bash_0070 I started watching expecting something good or at least not this bad because with such magnificent cast you can only ruin it with extremely poor or terrible script but sadly there was no script. Nothing happens in this movie really, just a few cool shots and good cinematography. other than avoid this one because its pointless,long and no story. I would rather waste my time scrolling my news feed on Facebook all day than watching this.Seriously A BIG NO.....

Martin Lopez Well, as you can see by my title and rating, I think this is a masterpiece. I think this is top Malick (along with New World and Tree of Life), where his style is perfect. If you don't know what I am talking about, watch this or one of those other films.In particular, this film is profoundly spiritual (transpersonal, for a more updated term). It deals with the search for truth in life, in an autobiographical/artistic manner - During the 70's, Malick spent many years as a writer-director in Hollywood, with big paychecks and no finished films. But this isn't really a story about the details, but about the universality hiding behind. This is one of the truly profound films ever made. It deals with spirituality in such a deep way that most people don't understand it. But if you have had dealings with spirituality, spiritual masters, transcendence and sacredness in real life, then you will recognize the elements in this film. On the contrary, you will be baffled by the story and you will only think of this as a beautiful but empty film. But, not because you cannot see something, does it mean it does not exist.No, this is not Malick turned into a parody of himself. It is maximal Malick, the most accomplished one. Contemplation is the style. Transcendence is the way.So, in summary, if you are acquainted or would like to be acquainted with the Dao, Advaita, Zen or any other true religion, then you will find a quiet but storm-full mirror in this infinitely profound film. Might as well give it a try. Bliss is on the other side.

LENA Terrence Malick's Knight of Cups (2015) is a pretentious nonsense. Throwing attractive actors into a pretty footage and adding mysteriously suggestive narration does not make this 2-hour movie important or deserving attention. The result is boring, repetitive, and is a waste of viewer's time. How many beautiful models in designer closing can one add to a high-end Californian scenery without questioning such multiplication?Do you think that mentioning pregnancies, separations, family issues, into the protagonist's life can make him any more interesting? Or maybe you think that accentuating his observant neutrality in the midst of "love experience" or group sex highlights his Buddha-like detachment on the way to enlightenment? It is very surprising that this director dared to present this material as a film.

tomashardy This is my first review here and I give it to Malick knight of cups(since I spend almost 30 minutes on it,then give up),not because of loving this movie ,I did not figure out what's this movie talking about before seeing lots of review here actually,but I just want to ask that if there is kind of bottom line for a movie ,to say it is good or badI'm asking this is just because I have been through lots of movie in my country,they have the similar surface with this one,(Tiny Times 1,2,3,for example), no obvious story line ,just intersection of images,I'm not meaning that those young rookie directors in my country can be compared with Malick.