfolds and ultimately ends up being the story of Pocahontas (which helped me make peace with what I thought was a little too much time given to the John Smith/Pocahontas romance in the early portions). There is a gradual shift in the latter two thirds where the strong appeal to the senses gives more way to traditional narrative (and the effect of the music score as a key to the film’s success give way to other elements). All in all, while it will likely fall in the category of slow-moving for most, I did not feel that way at all. I thought it moved along quite well actually and I would gladly have given more of my time to the experience.

The film is not faultless (but it does overpower it imperfections). I found the continual voice narration to be both pretentious and for the most part unnecessary; the images being presented more than conveyed a great deal of what we were being told by the various narrators. It did often break the illusion that had been cast over me by the non-narrated segments. In general, this film is not about great dialogue or speeches or things like that….actual talk is comparatively limited. The performances were….professional but unremarkable. For some reason I kept thinking that Adrian Paul from the old “Highlander” TV show might have been an acceptable substitute for Colin Farrell. Christian Bale, though appearing only in the last third, was fine but I wondered if it might have been better going with a lesser known actor. Besides the narration, my other point of significant criticism was during the battle at the fort (about an hour in to the film). It felt…….like it was presented out of order. I think it was comprised of 3-4 scenes and yet I felt that they were delivered in almost reverse fashion, meaning when we were shown the scene which opens the battle it seemed like it should have been a scene that closes the battle and vice versa….we get the feeling that there are very limited amount of men (maybe 35) in the fort and it seems a number are killed in the beginning but later scenes of the battle seem to indicate many more soldiers.

A quick comment on James Horner’s score, during some of its quieter moments it did remind me of his score for “Braveheart”.

In closing, “The New World” really worked for me and was so powerfully enchanting that it greatly overshadowed its weaker aspects. I’ve yet to watch “Syriana”, “Munich”, and the long cut of “Kingdom of Heaven” but as of now “The New World” would likely secure a rank in the lower bottom half of my Top 10 English-language films for 2005.

I watched the DVD last night and it was pretty good. I liked The Thin Red Line a little better, but I thought they were both a little slow. I would probably be willing to double dip if another cut of the film was released on DVD.

I just saw this and liked it a lot, but then I do like Malick. I also thought Pocahontas looked a lot like Jennifer Garner. And I had no idea that the actress was only 14!

My only criticisms were similar to what's been stated here - that there was a bit too much emphasis on the inner monologues and romance - and I also thought leads were just a bit too pretty/Hollywood looking.

This would be a great movie for a music/effects only track dvd feature. I'd probably want to have it on in the background all the time if it had that (and if I'd bought it instead of renting it ).

Does anyone here who saw the longer version in LA or NYC know what was cut for this version? I'm wondering if they cuts were to emphasize the romance? Anyway, gorgeous movie, terrific score. Just let it wash over you.

I got the recent Criterion release and I haven't seen the movie since it was in the theaters. Curious to know, which version is best to watch? The 135-minute theatrical cut, 150-minute final cut or the 172-minute extended cut.