The Color of Time

Well, I cannot say that I have read any poems by the poet this supposed biography makes a record of. I did start watching it with my lady fair and, hence, saw great potential for an evening of respite and romance... after all, surely a poetic movie will 'do the trick'? Sigh... after ten minutes, my impatient partner pulled the video out of the machine. Sigh, so ,hence, I cannot write a 'spoiler' since I do not know if this poet nixed himself from boredom in the end... Darn! Now I will have to research Wikipedia to find out the real story of an apparently perverted but boring and snoring life's, if movies are to be believed. If one cannot make it past the first ten minutes, why even a '3' for this thing? Oh, I might have watched it to see how much truth there is to it. But, sadly, never got anywhere near to understanding the reason behind this movie in the first place. Lesson to movie producers out there? If you are making a movie for arts sake then let the populace know that its purpose is not to entertain... this one seemed intended to drag people away from the story of poetry by immersing us in the poems and not the real life story...That movie about Stephen Hawking did not immerse us into Hawking's every living moment and astounding words. By trying to do this with this poet, the movie failed.

The story is not clear and the meaning behind it is not there. the cast is fine since we do not know the plot so we can not judge here right!

trying to tell a story based on a poem is a bit hard but may be they could fill in some gaps would make the entire experience much better.

Greetings again from the darkness. It's either a most unusual biopic on Pulitzer Prize winning poet CK Williams, an example of how director Terrence Malick has influenced the next wave of filmmakers, or a self-congratulatory exercise disguised as a class project. Regardless of your final take, most cinephiles will muster at least a modicum of interest in a film with 11 directors and 12 writers … each NYU film students during James Franco's time on campus as an adjunct professor.

We see the life of CK Williams through the flashbacks and memories of James Franco (as an adult Williams prepping for a reading of "Tar"). Williams as a child, as an adolescent, and as a college student (played by Henry Hopper, son of Dennis) offer a glimpse into the girls and events that helped shape his poetry. The sequence of Williams as a child is so similar to Malick's Tree of Life, that we viewers experience our own flashbacks … right down to Jessica Chastain recreating her scenes from that movie (this time as Williams' mother).

Mila Kunis plays Catherine, Williams' second and current wife, and it's clear – in a modern expressionist kind of way – that they are very happy together. There are a couple of disjointed sequences that come across as created simply to provide an outlet for Zach Braff and Bruce Campbell. However, when dealing with poetry, rules don't apply … at least that seems to be what this group of young filmmakers would have us believe. The washed out colors, fuzzy focus, shots of nature, and muted emotions dotted with monotone dialogue are all elements of artsy films. Whether these are the foundations of artsy films is a separate topic. Interspersed throughout are a couple of clips of CK Williams with his own readings.

Experimental filmmaking is always a risk and should not be discouraged. It's given us every advance in the medium for a century. It is a bit worrisome, however, when experimental film appears so similar to the work of a current master. Let's hope that's just the first step in the process of developing filmmakers. This one also acts as a reminder that turning poetry into actual images often defeats the purpose of the written words.

When i read the reviews (on rotten tomatoes also) i thought i didn't need to write my own, but i think that the audience had it all backwards. They kept on writing stuff like »came here because of Mila Kunis and was disappointed«. Don't you see that these actors are the very reason this film fails so badly? To be honest, what could you expect?

Mila and James (and even Jessica, damn it) are impersonating the hollow shells they are, so you can't even call this pretentious, it's honest to their characters, it's shallow, it's all for show. And the looks are not deceiving, the aesthetics of the movie are nice, but don't expect people to follow this for 90 minutes if you have no substance, no story, no narrative. Works for a video-clip, doesn't make for good feature length.

Poor film class students, just imagine what you could have achieved with such a high profile cast in the 70s. Mind you, they probably wouldn't have let you produce a mindless piece like this, back then.

If this film were about me i wouldn't be flattered. Or maybe i didn't get it: Was the author known to bore people to death? I don't know the poems of the writer as of yet, but a quick look on youtube tells me his ted speech is going to be more rewarding than this ordeal of a movie. So it had a positive outcome. It enticed me to research the author. I do hope he's better!

A boring movie that the creators thought would be cool, just because of the cool actors. The movie sounds like and endless poem, which many times repeats itself. There's basically no story, everything moves extremely slowly and the music makes it sad for no apparent reason. Of course it's one of those movies, many people would say it's artistic, therefore you should watch it. I'd say, don't watch it.