Enter into the Mystery

I have been hearing about the film “The Tree of Life” ever since it won Cannes’ most prestigious award, Palme d’Or. I have also read many reviews and have heard friends who already saw it comment on it. I even found out that some people were walking out from the cinema in the middle of the film! My goodness, what kind of film is this?

Finally, I went to see it. I have not seen any films by Terrence Malick, so I did not know what to expect. To be sure, the film is demanding. It truly demands that you pay attention to every frame and every sound. But it is also a beautiful film. This is not a film “about” anything, that is, there is no traditional plot. And yet, each frame is connected to the frame that follows it and that preceded it.

The film follows a life of an American family, and is seen mainly through the eyes of Sean Penn’s character and his young self. Penn’s character (Jack), as an adult man, is attempting to make sense out of his life. This is as far as I can go to reveal what the film is “about.”

Jack and indeed the whole family are merely conduits through which we might be able to see ourselves. The film opens with a quotation from the Book of Job: “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation...while the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” The whole film, in many ways, rests on this quote.

Film’s purpose is, I think, two-fold.

First, Malick wants us to enter into the film, and be led by the images. Entering might not be as difficult as we might suspect: the photography of the film is spectacular. But being led by it is another thing altogether. In the first thirty minutes of the film, I had a kind of tape playing in my head: “Where is this film going? Are we going to break from the elusive and “mystical” camera work and see some straight-forward film action? When are we going to get the answers to the film and life?” And then, after thirty minutes of questioning, I realized that I had to let go and enter the mystery of the film. I had to be led by the images without one shred of expectation or obessesive need to manipulate the purpose or end of this artistic expression in my mind.

Second, I am not certain whether Malick intended this but the film asks a bigger “request” of the audience: to enter into the mystery of life itself. This film is a meditation on the incomprehensibility of God and universe. It is also a meditation on the meaning of suffering, childhood and most of all, the power and fragmentation of the memory. Malick invites us to ask who are we and who are we in relation to God?

Another great “character” in the film is music. Although there is an original soundtrack composed by Alexandre Desplat, Malick uses already composed classical music, which was an excellent choice. From Mahler to Bach to Smetana, it was all glorious.

The film ends with a choral version of Agnus Dei, as adult Jack integrates his past into the present. But there are no straight-forward answers, or sentimental “forgiveness.” Although, I do think that there is a true redemption in the film. The film is, in many ways, an existential spiral of questions, which are natural to man and, which will always be asked by man: Who is God? Who am I? Why do we suffer?

This is a film filled with grief and confusion that our existence brings us but it is also filled with the possibility of being and awe that we experience in the presence of life.