A new different world....

Rating: 5/10 (21 January 2006)

A consistent theme adopted by movie makers over decades has been showing the differences that exist amongst people, places, cultures, religions, or families and tug at the heart strings based on that emotion that all of us realize sadly exists, even in extreme forms, in the world we live in.
The New World takes this up a notch. The discovery of an entirely new world has been depicted both in the mildness and violence that humanity shows to itself.
John Smith (Farrel) is an English captain who arrives on the coast Virginia in 1607 to lay the frontier of the new world. The interaction with the 'Naturals' (or savages as they are sometimes referred to) and eventual fall of grace from their view has been well pictured. Smith falls in love with the daughter of the powerful local king - Pocahontas (Q'Orianka Kilcher in a breakthrough role) who risks her life to beg to save Smith's. But, the dream of love and the time spent in 'captivity' of the Naturals soon ends when Smith is returned to his post. His sense of duty and honor (which is all so subtly depicted - kudos to director Malick on that count!)calls over his understanding of Natives and his love for Pocahontas. Bloodshed follows.
The Conquest of America, as one may call it, had a very humble beginning. The following generation would ensure that greater tracts of land were conquered along with the near destruction of an astounding culture, who had learned to be one with the senses of nature, was complete.
Giving into the greater calling of duty Smith leaves Pocahontas and spurned by her people she is taken captive by the English. She rediscovers love, and eventually understands life seen through a different prism, with John Rolfe (Bale in a very sedated role).
The movie managed to achieve a rare mix of (the John Smith-Pocahontas) legend and reality. Amazing concept. Real performances. It must make it one of the best movies of the year, but sadly it just doesn't. Where it falters is where director Malick has been said to have taken the most time on - editing and continuity.
Most of the story and screenplay are thrown in as background (as in commentary or observations by the characters) while adopting the technique of actors show reality of the minute they are engaged in, rather than carry the story forward with their actions. While this is a very novel way of moving the story forward - one does not become attached to any of the characters because they have not 'done' anything on screen to contribute to the story. All their decisions, actions and thoughts leading to major points in the plot are kept out of the view. And this brings in a sense of slowness to the movie, despite the fact that there is a lot of story that has been told (and personally, I felt the length was right considering the volume of story told).
I am an adherent admirer of filmmakers trying different ways of telling stories to the audience, but as is the case with most things in life, some forms work better than the other. Christopher Nolan (Memento) achieved it in breathtaking style, but Spielberg (War of the Worlds)- not so much. While Malick's attempt is worth applauding, it quite simply didn't make the cut for this story.
6 stars/ 10.