Review of Knight of Cups (2015) by K Nife C — 03 Apr 2017

If Siddhartha Gautama lived on the west coast, never attained any sort of enlightenment but feigned his spirituality by reading obscure Gnostic texts and getting tarot readings all the while basking in the superfluous reveries of modern America (i.e. boobs), he probably wouldn't be a very good role model. Christian Bale's character seems to do just that in this film, and it was very difficult to feel any sort of kinship or empathy towards him. If Bale is here representing anything or anyone, most would place their bets on it being director Terrence Malick himself. If this is true then Malick has revealed himself to be less of a Bodhisattva and more of a bourgeois savant in "Knight of Cups".

Taking the poetic stylism of his past few films to the absolute extreme, a few lines of on-screen dialogue become vital breaths of fresh air as the viewer wades in the mystifying soundtrack, swims through whispers of narrated subconsciousness, and drowns in the free-flowing dance of the camera. It's as ethereal as it is ephemeral. It is a beautiful but somewhat empty gift box that you can place whatever dreams, beliefs, or meaning you want inside. But if you aren't in the mood, it can be a grating bore.

Malick's defining work "The Tree of Life" is an absolute masterpiece of cinema, and this movie seems to be an extension of that. It is an experimental film, and like all experiments it must have a hypothesis. I'm guessing the hypothesis for "Knight of Cups" was: Can I push the boundaries of visual language farther than the limits of my audience's patience? Given the past several films have continually pissed off Malick fans and haters alike, it is no surprise that you'll hear the word "pretentious" thrown out fairly often. Pretentious is a word that I think most people use to excuse their poor taste and/or lack of comprehension of a given work of art.

To say that Malick and company are biting off more than they can chew or that they think of these films as more important than they are is a bit insulting to not only the filmmakers but also to those of us with a background in theology, mysticism, and/or the occult. The philosophy of the film is not half-baked, but it is a bit syncretic, blending eastern and western spiritual concepts at will. A brief literature review of the film (hell, just look up what the knight of cups means in tarot) will yield a more enriched understanding of the film.

That being said, "Knight of Cups" and its recent predecessors are for the most part all head and no heart. That doesn't make them any less real, just less resonant. Look at Wim Wenders. Most people will be looking for the raw sentimentality of "Paris, Texas" not the beguiling odyssey of "Wings of Desire". For Malick, he's a much different man than he was when making "Badlands". Instead of focusing on those big moments when your life changed, he catches glimpses of someone walking off, or a brief exchange when flirting, or another disappointing day - when life was really changing, it just didn't feel that way at the time. All in all this film comes across as detached and a little too specific to the experiences of a straight, white, male upper-middle class artist, but there's more to be found if you delve deep enough.