Directed by Terrence F. Malick ’65

New Line Cinema

3 stars





If you, like me, were born in the mid-to late ’80s, you’ve probably encountered the story of Pocahontas—which serves as the basis for “The New World”—at least once, in the endearingly simple Disney movie featuring the voice of Mel Gibson as a kind-yet-heroic John Smith.

Now Terrence F. Malick’s ’65 (“The Thin Red Line”) “The New World” has brought Pocahontas to theaters once more, and though the film is meant to appeal to moviegoers of all ages, it seems especially apt for a generation that grew up humming “Colors of the Wind.”

If cartoon “Pocahontas”—complete with singing raccoon friends and pervaded by a sugary-sweet insistence that love does, in fact, triumph over all—was a staple of childhood, Malick’s latest endeavor is appropriate to the end of adolescence, from the characters’ introspective first-person voice-overs with their unabashed expression of idealism, to the casting of “heartthrob” Colin Farrell (“Alexander”) as the angst-ridden, yet hopeful, John Smith.

The film’s themes also strike close to the preoccupations of people in their late teens and early twenties: Malick explores the vagaries of love, war and the indefinite attractiveness of Farrell in various states of scruff.

Whether or not Malick’s retelling of the Pocahontas story is more accurate than the Disney movie, it is certainly less simplistic: though Smith and Pocahontas, played by talented newcomer Q’Orianka Kilcher, quickly fall in love, he ultimately leaves her to undertake a new expedition, instructing the other colonists to tell her that he has drowned. In his absence, she reluctantly marries John Rolfe (Christian Bale), eventually traveling with him to England to be received by the King and Queen and serve as an example of the peacefulness and tractability of Native Americans.

Though Kilcher’s Pocahontas marries Rolfe primarily out of resignation, she is anything but weak. Her true moment of self-determination comes when Smith unexpectedly reappears in front of her house in England. Rolfe—knowing she truly loves Smith—gives her permission to leave him, but it is Pocahontas who proves her grace in the way she approaches and eventually resolves the situation.

The sweeping landscape shots and sparing dialogue emphasize the possibility of transcendence that the “new world” offers, one rooted in its quiet strength and beauty. That said, 135 minutes of quiet strength and beauty can be a bit much. The cinematography and score of “The New World” are beautifully done, and Kilcher’s exquisite acting shines, but the film remains unsatisfying and static.

The constant pans of sunsets over rivers and birds rising into a gray sky get dull after the first few times they appear. Even the understated quality of the interactions between Pocahontas and Smith appear a little contrived. After all, what two people really maintain a relationship by sitting and staring at each other in loving silence?

Malick attempts to convey his message about love and colonialism through symbolism rather than dialogue. Smith, Rolfe, and Pocahontas each represent different ways of encountering both the new world and personal relationships—colonial expansion and restlessness, development and domesticity, and appreciation and awe, respectively. Yet, these archetypes can’t really substitute for the real development of ideas, character development and plot that made Malick’s earlier films, such as “Badlands” and “The Thin Red Line,” so memorable.

Malick’s visual lyricism is wonderful and pleasurable, but “The New World” cannot possibly stand the test of time in the way that his more inquisitive past films have. As demonstrated by the reactions of the viewers next to me—one woman loudly exclaimed “Give me back my money!” as the final credits rolled—even standing the test of two hours proved difficult.

—Staff writer Marianne F. Kaletzky can be reached at kaletzky@fas.harvard.edu.