I watched The Fountain this past weekend because someone recommended it. I didn't think I'd like it, as I suspected it was somewhere between a romance story and Indiana Jones. I was wrong, of course, and I liked it more than I thought I would. Though I cannot help but wonder if it would have been just as successful if the leads had been played by Danny Devito and Cameron Manheim. :)

While it did seem preoccupied with spirituality, which I wasn't wild about, I did like its metaphysical overtones. I also thought it was great that they had extended periods of either no or very little dialogue, which is hard to pull off these days. The special effects were great as well.

Did anyone else here see it, and what did you think?

Tags: Hugh-Jackman, cinema, movie, rachel-weisz

Views: 1

Replies to This Discussion

I've seen it twice and hated it. If Danny DeVito had been cast, it would have worked as a kind of satire of pretentiousness in cinema. And I happen to adore this filmmaker's earlier Requiem for a Dream. Of course, my favorable inclination or predisposition toward the earlier film is due in no small part to the fact that a somewhat emaciated Jared Leto played the lead: a junkie who keeps stealing his prescription drug-addicted mother's TV sets to hock for more junk. Can you imagine Jared Leto with the same look Christian Bale would attain in The Machinist?!


Yeah, I just watched Requiem for a Dream this month and just fell in love with Jared Leto. I was not familar with him at all, except for seeing him in Fight Club, but did not realize it until I watched FC again after watching RfaD.

Why did you hate The Fountain so much? I liked it as a movie and a story, but it does have some spiritual propaganda that I didn't like. I liked how it moved in and out of time and realities in a very fluid, but non-confusing way. Almost like a stream of consciousness.
I hated it. It's all very pretty to look at, but that's about all. And I felt that Aranofsky was far too keen to beat his audience around the head with all of his New Age inspired symbolism. The whole thing just left me completely cold.
Well, it did not leave me cold, but I can understand your point. I liked the idea of the timelessness of it, or the transcendence of it, but thought that some of the New Age symbolism, like the scene when he sat in a meditative position and went into the circle of light, was a bit overdone. So good point.

RE: Transcendence: I've always been intrigued by alter states of consciousness, though I can't say I've ever had one. Probably the closest I ever got was when I particpated in a modern primitives ritual in my 20s. I had about 8 sleigh bells the size of tennis balls sewn to my chest and back, and danced for about 45 minutes to a drum with a bunch of other people. It was freaking weird and awesome.
|:O
People seem to either enjoy this film or hate it. I fall into the latter category. I watched the film about a year and a half ago. I found it to be quite frankly a mess. It uses spiritual symbolism to try and look clever and artistic but ultimately just doesn't work. It's nice to look at in places but that's about it. As noted by others, requiem for a dream is a much better film.
Well said. I agree with just about all you wrote here. It was a beautiful film, and I liked the lack of concession to linear thought and organization.
Great. I'll check it out.
Hm, I caught this accidentally on TV a few years ago and didn't realise it was by Aronofsky. I disliked it as well, I was not able to suspend disbelief for this one. But maybe on the big screen the Aronofsky style comes through better...? I really liked his other films.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

MJ

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service