Movie News

Terrence Malick to direct Mel Gibson and Colin Farrell in TREE OF LIFE'

Published at: June 16, 2005, 8:59 p.m. CST

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with something exciting for us Terrence Malick fans. No, it's not a sequel to his awesome ghost writing on Stacey Keach's THE GRAVY TRAIN (or THE DION BROS), but a huge budget flick called TREE OF LIFE starring Mel Gibson and Collin Farrell via an Indian (not Native American Indian, but India Indian) Production House called Percept Picture Co. Supposedly this movie will cost around $145 million. I can't imagine anyone giving Malick that much money, but I'm so excited to see what he'll do with it. Percept hasn't confirmed this yet, but they're not denying it either, saying to wait for an official announcement next week.

Click here for HitList's scoop and the full story!!!


Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 16, 2005, 9:07 p.m. CST

    Mallick's Overrated.

    by RetroActive

    That's all I have to say.

  • June 16, 2005, 9:07 p.m. CST

    New Movie

    by sactoda

    I would love to see Gibson and Farrell in a movie. I would be interested in seeing this. Donna A.

  • June 16, 2005, 9:12 p.m. CST

    Stop it.

    by RetroActive

    First is for dorks. I don't recall when that started. But it's dumb.

  • June 16, 2005, 9:15 p.m. CST

    Mel Gibson is still acting?

    by Bean_

  • June 16, 2005, 9:26 p.m. CST

    I'm a Mel fan

    by JediStryker

    It'll be good to see him in another film. And The Passion was a great film. So there!

  • June 16, 2005, 9:38 p.m. CST

    What the heck is this movie even about

    by Meremoth

    Alright, so I'll I gleamed from this is that it stars Alexander the Great and Braveheart and 15% takes place in India. I'll shut up now

  • June 16, 2005, 9:39 p.m. CST

    Do we have to wait 7 years?

    by deadguy76

    Since it's been seven years since The Thin Red Line came out. Does Mel Gibson really have to be in it?

  • June 16, 2005, 9:49 p.m. CST

    Terence Malick films are true pieces of art

    by John-Locke

    And there aren't that many filmmakers around that you can say that about and truly mean it. If this story is true and really happens... well I for one can't wait to see the results especially if he really does have $145 Million. I guess this would also mean that the investors have seen The New World and are more than a little happy with it. Has anyone seen it yet? The trailer was out months ago but I

  • June 16, 2005, 10:16 p.m. CST

    The New World

    by RetroActive

    Here in Jersey tghey've been showing the trailer before Batman Begins. Cinematically, it looks beautiful...but it just looks like something I've seen before. Man encounters strange race of people (i.e. Englishman meets American Indian tribe in 1600's), is defeated/abducted by "the strangers" then joins their cause after coming to know them. It seems to have a bit of the Last of the Mohicans/The Mission feel about it...and I liked both of those, so I guess I'll just play wait and see. Hope that helps, John-Locke. Oh, and no release date/season attached.

  • June 16, 2005, 10:32 p.m. CST

    Colin Farrell is the Counting Crows of film

    by RetroActive

    talentless. and forced on us by the media. despite our strong resistance. tell me, anyone: Now that he's made close to a dozen films, which one puts him in the A-List acting category of his C-rated talent pool? The guy makes $10-20 mil a pic and all he's famous for is making an ass out of himself in interviews. Lucky bastard.

  • June 16, 2005, 10:40 p.m. CST

    Adult Swim

    by RetroActive

    Sorry Mr. Farrell. Mr. Olivier is doing a few laps with Ms. Davis & Mr. Day-Lewis in the big pool. And although you'd like to swim in there with them, you'll have to go back to drinking your own piss in the 2 ft. wading pool. But they did request that you pick up the tab over at the bar for them, since you make a filthy living mailing in mediocrity. Apparently, a stellar acting reputation still doesn't cover two rounds of the 18 yr old scotches...

  • June 16, 2005, 10:42 p.m. CST

    Who's Ms. Davis?

    by Ribbons

  • So maybe this is true. Seems kind of weird to be made up anyway.

  • June 16, 2005, 11 p.m. CST

    RetroActive - Why Do You Think Malick Is Overrated?

    by Roger Thornhill

    I'm curious to your reasons.

  • June 16, 2005, 11:09 p.m. CST

    Why would Malick cast Ferrall in 2 films?

    by blackstormy

    If Colin Ferral is such a bad actor why would a great director, who waits decades between films and has a Kubrician reputation for quality in films and intelligence, bow under the pressure of the media hype machine and cast him in his movies? Ferrall, although he is someone easy to hate, one must admit that he has a nice screen precence and is a hard worker. His acting has never been noticably bad to me, I'm no expert on acting, but do not let your hate of hollywood "it" pretty boys blind you from the fact that they do have some talent.

  • June 16, 2005, 11:24 p.m. CST

    John Smith vs. John Smith?

    by Osmosis Jones

    Think about it.

  • It's getting old.

  • June 16, 2005, 11:37 p.m. CST

    How does Webster's define "pretentious"?

    by Silver Shamrock

    1: making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing) b: expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature. Synonyms see SHOWY, TERRANCE MALICK

  • June 17, 2005, 12:35 a.m. CST

    Yeah, what's the plot??

    by godoffireinhell

    I'm supposed to get excited about this without a single word about the plot or even what genre it will be in?

  • June 17, 2005, 12:50 a.m. CST

    $145 million

    by El_Barstardo

    What the fuck? No WAY will this flick get that budget, unless it has spiderman swing by or something. www.armchairwarriors.net

  • June 17, 2005, 1:14 a.m. CST

    Osmosis - YOU RULE! Good catch!

    by Dannychico

    John Smith vs. John Smith. hehehe

  • June 17, 2005, 1:42 a.m. CST

    Why is there a need to make a cynical religious joke when Mel Gi

    by slappy jones

    dude, have you seen the passion of the christ? because that film answers your question......

  • June 17, 2005, 1:48 a.m. CST

    Wolf at the door

    by Dannychico

    "any hack can hire a decent cinematographer to make their film look good." - you don't really know anything about the dynamics of the director/D.P. relationship. also, the thin red line is certainly "arty," but it's not pretentious. look up the word before you misuse it again, please.

  • June 17, 2005, 2:28 a.m. CST

    Malick does not affect greater importance or merit. Neither do h

    by TonyWilson

    "GET IT" for want over a better phrase. If you don't like Malick it's because you are not on the same wavelength. I'm not saying your stupid or anything like that. Malick haters are clearly missing something from his films. But thats your baggage not a reflection on the excellent films.

  • June 17, 2005, 2:38 a.m. CST

    Gibson.Farrell.145 mill.

    by GiftedInThePants

  • June 17, 2005, 2:42 a.m. CST

    Get it?

    by GiftedInThePants

    LMAO stfu elitist snobby faggot. There's nothing to get. Thin Red Line sucked ass. nuff said rofflewaffles.

  • June 17, 2005, 2:48 a.m. CST

    Just wondering

    by sith-vol

    No one gets crucified in this do they?

  • June 17, 2005, 2:49 a.m. CST

    Ok are you talking about all 3 of Malicks films when you say he

    by TonyWilson

    There is plenty to get. Like i say you are just not seeing it. I have a great bullshit detector and can whiff pretentious bollocks at 30 paces. Malick's films all have something to say. Overtly or in more subtle manners. Calling something pretentious is an easy way to rubbish something you don't understand and a great way to stuck with the general consensus. p.s Wolf at the Door, is that from Hail to the Thief? Because i would have thought a fan of Radiohead would hate people using the word pretentious when applied to forward thinking art.

  • June 17, 2005, 2:50 a.m. CST

    Ribbons & Roger Thornhill

    by RetroActive

    Sorry. Was off to bed...then couldn't sleep. So hear you go... Ribbons...Ms. Davis is Bette Davis Thorhill: Looking @ Badlands & Days of Heaven Malick's what I'd call an "elemental" director. He's more focused on specific keys to a movie (i.e. sound, visuals) than telling a compelling story as a whole. And I think that the awards for his films really lie with his choice of cinematographer. His sotries are usually weak because he's too obsessed with the sunset in the background. nThat's wy his DP's win the awrds and he's overrated. All style. No substance. That's just my opinion, though. OKay. Back to bed. rip away. take care.

  • June 17, 2005, 2:52 a.m. CST

    Giftedinthepants

    by TonyWilson

    Look i made sure i didnt question the intelligence of people who dont like Malick. I simply said you cannot see what is clearly there, for whatever reason im not going to presume to know. I can tell you that his films are boundary pushing (esp Badlands) and intelligent. But you hve to go in with an openmind.

  • June 17, 2005, 3:04 a.m. CST

    True?

    by enemakid

    Possibly... I live in India and a local paper ran this story yesterday... they also mentioned (as a footnote) that Michael Douglas *MAY* also be involved

  • June 17, 2005, 3:13 a.m. CST

    No seriously, Does anyone know what this movie is about?

    by Meremoth

    i mean for all I know it could turn out to be some touchy feely chick flick or someting retarded like that. How am I supposed to be exited that a movie 'might' get made if I don't even know what the damn thing is about. Can someone enlighten me as to what it is about or are we simply supposed to enamored by the cast, director and big budget alone?

  • June 17, 2005, 3:14 a.m. CST

    Oh

    by enemakid

    Oh wait, thats the story they've linked to... Serves me right for not reading all the way through

  • June 17, 2005, 3:31 a.m. CST

    No I read the Damn Link

    by Meremoth

    That site still doesn't tell you a damn thing except that 15% is to be filmed in India

  • June 17, 2005, 3:51 a.m. CST

    I see the movies just fine

    by GiftedInThePants

    just because i don't fucking like it, doesn't mean I am not seeing it. Don't fucking condescend me!! LMAO LOTR SUCKS. Really though, it's an opinion. I got what the movie was trying to say. i think the movie sucks ass.

  • June 17, 2005, 3:55 a.m. CST

    If you got what the movie was trying to say and thinks it sucks

    by TonyWilson

  • June 17, 2005, 4:24 a.m. CST

    Choose George Clooney over Mel Gibson!!!

    by chien_sale

    Come on he`s better, more verstatile actor or in term of filmaking-wise. He`s got more respect than anybody around filmakers and fans. And he`s a stand-up guy(not nuts like Gibson).

  • June 17, 2005, 4:41 a.m. CST

    Pretend hooligans like Farrell and Crowe.

    by Trevor Goodchild

    Trying desperately hard to get a bad boy reputation because the fact is they play dress up for a living and wear makeup most days.

  • June 17, 2005, 7:30 a.m. CST

    Wow, with Farrel on board, good 'ole Mel will be back-flippi

    by Big_Bubbaloola

    1 (or 15) more for the road eh guys???

  • June 17, 2005, 7:49 a.m. CST

    Hypocrites who hate Gibson

    by liljuniorbrown

    Mel was a fanboy hero before he made Passion of the Christ,but because he sank his own money into a movie about Jesus he's all of a sudden Crazy or a Psycho.It just shows hatred of anything remotely religous.I'll bet you any amount of money that the same people that are calling him crazy either 1.Detest anything to do with christianity,not the religous right,just christianity in general. 2. Never watched The Passion of the Christ 3.Would have still called him a legend or hero if he would put his money and time into a movie on the life of any other controversial figure such as Hitler or Stalin or even Mohammed. My point is this, we can't judge everyone who practices a certain religon on the actions or attitudes of those who claim that religon but take it and twist it for there own hateful agenda such as the sept 11 terrorist or the Oaklahoma City Bomber. Thats people using there religon and power for the wrong purposes,not The Passion of the Christ or even Battlefield Earth as bad as it was. Being passionate about something you belive in and expressing it in a positive way is a huge part of creativity in the entertainment industry.This site used to be about movies but now every new story turns the TB area into a big debate over who voted for who or who prays to what God. I got news for ya Gibson,Farrell,Cruise,and Crowe are all going to be making movies and news stories on this site for a long time so lets just stick to critiquing there talent and or the roles they play and leave the personel shit to the Enquirer and the dumb asses who read shit like that. Sorry to rant but if i wanted to get into debates i'd go to Bill O'Reilly or Al Franken.com.I just want to read cool news about movies and see what assholes like me think about them without hearing everybodys half assed opinion about the way people who they'll never meet live there life.

  • June 17, 2005, 7:50 a.m. CST

    Sorry about my last post.

    by liljuniorbrown

    It was way to long and ranting, i wish i could erase half of it.It won't happen again.

  • June 17, 2005, 7:55 a.m. CST

    Never happen

    by NFLRefugee

    Mel doesn't care anymore. He'll pull a Brando: If I am up for it and the money is good, but then again, its work and I would rather do nothing. Colin Farrell is over (he never really began actually). He should stop ending the careers of great directors (I am sure Oliver Stone is still standing by his decision to cast him as Alexander the Great, it was Farrells lack of box office appeal that sunk Alexander) and go back to what he does best: drinking, cursing and giving STD's to starlets. (Conversation between Farrell and his pickled brain: 'I wish I was tough, and brooding like Sean Penn'). The difference between Penn and Farrell is that Penn has talent. He isn't a 'personality'. If I were Malick I would get a pay or play deal now. Because after New World tanks, he'll never have another pay check again. You can't get paid for loafing around Austin watching birds and putting your talent on hold for 20 odd years. I am sure he won't care. Keep in mind I'll see New World (it will be our last chance to see a new Malick film in a theatre, unless he gets an agent and makes The Mummy 3) but it will be an empty theatre. If Malick ever speaks it will sound like this: "I pissed away my career, thanks Colin. Hey, a blue jay."

  • June 17, 2005, 10:52 a.m. CST

    Whoa.

    by dr_dreadlocks

    Why does this sound like one of the more bizarre news stories? The seminal whore meets the seminal christian. It's like... a crusade in my mouth and everyone's invited. Although Malick is winning me over. My first experience with him was Thin Red Line, which I'm not going to start a rant about for fear of flaming talkbacks. I just didn't like it, sorry. But Badlands is a masterpiece, and The New World looks great. So, maybe just maybe, Malick will make some more kick ass films soon. Put himself in my good books. I doubt he'll care, but it's another thirty bucks of DVD sales. -- http://www.cafepress.com/thenewpulp

  • June 17, 2005, 11:52 a.m. CST

    one actually can call _days of heaven_ pretentious...

    by duanejones

    ...because, mindful or wolfie/OED, as referenced above, it is. doesn't mean it's not a good film -- it is. great, strange performances from sam shepard -- his film debut, if you ignore, as you should, _renaldo and clara_, aka, _tangled up in blow_ -- and the nearly forgotten (except, ick, by harmony korine) linda manz, whose voiceover is where the pretense begins. not her fault, you understand. it's terrence malick's. and _days_ is light years ahead in character insight, artistry, lack of narrative indolence, etc. from _thin red line_. i remember too vividly mel gibson's promise in early films like _gallipoli_ and _year of living dangerously_ to say he can't rise to the occasion of his talent again. not holding my breath, either. nor for this film's propects, nor colin farrell's. nor, should there be any doubt, terrence malick's...

  • June 17, 2005, 11:57 a.m. CST

    JediStryker, I'm a Mel fan too!!!

    by viola123

    I loved "The Passion of the Christ" and it'll be incredible if Mel and Colin do a movie together. Directed by Terrence Malick?! My gosh, just that casting/director team is awesome - or certainly promises to be. :)

  • June 17, 2005, 12:23 p.m. CST

    TRL does have a problem

    by Dannychico

    But it's not that it is "pretentious." It's that it's filled with useless and distracting cameos. Wolf at the door, the film didn't suit your tastes. So be it.

  • June 17, 2005, 12:57 p.m. CST

    TRL's problem

    by PVIII

    was losing Carson Daly. Aaand I'm not funny. Seriously though, TRL had too many "lets pan up to the foliage, get blinded by sunlight glinting off a river while be yelled at by some parrot and/ or monkey" scenes.

  • June 17, 2005, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Oh my God! This is so gonna rock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by revam

    I love Mel and Malick, and Colin ain't so bad either! Make it happen!

  • June 17, 2005, 3:18 p.m. CST

    Oh my God! This is so gonna rock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by revam

    Make it happen! I'm running around in circles now, flailing my arms around!

  • June 17, 2005, 3:20 p.m. CST

    AWEEEEESOMMMMMMMMMMEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by revam

    Ok, I'm gonna breathe now.

  • June 17, 2005, 3:22 p.m. CST

    Mel and Malick...... too good to be true

    by revam

    this is pure gold for me. I don't give a rats ass what you guys think of both, but if this happens, I'll be in heaven.

  • June 17, 2005, 3:47 p.m. CST

    I can't believe you guys liked Badlands...

    by _Maltheus_

    ...it was a complete ripoff of True Romance. ;-)

  • June 17, 2005, 4:29 p.m. CST

    Counting Crows and Tony Wilson

    by PantherMatt

    Whomever it was who titled their post "Colin Farrell is the Counting Crows of film" (Retroactive, right?) had me laughing so hard I just had to read this lengthy talkback, but come on, let's face it: That band is Talented. I can certainly dig not liking Counting Crows (i'm not a big fan, myself) but the band IS made up of talented players, whether you like Duritz's whining about that same damned girl or not... Tony Wilson brought up a nice point about Malick's work. Certainly TRL is beautifully filmed, and I freely admit that I didn't get it (as it's one of my least favorite movies of all time. Up there with Congo). But here's the thing: TRL is poorly paced, has a large cast of A-listers who mostly give outrageously bad performances, and the point of the danh thing can be summed up (to me) thusly: War Is Hell. Nature Perseveres. And that's not enough to sustain an endless live action Sunday Mark Trail comic strip, which is what TRL is most like, to me. Only Mark Trail is a better actor than most of the cast proved to be. Badlands, however is a wonderful film, and I strongly suggest you check it, if you haven't. So Malick erred with Thin Red Line. no biggie. Looking forward to New World...

  • June 17, 2005, 5:17 p.m. CST

    TRL

    by Mosquito March

    My problem with The Thin Red Line was that it seemed to want to do its audience's thinking for them, to the point that it became too obvious that, say, a shot of a crocodile represents man's animalistic nature. There were similar weak metaphors all over the place. And, every character, no matter how uneducated a person they'd probably be, given their presumably poor backgrounds, could debate metaphysics like fucking philosophy majors, and tirelessly and blatantly explained the themes of the movie to one another. It was like Malick decided to turn himself into thirty different characters and have them all share his singular point of view. The only character that I found compelling was Elias Koteas's conscientious objector. He seemed more like an actual human being than just a cypher for Malick's ideology, but even he wasn't saying anything that Malick hadn't already hit us over the head with 50 times. I guess that's my ultimate problem with that film - it repeatedly addressed deep, complicated issues in a very superficial, unengaging way. And, I hated having that reaction, because I really liked Badlands and Days of Heaven. Then again, those films were actual stories, with actual characters. TRL was all over the place.

  • June 17, 2005, 6:10 p.m. CST

    sensitivity

    by GiftedInThePants

    hey cocksucker, its my fucking opinion, and opinions aren't wrong. fucking nazi.

  • June 17, 2005, 7:01 p.m. CST

    Colin Farrel

    by RezE11even

    Stomps more ass than Godzilla and King Kong combined. That's a lot of ass, you wankers.

  • June 17, 2005, 11:49 p.m. CST

    Mel Gibson?

    by BAMF

    Malick just lost my ticket dollars. Guess that's why they call Gibson one of the most powerful men in Hollywood...he has the power to turn off my wallet.

  • June 18, 2005, 12:31 a.m. CST

    Thin Red Line was pretentious

    by mara_rhodesia

    But this project sounds very interesting

  • June 18, 2005, 10:51 a.m. CST

    There's always a wolf at the door as nobody is stupid enough

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Wolf at the door, just because you don't 'get' The Thin Red Line doesn't mean you should slag off people who do. Away and watch some Buffy episodes as that seems to be your intellectual level. Ooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww! I am the Kwisatz Haderach. That is enough.

  • June 18, 2005, 11:25 p.m. CST

    I'm a Mel fan too!

    by mara_rhodesia

    And I'm excited about this movie. I'm not exactly a Malick fan as I have not seen much of his films, but this sounds cool!

  • June 19, 2005, 1:29 p.m. CST

    I am huge Gibson fan

    by cynibun

    He is the first gorgeous man who could act in my generation, and I support him all the way. Brilliant director, and amazing actor as far as I am concerned. Would love to see this flick if made. Will be there with bells on, and as far as The Passion, made me cry like a baby and want to hug the entire planet, which is the only reaction he or God for that matter ever intended by that film. Love each other people is the only message of that film, love and forgiveness. You know Christ, hello??? That is what he was about.

  • June 19, 2005, 2:26 p.m. CST

    The "problem" with TRL?

    by flickhead3

    I think a large part of the brilliance of The Thin Red Line is the long stretches of what people who don't like it consider "boring." Think about it: for the soldiers in battles such as this, it would be long periods of staring around at trees and listening to f--king birds punctuated by a few minutes (or hours or days) of absolute hellish insanity. I think The Thin Red Line did more to get inside the mind of a WW2 soldier than any of that heroic, posturing action-adventure nonsense we get pelted by 9 times out of 10. (Sure, some of it's fun, but it has about as much to do with the real world as The Matrix does.)

  • June 19, 2005, 2:28 p.m. CST

    Oh, forgot to say:

    by flickhead3

    I like Terence Malick, I like Colin Farrell, and I usually like Mel Gibson, but like godoffireinhell said (in not quite the same set of words)... What's the frickin' story?!