Ah, pour moi, tout le reste est parfaitement clair.... Comme quoi.

Mais pourquoi Malick met-il un troisième frère qui ne sert vraiment à rien?

T'as raison. Baisse ta note.

Devant le ramassis de conneries lues depuis quelques heures sur ces pages voici de quoi vous éclairer un peu sur la nature de la fratrie de Tree of Life :
"The Malicks were a family of secrets, marked by tragedy. Terry was the oldest of three boys. Chris, the middle son, had been involved in a terrible automobile accident in which his wife was killed. Chris was badly burned.
Larry, the youngest, went to Spain to study with the guitar virtuoso Segovia. Terry discovered in the summer of 1968 that Larry had broken his own hands, seemingly despondent over his lack of progress. Emil, concerned, went to Spain and returned with Larry’s body; it appeared the young man had committed suicide. Like most relatives of those who take their own lives, Terry must have borne a heavy burden of irrational guilt. According to Michèle, the subject of Larry was never mentioned."
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/cla ... ius-199812
Article de Peter Biskind daté de août 1999

Et? Qu'est-ce que ça prouve?

(...) coupé au montage, comme ce fut le cas auparavant pour Bill Pullman, Martin Sheen, Gary Oldman, Viggo Mortensen ou encore Mickey Rourke dans La Ligne rouge

Mais pourquoi Malick met-il un troisième frère qui ne sert vraiment à rien?