Faith in Film — Tree of Life

As we begin the second half of our exploration, tonight we'll tackle "Tree of Life," a fascinating and pensive movie, if a difficult watch.

Discussion Questions:
1. Did this movie work for you, why or why not?

2. How do you reconcile the nature of God with suffering in this world?

3. Why do bad things happen to good or innocent people?

4. What do you think of when you consider God? Who is God? How, as a mere human, can we rationally hope to understand God?

Thoughts:

Few films received as mixed response as “Tree of Life.” It won the Palm D’Orr at the Cannes Film Festival — the highest prize for a film at the festival — and was a Best Picture nominee. But it wasn’t universally lauded, or even understood. It seemed like those that saw the film fell into two camps — they loved it for the style and exploration of larger themes or hated it for the style and the way it tackled those themes. There was very little middle ground. Such is the fate of many Terrance Malick films.

Personally, I was moved by some of the larger fabric and ideas of this film, but wasn’t totally sold on the entire production. This is a completely non-linear film. There is no plot, per se, just a collection of musings, thoughts, reactions, and events that pertain to three characters — a mother, a father, and their son. This film is an exploration of some high-minded concepts — such as the meaning of life, the nature of grief, the contrast between the nature of God and the evil in this world, and the rationale for being a good person — that flow in a very deconstructed way. That combined with the fact the film weighs in at more than 2.5 hours were big turn offs to many audience members. That makes this a fascinating film. Also fascinating with the way Malick approaches these topics. It would be fair to say he comes at them as an agnostic — he seems open to faith but doesn’t quite get it.

The film begins with a quote from the book of Job 38:4, “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?" I think the intent in presenting that passage is to frame where Malick is coming from. He understands what he's supposed to believe about God, but like Job he cries out in frustration because of what he's experienced or seen. He's wrestling with how God answered Job; with his knowledge of God and the emotions of what he's seen in this life.

That's an interesting place to approach a film from. Malick also incorporates some philosophical approaches to this idea of faith and theology. I found an excellent companion to the film in the book "He Is There and He Is Not Silent," but Francis Schaeffer. It's not a light book or an easy read, but it really compliments these ideas. And that will help frame our discussion of this film tonight.

I think there's a few things to look at with this film. First, is how people struggle with the idea of God's goodness in a fallen world. Second, the way some people misconstrue the Gospel in trying to "comfort" people during times of grief and loss. You have to think both of those ideas are pressing on Malick, and are a reason for his meditation in this film.