Extended ToL

   No less complicated, but much more interesting, Tree of Life has taken on a whole new meaning after our in class analyses. Going deeper than any of us ever expected, all of the questions I had have been answered (for the most part) from the initial viewing of the film. But that has laid the groundwork for new questions to spring up. For example, my very first question about the film was about the dialogue, or lack thereof. I think the point Malick was trying to make with very little dialogue was that it's not about the things spoken. The movie was about what was going on internally with our main characters. The few sections of spoken word were very strategically used in the movie, and were never single-layered in meaning. And now I find myself over analyzing every word spoken in the movie. Now it makes me ask the question as to why only three (four including the priest from today) got dialogue? There were a lot of important characters, like the little brother that dies, that never spoke a word.
    I still don't know why the creation sequence had to be so long, but I understand the importance of it now. That sequence took us through everything about the world we live in. Much like in Beasts of the Southern Wild, it brings to light how small we actually are in the history of the world, and how everything had to have been created to get us where we are today. But it still boggles my mind as to why this sequence shows the evolution of the world, which goes against the very foundations of Catholicism, and seemingly the film itself. According to the first book of the Bible, god created the people and the animals to keep us company. The song playing in the background, Lacrimosa composed by Zbigniew Preisner, and Lacrimosa was a title given to Mary (the mother of Jesus). HOW CAN A SEQUENCE IN A RELIGIOUS FILM SHOW EVOLUTION WITH A SONG DEDICATED TO THE MOTHER OF JESUS? If the actual Tree of Life was in the Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve, and it could have even been in this sequence, where were Adam and Eve in the sequence? This continues to fuel me on my search to determine if this movie is about the goodness of God and the ways of grace, or a PSA about the dangers of blindly devoting yourself to a god who doesn't help you.
   As we talked about in class today, the final scene still perplexes me to no end. Why is everybody young, or still alive in the Dad's case, in a place that to me represented the land for eternal souls? In the beginning of the movie when old Jack is following young Jack through the desert, does that mean that he had to find who he had been as a child to make it to where his soul can rest with his family? Why, then, are we never distinctly told if Jack is alive or dead? I believe that he is alive at the beginning of the movie (unlike in Beasts), but when did he die? How? Was it suicide from the heights of the tall buildings we keep seeing that surround Jack? I think that if my questions about Jack's death(if that's what happened) were answered in a more concrete way, then I could maybe say that I like the movie completely. I'm not quite there yet though. To say that I loved the movie is a stretch, but so is saying I disliked it. I think it's just more of a complex movie than I'm used to, and that is taking a while for me to get over. It has definitely thrown me into a maelstrom of questions with extremely vague answers and biblical research that is rarely ever fruitful.
   But in terms of style, I think the film gets its point across very well, whatever that point may be. Full of close ups and almost awkwardly lit rooms, the film is ethereal in feel. It's like I can almost touch it but its intangible. A lot of shots we view in class everyday consist of areas or rooms alit by the sun in ways that are so natural it's like the light of God is shining directly onto the screen. The natural light, in conjunction with the seemingly natural breezes, the film altogether has a very earthy feel that makes it a more humble watch for us viewers. A movie that throws into question everything about love, life and religion has to be humbly shot, or else watching it would be too traumatic of an experience for everyone.Also, each shot seems like it almost always tries to include those earthly features. Not to say it goes out of the way to get nature in each shot, because it does feel right and natural, but it is a consistent string of images that spans the entire movie.