Nov 27, 2006, 05:39 PM
|
#1 of 52
|
I was part of the rather cultic "Anticipating-The-Fountain" bunch, having followed the project for six years in anticipation, reading every shred of news that surfaced regarding the movie.
Now that it's completed, and I have seen it twice (to confirm my suspicion), I have the say The Fountain dazzles the eye but not the mind.
The perceived response groups are you either love, or hate The Fountain. Whereas the haters hate because they're unwilling to accept something slightly uncoventional (there are far more abstract films), the lovers are tossing around hyperbolic mantras like "The 2001 of our generation!", "...reinvents the sci-fi genre!", or "way ahead of its time!"
2001, and currently (I believe), The New World are ahead of their time. But comparisons between 2001 and The Fountain seems apt, since whereas Kubrick probes the unknown, Aronofsky delivers the answers outright. There's also a severe lack of irony in the film, one that the climax of the Conquistador segment gets major points for, but the rest of the movie lacks. Also, some of the devices seem to come straight out of Screenwriting 101.
This is one of the best looking films of the year - the space sequences continually give me pause, and Clint Mansell's score is, well, a great piece of work. Aronofsky demonstrates full control of the project, from score to set pieces, to acting and is a greater director than he is a writer.
I think I'll stop here. Judging from my last film related post, people don't really like to read. Ambitious as the film is, I'm dismayed the film (and Izzi's novel to counter Tom's single-mindedness view of death) spends all that time developing what kids are trusted to pick up upon the first five minutes of The Lion King.
Jam it back in, in the dark.
|