From David Nicol:
The camera drifts slowly across a stretch of calm water. Insects and birdsong can be heard. Raindrops begin to strike the water's surface as we pass over a patch of water weed. And in voice-over, a young woman says, "Come spirit, help us sing the story of our land. You are our mother; we, your field of corn. We rise from out of the soul of you."
This is the opening shot of "The New World" (2005), Terrence Malick's dream-like interpretation of the founding of the Jamestown colony in Virginia. The film depicts the interactions between the English colonists and the Powhatan natives, and in particular the relationship between John Smith and Pocahontas, who speaks the film's opening words. As an opening shot, this image of placid river water is less spectacular than many of those that we have studied for Jim's project, but its simplicity is deceptive and it contains all of the qualities of a great opening shot that Jim has been encouraging us to see.
The camera shoots the water from the point of view of someone gazing over the side of a shallow, drifting boat. It has an exploratory feel: we are surveying the water, studying it, so that even though it is Pocahontas who provides the voice-over, the explorer Smith is also subtly present. But this is not the gaze of someone who is simply staring at the surface of the water. The gazer is looking deeper, into the river's heart. At first, we see nothing of what lies beneath the water's surface, because blue sky and trees are reflected onto it. But as the shot continues, the reflection fades, and we see underwater a thick layer of green plants, whose tips eventually stipple the water's surface. Sky, water, and plants exist together, all in one shot. When combined with the din of the insects and birds, it's an image that plunges us from the outset into the beauty and the fecundity of the natural world, and Malick will continue to emphasize that theme throughout his film.
But the idea of looking deep into the river has further significance. This shot is our introduction to the network of waterways upon which most of the film's events will take place. The credits sequence that follows this shot will display animated versions of John Smith's maps of the rivers of Virginia. Following that, we will see images of the Powhatan people swimming in the river and (in the 'Extended Cut' of the film) Pocahontas's voice-over will refer to the spirit-mother as "the great river that never runs dry". As the swimmers rise to the surface (from out of the soul of her), they will see, coming up the river, the three ships of the Virginia Company. The Englishmen will build the colony of Jamestown on the banks of the river. So the river water that we see in this opening shot is not only the source of the Powhatan sense of origin, but also of the colony of Virginia that will ultimately become the United States. Everything comes from the river. And Malick will underscore this in the music that he chooses to accompany the arrival of the ships: the prelude to Wagner's opera Das Rheingold, which opens with the three Rhine-Maidens swimming in a river at the beginning of the world.
This is a film about the arrival of change, change that is sometimes fascinating and sometimes catastrophic. Malick evokes these impending transformations at the end of the shot. The crystalline water is disrupted as first one, then several, then many raindrops hit it. As the rain strikes, the river trembles, and just as the shot ends, we hear the roar of crashing waves. Sound and image are warning us that something is coming (to quote another great cinematic opening sequence, "The world is changed; I feel it in the water"). I don't think the raindrops are an entirely disquieting image, though; rain gives life as much as does the river. That ambiguity is fundamental to "The New World," whose title describes both Smith's discoveries in Virginia and Pocahontas's in London, and which concludes with a revelation that the spirit mother is everywhere, even on the banks of a muddy English stream.
Beautifully done, Dr. Nicol -- thank you! What a deeply mysterious opening it is, beginning with a reflection on the placid surface of the water that looks like an upside-down Impressionist landscape illuminated through Magritte's "Empire of Light" -- European and/or Native American, depending on your sphere of reference. And as we begin to realize that we're moving over the water, we begin to see not only the disruptions on the surface, but, as you say, the world beneath it -- very much a new world, as in prehistoric, untouched. The next shot is (we assume) of the speaker, Pocahontas, herself, gazing in the opposite direction, toward the sky with her arms outstretched. Following the credits (patterned on old navigational maps), we are below the water, swimming with the fishes and the people who live here...
And it ends with the camera gazing up at the tree of life -- a whole forest, really -- as a bird, silhouetted against the sky, swoops fleetingly through the frame.
Note to MZS: I'd still love to read your take on it too, Matt!
10 Comments
In some way this strikes me as a cinematic version of Escher's "Three Worlds" http://www.artchive.com/artchive/e/escher/escher_3worlds.jpg
be well
-h-
Jim -
Which version of the film is being described here?
Malick initially released a 150 minute cut in December 2005 to qualify for awards season and that version remains intact in Europe. He made some edits and ultimately released a shorter 135 minute cut theatrically in North America, which was then released on Region 1 DVD. To confuse matters even further, a DVD/BluRay with a 172 minute extended cut was then released in 2008.
I don't know which cut is the definitive cut or if there even is one. Was Malick involved in all three and has he stated any preference? Any insight here?
Thanks
I'm reminded of what Nick Nolte said on "Charlie Rose" at the time of the release of "The Thin Red Line" -- that he didn't think the film was finished. That's Malick. Perhaps his films (at least his later ones) will, like "Apocalypse Now," never really be "finished." However, the opening shot is the same in all versions. Malick has final cut, so they were all his -- created to suit different needs at different times. I've seen the 135 minute PG-13 cut (which some actually prefer to the longer versions), and have the 172-minute unrated Blu-ray standing at the ready...
I've had the pleasure of having Dr. Nicol as a film professor and I'm glad to see some of his writing here. I've recently re-watched "The New World," watching the extended cut of the film. The first time I watched the film it was the 135 minute theatrical cut. I still feel the need to keep revisiting the film because there's so much symbolism and hidden meaning to explore. I've just finished writing an analysis of sorts on my blog if anyone is interested in reading it.
http://thenoirzone.blogspot.com/2011/06/films-of-terrence-malick-new-world.html
It's not as complete an analysis as I would like but I hope it offers some insight in to my feelings on the film. I'm looking forward to seeing "The Tree of Life." It'll be the first Terrence Malick film I would see in a theatre, which is exciting.
Hi Andrew!
I really like your review. The way you interpret some sections of the film as a dream is really interesting - I hadn't thought of it that way, but it adds a lot more complexity to the film, and fits beautifully with the film's style. Hmm...
Interesting point and thank you for clarifying that the opening is identical in two of the three versions. I had read that narration was different and chapter titles were added, so I wasn't certain if cuts were made.
If you have the inclination to compare the versions, including the 150 minute European Cut (if accessible), I would love to read about it.
Regarding the run time: If you watch the special feature on editing on the Criterion edition of The Thin Red Line, you'll find that Malick only sat through the entire film once for the five hour assembly cut. Billy Weber said that he and fellow editor Leslie Jones had a difficult time convincing him even to do that. Once he'd seen the assembly cut, he would only watch the movie one reel at a time. Not that I doubt Malick's ability to process something in the whole, but it seems like, from that anecdote, that he's more interested in the process than the result. It gives his films the impression of something free-floating. My guess is that he had a similar process with The New World. The whole editing feature is amazing, actually. Recommended viewing for anyone interested in Malick's working methods.
What a fantastic entry, David! I love how you begin by describing the shot's simplicity only to lead us to the reality that the shot isn't so simple. That image of the water is so fascinating because, as you describe, it illustrates both the physical depths of what is in the land while also showing how the water acts as a flat plane, like a canvas. The native Americans interact with the Earth, submersing themselves in the depths while the settlers see that canvas as a starting point to be shaped by what they bring to it. "Sky, water, and plants exist together, all in one shot." Brilliant.
I'd highly recommend the 170 minute version of The New World over the theatrical version. To me the theatrical cut always felt too vague, too brief, and ultimately unsatisfying. The 170 minute cut develops the narrative and the characters with far more depth and clarity.
It also fixed quite a few of the problems of the theatrical cut. Some of the annoying voice-overs have been remixed to a quieter level, so that the music is more prominent, and the words the characters are saying in voice-over aren't as emphasised.
great review. There's more to this shot as well. I think, at least. In the first three shots that make up the beginning of the film, Malick tells us everything about his thematic concerns with the film. Malick is concerned with the connection between the material world, the human being, and the spiritual world. In the opening shot, we see the material world, the river, and everything that is captured in it's reflection. In the next shot we she a woman reaching to the sky, the spiritual world. But how malick connects, these two shots is through the voice over of the girl. Her voice over is how she communicates to "mother" which may be god. So there it is, in two shots and voice over Malick sets his thesis. The material world, a human reaching to the sky, the spiritual world, and a voice over connecting them. And the last shot. The tree, well, isn't the tree a perfect metaphor for the same thing? A tree is grounded in the material/physical world while at the same time it reaches for the light, or the spiritual world. But where is the human element in this? Why would Malick leave us without it? Maybe because, this story "the new world" is over and he is imploring his viewer to begin their own search between the duality that he has always tried to overcome?
Leave a comment