Monday, October 20, 2014

Ebert Review/Post-initial analysis

"Nature is always deeply embedded in Malick’s films. It occupies the stage and then humans edge tentatively onto it, uncertain of their roles.....They are nudged here and there by events which they confuse with their destinies."
Holly confuses Kit with what her destiny should be. Kit is essentially homeless and finds himself gravitating towards homes through the film. He starts by burning Holly's house. Then he decides to build a new treehouse home for just him and kit, a place where the happy couple can start a life together. But as they keep running into trouble they start taking over other people's homes- Cato's, the mansion- until he finally returns to his car, his only safe place, and forces Holly to live there with him  and that's when their relationship starts to fall apart. At first, Kit is a victim of society, forced to live among the emotional trash that other people have discarded. Then the idea of nature comes up; Holly's fish gets sick living in the house and she is unsettled about "setting it free" to die outside. Nature, in this case, is a release from the world of the home.
Ebert's review says, "Malick’s direct inspiration was the story of Charles Starkweather, the “Mad Dog Killer,”." So in this case, Kit is the same as Holly's father. The dog is the one thing Holly is closest with and her father takes it away to teach her a lesson. Kit thinks that he can profit from making his coworker eat the dead dog. Similarly, he thinks he can find some identity by taking Holly away from her home, in a way "killing her dog". The home has now lost its love and emotionality; Kit thinks love and emotion can be traded like loose change. In the end, Kit never finds love; he gains a fan base because of the newspapers, but he gets executed just like Holly's dog while she receives probation.




No comments:

Post a Comment