Quote:
Originally Posted by dankrsta
I haven't seen The Fountain, so I can't comment on that, but I'll probably see it soon. Actually I've only seen Requiem and Pi, so my impression of Aronofsky as literal comes from these two. It didn't bother me in Requiem, I thought that was pretty effective for showing the horrors of drug addiction. But, here, in Pi everything felt so transparent and fake, the way these big philosophical themes were handled, the decent into madness. So it's quite possible to take such a broad subject that just gives itself for many interpretations and turn it into something very transparent and literal by the way it's handled. I am now very curious to see how he does it in The Fountain. After all, Pi was his first film and it very much feels like a student film lacking in experience on every level.
|
I just can't relate to this take on
Pi at all. It's such an open-ended, open-for-interpretation movie I have a hard time seeing how someone would describe it as extremely literal. I do agree that it feels like a student film, but mostly because of it's extremely low-budget and the fact that it was shot guerilla-style with no permits. To me these things are assets, as they give it a very raw, gritty feeling that works well with the movie. In that sense
The Fountain is very different, as it's very lush and polished.