Beautifully Filmed, But Quite Lacking In Story

Rating: 2/10 (1 August 2011)

I can completely understand those people who speak of how beautifully photographed and filmed this movie was. It truly was. Director Terence Malick deserves credit for that. The sceneries were lovely, and the re- creation of early 17th century Jamestown had a feel of authenticity to it that's often lacking in movies such as this. If that's all you were to rate a movie on then this movie would have to be rated spectacularly. But there's more to a movie than the photography and scenery. There's story and pacing. On that count, I can also completely understand those people who speak of how poorly paced this movie was and how dull it was in many ways. I fall on the side of the latter group in this debate. As beautifully filmed as this was, the story failed to hold me. At 2:15, this movie isn't outrageously long compared to some, but it seemed to be.
The movie appropriately documents the early development of Jamestown as happening within the context of a clash between English and native American culture. That would have been more powerful if it hadn't then chosen to buy into the myth of the Pocahantas-John Smith romance, around which the movie largely revolved. The broad brush strokes of Pocahantas' life are accurate - from her upbringing with her native tribe in America to her later life in England with John Rolfe - but Smith isn't accurately depicted, and the romance between the two, from what I know, is fiction.
Colin Farrell as Smith was surprisingly low-key (considering that he's - well - Colin Farrell!) but he was OK in the role, and newcomer Q'Orianka Kilcher was about the same as Pocahantas. The movie - with its slow- moving and largely unfocused story - rises or falls on how well you can appreciate a movie based almost solely on its artistic merits. For me, I needed more of a coherent story to keep me involved. (2/10)