Self-indulgent as in it's not made for any audience other than the creator. Every whim, idea and obscure symbol is thrown into the movie with total disregard of the audience.
Abstract artistic displays in a film are definitely 'pejorative' when it's at the expense of character development and story. Most people don't watch movies to immerse themselves into someone's subjective abstract mindscape. Most people watch movies to see a great story in a audio-visual medium that collaborates with many other different types of art. That's what Tree of Life did not have. A story.
When you choose being 'artistic' and 'self-indulgent' with your film over any kind of story, it doesn't make for a very interesting experience.
As a writer I have very particular tastes in movies. I love a movie with an original, well-paced story that's full of rich and fresh characters. I want goosebumps on my arms from a surge of emotion when I watch a movie. I care more about the story than any other aspect (director, subject matter, actors, special effects, what year it was made) so obviously for me Tree of Life was a complete disappointment. There is really no story.
Is Tree of Life original? Of course. Is it well-paced? The farthest thing from it. Is it full of rich and fresh characters? Not at all. Did I feel emotion? Only boredom and frustration.
Like I said this is just my opinion but I couldn't have disliked this movie any more than I did. Saw it in theatres and it was hard not to fall asleep. Of course that doesn't mean it's in any universal or objective way a 'bad' movie, or that you shouldn't or can't like it. Just one man's thoughts.



Reply With Quote
