To Malick or not to Malick

Rating: 8/10 (27 June 2001)

For years the debate on Malick has been a simple one, is he a great director because he makes beautifully lyrical films, or is he a lazy over rated director because he makes beautifully lyrical films that rely on the voice over? For me, the use of the voice over has never been a cop out per se. Somewhere between "My Dinner with Andre" and the action genre, a voice over can be helpful if not necessary. Malick has used this technique to propel his previous films ("Badlands" & "Days of Heaven")and focus the movie goers attention to the moral ambiguities being portrayed on the screen. In each case, I found the narrative to be unassuming and not a representation of his inability to craft a story through his lens. In the case of "Thin Red Line", the enormity of the issues at hand takes the voice over to the forefront, admittedly making it the central delivery system of the narrative. So once again is Malick lazy or skilled? I believe he is the latter and "Thin Red Line" is a wonderful film for this reason. Simple themes such as life being out of balance can be delivered in image alone. Godfrey Reggio proved this with his brilliant "Koyaanisqatsi". Yet attempting to communicate the struggles between action and thought, technology and nature, innocence and corruption in a manner average movie goers can grasp is a tall order (a casual read of a cross section of comments on this film shows just how tall indeed). So Malick's reliance on multiple voice overs can be excused. The "Thin Red Line" is a beautiful and complex film that provides a fitting end to his trilogy that started in 1973 with "Badlands".