August Schellenberg, Christian Bale, Christopher Plummer, Colin Farrell, Michael Greyeyes ...( see more  see more... ) , Q'Orianka Kilcher , Wes Studi

This epic adventure is set amid the encounter of European and Native American cultures during the founding of the Jamestown Settlement in 1607. Inspired by the legend of John Smith and Pocahontas, thi...( read more  read more... )s story is a sweeping exploration of love, loss and discovery -- both a celebration and an elegy of the America that was… and the America that was yet to come. Against a historically accurate Virginia backdrop, two strong-willed characters -- a passionate and noble young native woman and an ambitious soldier of fortune - are torn between the undeniable requirements of their civic duty and the inescapable demands of the human heart.

Flixster Users

51% liked it

131,604 ratings

Critics

61% liked it

168 critics

PG-13, 2 hr. 13 min.

Directed by: Terrence Malick

Release Date: January 13, 2005

Invite friends to see

DVD Release Date: May 9, 2006

Get It:

Stats: 5,743 reviews

Your Rating



clear rating

Flixster Reviews (5,743)


  • January 31, 2010
    unlike any movie ever made. malick is certainly a visual director, and this is one of the most visually remarkable films ever made. the entire story is told through the visuals, and dialogue and character development is at a minimum in the film, but this is one of the rare time...( read more)s when that works. at times i felt like i was really getting to know jamestown more through this film than in all of the study ive done on the place. malick accomplishes trapping you in his story and scenery so well that when the characters end up in england in the final act, despite the fact that its far more like what we experience in life, i still felt a bit of culture shock that helped me resonate with the characters in a profound way. a beautiful movie.
  • December 6, 2009
    I dont have words for this Movie except two. OUTSTANDING PERFOMANCE!
  • November 21, 2009
    "Love...shall we deny it when it visits us...shall we not take what we are given."


    I can see the line of divide between people who are either going to hate this or love it, there seems to be no middle ground.

    Throughout the film, namely the opening scene, the combina...( read more)tion of music, sound effects and visuals, blend together seamlessly to paint an incredibly beautiful picture. The way the scenes move from one to the next and most of the dialogue being voice over, spoken almost in a whisper with a somber tone, gives the film a dreamlike (almost hallucinatory) quality and pace, which is no doubt what lulled most viewers to sleep. I can't defend the films length, as you do feel every minute, it strolls along but i was one of those few people who did enjoy every moment. I don't think poeple who didn't like this are "stupid" or "didn't get it", it's just different from 99.9% of films out there and clearly not made for everyone (in particular the more mainstream audiences as it's not typically "Hollywoodized").

    In my opinion all actor's performances are impressive and sincere, as each fully become their characters. Chemistry is good between all and no one steals the spot light fom another. This film just goes to show that dialogue isn't everything and is not what creates a brilliant performance. I was amazed at how much of the story and emotion was portrayed in silence, by body language, an expression, a look or a touch. The relationship between Pocahontas (Kilcher) and Smith (Farrell) is beautiful to watch develop, her innocence and spiritual nature seem to counter his physicality and wild personality, as they meet each other with curiosity and wonder, as if they are both meeting another human being for the first time. Their deep emotions (love and sorrow to name a few) echo through the entire film with the actor's strong performances, so much so that when we meet Rolfe (Bale) later in the film we feel somewhat resentful at his advances towards Pocahontas, as our hearts still lie with her and Smith, despite the fact they are both honorable men.

    I felt the authenticity of the Indian villages, clothes, rituals, language and behaviour were superior to any adaption of this story I've ever seen. As is the age gap between Smith and Pocahontas, Kilcher being only 14 at the time and Farrell 29. Malick also shows (fairly) the barbaric and peaceful sides of both tribes (Indians and English) unlike anything I have seen before. Definately the most beautiful, poetic and soulful version of this story I have ever seen. It's clear that Malick loved making this, he made it more for himself I think and despite it's criticism I'm glad he did ♥


    "They are gentle, loving, faithful, lacking in all guile and trickery. The words denoting lying, deceit, greed, envy, slander, and forgiveness have never been heard. They have no jealousy, no sense of possesion. Real, what I thought a dream."
  • February 17, 2009
    Quite a beautiful film, both in storyline and scenery. The film (although narrated in parts) was left rather a lot to visual explanation, rather than dialogue, which worked well (especially as I wasn?t particularly blown away by Colin Farrell?s accent).

    I would have enjoyed a...( read more) deeper look into the Native American culture (a personal fascination), but as this was the story of Pocahontas, the love story was obviously the main reason for this film and of course the Expring.

    An Epic, which I wouldn?t want to repeat watching, but was worth watching the once.
  • October 15, 2008
    Note: This is a review of the extended version

    Terrence Malick is notorious for a few things. First, his famous 20 year absence from filmmaking. Second, he's always rushing around at the last minute tinkering with his films. The New World was released first in a longer cut which...( read more) was then pulled and reedited by Malick for its wide release. A few people saw it, and claimed that the differences were few. Well, now comes a nearly three hours long cut, billed as the extended edition. Producer Sarah Green hinted that this was Malick's preferred cut, once saying after the film had been released Malick stayed in the editing room and then finally had a 3 hour version he was happy with. Is this that version? Who knows, its likely he would have reedited again after that. Either way, this version is not the version that was first screened, as many had suspected. And while the added material in this version again does not add much to any shift in the dramatic narrative, the changes and extensions are quite substantial.
    For starters, the opening underwater sequence is extended. Some had speculated that it was now up to 12 minutes, but that's not the case. It lasts I would say twice the length as in the theatrical cut. Voice overs are also changed around a fair bit. There are new ones entirely, and the originals seem to have been beefed up in sound and clarity. Malick also makes interesting use of cross cutting a number of voice overs with dialogue on screen, and sometimes with other voice overs. It's quite interesting, and I think a successful move.
    While there are a few extra scenes added in, its mostly just an extension of existing scenes through more material and more exquisite nature edits. There is the addition of a couple new characters. One is a 'mad' Native, who has a lovely montage around Jamestown. I had noticed him in the theatrical cut, and noted his peculiarity, so having it explained here was nice.
    One of my favorite additions to the film is the extension of the mission upriver by Smith to find the Natives city. The music and poetic edits of gorgeous scenery with a clarified voice over is stunning, and reminded me of the tone in Herzog's Aguirre - which was always an influence on the early part of The New World.
    The other major addition into this version is the placement of title cards, breaking the film up into distinctive sections. I really liked this addition, and felt that they really added poignancy to what happens on screen.
    While detractors may insist that adding footage would only slow down an already slow film, I think that the additions actually move the film along better. It has a certain poetic rhythm to it, and flows naturally. The changes in music and scene placement I think heighten the film. It's patience becomes more understandable, where some moments seemed rushed in the original.
    Bottom line is this: If you liked the theatrical cut, you're likely to love this one. Its more of Malick's visual poetry and grace. If you don't like The New World or Malick's style, you'll likely only be less pleased with this. Malick charters to no one's desires but those of his own striving.
    Personally, next time I watch The New World, I will watch this version. It's by no means vastly superior - how could it be? But this is a beautiful and stunning version of the film, and I prefer it.
  • February 3, 2010
    sometimes love is difficult.
    love must be choose, although its hard
    i like this movie. its great story love.
  • January 28, 2010
    Summary
    Beautiful visuals, performances and very historically accurate. However, it's reliance on visuals to tell the story cause it to drag considerably.

    Review
    The cinematography and attention to detail in this film are stunning and I think it's important to stat...( read more)e that before saying anything else. However, relying primarily on images to tell a story can cause a film to drag, especially when the film is two and a half hours long. Visually, its beautiful; It's attention to detail and historical accuracy is spot on; but unfortunately, for many who watch this film, it's lack of any real plot (or dialogue for that matter) will leave you bored and lost, wondering if the film will ever end. It's for the lack of direction or narrative that I've given it three stars, however, I can't knock the quality of film making. It's an odd one.

    If you enjoyed this, you might like
    The Bounty
  • January 26, 2010
    Slow, I almost fall sleep. But a pretty film. I usually don't like romances, this was not an exception.
  • January 24, 2010
    I couldn't believe at how quiet this movie is.
  • January 22, 2010
    wasn't as i've expected it to be.. it was more drama than an epic movie.

Critic Reviews


January 20, 2006
Moira MacDonald, Seattle Times

The New World laps over its audience like water on a deserted beach, moving so quietly that you almost don't notice that it's enveloped you. full review

January 20, 2006
Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle

Through elliptical and seemingly oblique methods, he [Malick] forges moments of staggering emotional power. full review

January 19, 2006
Claudia Puig, USA Today

The ponderous narrative lacks so much focus that it will likely leave most viewers squirming in their seats. full review

January 19, 2006
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times

He [ Terrence Malick] is a visionary, and this story requires one. full review

December 22, 2005
Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com

Terrence Malick may not care much for people, but he never met a tree he didn't like. full review

December 20, 2005
Anthony Lane, The New Yorker

The lesson is as clear as rainwater: to the innocent eye, ripe for marvelling, every world is new. full review

December 16, 2005
Nick Schager, Lessons of Darkness

An unqualified masterwork...[that] feels less like a manipulative man-made construction than like a piece of organically produced art. full review

December 16, 2005
Peter Travers, Rolling Stone

Rapturously romantic and haunting. full review

View more The New World reviews at RottenTomatoes.com

Comments


  • armygal767
    January 11, 2009
    Absolutely amazing.. It is movies like this one that makes me proud of Hollywood. Film making is supposed to be art, and this movie represents that. I am sorry, but whoever trash talks this movie, is sort of immature in my eyes.
  • vampirehs
    January 7, 2009
    i think its very artistic movie and has great effect from true love and the fact of life this movie theached me that reality of life is so different from dream and what is true love without sex pelationship
  • carla223
    November 12, 2008
    Malick should take another 50 years off.
  • darnitalltoheck
    September 21, 2007
    Beautiful peice of art he touches her and looks at her the way every man should to a woman, he doesn't fall in love with her body but her and her soul!!! Its sad that they grew apart and in the end she chooses as different path but sometimes a beautiful picture is painted not for you to enjoy it but for you to move on to the next one and only by looking at the first can you fully appreicate, understand, and love the second!!!!! If you can't understand that then your missing the entire aspect of life and its meaning! Beautiful music and a tender story (I've watched it millions of times!!!!) Always the same butterflies in my stomach completley and utterly stunning!!!
  • TheBohemian
    June 29, 2007
    This movie = Lava Lamp.
    'Nuff said.
  • mardijo
    March 13, 2007
    omg Exile89 you hit it on the head.
    there was no dialogue, and what there was i didnt understand! you had to rely on the cinematrography to know what was going on and with all the arty shots of nothing even that was hard to follow.
    and you had no idea about how much time had passed i mean come on, shots to distinguish that its a different time are easy to through in!
    and not ending up with john smith in the end is was just icing on the cake.
    disneys the best, it had awesome songs (even if in pocahontas 2 she got a new love interest)
  • mardijo
    March 13, 2007
    i can understand why people like this film. i can apreciate the shot compostion, it was really beautiful, but it was boring as hell! it was soo slow, if it was me i would cut about an hour off it, cause all the arty shots were just boring! and i appreciate arty films, i like things that are artistcally challenging (i study media i have to look at that sorta thing all the time, hey were making an arthouse short film now) but this was just badly done, and from a director with that many years under his belt id expect a lot more!
    after the whole extended bit of him living with the indians, i just ended up amusing my self by comparing the movie to Pocahontus, and finding reasons why the disney one was better. i was watching it with my dad and he were doing the same thing. by the time they got to engliand we was like "where's all the songs? and the talking tree? raccon?' but then hey they landed and their was a dog, and their was the racoon in a cage! the movie was just a bad Pochontus.
  • 1nhl
    January 28, 2007
    Don't you think the reason why this movie rebukes (apparently) so many viewers is because they expect an epic tale of clashing civilizations, a romance of star-crossed lovers or a novel about the first European settlements in America, and get instead a poem about trees, organic growth and the discovery and acceptance of the self and of one's place in the universe (which is very different from "resignation")? It might be judicious to see it that way before debunking it on criteria (slow, contemplative pace, few direct dialogues and such) which do not apply to it.
  • cerocks
    January 20, 2007
    I can appreciate all comments on the daring aspect of the film. Its bold in its scope and accurate representation of fact. However when watching it the only thing i have seen before that i can liken it too is a 2hour long perfume commercial; Well not the entire film of course but there were these points throughout the film when he was learning the ways of the indians, when the sun is shooting through the trees and he is holding the indian women in his arms yadda yadda and i just expected it to go "Calvin Klein" or something. Don't get me wrong i appreciate the effort, and liked the contrast between the settlers and the natives, but it prob is the worst film i've seen in along time...and i've seen american dreamz another terrible film so thats saying something
  • hulabazoo82
    November 15, 2006
    how come Q'Orianka Kilcher is not on the actors list? she was amazing in this film especially seeing as she was only 14 when they started filming it!!!

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Official Trailer

More Like This


Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • The Thin Red Line
    The Thin Red Line (59%)
  • Pocahontas
    Pocahontas (61%)
  • The Last of the Mohicans
    The Last of the Mohicans (63%)
  • Jungle Fever
    Jungle Fever (25%)

Facts


No facts approved yet. Be the first

The New World : Watch Free on TV


The New World Trivia


  • What is the movie Q'orianka Kilcher gets to play pocahontas?  Answer »
  • He made Badlands in 1973, Days of Heaven in 1978, The Thin Red Line in 1998 and this film in 2005.  Answer »
  • What movie is this quote from: "I think you still love the man. In my vanity, I thought I could make you love me and one can not do that or should not. "  Answer »
  • Who is the actor that plays john smith in 'the new world' ?  Answer »

Recent News


No recent headlines. Got one?

Most Popular Skin