The story line is fairly straightforward, although Malik’s telling of it is not. He interweaves voice overs, flashbacks, flash forwards, massive amounts of music, and surreal effects to tell the story of the O’Brien family. Much of the story is set in Waco, Texas in the 1950’s and concentrates on Jack O’Brien’s childhood, his mother, father, and brother (named R.L.). The story proceeds by exploring Jack’s painful mental scars that he carries from his upbringing.
As the movie begins, music soars and a wavering flame appears in the darkness. Mrs. O’Brien narrates that, as a child she was taught that everyone in life must choose between the path of Grace, or of Nature. Grace sees the world through the eyes of love. It approaches life with reverence, wonder, and caring. Jack’s mother chooses this road. The path of Nature on the other hand, is cold, competitive, and sees life as a brutal struggle for existence. Jack’s father, Mr. O’Brien, chooses this path. One might wonder if he ever knew that he had another choice. Like most people we encounter, the answer can never be known. A large part of the film covers Jack’s childhood memories with his mother providing love, support, and an appreciation of life. His father is rigid, authoritarian, and takes out life’s disappointments on his family. He constantly wonders why he is not more successful and why bad luck and misfortune cheat him of status and security. Eventually the family leaves Waco when Jack’s father is given the choice of accepting a demotion, or being fired. The father laments his fate in a one-sided conversation with the young Jack, saying in effect: “I did everything right. Went to Church, tithed, lived a good life, and look at my reward!” He becomes even more severe and domineering, trying to prepare his sons for the pitiless fight for survival that he believes life is. He gradually wears Mrs. O’Brien down in the process.
Much of the movie retells growing up in a nuclear family at the height of “Baby Boom” America. Viewers 50 and older will find themselves immersed in a lost world of childhood where father worked, mother took care of the house, and children were left to their own devices. Technology was unobtrusive, material progress assured, and the future beckoned with good things in store for all. Part of the appeal of this film lies within the individual viewer’s memory. It can be both painful and refreshing to relive one’s childhood. The film does a masterful job of taking the audience back in time. Many of us now know that life in the 50’s and 60’s was narrow, crabbed, and devoid of real societal purpose. Science and technology, while providing real benefits, bestowed those treasures unevenly, and with unintended consequences. It is unclear whether life is better now or then. Malik seems to yearn for this simpler time. In all of his movies, modern life is seen as sterile, impersonal, and fraught with angst-laden emptiness.
The film bounces back and forth between Jack’s present life as an adult, and his memory of old traumas that continue to haunt him. He is torn psychologically. He has adopted his father’s outlook in terms of job and career, but longs for his mother’s loving attitude toward life. He is tortured and unhappy, spending his days at work hammering out complicated architectural problems while haunted by his lost childhood. Although his father endured one major setback, he appears to have overcome it, and is now a wealthy man. Success does not insulate the family from misfortune however. In one scene, a phone call informs Jack’s mother that her son R.L. has died somewhere overseas. It is unclear if the death is an accident, related to military service, or a murder. The family is devastated and Jack and his father become estranged in the emotional fall out from this event. It becomes evident that this conflict had its roots during Jack’s adolescence. As he grew older, he became more and more critical of his father’s tyrannical behavior, especially his treatment of Mrs. O’Brien. With nowhere to turn for support, he withdrew emotionally, and paradoxically adopted his father’s view of the world.
Malik borrows from the Book of Job when dealing with human sadness. Right after R.L’s funeral scene, he embarks on a sequence in which the universe is created, life appears on earth, dinosaurs die off, and the modern era begins. With all this pain, suffering, death, and creation over millions of years, of what importance is one single human tragedy, he seems to imply. As God asks Job: “Where were you when I founded the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its size; do you know?” (Job 36, 4-5) Human misfortune, while important to the individual, is just a small part of the story of Time, Humanity, and the unfolding of Reality.
Ultimately, all one can do is follow the path of Grace if one wants individual peace. At R.L.’s funeral service, a neighbor attempts to console Jack’s mother, saying to her: “He’s in God’s hands now.”
Mrs. O’Brien replies: “He was in God’s hands the whole time wasn’t he?”
For Malik, the path to happiness lies in the acceptance of Man’s Fate, along with a firm belief in a moral universe that will ultimately make sense at some future point. The problem with this view is that it has to be taken on faith. There is no other way to peace however, since the alternative path involves nihilism and ultimately, self-hatred.
The movie concludes with a surrealistic vision. At the end of his work day, Jack is riding down an elevator and experiences a vision of his younger self walking across a rocky wasteland. In the distance the sun expands into a red giant that engulfs the earth and then dies, becoming a white dwarf star. Jack walks through a door frame and sees images of his family and all of the people who are part of his memory. He is reunited with his mother. His father is happy. He meets his brother R.L. and brings him to his parents. On a sandbar by the ocean, Mrs. O’Brien looks at the sky and whispers: “I give him to you. I give you my son.” Jack’s vision ends and he leaves the building at peace, with a smile on his face. The screen darkens and the wavering light that began the film flickers in the fathomless darkness.
The average viewer who simply wants to be entertained would be advised to avoid this film. It does not tell a simple, easy-to-understand story. Its conclusions are ambiguous, and depend on the how much effort one wants to give to Malik’s vision. It demands attention, a concentrated desire to watch closely, and sympathy for his views. Another problem with the film is that it will probably be seen by most people on a small scale, either on a television screen, or a computer monitor. As the director, Malik’s vision for his work assumed a theater screen and a large, darkened space. Although one can understand Tree of Life without the accoutrements of the stage, to watch it on a small screen is akin to looking at a postage stamp version of the Mona Lisa. You’ll get the gist, but miss much of what the artist meant to convey. If one believes the purpose of art is to merely entertain, one will be dissatisfied with this movie. If one believes that art should teach, elevate, and instruct while telling a story, you will not be disappointed.
Malik is also difficult to enjoy for purely technical reasons. The sound in his work is overly layered, and much of the dialogue can be extremely hard to hear. The pace of the action is leisurely, almost glacial at times. Finally, he can be heavy-handed in his treatment of the pristine beauty and innocence of the natural world, especially when he contrasts it with the horrendous results of human interaction. All artists—particularly film directors—are who they are. They make the films that they make. To expect Malik to become John Ford, or Alfred Hitchcock is unrealistic. Stephen King recalled that an interviewer once asked him in effect, “Why do you waste your time writing that horror story junk?” King recalled that he answered, “I write what I can write. I don’t choose my work. It chooses me.” The same can be said for Terrance Malik’s films. To expect anything different is to court disappointment. I recommend the film, but with reservations. It is not for the timid, or the easily bored, or the cynical. It is not for those who have chosen to follow the path of Nature.
