I had mixed feelings about seeing The New World. Though I love all three of Terrence Malick’s previous features (1973’s Badlands, 1978’s Days of Heaven, and 1998’s The Thin Red Line), I was underwhelmed by its plot outline. The New World is about the English settlers not getting along with Native Americans in the 1600s, while also a love story between John Smith (Colin Farrell, whom I have never liked) and Pocahontas (Q’Orianka Kilcher). Still, the Malick pedigree was enough to bring me to the theater, and it paid off.

Malick’s films are something of an acquired taste; they’re always languorous and ruminant, slow moving and thoughtful. Even those of us who like them have to be in the right mood to see one. To further complicate things, both The New World and The Thin Red Line are quite long (World is 150 minutes, Line 170), often making it hard to fit into your schedule. Also, they absolutely, positively have to be seen from a film print on the big screen, or else you’re really just missing the point. In fact, to illustrate that last point, The New World is the first film since Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet (back in 1996) to be partially shot on 65mm film, which is a much more expensive and higher quality stock than the usual 35mm—something you would never be able to tell by watching the film on a DVD.

In The New World, Farrell is rather subdued and rarely talks. Despite his being presented as the main character early on, the film eventually gets distracted and follows Pocahontas instead, which eventually gives way to John Rolfe (Christian Bale) taking center stage. It is precisely this kind of weird pacing and rhythm in a Malick film that puts a lot of people off, but taking the viewer away from Farrell comes as a nice relief. Another Malick standby—interminable shots of landscapes—also serves the film well, as they lend an air of discovery and newness to the shots of Virginian landscape. And, for their parts, both newcomer Kilcher and Batman Begins’ Bale hold the viewer’s attention.

---