Stanley Kaufman confirms my take on Terrence Malick:

The opinion that Malick forces on us, out of the decades since his first (and last) good film, is that he can perceive but that his purely cinematic mind, the ability to transmute his ideas into sustained films, is weak … Malick continues to float along the edge of the American film world as an unusually intelligent personage who occasionally delivers the fruit of his meditations. But his role as adjunct philosophe is better than the films he eventually gives us.

So do I have to see “The New World” or can I just assume it sucks?