Badlands (1973) User Reviews

Badlands, you gotta live it everyday...

[dbdumonteil · 9/10 · 28 November 2004]

It's really a shame that Terrence Malick didn't have the brilliant career he deserved at Hollywood. Shot with a nearly shoestring budget, "Badlands" remains one of the most dazzling debut movies of all time. Malick's legend based on his (long) absence has helped it to become a cult-movie. Inspired by a tragic short news item which took place in 1959 (a young couple who decides to commit a series of free murders to leave a mark in history), the odds are that Malick's first feature-length movie inspired Oliver Stone and Quentin Tarantino for their dangerous and irresponsible "Natural Born Killers" (1994). Concerning Tarantino, I read an interview about him in which he expressed his admiration of Malick's work. It shows that the author of "Pulp Fiction" (1994) has a great esteem for this talented and mysterious film-maker. At the same time, we can also note down that Malick's work inspired Bruce "the Boss" Springsteen two songs: "Badlands" on his "darkness on the edge of town" album (1978) and "nebraska" on the eponymous LP(1982).

An American journalist had written that "Badlands" was the best mastered movie in the history of cinema since "Citizen Kane" (1941) by Orson Welles. One can judge this affirmation as exaggerated but it is nevertheless indisputable that Malick's opus strikes on numerous aspects: an assertive and opaque story, a fluid making, a relevant screenplay, an original photography which gives to the landscapes an image of desolation and lost paradise perturbed by a free violence. The work is also strongly steeped in a certain poetry.

Concerning the two main characters, a French critic had written that it was difficult to feel liking for these two irresponsible. I think that this critic badly analyzed the film. Terrence Malick doesn't try to make them likable to us. He describes them without kindness and condescension. They haven't got an imposing personality and live only through an intermediary myth. It is particularly obvious for the young man (Martin Sheen) who is obsessed with James Dean. One can also say that Sissi Spacek's voice-over which tells this dramatic story is of an amazing neutrality. Then, unlike many criminal lovers, Sheen and Spacek will live at the heart of this violence and the latter won't bring them together or take them away.

With "Badlands", Malick was judicious for the choice of the actors. In a way, his first movie enabled to put Sheen and Spacek on the map and it also launched their respective careers. Then, what happened to Terrence Malick after this sensational debut movie? A second movie, "Days of Heaven" (1978) starring Richard Gere as successful as "Badlands". After that, for twenty years, nothing. However, in 1998, Malick made a rather successful come-back with "the Thin Red Line" (1998). According to the latest news, he would currently shoot a movie about the first years of America's colonization in the beginning of the seventeenth century. If my memory serves me well, the movie will be released next year. Let's hope so...

Like this?try these....

"gun crazy" ,Joseph H.Lewis ,1950

"you only live once" Fritz Lang,1936

"Bonnie and Clyde" Arthur Penn,1967

"Saw her standing on her front porch, just a-twirling her baton..."

[paul2001sw-1 · 8/10 · 26 November 2003]

The serial killer genre is the most overdone in modern cinema, but director Terrence Mallick took a real life story to make his powerful debut, 'Badlands'. He even toned it down, his interest being not in presenting a picture of pure (and wholly artificial) evil but rather in portraying a wholly human story. Murder is depicted here in all its banality - people shot (off-screen) through locked doors, by a young man acting for wholly normal motives but without the customary restraints on behaviour that we term morals. The result is a haunting, though occasionally pretentious, study of individuals drifting beyond the bounds of civilisation, their physical location (America's still-wild west) symbolically matching their mental isolation. Sissy Spacek is particularly good as the ordinary girl just along for the ride. A fine film, 'Badlands' is also genuinely disturbing, in a way that Hannibal Lector could only dream of.

"If I could sing a song about the way I feel right now... it'd be a hit."

[alexander-978-692186 · 9/10 · 28 July 2020]

Badlands is a dark 1970s existential road oddity through the Badlands of the midwest with fugitive Kit and his 15 crush Holly. The story, which is set in the 1950s, seems to exist in a fairytale, and this element is one of the reasons I love this film. The film is mostly spoken through the internal monologue of Holly, delivering the film as a tale or fable. She encounters a war veteran who collects garbage, a man with images of grandeur, who has nothing to live for and nothing to lose. When the two social misfits hit it off, her protective father disapproves and kills her dog, bags it and dumps it into the river as punishment; a rather drastic measure. It does go some way to explain why Holly, who we must remember is 15, seems to be benevolent to the actions of Kit when he starts to murder people who pose a threat to Holly and their survival. Both father and lover seem to resort to vicious, violent acts to protect her. He naivete does not survive the whole film though, as she tires of their time on the road, she dreams of the man she will marry, what he looks like, and where he might be right now.

While it is important to note that the film was inspired by the real-life serial killer Charles Starkweather and his lover-or captive-Caril Fugate', one should not assume the script is a retelling of their story. Malick does not reference them in the movie, and it must be said Charles Starkweather's story was more horrific in every detail. Badlands is more a coming of age story for Holly, a fall from grace for Kit, and the fairytale they lived in the moments in between.

I must admit that I adore the dialogue from this film, the subtle interactions, often littered with dark humour, and an air of altruism fill the film with a poetry that is complemented by the exquisite imagery of the Badlands, nature and the most incredible shot of Martin Sheen holding his rifle over this shoulder as the sun sets. The soundtrack further accents the mood of the film, bringing the entire atmosphere to one that envelopes you.

The voice of innocence whispers in our ears...

[Balthazar-5 · 10/10 · 4 February 2005]

Is it really possible that this luminous masterpiece is a first feature film? It is as though Mozart had started his career in composition with one of his mature symphonies. What is totally special about 'Badlands' is the visual control that Terrence Malick applies to the story, and his use of fabulous music to embed his amazing images in our mind. The 'Bonnie & Clyde'-ish story could have been turgid, but Malick turns it into a mythic journey.

At the heart of Malick's method is the fabulous interior monologue by Holly explaining and ironically commenting on the story. "Kit made me take my schoolbooks so I wouldn't fall behind with my studies...". This has been characteristic of each of Malick's films - Linda in 'Days of Heaven' and Witt in 'The Thin Red Line' have somewhat similar monologues - and 'New World' is monumentalised by the haunting monologue/montage with which it ends. Here it totally sucks the viewer into the story and makes the montages that it accompanies into, just about, the high-point of seventies cinema.

Alongside this, Malick uses some of the most haunting music in existence. Whether it is Carl Orff or Nat King Cole, Malick transports us with fabulous romantic imagery that perfectly balances it.

I started on this comment determined not to use the word 'poetry', but I just can't avoid it. With nearly all filmmakers, including very great ones, the style that they present is very much prose - great prose, perhaps, but firmly rooted on the ground. With Malick, we are taken, emotionally, to the stars by the lyric magnificence of the totality of his vision.

It is said that Welles learned cinema by watching John Ford's 'Stagecoach' before embarking on 'Citizen Kane'. Every young filmmaker should watch this amazing masterpiece again and again and again and inform their work with Malick's matchless sense of true cinema.

Desperados Detached

[Lechuguilla · 9/10 · 24 July 2006]

In January, 1958, nineteen-year-old Charles Starkweather and fourteen-year-old Caril Ann Fugate went on a murder spree in Nebraska and Wyoming. Eleven innocent people died. Most, though not all, of the killings were random. Starkweather and Fugate's story "inspired" several films, including this one.

In "Badlands", the pair's names were changed to Kit Carruthers (Martin Sheen) and Holly Sargis (Sissy Spacek), and their ages were altered slightly. From what I have read, Starkweather and Fugate were emotionally detached and casual about the killings, especially Charles, once the initial murders had occurred. Both Sheen and Spacek do a good job of mimicking this nonchalant attitude. At various points throughout the film, Holly narrates the story in an emotionless, monotone voice. It's like she's reading a diary of what happened as we, the viewers, watch movie footage of the events.

The film's title is appropriate, given that the characters' inner lives must surely have been wastelands, and given that the film's plot takes place mostly outdoors, on the lonesome High Plains, with its brooding and "stark" landscape.

The film's color cinematography conveys a mood of desolation, especially in those scenes that contain little more than the horizon, expansive blue sky, treeless plains, and a couple of lonely desperados. At one point, the color morphs into sepia-tinted images of small town America, as the whole country, in fear, takes up arms against the fugitives, a photographic change that renders an almost documentary tone to the film.

From time to time, classical background music accompanies the senseless violence, a cinematic contrast so "stark" as to make the film surreal. And, of course, the sequence toward the end where Kit and Holly, with car radio on, dance in the headlights as Nat King Cole sings "A Blossom Fell", is truly mournful and haunting.

"Badlands" is incredibly understated and low-key, as detached as the characters portrayed. Director Terrence Malick conveys a simple, uninvolved story, packaged in a film that makes no effort to communicate either symbolism or thematic depth. Nor does the film render judgments about the characters or events. It's an approach that probably wouldn't work today. But it is effective, and through the years the film has gradually become more respected as an excellent character study of 1950's teen rebels without a cause.

cool, disinterested study of amoral pair

[thomandybish · 15 May 2001]

BADLANDS is an intelligent little film. We're given characters and situations and left to make our own conclusions. Based on an actual young couple who went on a killing spree across the southwest in the late 1950s, the story has two young people doing their own thing with precious little in the way of ethics to guide them. It's interesting to note that both these kids substitute their own fantasies for any sense of order or responsibility that society may have to offer. The turning point comes when Kit and Holly decide to shuck their semblances of normal life for whatever their fantasies provide which, unfortunately, can't sustain them. Sheen's Kit is full of swagger and bravado; it's almost easy for someone to see him committing robberies and serial murders. Spacek's Holly is more intriguing: a soft, vanilla, invisible girl from a respectable, emotionally detached home, she seemingly possesses little in the way of what one would associate with a violent criminal. Yet, she accompanies Kit, with nothing in the way of reservations or regret. The chance to fulfill her vapid, movie magazine fantasies, if only by hiding out in the woods and applying makeup, seem infinitely more palatable than her dull existence twirling batons in her yard(it's interesting to note that one of the few things she takes away from her home is a highly romanticized, Maxfield Parrish print). These misguided illusions, along with her adolescent love for Kit, keep her going to the end. A worthwhile exploration of the bland, vacant American sensibility that values appearances or passive, benign behavior over real ethics and personal morality. And definitely more relevant as the years have passed.

Film Review – Badlands

[anthonygreen93 · 6/10 · 26 August 2012]

Terrence Malick's crime-drama Badlands (1973), loosely based on the real-life murder spree of Charles Starkweather in 1958, is a harrowing and bleak film on a teenager's murderous adventure with his girlfriend. The film is told from the perspective of Holly (Sissy Spacek), a lost teenager living in a dull South Dakota town. She narrates the love story between herself and Kit (Martin Sheen), a young, charming man with looks that aren't dissimilar from James Dean. Holly is so smitten by him that she is corralled into becoming an accomplice during his killing spree, which commences with the murder of her disapproving father.

Initially, the couple finds temporary relaxation, living in a forest with wooden shelter and animals to feed on. However, when Kit senses danger from three men holding shotguns, he ruthlessly guns them down before they get the chance to threaten. This begins a pattern that transpires like dominos falling down one after the other as Kit murders anyone and everyone that stands in his path.

The film is well photographed by Tak Fujimoto with beautiful aesthetics of the colourful, vibrant and natural American countryside. This is the high point of Malick's film as well as the great performance from Martin Sheen. Whilst the story was engaging, it became too repetitive and tiresome after the same scenarios occurring from place to place on their killing spree. Personally, I found Badlands to be quite similar to Arthur Penn's Bonnie and Clyde. However, Penn's is a far greater film to Malick's as Bonnie and Clyde has a superior constructed narrative consisting of characters that were explored with more depth

Although I didn't particularly enjoy Badlands, it must be acknowledged that it is an impressive debut feature-film from Malick, which is the start of a lengthy and impressive career.

Landmark film. One of the best directorial debuts

[ODDBear · 10/10 · 3 June 2005]

Kit is a garbage man, Holly just a teenager living with her father. Kit and Holly get together and Holly's father disapproves. Kit kills Holly's father and together they go on the lam and a few others get killed in the proceedings.

This 1973 landmark film was the directorial debut of one Terrence Malick. It's been described by many as one of the most mature debuts in film history. The numbness of Sheen's and Spacek's characters is haunting and makes a very strong point and it's very hard to swallow. Spacek's voice-over, which tells how she experiences life with Kit, is disturbing and yet, poetically beautiful. The sheer innocence of her character, her bright-eyed view of the world, her acceptance of Kit's explanations make a stronger point in the examination of two completely alienated individuals than any other movie I can think of.

Martin Sheen has never been better than here. His Kit, obsessed with James Dean apparently, is one of cinema's coldest villains. His utter detachment in all the proceedings is a wonder to behold. He's completely numb and that's more haunting than any outburst of rage. He's a flawed product of society. He doesn't feel evil, he just doesn't feel anything. Sissy Spacek is also wonderful in her role, giving a very memorable performance as Holly.

Terence Malick's direction is superb. The cinematography by Tak Fujimoto is beautiful, every frame simply looks stunning and he captures the era wonderfully. It's hard to believe this film is over 30 years old. The music is also very good, with a catchy melody which seems to go well the innocence portrayed in Spacek's character. This almost feels like a children's tune.

This film is considered to be loosely based on the real life killing spree committed by Charlie Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate in 1958. Starkweather was executed and up until his last day alive, he said that Caril was just an observer but finally said she was as guilty of the killings as he, even initiating some herself.

Badlands however says in the end credits that the story is fictional.

One of the best films of the 1970's.

A very beautiful film; does it have any other purpose?

[osdenflux · 7/10 · 5 May 2010]

It has been said that Badlands was in part a reaction to the romanticising of deviance and criminality in films such as Bonnie and Clyde. In that film the protagonists were played by two fabulous-looking, charismatic (not to mention talented) actors. I came away feeling that Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow would have been great fun to hang around with--dangerous, sexy fun.

Badlands is not like that. Sure, no-one would really want to be like or spend time with Kit Carruthers (based directly on fifties killer Charles Starkweather). But I was troubled by several aspects of this stunningly put together film. Essentially, it is fine craftsmanship created around a very difficult subject with little exploration of the characters, their motivations or the consequences of their actions. What remains for the viewer but a kind of detached voyeurism?

Cruel and cowardly, Charlie Starkweather was full of self-loathing, believed himself a failure and felt his life was doomed to misery. Murder is a simple act that even the sub-intelligent can commit, but it has staggering consequences. Having killed, Starkweather changed; in a way he grew. He felt himself to have achieved something. It completed the sad story that was his life.

Kit Carruthers, on the other hand, slouches, mumbles and poses throughout Badlands. We know almost nothing of his past. Of course, the narrative follows Holly's point of view, but since she appears to be in a dream and virtually clueless throughout the whole affair, how useful is this narrative method? At the end Kit is pretty much his same inscrutable self as at the beginning, except now he is famous. He's kinda cool and he knows it. When he kills it's as if he has met some unpleasant but important obligation that only he is qualified for. The murders themselves are sterilised, just a bang and the victim quietly lies down. The sets and locations are picturesque, the actors are picturesque, the murders are picturesque...

The 1957 film In Cold Blood is a gripping example of what can be achieved when something of the nature of spree/serial killers is explored, when the consequences of their actions is stark and real, and when the people inside them are glimpsed. (And there are people inside, badly damaged and loathsome, but fascinating.)

A sophisticated exploration of the nature of good and evil

[jongru · 9/10 · 24 January 1999]

Surely one of the most brilliant films ever made. The haunting music and cinematography would almost suffice by itself. The hero is little more than a child: the heroine his willing accomplice, and we are made to question what is good and what is evil by seeing the world through the eyes of children. From the moment when the girl's father shoots her dog to punish her, we lose any loyalty to traditional values or to the rights of parents over their children. By the end, it's obvious to us that society doesn't value the lives of those who were killed. It anticipates Natural Born Killers, but perhaps says more and uses a tighter structure.

Brilliantly acted and directed, with many layers to it. A film to watch again and again.

A Not Unimpressive Amoral Film

[Theo Robertson · 7/10 · 30 July 2005]

While the end credits were rolling I noticed an on screen disclaimer along the lines of " All the characters and situations are fictional and any relation between the events depicted in this film is entirely coincidental " which had me scratching my head because whenever I read about Terence Malik's BADLANDS I'm told that it's based on a true story about two teenage lovers who went on a killing spree in 1950s America . Thank you very much IMDb for pointing out via the trivia section and other reviewers comments as to why the producers suddenly wanted everyone to think that this is not intended as a true story . I'm sure it would have been impossible to make anti heroes out of the true life protagonists

As it stands Kit and Holly are portrayed as two amoral children living out a childhood wish fulfillment . They kill someone and then spend a long period of time living out in the woods . It's almost like these childhood fantasies we have when we're younger how wonderful it would be if we could just escape from a world of industrialization and adults and just do whatever the hell we wanted with no interference and the point is hammered home when Kit builds a tree house out in the woods . Who but a child has ambitions to spend their life in a tree house ? However I find myself asking myself how this would be possible , is it likely that two teenagers wanted for murder , who have no probable experience of rural life and who both smoke cigarettes being to live off the land without having to buy groceries or go into town ? I could have accepted this if it stuck to a true story but not if it's been heavily fictionalised . Likewise we really don't find out the motivation behind the killing spree , Kit and Holly ( Well Kit since Holly is portrayed as being a bystander of sorts ) allow some people to live and some people to die without any rhyme or reason to it . Come to think of it perhaps the reason BADLANDS is so well regarded is because it's supposedly based on a true story . If you start looking upon it as a made up story it seems shallow and unimpressive for the most part doesn't it ?

Not to be negative this is a good debut by director Terance Malik who manages to bring out two very good performances from the then fairly unknown Sissy Spacek and Martin Sheen . Remember I said something about childhood wish fulfillment ? that's exactly how Spacek and Sheen play their roles - As two children with misguided views on the world in general and love in particular . It's as if Kit and Holly are unaware of what consequence is , which again seems like a child's mentality would be . I also couldn't help noticing that Malik seems to have a great love of nature with shots of wild life and glorious and beautiful sun sets filling the screen , something he used in his later masterwork of THE THIN RED LINE which made me ask myself if Malik is a member of Greenpeace ? Perhaps not since he's an auteur who seems to know that while there's great beauty in nature there's also great cruelty present too

A good though perhaps not great example of cinema from the 1970s when amorality was all the rage

Slower Is Better In This Crime Tale

[ccthemovieman-1 · 9/10 · 29 October 2005]

Made in the early 1970s, this was more of classic type crime story than a modern-day one in that the violence wasn't overdone and it was a slower-paced story than what you would see if re-made today.

That slower pace makes for a better study of the two main characters, who were based on the real-life serial-killing duo of the 1950s: Charles Starkweather and his girlfriend.

Martin Sheen's Starkweather-type character "Kit Carruthers" is amazingly low- key for a killer and Sissy Spacek, playing his girl, "Holly," shows some really strange reactions (she hardly reacts after Sheen shoots her father) while providing fascinating narration. In fact, the more I watch this film, the more Spacek's narration is the highlight for me. It's great stuff.

Being a Terrence Malick-directed film, you know you are going to get some nice photography. He really loves closeups of nature. Another plus is the absence of profanity. There is very little of it.

Not just a dramatization of real events, but a romanticized portrait of crime...

[moonspinner55 · 7/10 · 28 April 2006]

In the 1950s, a quiet but quick-thinking young man who postures like James Dean stirs up trouble for a simple teenage girl living with her father; he eventually takes her on a journey across several states by car, leaving dead bodies in their wake. Dreamy, intentionally vacuous (one presumes) debut film from director Terrence Malick, who also wrote the screenplay and served as producer. Although inspired by the Charles Starkweather murder spree, "Badlands" probably bears little resemblance to that actual case. The two main characters played by Martin Sheen and Sissy Spacek aren't shaped in the writing: they're blobby malcontents without a plan. There's a surge of excitement in their initial escape, but there isn't even much romance between them. Obviously, this was exactly what Malick intended, but the viewer can't really get a firm grip on this story; it's shapeless and blobby, too. The low-keyed action and (amusingly) droning narration by Spacek (reading the dialogue as if it were from a fortune cookie) makes the whole thing seem like a non-event, and yet the performances are controlled and interesting. We're probably not meant to be moved by either of these two, but Sheen's joshing confrontation with some officers is incredibly bracing, and his acting in general is raw without ever seeming showy or amateurish. The background score (with a theme that sounds like jewelry box music that keeps getting louder and stronger) is evocative and spooky, and the film's ambiance is intriguing. But the loose narrative slips in and out and around what we're seeing, as if there wasn't a proper script, giving the impression the filmmaker was relying strictly on externals. *** from ****

Teasing to Deceive

[benedictmichael-03235 · 1/10 · 9 August 2023]

To be clear, I believe that this film has many impressive qualities, but I have a problem with its depiction of psychopathy. Malick takes the deeply poignant story of the Starkweather-Fugate murder spree in 1958 Nebraska and makes of it a pastoral. It looks at the murder spree from the disengaged, apathetic, and uncaring perspective of the killers. When I say poignant, I mean, of course, deeply poignant for the victims and the bereaved. The film conceals Starkweather and Fugate's intensely cruel actions and puts two very beautiful people in their roles: Sheen and Spacek have fine-looking, expressive faces, sympathetic, intelligent, and friendly. In a similar fashion, this was the case with 'Bonnie and Clyde' (1967) played by the exceptionally good-looking duo of Faye Dunaway and Warren Beatty. Their 13 murders are in effect airbrushed out of history. Their soulfulness is totally at odds with the 'actions' they depict, the actions of the originals, and this creates a sort of whimsical, trite frisson. This is the film's artistic alibi. In oil painting it is called teasing and is another word for deceit or artistic fraud. Check out the real photos of Charles Starkweather and Fugate. Charlie looked like a halfwit, Fugate, a complete dolt.

In a letter sent to the San Francisco Chronicle (dated May 8, 1974) the Zodiac Killer writes that that the newspaper's carrying "ads for the movie 'Badlands,'" showed its "poor taste & lack of sympathy for the public," that it was a "kind of murder-glorification."

The US loves its spree killers and serial killers. As with Bonnie and Clyde's body count, Starkweather and Fugate's 11 victims (including a two-year-old) are also airbrushed out.

A common assumption is that such killings have something to do with individualism and the exercise of sovereignty or something. In 1993, I read on IMDb, that 'Badlands' was selected for preservation by the American Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant." The American Library of Congress and the Zodiac Killer appear to agree on this one.

A slow but rewarding film and an impressive debut

[bob the moo · 24 August 2006]

Based on the Starkweather-Fugate killing spree of the 1950's, this film follows 15 year old Holly Sargis as her quiet, small town existence is changed when she is approached by the 25 year old Kit Carruthers. The pair get friendly as they take walks together but Holly has to keep it a secret from her father, knowing he will disapprove. When her father finds out he shoots her dog as punishment but neither Holly nor Kit are dissuaded from being together. Kit decides to leave town and take Holly with him, when her father tries to stop him he kills him and heads off on the run.

Although on the surface this sounds like a lovers-on-the-run film with a serial killer edge, Malick's writing and direction prevents it from just being what you expect as he delivers a memorable debut. I first saw this about 15 years about when I was about 13 or 14 and at the time I only remembered that not a lot happened and that I was quite bored, so I can appreciate why some viewers don't find this to their tastes. Watching it again the other day I found it much more interesting, perhaps because I am older or maybe because I wasn't paying attention the first time. The film is slow but it is very interesting because of the characters that Malick has written and then allowed to develop out over the film. On one side we have the cold Kit who is a cold killer on one hand but breaks into a smile at comparisons with James Dean and the chance of fame. It has been done loads since but the look at the fame-hungry killer here still feels fresh.

On the other side of the story is Holly. As narrator a lot of weigh is put on her but the way it is done she is more than just a story teller. While the on screen action tells us about Kit, Holly's narration says a lot about her mind. Her fairytale, sing-song delivery and dialogue contrasts really well with the cold, unromantic violence on the screen. Her denial and desire to explain it all away is clear but not forced down the viewer's throat. The cast respond well to the direction and both give restrained but strong performances, avoiding showboating or pushing too hard. Sheen is strong, holding back for the majority and coming out at the end. Spacek is the heart of the story and her innocent (or naïve) character is played well both on screen as well as in her narration. Malick's direction is patient and as dry as the violence. The scenes are blessed with an open (empty) feel thanks to the impressive cinematography.

Overall this is a slow film that is fairly empty if viewed on a superficial level just looking at the narrative. However the characters and the examination of their mindsets is what makes the film interesting and Sheen and Spacek both react well to that. It also helps that Malick has done a great job as writer and director while his cinematographers have produced a barren and pointless landscape to match the heartless and pointless killings.

Meditative view of life, love, and death by Terrence Malick

[Quinoa1984 · 10/10 · 8 November 2003]

Badlands, based on the relationship between Charles Starkweather and Caril Fugate (and later an inspiration for Tarantino's True Romance and NBK), never has a moment where something un-realistic curries. Writer/producer/director Terence Malick leads his film along with a true emphasis on both the psychological nature of Kit (Martin Sheen) and Holly (Sissy Spacek), and with the un-canny knack for a relaxing style in his camera. At best, Badlands is one of the successful homages to European cinema of the 1970's, something that will last a long time due to its pairing of absorbing art-house and (perhaps) mainstream sensibilities. At worst, a viewer could feel bored with Malick's intent on running with his poetic ideas as a director. If there was any pretentiousness at all, it went over my head; this is a film that draws you into its tragic nature.

Sheen and Spacek are totally believable as a couple on the run, as Kit continually has a trigger-happy attitude to people after he shoots Holly's father. While Spacek holds the heart of the picture steady, I'd have to say that Sheen's Kit is one of his best performances. He comes off in the perfect sense- you wouldn't think for a second that Kit could be a killer, that is until he pulls out his pistol. It works just as well that Holly is the narrator, so that the viewer can understand where Kit's coming from, and where he's going. If there is any distance between his character and the audience, there's still a strong, emotional connection through Spacek, and their bond as a loving, if dangerous, couple.

Overall, Badlands is extraordinary in a way that doesn't cram its atmospheric from start to finish on the audience, and it looks at young people in love, however in such twisted circumstances, in an honest way in how escalatory events create a disillusioned feeling in youth. That it's made on such a low budget gives it more merit. Kudos should go to the musical score by James Taylor, Gunild Keetman and George Tipton, too; it's one of the best debuts of the 70's. A+

Regarding some people's negative comments

[Itchload · 10/10 · 1 January 2003]

First off, this is one of the greatest movies ever made. It's just as objective as a Stanley Kubrick movie, and just as disturbing, but instead of typical Stanley imagery, here you have pretty landscapes, wildlife, and cloudy skies. This is the Malick way.

Anyhow, I'd just like to address some people's negative comments about the film. First off, the pace of this film is measured and certainly not speedy, but it really should only come off as dead slow to people more accustomed to contemporary action/comedy/suspense movies, as for the '70's this pace is pretty normal, especially for a movie this hypnotic. Also, the implausibility of some of the character's actions is simply because these are detached, out of place people. I can think of a handful of people I've met who actually remind me of Martin Sheen and Sissy Spacek in this movie, socially just acting in subtely bizarre ways. One reason this movie is so brilliant is that it captures the presence of this type of person where I rarely have seen any other film that does. Finally, the psychotic person who sees this movie as a condemnation of Americans and a glorification of the the British a) Terrence Malick is not British, he was born in Illinois b) He did not direct "the Limey" c) Steven Sodenberg did, and he's not British either d) this movie is based loosely on a true story and actually tones down the much more graphic and depraved violence that the real life American redneck Charles Starkwater actually acted out in order for Malick to offer the wide array of thematic food for thought within this movie.

Looks really good but it's all veneer and affectation and nostalgia

[secondtake · 6/10 · 4 June 2016]

Badlands (1973)

It's true what everyone says—this is a kind of Bonnie and Clyde story. But don't get it wrong, this has none of the depth or fascination (or originality) of that famous 1967 movie. It's worth seeing because this is director Terrence Malick's first big film. For those who follow his movies (or avoid them—the negative reviews for his later work are astonishing), you'll see the first signs of characteristic moods and styles and themes.

This romanticized story set around 1960 is shamelessly nostalgic. It is filled with intentional references to earlier (and better) sources, including Bonnie and Clyde itself and, most outwardly, James Dean. The violence is weirdly casual and frankly cruel and unfelt, and I suppose that's part of the aesthetic distancing involved in what is really a college student's view of the world. Not that Malick was still in college (he got out of film school four years earlier) but his sensibilities came from studying film more than living it (in my limited view). What he does without fail is pull together a great crew and cast and make the mechanics of the film really really good.

So yes, this is a very well made movie, and it sweeps through upper middle of the country with a kind of schoolboy feel for the icons of the place and time. I wouldn't be so crude as to say it's like a giant (and long) Hallmark card on the surface, but there you have it.

Martin Sheen is really good in his role as a kind of wannabe James Dean, and Sissy Spacek plays the naive 15 year old a bit too naively, though she has a country-girl innocence that sets up the violence well. Eventually, without giving away much, the two are on the run. And there are a couple of minor turns of events, but really it's a routine tale told better before (see "They Live by Night" for a great one), and told with more honesty.

The end is important, and hard to talk about without giving anything away. But when you see it you'll see something that was talked about at the time—the glorification of an anti-her, the identification with a mindless and selfish killer. (Al Pacino makes this the whole point in Lumet's "Dog Day Afternoon" two years alter). And here Malick makes it almost laughable and cheesy. And utterly unbelievable, especially for 1960, especially after such a killing spree.

Yeah, a love hate movie. Looks and feels good, but it lack depth and logic and sincerity, despite it's sincere appearance. The worst mix of things possible.

What could have been just another story about delinquents on the run was turned into something extraordinary by first-time director Terrence Malick.

[khanbaliq2 · 10/10 · 4 May 2010]

Badlands is one of the first literate examples of narrated cinema since the early days of Orson Welles and Abraham Polonsky. A teenage girl (Sissy Spacek) and a young garbage collector (Martin Sheen) take to the road, and wander across several states of America on a vengeful murder spree.

If a film can be defined by its influence, the status of Badlands as a cult classic is deserved. The template of two kids on the run has served any number of subsequent film-makers, who have gazed enviously on its elusive power. Its story is filtered through the feelings of Spacek's Holly, who views Kit's actions as hopelessly romantic; she is blinded by her adolescent crush on him, and the dislocation between her dreamy acquiescence and the horror of the couple's actions lends the film a unique tone, fluctuating between lyricism and jolting reality.

Little did I realise that what began in the alleys and back ways of this quiet town would end in the Badlands of Montana.

[hitchcockthelegend · 6/10 · 22 June 2013]

Badlands is written and directed by Terrence Malick. It stars Martin Sheen, Sissy Spacek, Ramon Bieri and Warren Oats. Music is by George Tipton and James Taylor and cinematography by Tak Fujimoto, Steven Larner and Brian Probyn.

Badlands seems to be adored by critics, often being coined as one of the best debuts ever made by a director. Maybe based loosely on the Starkweather-Fugate killing spree of 1958, though the makers have been at pains to ensure we know this is a case of all the characters and situations being fictional, Badlands does indeed have impressive strands. It's a gorgeous picture visually, the surreal feel that is sometimes garnered by Malick in the narrative gives the piece a haunted edge and Spacek and Sheen are very good given the characters they are asked to play.

However, Malick's commentary on amoral youth of 50s America, a corruption of innocence, alienation and etc, never has the depth, to my mind, to really be as special as so many say it is. Some argue the sketchy motives and reasonings involving Kit and Holly are deliberately thought provoking, I'd argue that devoid of psychological meat they are dull characters only livened by the actors' performances. Holly's narration is a clever device by Malick, serving to keep us interested since the structure of the film is repetitious, where being in the company of Kit and Holly becomes a chore. And lets not get onto credibility either...

I know I'm in the minority, but three times I have tried to grasp this supposed genius in Badlands, and I just don't see it. There's a myth and mysticism that has been attributed to it, even enhanced as the years have rolled by, but where there is undoubtedly beauty on the surface, down below there is no beast. 6/10

Minimalist thriller

[Leofwine_draca · 8/10 · 25 November 2015]

BADLANDS is a minimalist thriller from famed director Terrence Malick, a film which gets by on mood, feeling, and a sense of dejected atmosphere and inevitable foreboding that accompanies the on-screen actions. There's not a great deal of plot complexity in this film, but at the same time it speaks volumes about human existence - a truly existential thriller. A bit like a Herzog film, then.

The story is a straightforward one about a modern-day Bonnie and Clyde who go on a violent road trip across America. Its influence upon the more recent likes of KALIFORNIA and NATIONAL BORN KILLERS is obvious, and yet as the first of its type it clearly has the edge over later additions to the genre. Martin Sheen excels in a frightening, career-making performance, but it's Sissy Spacek who really holds things together. Her quiet, mousy character is somehow the worse of the two, mainly because she deals with intense violence in such a matter-of-fact and accepting way.

The cinematography is excellent and brings out the lonely barrenness of the Colorado locations - it's a shame more Hollywood films don't escape the studios once in a while to celebrate the geography of North America. Warren Oates bags a nice minor but pivotal role, and the set-piece sequences are very well handled. It might be a grim and depressing story - it is based on facts, after all - but in Malick's hands it becomes somehow oddly beautiful.

The Seductive Power of Amorality

[mackjay2 · 7/10 · 3 April 2021]

There's no doubt that this is a beautifully shot film. It's strong evidence of Terrence Malick's future mastery of expressive image. The young leads are charismatic enough to capture and hold our interest. If the film has a point of view, it seems to be how seductive an amoral "free spirit" can be to a young person who feels trapped in a dull life. Martin Sheen couldn't be better cast: James Dean-type looks, a great haircut that never changes over the course of the film, an ability to play an uncaring murderer without sacrificing the character's innate appeal. It's easy to see how Sissy Spacek's bored, small-town teenager is so easily led away by him. The characters' youth are the essential element --though both actors were older, Sheen was 33, Spacek in her 20s). The film is not judgmental of their actions, but the cold-bloodedness of Sheen's actions can at times have a chilling effect. It has many strengths, but this is far from Malick's best film--the voice-over narration goes on too long and isn't really necessary to begin with, and a few scenes seem to be marking time. For fans of the director, it mustn't be missed.

Malick's debut, and a very impressive one

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 10 July 2011]

I am now highly appreciative of Terrence Malick's style, his films I agree are not for all, but even if I didn't like the director much(not the case here) I would make an effort to appreciate him/her.

Badlands is Terrence Malick's debut, and while not my personal favourite of his work(The Thin Red Line), it is a very impressive one. His direction is superb and very poetic as it consistently is, the story is compelling and very moody in its tone and the dialogue is beautifully and thoughtfully written. Effort once again is made to make the audience care for the characters, but it isn't a Malick film without astounding visuals and a haunting emotionally resonant score, Badlands has both.

The acting is top notch especially from Martin Sheen and Sissy Spacek and Warren Oates gives fine support too. All in all, a very impressive debut. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Doesn't hit all the right notes, but powerful in spots.

[TOMASBBloodhound · 6/10 · 18 March 2007]

Badlands was a mild disappointment. Any film by Terrence Malick that scores so highly on this site should have been better. That's certainly not saying its a bad film, but there are more than enough flaws to prevent it from reaching "classic" status. The film is of course based on the Starkweather-Fugate killings of the 1950s. We are told the story of a young man and his much younger girlfriend who go on a random killing spree and generate a massive manhunt. Martin Sheen (looking very much like Charlie) plays the young man named Kit. Sissy Spacek plays Holly, his young girlfriend. The two give terrific performances in front of a typically beautiful natural backdrop that you would expect from a Malick film. It's ultimately the script that comes up short.

The story begins with Kit working as a garbage man and quickly being fired from that job. Probably for talking too much and trying to take home some of the things people are throwing out. One day he notices Holly twirling a baton in her yard, and he quickly begins to charm her. The two have to sneak around because her father (Warren Oates) can tell right away that Kit is too old, and a little weird for his daughter. The tension between Kit and Holly's father boils over quickly, sparking the spree of violence and destruction that makes the two young lovers famous. Much of the movie has the two of them driving aimlessly around the countryside. This gives Malick the chance to do what he does best by showing us some beautiful shots of nature, but somewhere along the way, the narrative gets lost along the side of the road.

There are some scenes that just play completely unconvincingly. One scene has Kit and Holly showing up at the home of one of his old garbage collection buddies named Cato. After the three have lunch, Kit gets the idea that Cato may try to turn them in. Kit shoots Cato through the back, causing a very serious wound. What happens next? Cato GETS UP and walks back inside the house with Kit and Holly! Yes! Then he kind of casually sits down on a bed and explains to Holly that he feeds flies to his pet spider! There is no anger, there is no anguish, and there is no logic! Despite the fact that Kit and Holly are known and wanted killers, nobody ever seems to be really afraid of them. Two friends of Cato show up shortly after he is killed. They show virtually no fear as they are led into an exterior cellar at gunpoint. We don't even hear them scream as Kit sends two rounds through the door once they're inside! Later on, Kit and Holly invade the home of a "rich man" at gunpoint. Once again, their victim seems to show no fear. Hardly even a sense of being forlorn as he and his maid are held against their will. And no sense of thanks after their lives are spared later on for the price of his Cadillac.

One of the goals this film had was to show a detachment in the way Kit kills his victims. Okay, I get it. But if you don't project terror from your victims, then the whole premise rings false. I highly doubt these victims would have all gone so quietly. That said, Sheen is pretty good as Kit. He is not outwardly angry or threatening most of the time. He acts overtly polite, but there is an edginess that you can see festering just below the surface. Sissy Spacek is wonderful as the young lady originally enthralled by this guy who looks like James Dean, but then gradually pulls away from him as his spree continues.

The film has some disturbing scenes of animal cruelty. In one, Kit steps on, then over a dead or dying cow at a feedlot where he works for a time. Another shows Holly throwing out a pet catfish into a melon patch and leaving it to die. And worst of all, her father punishes her for dating Kit by shooting her dog and dumping it into a river. Perhaps the film is trying to reinforce the notion of cruelty to animals leading to cruelty to humans later on. It's an old notion. Another old notion the film reinforces is that of celebrity coming to our most deviant criminal figures. Even in 1973 this was an archaic idea, going back in this country at least as far as the outlaws of the Old West. We have always glamorized our most dangerous criminals in this country. Badlands has nothing new to offer us in that regard.

Overall, this is a beautiful and well-acted film. The script might think it has a little more to say than it actually does, but if you're a die-hard fan of Malick, you'll probably love the film, anyway.

6 of 10 stars.

The Hound.

I stand alone

[counterrevolutionary · 4/10 · 29 January 2003]

I hesitated before writing this review, because *everyone* seems to think this movie is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Personally, I thought it was deadly dull, and the characters unmotivated cardboard cutouts who have nothing in common with real human beings.

I also object to Malick's fundamental dishonesty. In his desperate desire to say something Real And Meaningful (in other words, arrogant and sophomoric) about the horrible 1950s, he uses Charles Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate as an emblem of alienation in Ike's Amerika, while minimizing the actual crimes they committed. (Among other things, Starkweather murdered Fugate's two-year-old sister by ramming a rifle muzzle down her throat until she choked to death. He also sexually assaulted a 16-year-old girl before he and Fugate murdered and mutilated her. Neither of these crimes is so much as alluded to in the film, because The Message is too important to be sullied by mere truth.)

So am I so out of touch?

No. It's everyone else who is wrong.