Movie review: The Fountain
So, is Hugh Jackman in every movie out this year? Apparently so, but so far the worst movie he's made is X-men 3, and that wasn't really his fault (I blame Jesus). After a mighty performance in the wonderful and yet box office failing The Prestige, he returns with the aforementioned film, The Fountain, by my favorite director of ass-to-ass scenes, Darren "Why Can't I Just Make a Romantic Comedy?" Aronofsky.
The Fountain is romantic, but the only laughter Laura and I heard at the Ritz theater this fine evening was of people who felt the film was silly. And perhaps pretentious. And, maybe it was pretentious, but this is a man who made a movie about Pi and then made a movie where some dude's arm gets amputated and a Wayan's brother vomits into prison mashed potatoes to a soundtrack of the Kronos Quartet playing dissonant chords. As far as I'm concerned, he has gotten pretentious before and will continue to do so. He's like a more talented Paul Thomas Anderson (don't get me wrong, I like me some PT Anderson, but in a filmmaking fight to the finish, I think Aronofsky would win. We'll see if that changes when Anderson's new film, based on Upton Sinclair's novel Oil!.)
So, what is this movie about?
Well, it's hard to discuss without giving too much away. The really simple description is that it weaves three time periods together to tell the story of a husband and wife from the present.
Is it worth seeing? I would say absolutely. My charming wife declared that it pleasured the part of her brain that also responds well to films by David Lynch. In some ways, The Fountain feels like a softer version of a film Lynch might have made. It's open to a bit of interpretation and is visually mesmerizing. And at the end many people will feel confused. In fact, one of the kids in a row of 17-year-old Asian kids behind us said, "Does anyone know what that was about?" when the lights went up. These were the same kids who said, "It got a 7.8 on IMDB, which is really good." People who go by IMDB movie ratings probably shouldn't be allowed within fifty feet of a Ritz theater, but I suspect that's a law that will never pass.
Suffice it to say, it is a film that will cause you to feel something -- be it joy or confusion and perhaps a bit of anger at having spent 9 dollars for something you did not enjoy. I would suggest that if you enjoyed Requiem for a Dream you might enjoy this. It is not nearly as dark as that film, but certainly as challenging a viewing experience. In some ways it's like a version of 2001 that's about people with emotions rather than technology. But even that's a bit misleading.
I don't know what to say. I guess this whole review was pointless.
