The New World

First and foremost, I want to apologize on behalf of this movie's cover. Not only does it fail to do the movie any justice; it fails to depict a scene featured in the movie at all. No, I promise you, this is not some sort of shitty Pathfinder 2. In fact, it was one of the most prettiest movies I've ever seen. Terrence Malick (the guy who directed The Thin Red Line and The Tree of Life) is known for making beautiful movies with authentic footage of the films' settings. And he really nailed it in The New World, which was essentially just a live-action (mostly authentic) version of the story of Jamestown and Pocahontas. In order to fully convey to the audience the awe the English settlers must have had for the proverbial New World, Malick provides footage and sounds fit for any nature documentary. The marshes of the Chesapeake did indeed seem like a wholly foreign place to me during the first half hour or so of The New World. And although I've only praised the cinematography so far, the rest of the production was fairly top-notch as well, from the acting to the writing to the set design and costuming. The thing is, this movie was more poetry than prose (if that makes sense) and while the quality was amazing, the story was somewhat slow and drawn out, not to mention predictable (like any historically accurate dramatization). So although I never stopped enjoying the movie for what it was, I can't say the characters and the action held my interest once the first hour or so had gone by. The film picks up a bit near the end when Pocahontas heads to London. With beautiful tonal symmetry, this very familiar Western world of textile clothing and cobblestones and the English language and large buildings now seems to be a whole "New World" in and of itself, both to us and, of course, to Pocahontas. The New World wasn't the most popular movie. There's a good chance you haven't even heard of it. It was released on Christmas Day in 2005 in the middle of "Awards Season," no doubt hoping for some big Oscar nomination recognition. It was nominated for one category (cinematography) in which it lost. It barely made back its budget. Nonetheless, there are a few critics who absolutely love it. I've seen it on a handful of "top 10 films of the decade" lists and heard more than one person call it the greatest movie of the decade. That's quite lofty praise for such an unknown and ignored historical drama. My own opinion of the film isn't nearly that high, but I still think it's an underrated hidden gem from the not-so-distant past. And for what it's worth, I liked it more than any of the other Best Picture nominations from 2005 that I've seen.