On Knight of Cups and Aimlessness
For many decades, Terrence Malick would release his movies sporadically. Starting with Badlands in 1973, he has only released five more films since then. Two of which, 2011’s The Tree of Life and 2012’s To the Wonder, were made in the four years before 2015’s Knight of Cups. In Knight of Cups, I believe we find his most personal movie yet. A story of a screenwriter in Hollywood continuously looking for something.
Since Badlands, we have seen a change in him going from script to screen. In what is more traditional, scenes will be more goal-oriented. Each scene will have a distinct point in moving the story along. This will create expectations of the character in a particular scene based on what we already know about him/her. How he/she will react and how others will react to him/her. It can be predictable. In this film, he’s less focused on what was written at the time and encourages the actor to free wheel through a scene. Normally, what can be created is a box which the actor must act within. It can feel like a prison to move through rehearsals and repetition this way.
In Knight of Cups, actors can freely feel out a scene and thus feel out the role of the character they are representing on screen. This is more true in Malick’s recent work. Christian Bale, who plays Rick in the film, is allowed to take what he is feeling and portray it honestly. His character is on a journey of self-discovery and it feels right that the actor is on the same journey of self-discovery with his character. Who am I?
It is not right to simply define this film as experimental. I think this film definitely pushes the boundaries of what most people might consider a movie. For those people who get caught up in the details, it’s best to forget that before entering. Films are first and foremost a visual medium and Terrence Malick truly takes that to heart in this film. His visual style so perfectly weaves in the narrative that it is inseparable. A lot of modern movies seem to separate it, if not accidentally, then unconsciously.
You think when you reach a certain age things will start making sense, and you find out that you are just as lost as you were before. I suppose that’s what damnation is. The pieces of your life never to come together, just splashed out there. — Joseph, Rick’s Father
There are very few scenes where two characters are inside and talking to each other. It’s mostly shot outside where the atmosphere is dynamic and the characters often move with it. This film dissolves itself of a three act structure in favour of eight chapters, each appropriately named after a tarot card. In these eight chapters, plus introduction, we follow Rick’s journey through Los Angeles and the various people that serve as distractions for him.
Rick, a film screenwriter, is our main character. He is on a quest to find meaning and we watch go through an existential crisis. In his private life, we see him cycle through women while at work we see him being pitched projects by his agents with no direction. His life is almost fantastical and he is caught in a purely aesthetic existence.
We see the film from Rick’s point of view. He wanders aimlessly throughout the film as we learn of the attempted suicide of his brother, about his ex-wife and despite having a successful career, he lives an empty life. This success comes from the approval of other people and his inclusion in Hollywood parties. If you own nothing, you have nothing to give. This is made apparent when Rick is robbed in his own house and the men question him on why he doesn’t have anything in his house.
Most of the dialogue in the movie comes from voice-over. This helps shows the emptiness in the main character’s life since very rarely do any characters address one another through dialogue on screen. Most of the chapters focus on Rick’s distraction with a particular woman of the moment with each one representing something to the character, but quickly fades into the next one.
The film withholds details because they’re not important. It flows naturally and logically from scene to scene from which we conclude Rick is looking back on his memories. These memories often involve a woman in a particular time of his life. We don’t know the start and end of these relationships which are details we lose from his memories. Each memory is one of significance and together allow us to piece together someone’s life. These memories might not be how Rick experienced them though, but we’re looking on these memories through the theme of aimlessness and Rick’s existential crisis.
The film lacks a clear narrative, but I think that only adds to the aimlessness of the character. He wanders through and we see that. Very little is made explicit in the film. There’s a vagueness to it all. It is built on withholding some information. Really because not a lot needs to said. If a picture is worth a thousand words, then the visuals speak for themselves. They are definitely awe inspiring for sure. We feel that we are viewing someone else’s memories. It asks a lot of itself as Rick’s search for answers doesn’t offer many conclusions.
Los Angeles is the perfect backdrop for this character as it echoes the emptiness he feels. We notice this when Rick walks through the backlots of a studio. In contrast, when he goes to social gatherings there is no shortage of people. Yet, it never loses its hollow feeling. These parties are where everyone wants to be and that’s what makes it almost mythical. This brings us back to the beginning where we learn about a knight whose father sends him west to find a pearl. When he gets there, the residents give him a cup to drink from that made him forget he was the prince and forgot about the pearl. We don’t know much of our main character, but through voice-over matched with him partying in a penthouse, we know his purpose.
One of the main criticisms of the film is that it borders on self-parodying. That Malick has lost it in an effort mimicking that one kid in your film class that thinks in deep thoughts and those thoughts are unique to him. Starting with The Tree of Life, which received vastly different reviews, he has inserted himself into his movies and made them more personal. Stories that feel like a personal therapy session rather than something that should be shown to the masses. Isn’t that what makes a film great, though? It’s the insertion of the artist’s own thoughts and feelings into his/her film because they are moments he/she has lived through and come from first hand experience. It’s the relaying and sharing of these feelings that make a film lived in rather than soulless.
I didn’t watch Knight of Cups like I normally watch films. Instead, I just let it wash over me like waves on a beach. It’s free flowing as it never nails itself to a specific genre. It remains vague. That’s what I loved about it is it became easily personal even though I have had very few similar experiences. I encourage everyone to see it that way. If you constantly look for the deeper meaning or go into it with expectations, then you risk not experiencing it for what it is. A truly great film.
