Film Review: ‘Knight of Cups’

knight of cups

Christian Bale plays a lost soul adrift in Hollywood in Terrence Malick's latest impressionistic drama.

You go into a Terrence Malick movie expecting a gorgeous collage of sound and image, but not necessarily the sight of a neon-lit strip club, a Caesars Palace pool party, or a fashion shoot where a model is told to pose like “a dirty f—ing housewife.” In other words, there’s something at once vividly familiar and strikingly different about “Knight of Cups,” a feverish plunge into the toxic cloud of decadence swirling around a Los Angeles screenwriter gone to seed. Having made contemporary American life seem both recognizable and alien in “To the Wonder,” Malick now extends that film’s tender romantic ballet into a corrosive critique of Hollywood hedonism — a poisoned valentine to the industry by way of a Fellini-esque bacchanal. Those who have had their fill of the director’s impressionistic musings will find his seventh feature as empty as the lifestyle it puts on display; for the rest of us, there’s no denying this star-studded, never-a-dull-moment cinematic oddity represents another flawed but fascinating reframing of man’s place in the modern world.

With “To the Wonder” (2012) and now “Knight of Cups,” plus a still-untitled drama and the documentary “Voyage of Time” still to come, Malick has settled into a deeply personal and unusually productive vein, albeit one that all but his staunchest admirers may find wanting compared with his celebrated earlier work. Absent the grand historical subjects of “The Thin Red Line” and “The New World,” or the cosmic glories of “The Tree of Life,” the director has turned his focus on attractively forlorn wanderers set adrift in the present day, pursued by a restless, roving handheld camera that blurs their visions, memories, private moments and encounters with others into one convulsive stream of consciousness. To see our 21st-century reality from Malick’s exalted perspective (mediated once again by the superb eye of d.p. Emmanuel Lubezki) is to feel at once astonished and mildly deflated; it’s as if he were encouraging us to look at our everyday surroundings anew, but also working overtime to extract something profound from the overriding banality of modern life.

At the same time, given how few filmmakers of Malick’s stature have made this kind of moral and spiritual inquiry so central to their work, it’s hard not to be taken with a movie that opens with an audio excerpt from “The Pilgrim’s Progress” (recited by John Gielgud), then pauses for some stunningly beautiful images of the aurora borealis as seen from outer space, before settling on the figure of a bedraggled-looking Christian Bale walking around a lonely desert landscape. A narrator (voiced by Brian Dennehy) recounts an ancient tale of a knight from the East who was sent westward by his father in search of a magnificent pearl, but drank from a fateful cup that caused him to fall into a deep slumber. We can safely infer that Bale’s character (identified as “Rick” in the closing credits) is meant to be a latter-day stand-in for that knight, a Hollywood type who has embraced la dolce vita and lost his sense of self in the process. “All those years, living the life of someone I didn’t know,” Rick murmurs in one of the film’s many voiceovers, the preferred method of communication for this otherwise tight-lipped character.

If that sounds like too simplistic a premise for a 118-minute feature, the result is sufficiently sprawling and formally bold to propel the viewer’s attention forward, guided in part by the glitziness of the L.A. locations (abetted by Malick’s regular production designer, Jack Fisk) and the dynamic movement of the camera. Following a violent earthquake that rattles the foundations of Rick’s Santa Monica apartment, we find ourselves immersed in the lazy rhythms of life as he has come to know it — conveyed in brief sensory snippets of him speeding down the 405 in a convertible, hanging around seemingly empty studio lots (Warner Bros. and Paramount make fleeting appearances), visiting the CAA compound in Century City, and cavorting with all manner of lissome young women in nightclubs and hotel suites. The pulsating background music in these scenes stands in jarring contrast to the passages of Grieg, Chopin, Pachelbel, Debussy, Arvo Part and other selections that otherwise flood the soundtrack in classically Malickian fashion, complemented by a recurring seven-note progression that forms the basis of the score by “To the Wonder” composer Hanan Townshend.

The Knight of Cups is an explicit reference to one of the cards of the tarot, marking Rick as someone who is restless, artistic, romantic and adventurous by temperament. Many of the other figures in Rick’s life are introduced with their own handy tarot symbols, lending the proceedings a somewhat cleaner, more episodic structure than usual; in perhaps Malick’s most nakedly autobiographical touch, Rick is revealed to have two younger brothers, one of whom died tragically young (and is referred to as “the Hanged Man”). His other brother (Wes Bentley) is a volatile figure prone to ferocious physical and emotional outbursts, most of which are directed at their aging father (Brian Dennehy) — his tarot card is “the Hermit” — whose pride in Rick’s achievements is tempered by disapproval of the life he now leads.

That life, and indeed the movie itself, is largely consumed with the comings and goings of many, many beautiful women, and if “To the Wonder” seemed sexually forward compared with the director’s earlier work, then “Knight of Cups” often feels downright transgressive. While there are no straight-up sex scenes, there is ample female nudity, a suggestion of a threesome, and what is surely the first instance of erotic toe sucking in Malick’s oeuvre. The women themselves include the petite, pink-wigged Della (Imogen Poots), who tags along with Rick for a while; Karen (Teresa Palmer), a stripper he runs around with in Vegas; and Helen (Freida Pinto), a gorgeous model he first encounters at a gaudy party attended by a veritable who’s-who of bigscreen and smallscreen talent; these include Antonio Banderas, Jason Clarke, Nick Kroll and Joe Lo Truglio, among others. Whether these actors were hired for walk-on appearances, or cast in larger roles that were then whittled down to mere seconds of screen time (probably the former, but you never know), this is one setting where Malick’s penchant for casting A-list talent feels more germane than usual.

While there is mercifully less of the incessant earth-mother spinning and twirling from “To the Wonder,” the women here still do plenty of dancing and running about, often with our hero in ardent pursuit; the film’s signature shot finds Rick walking along the beaches of Malibu with one of his fetching paramours in tow, frequently pausing to dip their feet in the surf. A more substantial kind of romantic drama emerges along with the film’s two top-billed actresses: Cate Blanchett surfaces in flashback as Rick’s ex-wife, a hard-working doctor whom we see growing disenchanted with her increasingly unmoored spouse, while Natalie Portman appears later on as Elizabeth, a married woman who has a brief fling with Rick and finds herself pregnant and guilt-stricken shortly thereafter.

Despite the strong emotional undercurrents in these scenes, the feeling persists that these excellent actors — particularly Blanchett, her striking features and natural expressiveness fascinatingly at odds with the prevailing aesthetic — are being confined by their fundamentally archetypal roles. At this point, too, there is something inevitably reductive about Malick’s primary conception of women as love interests passing through the revolving door of Rick’s life, a problem that would grate more if the man himself were less of a cipher. Even allowing for the director’s way of treating actors as vessels for his themes and ideas, and his gift for using blocking and body language to convey meaning, it’s hard not to notice the degree to which Bale’s magnetism has been drained away here.

Similar things were said of Ben Affleck in “To the Wonder,” of course, but he had less onscreen charisma in the bank to start with, which made sense for the reserved, emotionally indecisive man he was playing. Rick, although similarly hard to read, could have at least conveyed a modicum of the creative spark or energy that ostensibly brought him to his current high-low point; the press synopsis describes him as a “comedy writer,” but there’s little in the film — or indeed, in Malick’s largely humorless style — to bear out that description.

Unsurprisingly for a filmmaker who has steered clear of any conventional or commercially driven rubric over the course of his four-decade career, “Knight of Cups” reveals little interest in dissecting the industry at hand or providing any concrete insights into the art-making process. Malick remains concerned almost entirely with interior states; with the spiritual connections that are forged and ruptured between individuals; and with the grim consequences of a life lived in continual exposure to the world and its most corrupt elements. (In that respect, one movie it clearly recalls is Sofia Coppola’s “Somewhere,” another example of an auteur employing a highly specific, image-driven cinematic language to explore celebrity ennui.) It’s a moralistic stance that may in and of itself cause certain viewers to recoil, particularly when Dennehy’s earnest, prayerful father figure and Armin Mueller-Stahl as a grave-looking priest are on hand to nudge Rick back toward the straight and narrow.

Those tarot references aside, Malick’s view remains a deeply and unapologetically Christian one; Rick’s story may echo that of the lost knight, but it also has obvious roots in the parable of the prodigal son, and throughout “Knight of Cups” you can just about make out the voice of a father patiently, insistently calling his wayward child home. It’s that instinctive compassion that keeps the film from turning crushingly didactic, along with the myriad aesthetic pleasures afforded by the Malick’s typically dense layering of image, sound and music. Shooting in Los Angeles for the first time (on a mix of 35mm, 65mm and digital formats), he proves particularly attentive to the ambient drone of traffic and the glittering lights of downtown at night. Once more, too, he finds poetic contrasts between external and internal spaces, an untamed wilderness and a glassy modernist cityscape — or in this case, between the natural splendor of the ocean and the beautiful prison of a swimming pool.

Film Review: 'Knight of Cups'

Reviewed at Aidikoff screening room, Beverly Hills, Feb. 4, 2015. (In Berlin Film Festival — competing.) Running time: 118 MIN.


A Broad Green Pictures release of a Waypoint Entertainment presentation in association with FilmNation Entertainment. (International sales: FilmNation Entertainment, New York/Beverly Hills.) Produced by Nicolas Gonda, Sarah Green, Ken Kao. Executive producers, Glen Basner, Tanner Beard. Co-producers, Hans Graffunder, Elizabeth Lodge. Co-executive producer, Christos V. Konstantakopoulos.


Directed, written by Terrence Malick. Camera (color, widescreen, 35mm/65mm/HD), Emmanuel Lubezki; editors, Geoffrey Richman, Keith Fraase, A.J. Edwards; music, Hanan Townshend; production designer, Jack Fisk; art director, Ruth De Jong; set decorator, Beauchamp Fontaine; costume designer, Jacqueline West; sound (Dolby Digital), Susumi Tokunow; supervising sound editor/re-recording mixer, Joel Dougherty; visual effects supervisor, Jamison Goei; visual effects, Rez-Illusion; associate producers, David Melito, Morgan Pollitt, Tyler Savage; assistant director, Sebastian Silva; casting, Francine Maisler.


Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Natalie Portman, Brian Dennehy, Antonio Banderas, Wes Bentley, Isabel Lucas, Teresa Palmer, Armin Mueller-Stahl, Freida Pinto, Cherry Jones. Voice: Ben Kingsley.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 14

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Con macky says:

    Dire! Worst film ever! If you like watching a spoilt, boring and arrogant guys life in slow motion with the added bonus of constant whispering voice over speaking gibberish then this is the film for you. So disappointing Natalie Portman associated with this as she is better than this

  2. Amin says:

    If you want to change your view of movie and art, then watch Knight Of Cups. this movie touched my heart so deeply and I learned so much from it.

  3. bob meier says:

    I saw Knight Of Cups last night and loved it…your review clarifies and reminds me of the many wonderful things and ideas in Mallick’s film. In the narcotic-like blur the film gave me, there was a lot that you perceived that I did not..or simply merely observed rather than comprehended or took in in any way. Obviously this is a film that would profit from more than one viewing-like anything worth seeing.

  4. DeDee says:

    I have to say that your review was difficult to understand with all the unusual words you used throughout! Why do people feel that unusual words will make their writings appear more intelligent! I really dislike anything that I have to look up meanings of words throughout their dissertation. In addition, why write a BOOK as your review?? All that you said could have been written much simpler and more concise. In addition, it was BS!

    • bob meier says:

      Yeah DeDee gag me with a spoon-you said it girl! I hate big words and thinking too much about something. I mean I can watch a Mallick movie and get it right away..I don’t need any help from some egghead film nerd. You wanna catch the new Batman movie, girlfriend?…now That I could read an in depth review of. See you at the mall honey.

  5. Bob Ellis says:

    Saw the film a few days ago, enjoyed it. Still thinking about it. This review shows great insight into the film and Malick’s methods.

  6. Adam says:

    I loved the first half of this movie, then it sort of just dragged on thereafter. A couple of unnecessary scenes with the brother did not add too much to the feel of the movie, and they kept on repeating a melody through various scenes which became a little irritating. With that being said, I felt the movie had a very powerful message and the imagery suited the themes of the movie very well. It makes you re-evaluate your direction in life and how the idea of happiness is twisted by our material society.

  7. Lance Spencer says:

    Malick tends to dig to the core of life. Many people are uncunfortable with this digging, or they have it “figured out” so any introspection is not wanted or needed. I haven’t seen the film yet but I’m pretty sure I will enjoy it based on what I’ve read. He is digging into what gives us meaning and purpose in life, he tends to use distraction as a theme in a lot of his films. For example, Bale is using theme women as a way to distract himself from his true meaning or purpose. To me, this is quite eloquent as this is the basis for human motivation. The emotional suffering is bandaged by distractions from our various vices.

  8. Bart Dickens says:

    Saw the movie last night at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival. Wow not sure how the second half was, I walked, no more like ran out. Do people really like this stuff or do they just feel like some
    “critic” tells us to like it, so they act like they “appreciate” the movie?

  9. Elaine says:

    Thank you for writing this review, I like your review. Just watched it today, I am big fan of Malick and I enjoy it very much, but I got to say, if you are not the fan of Malick, you are probably not into knight of cups.

  10. James R. Hermann says:


    This is my first time reading one of your reviews and thank you for the effort you put into it and the balance you maintain as you take us through this film. I am a fan of Malick Thin Red Line. I really appreciate how you put this film in the context of his other works, with reference to the actors, your analysis of the film and how it was (apparently) put together. I feel like I learned something more than just about this movie, so I really enjoyed reading this review. I think it will enhance my enjoyment if I watch the movie, though the implied West Coast narcissism is off putting to this simple Midwesterner. Great job.

    Jim H

  11. JJ says:

    this sounds awful

  12. LOL says:

    Malick needs to get a H’wood studio to front his next feature. They were doing it up until 10 years ago, they ought to continue. Gosh, even Kubrick would’ve probably had to go the indie route had he lived and continued to make pictures.

  13. Peggy says:

    Call me when the one with Fassbender and rock music comes out.

More Film News from Variety