Scots Taffer on 7/4/2009 at 23:02
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
The Fountain was overindulgent drivel.
Oh sorry, I hate you again!
SubJeff on 8/4/2009 at 00:23
If its because I hate The Fountain then you'd better cuz I hate you more! :mad:
Did I need to be on drugs to enjoy it? Seriously because you know guys I thought I should like it and people said Hey, its up your street and that's why I saw it in the first place but just no. Maybe I should watch it again. Thing is if I still dislike I'll just be hatin more cuz of the time waste, innit?
Scots Taffer on 8/4/2009 at 01:08
It was a fucking profound experience. It's the first time cinema has challenged me to think about the absolute abstractions of death and love and time. It was meditative, visually astounding and still really intriguing with the way that it told its story but also conveyed the concepts that keep you thinking later, also it was bloody well acted.
june gloom on 8/4/2009 at 03:21
I don't know about you guys but I only ever saw pi and that was pretty awesome.
june gloom on 8/4/2009 at 04:57
It's like Jacob's Ladder for math nerds, how could that possibly be a bad thing?
EvaUnit02 on 9/4/2009 at 09:51
I quite liked Requiem for a Dream. Really well made film, especially the Ellen Burstyn story thread. I usually watch it as a double feature with Leaving Las Vegas.
Most people that I know call it poorly written, contrived, preachy pontificating tripe. Yeah, that's really label something like Crash deserves - which was genuinely cringe-worthy (ie Don Cheadle's "WE CRASH INTO EACHOTHER" quote from the beginning of the film) and probably Babel too (A SHOT IS HEARD ACROSS THE GLOBE), but not really this film.
I can see where they're coming from, but I rate RfaD on par with Olmos' terrific American Me. Really, not everything has to be as subtle as the social commentaries in Cronenberg films to good.
Stitch on 9/4/2009 at 19:42
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
I usually watch it as a double feature with Leaving Las Vegas.
I have now been disabused of the notion that possessing great expanses of empty time is desirable.
Muzman on 9/4/2009 at 21:40
Pi is ok I guess, but that sort of thing is supposed to blow my mind with the numbers, which it didn't. It was more like a humanities student rendering mathmatical "woah" who doesn't really understand it (says the humanities student). I wouldn't mind as its well done, but whenever the maths gets hard it's 'CUT TO: montage of typing-driving techno' and substitutes wounded old men who stared at the numbers too long for really taking the audience through it (in an illusiary way). It's a pretty cool appropriation of all those spooky old tropes though (instead of Lovecraftian/Catholic delving into the unknowable truth that destroys the mind, we get Jewish maths).
Requiem for a Dream gets an irritating amount of gushing from art student types as well, which kinda bugs me. I don't think it really has a point and isn't meant to be looked at that way. It's a cinematic illustration of additiction and very good for that. But I've had too many long caffine fueled discussions about it changing cinema with its transcendent visual genius to put it in its proper perspective. ("look you're young and it's all very exciting seeing obsession rendered in a way you relate to in your drug fucked student life, but all he did was make a hilarious talking fridge and cakes come out of a light fitting! It's not all that profound really. And further more a... Ow! not the shins!")
Haven't seen The Wrestler or The Fountain yet, but will do at some point.
Scots Taffer on 10/4/2009 at 00:52
Requiem for a Dream is definitely not profound or making any grand statements but is an effective movie at completely emotionally dismantling its audience through pure visceral use of cinema. The visuals in the movie are astounding.
