I’ve been looking forward to Aronofsky’s new film “The Fountain” for quite some time now… but I remember way back when the first trailer came out… it actually turned me off of it a little bit. It felt really self absorbed (just saying that’s how it felt to me) and a bit too trippy. But keep in mind… it was only a trailer.
Well, then the booing came. Audiences at the Venice film festival booed and walked out of it. Many just wrote it off to Euro folk not getting it. Then there was a significant walk out at the Toronto Film Fest. Then, critics were totally split on it… some LOVING it… and others HATING it. Right now The Fountain has a very disappointing 50% on Rotten Tomatoes. But the news gets worse for The Fountain…
On it’s opening weekend, The Fountain came in 10th, only taking in a pathetic $3 million. Looks like the trailers didn’t impress anyone else either.
So I have 2 questions for you. Why do you think no one went to see this “highly anticipated” movie. Second… if you saw it… what did you think of it?
First off, I just want to say I’m a big fan of John Campea…he’s a good man…
Now. Okay, I am not particularly an Aronofsky fan, but I was really excited when I heard about the Fountain and got some internet buzz saying that it was the “most amazing movie one had ever seen”. I was expecting a new and riveting science fiction film like 2001 that was smart and visually captivating. I also read magazines on how Aronfsky bybassed CGI(which I too am against movies overuse of CGI) and used microphotography of bacteria or something to create the nebula special effects. Believe me…I wanted this film to be good I had faith in this movie, then I bought the ticket…
The movie sucked. I don’t care much for box office or critics(except Ebert and Campea)But I understood this movie the whole way through. Its not deep or philosphical. It doesn’t inspire or challenge you. It’s mainly for people who don’t understand the great movies of film history(like 2001: A Space odessy, or Ingmar Bergman stuff) and who get a kick out of understanding a pretentious mainstream movie like the Fountain(Believe the Fountain is much more mainstream than any real art film) and its for hippies and stoners. The special effects weren’t as mind-blowing as I thought they would be, and who cares, I didn’t care about Tom and Izzi pipe dreams about Mayan Indians, Nebulaie, and a Tree of Life with ejaculating bark…anyway, I’m ranting. Any intelligent person would understand this without writing this much, but unfortunately there are not many intelligent movie goers around anymore, only posers.
I love this film but I can see where the marketing has gone wrong. They’re really pushing the love story and although it plays a part, it’s far from the main event. I’m not sure there’s a good way to market this other than going for the “Matrix” appeal and pose it as a question – what is eternal life? Scrap that…it sounds just as bad.
It’s too bad this isn’t doing well because it deserves at least a viewing. Yes, it’s divided audiences but I’d find it difficult to believe that after watching it – even if you didn’t like it – it didn’t manage to get some conversation happening.
a friend of mine saw it and loved it….he infact gave 5 stars in his review which he was kind enough to post on my blog…..I am not sure what John’s rules are on putting hyperlinks here….so i am not going to add one, but if you are interested please check it out at moviewalah.com…..going by that review, I’ll be sure to watch this movie
Honestly, watching the trailer for this movie made me cringe. I was turned off by the trailer. I hadn’t heard of it prior to seeing the trailer and when I did see it I personally thought the movie looked really stupid and I don’t like the idea of the movie.
WolfMarauder, I almost always find that serious movies have to attain PG-13 through extensive editing and cuts. Now this is not always true, but it’s just what I’ve found. Real life is R rated. Any attempt at trying to show real people (and this includes both children and the elderly) should mostly be R rated.
When I see a serious movie with a PG-13 – especially a movie with violence in it (the conquistador part I would imagine), I immediately think of what most certainly ISN’T in the movie; Realistic violence, All parts of a realistic relationship (well realized sex and intimacy), foul language ect. With an R, I at least don’t quite know the limitations of the flim.
Reminder here, I’m talking about serious movies, not movies clearly designed for younger audiences.
It’s official. CRITITC’S DON’T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT. This movie does not deserve the bad reviews it’s getting. I am going to refrain from calling a masterpiece because it still has not sunk in yet. However as every minute goes by it becomes clearer. I don’t want to get into the story to ruin it for people who haven’t sen it yet. Basically if you read the passage about Adam and Eve disobeying GOD in the book of Genesis you’ll understand this film easily. Apply the answer to this question {What is the outcome of disobeying GOD?} The movie also speaks to the gluttony of man, how he is never satisfied with what he has. That’s all I can say. The movie is not complicated, nor boring. I can’t really rave about it because it’s not for everybody, but it definitely does not suck. It’s a movie you have to see for yourself.
Haven’t seen it, and haven’t seen previews on TV for it. But, I think it may not even be worthy enough of being in the Top 10 for the simple reason that it just may not be good enough of a draw to attract the audience it was hoping to cater to. I don’t think I know anyone that wants to live forever, let alone chasing the same woman around! LOL.
Now, I’m sure if Rachel Weisz was naked and there was some sort of raunchy sex scene, I think this movie will rocket quite quickly. Just my opinion.
it is such a shame we live in a time where a film is judged hit or flop almost entirely on its opening weekend…i mean here we are discussing why the fountain flopped and it has been out for what four days??………i haven’t seen it yet so I am not saying it is a shame for the fountain in particular but this happens all the time. a film is judged a flop before it has had a full week in the cinemas
labelling a film a flop straightaway can put people off seeing it…regardless of how good the film is….
a lot of people, if they hear a film is a flop, will automatically assume that the film is bad and then the film never gets a chance to find an audience and have a lengthy life in the cinema….positive word of mouth is always great and go a long way to help but when the word flop is pretty powerful to a lot of people…..
that is the time we live in though….it is the same with the music industry…it used to be that a label would build a band…work them ….help build an audience but these days if your first album doesn’t stick they drop you. I have friends who have had that happen.
its the disposable generation….people want and expect instant gratification and it is a shame as I really feel some things don’t get a chance….again the fountain is being perceived as a flop after 4 days. and it is a shame that that is a sign of the times…
then again did anyone expect this film to be gigantic film??
it is from a cult director who has yet to make a huge cross over films…sure it has some name stars but these days that hardly guarantees a hit and when you take into account the subject matter and the look of the film is hardly the stuff of giant blockbusters….i certainly expected it to do more then it did but it was hardly been a massively hyped tentpole release.
I just wished we gave things a chance…i do it all the time too…i see the weekend box office and say to myself “wow so and so bombed” so it is time to practice what I preach….anyway
Oh…….. is it out already? ; )
I’am gonna see it right now. The director does nothing for me but I’ll give it a chance. Yeah! nobody like Spielberg’s AI but I think it’s one of the top film of all time, just simply amazing. I’ll be back in 3 hour’s with my unbiased opinion.
Yeah, do you really think that anyone expected it not to flop? Even Aronofsky’s biggest fans could see it coming. Besides, it still has a great chance of making the money back on DVD sales which is what I believe were the main profit of Pi and Requiem. The film only cost about 30 million, so it won’t have much of a problem getting over that.
Anyways, I saw it at the toronto film festival second showing and everyone who I talked to liked it/ loved it. It certainly isn’t a great film but it was damn good but had a few narrative and clarrifacation flaws. I would give it 3.5/4 and it’s the second best film of the year so far (my first is When the Levees Broke which was one of the only two premieres I went to that got a standing ovation the other being Pan’s Labyrinth which The Fountain was better than).
Noone saw it because it doesn’t have general appeal. It’s basically an art house film. That’s not the kind of movie that appeals to a large audience. Alot of people seem to not get it for some reason or think it’s pointless.
I had been waiting for this movie for years and was worried I had overhyped it in my head before it ever came out. But I absolutely loved it. It went beyond anything I had expected. And it actually ended up coming in #10 at the box office which i was pretty surprised to see.
I think 3 million is a lot considering how “out there” this film is. Just because it has a couple stars and some amazing effects, you can’t expect people to throng to this film, especially when you look at what else there was to see over the thanksgiving break. The Fountain is just not mainstream at all, I can’t believe how wide a release it received. Awesome story though, I loved it and can’t wait to see it again.
The Fountain is a great movie, one of the best I have seen this year.. I thought I’d get that part out of the way, right away…
But, one of the things that made this movie something more, something better than other movies I have seen was how it made me think.. long after seeing his movie I was thinking of what things symbolized. There are scenes in this movie that you kind of just soak in, you aren’t told what is happening, nor are you told why – but these things make you feel something. I recall one amazing moment where the character Tom (in the present day) goes to see his wife in what seems to be a museum. He gets on the elevator and there is this long shot of the elevator wall. There is a look at this texture, one of many you see in the movie. I can’t describe it well, but seeing that made me feel something. It was almost as if the various textures in the movie were like characters themselves.
Before going into the movie the ads tell you that the story is something about a man on an adventure that spans over three timellines. While this is not specifically a time travel movie, these elements are not what the core of the movie is about. The story is about dealing with death, learning from mistakes, obsession, soul. There is even a strong spiritual context (in these brain-dead religious times, its amazing to see this kind of thing). Of all the things I know about this movie, there’s so much I don’t. It has to truly be experienced to appreciate it. but, Hugh Jackman is incredible, he is what makes this movie.. I would not be surprised to see an Oscar for him in march…
I didn’t even know it was out yet. Didn’t see one commercial for it. I have YET to see a Happy Feet commercial, too.
Honest question, JeffGrey.
Let’s pretend it was the exact same movie as it was now. No difference. Only it had been rated R. You’d give it more respect because someone in the MPAA slapped a different letter on it?
The “space bubble” part of the film is by far the best part. It is one of the most visually stunning sequences I’ve ever seen on film. It practically brought me to tears. On the other hand, my least favorite part was the conquistador sequence, because it was far too corny.
I think what happened there with tenacious d sean is it came about 4-5 years too late…I thought it was funny though….
I think the three storylines of the film didn’t help people want to see it. When I read about it at least, I saw that part of the film was about a conquistador (sweet), a modern day scientist (…ok), and a dude in a space bubble (what?) – obviously, only one of those storylines sounds cool. I don’t really feel like sitting through the scientist stuff, and I most certainly don’t want to sit through the space bubble crap, so I’m left with a thrid of a movie that sounds ok. Then, when I read that the conquistador part is
**Minor Spoiler**
*** part of a novel***
***End Spoiler***
it doesn’t make me want to go. And I’m a fan of DA. Also it’s PG-13.
campea, when are you going to stop covering ground by saying ‘why did it flop? NOT SAYING IT”S A BAD MOVIE!!!111’ and give us YOUR opinion on it?
Also, the Fountain opened on only ~1500 screens – miniscule compared to most films.
I have to agree with most everyone here in that “Fountain” wasn’t a well hyped movie, and some people didn’t even know it was out this past weekend. There are also a number of folks who don’t give a hoodwink about Aronofsky’s films.
I happen to be one of them.
Personally I don’t think The Fountain really had a shot at commercial success. The box office results shouldn’t be very surprising.
On the other hand, the bigger dud of the weekend was the Tenacious D movie. What happened there?
— Sean
FilmJunk.com
I hate to join in on kicking the marketing of this movie, but I have to agree: ‘The Fountain’ could’ve been promoted much better. The sci-fi aspects could’ve been marketed to the male audience. The romance side of it could’ve been pushed toward the female audience.
On the other hand, considering so many of us are saying the film was incoherent, exactly how should it have been marketed? (Of course, that’s not our job.)
I also think Aronofsky lost a lot of “juice” in the long process of bringing this project to completion. ‘Pi’ and ‘Requiem for a Dream’ showed quite a while ago. Had ‘The Fountain’ been released when it was originally set to, I wonder if it would’ve had more people excited?
I liked the film, but I didn’t love it (and didn’t expect to). Hugh Jackman was very, very good, but overall, it was dull and drab – both literally and figuratively – in too many places. Yet I’d really like to see it again, which means I was intrigued. And not enough films do that for me these days.
I hope to see it tonight. The score does indeed sound wonderful.
oops, I meant combined, not “compared”.
Marketers screwed the pooch here. The only thing they thought that they really had going for them was Aronofskys name. Like he is some well known director. Well folks, its just plain NOT mainstream or well known.
Personally, I LOVED Requiem for a Dream. It is one of my all time favorite movies. But for one, that was six friggin years ago! And more importantly, Two: that was an arthouse movie, which means very few in the grand scheme of american movie goers have ever seen it.
Heres a good way to look at it. When Kevin Smiths Clerks cartoon series debuted on ABC he said that more people have now seen that cartoon than all the moviegoers and video renters for all my movies compared. All that from just one airing on ABC! Smiths films are actually pretty mainstream too. So Aronosky had a very tiny installed base.
Couple that with a trailer that gave you almost zero idea of a plot and you have box office flop. Granted the marketers didn’t have too much to work with. Its very much an arthouse film, but still, if you need to make tons of money back. You gotta appeal to the wider audience who need some easy, obvious, duh plotline in the trailer.
So there ya go. I’m betting Deck the Halls did much better than the Fountain and that movie sucked balls. I was forced to go, and I have to say it was one of the worst movies I’ve seen in years.
Quite frankly, the marketing campaign passed it off as “high concept” sci fi, in that bad pretentious sort of way. Then there’s the fact that the movie sounds ridiculous when you read a synopsis of it. Any movie that sounds goofy and self satisfied in summary is fighting an uphill battle.
It is called the Fountain because ……there is a “Fountain Pen” involved in the plot.
I saw it with my girlfriend this weekend.
We were the ONLY people in the place.
We considered getting up and leaving.
We decided to try to figure it out.
I spent my entire time trying to understand what the heck was even going on.
We talked about it afterwards we think we got alot of it.
People can say how amazing it is, I still think I could have told the same story in the same way but alot better. I think it could have been much better if it was told slightly different.
I don’t like the initial “jumpyness” (spelling I know) …….
High Jackman may have acted well, but overall, I give this movie a no-go.
I do want to hear the director commentary to hear all the BS he is going to try to say he was doing, I look forward to hearing how he was thinking on some level that no-one could get completly from initial viewing of the movie.
If you want to be tripped out, puzzled, or maybe you are already high a little bit…go watch this movie.
If you want a movie that is coherent then DO NOT see this movie.
The religion and philosophy in The Fountain is an amalgamation of several things, which actually makes the Fountain quite a good title (Better than “The Tree”!)
Like much of the movie, the work to assemble meaning from the film is mostly left to the viewer. For a studio film, this is a very, very good thing.
The Toronto Film Festival Audience I saw it with in September was appreciative of the film (not raving, certainly no booing).
Personally, I think the film fits together quite nicely (only one or two assumptions need be made on the film) and is clearly one of the fore-runners for best film of 2006. It clearly earns a place along side Kubrick’s 2001 and Tarkovsky’s Solyaris amoungs the grand Sci-Fi epics of cinema.
For those who have seen the film, there is a lively discussion of it going on at the Twitchfilm.net Forum under the ‘Reviews’ category.
Cheers.
the movie was awesome!!!
but its definitely acquired viewing.
once the movie ended, i heard a teenage girl behind me say “woooh, that was like just getting off of a mushroom trip.” i think that pretty much sums it up.
a quick PS – I didnt read the ‘source material’ for this film, so maybe its explained there… But why is this movie called “The Fountain” when it deals with the “Tree of Life”? From what i recall they are two completely different ‘legends’.
Anyone have any insight? (Maybe ‘Fountain of Youth’ is just more well known?)
I saw this film on Thanksgiving. I REALLY wanted to love it. The trailers had me hooked months out.
But… I have to say… it was a very very weak film in my opinion. It failed in its goal. (At least the goal I perceived it to have.) The acting of Jackman and Weisz was SUPERB. I mean, there were times where I almost cried. The visuals were amazing. The music/score was amazing.
So, how could I call it weak? Well, despite all of those things it just never “Came together” as a film. I am sure some will read this and say “You just didn’t get it!” Well, no… I feel that I understood everything; I just thought it went off into the absurd.
***LIGHT spoilers***
The movie jumps around through different time periods, but in the present Weisz is writing a book about the past portion of the film, is it real?, in the future Jackman is on a ‘life saving’ journey, as a monk in a plastic bubble?, but Jackman ‘dies’ in the past, Weisz ‘dies’ in the present, both are ‘there’ in the future, there is a monkey getting operated on, he speaks to her in the past from the future, he does it again…with DIFFERENT results…etc.
I UNDERSTAND most of what he was ‘trying’ to do and say, but…c’mon. What I got from this was the bullet point of “It’s hard to lose someone you love.” But this film got a little full of itself and just kept spitting the new, strange scenes onto the screen…beautifully acted and visually appealing as they were, it was just a mess in the end.
A quick note about the trailer: it was deceiving. This film really wasn’t much of a sci-fi film at all. It was more of an existential look into the process of life and death, and what it does to these characters and what they do about it.
Overall, I thought this film was grand in what it what trying to say and do, it just fell short and screwed up on the execution. To paraphrase what I read a film critic say (Roeper, I think) “I would rather see a film take a new idea and a new approach and try to show us something different and FAIL, than just see the same old shit.” So, I was not at all upset that I saw this film; I just thought it fell very short of its goal. Just my 2 cents. (Which I think is like 2.9 cents Canadian…)
(WOW… anyone still reading? Didn’t mean to ramble on like that!)
John,
Did you mention the booing and fail to mention the ovation? That’s what I was alluding to. I didn’t say that you had it out for the movie, or that you never said anything good about it.
Try not to react so strongly. I wasn’t attacking you, just noting a little lopsidedness in the reporting of the Venice screenings. That’s all.
I LOVED this movie, I saw it twice and can’t wait to pick up the graphic novel. Fuck the critics, look at the user rating – around 86% last time I checked. IMDB ratings – 8/10. I think this is going to be a fan (cult) fave like 5 years down the road. It was beautiful, thoughtful and heartwarming. Why did it fail? Idk, people just didn’t get it. That’s probably why those venice snobs booed. The ending wasn’t 100% clear to them. And it still isn’t 100% clear to me (but the open conversation that ensues makes that one of the best parts of the movie).
Darren A. has definitely earned his spot as one of my favorite writer/directors. He tries to do something new with film.
Oh, and so everyone knows what I’m talking about:
In Venice, the press screening was booed, but the public screening resulted in a 10 minute long standing ovation.
Hey Scoville,
Ummm… how about doing some research before saying nonsense like that?
I have reported excellent things about The Fountain. Just do a quick search.
I hate it when fans can’t accept that other people may have diferent opinons than theirs, and then to justify themselves just go off with some wild “You’ve had it out for this movie” garbage.
I’ve never said one bad thing about The Fountain. Not one (Except that I didn’t like the trailer. That’s it.)
Do a little reading before spewing stupidity like that.
Hey Varun
I don’t think anyone suggested that just because no one sees a movie (bombs) that it means the movie was bad. I certainly never suggested that.
The question was: Why did no one go to see it? Not “Why was it so bad?”
But… half the critics, and an awful lot of people HATED this movie. Just as many also LOVED the movie. There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground.
Why report on the supposed booing and not the standing ovations that the movie received? The press (this blog included) has been very one sided in their coverage of the crowd reactions.
I must say that it was one of the best movies I’ve ever seen. I can see how most movie goers these days wouldn’t get it, but IMO the critics shouldn’t have panned it the way they did.
Note: Any critic that alludes to 2001 instead of Solyaris in their review of the fountain needs to rethink their occupation.
Also just because a film flops doesnt mean it is NOT a good film.
Tim May, I agree its all subjective and I definitely think you have a point about how good The Fountain is. It really is a great film (and out of the films released this year maybe one of the smartest and most original). I find it a little inacessible
This is how you have film discussions….god I hate forums with lots of flamers.
Honestly, I do think the critics have been too harsh of this film. I think that they are either 1. Jealous or do not comprehend Aronofsky’s vision 2. Jaded by the poor quality of films in general that a film of depth and quality comes off as pretensious. It is much better than what people say and harkens back to when formalism and metaphorical films truly meant something.
I personally only saw 2 commericals for the movie, i didn’t see alot of buzz for this movie from the get go, I’ve seen the spidey 3 trailer 3 times in theaters already, 3, and that movie isn’t coming for another 6 months.
coming out on thanksgiving weekend was another of the problems, people didn’t consider watching the poorly marketed fountain, when they got 700 dollar hdtv’s at best buy
and the critics have destoryed the film, theres 2 sides one that hail it as a masterpiece, and one that call it self-obsorbed and boring.
i saw it opening day, and i was very pleased w/ it..didn’t understand some of it til i talked about it w/ a friend, but I rather a movie like this where i can like it/dislike it based on it’s orignal movie concept, than lets say casnio royale, which was amazing, but seriously…it was adapted so who really should be taking the credit for good source material.
The trailer and movie would come across as seeming very sci-fi/fantasy heavy which can tend to make the movie less accesible to a lot of the general public. Secondly, it didn’t really have a simultanious worldwide release (at least we haven’t gotten it here yet) which kind of indicates the movie studio didn’t really feel that invested in it either.
Perhaps if they played upon more of the “love” story factor and the human side of the story, than letting the visuals take priority in the promotional materials it might have stood a better chance at appealing to the mainstream audience.
None the less, I still am more than interested in watching it – had a look at the graphic novel and the story seems pretty interesting, plus, I think Hugh Jackman is a great actor, these days especially.
Sorry, forget to finish my last sentence. 2001 AND Blade Runner were only panned upon INITIAL release of the film.
Even though this is not one of the best films I’ve ever seen. This is definitely the best film of the year for me by far. This is a film that requires A LOT of patience to understand. I’ve seen the film twice now and both times the audience was in complete silence for about 30-45 seconds as the closing credits were fading in and out. I just think that the film is too ahead of its time (like 2001 and Blade Runner). And like 2001 and Blade Runner, both films were ripped to death by film critics.
I have seen Blow-up and the Passenger, and yes, they are some of the best movies I’ve seen. Everyone esle in the theater I was in HATED the movie, or didn’t understand it or whatever. As for you third point, I guess we just hold different opinions. Film is subjective, and I personally think that The Fountain is one of the best I’ve seen.
Jagmir and charger—I would like to defend John right now, because what you state is simply rediculous.
Since the beginning John has been reporting both sides of the story saying some people loved it and some people hated it and that he personally thought it was a little boring.
In fact in his July 24th post he said he found the trailer to be a little bit trippy, but was looking forward to seeing it. Do some research about what John has said before you attack him. He has always been even-handed with this film.
He just reported the news, which is his job as a blogger and has ALWAYS said in his various Fountain posts that some people ABSOLUTELY LOVE THIS FILM. Infact of course he never formed an opinion about it charger, because unlike some fanboys he didnt make an opinion about a movie he hadn’t seen and only reported what other people had been saying.
Dont bust on John, because he was logical and did the right thing.
Also a movie is MOST CERTAINLY a flop if it does not do well its opening weekend with an average 40%+ drop off rate between weekends 3 million can be seen as a disaster. The rare case is what we call cult classics or fan favorites, things that get really popular when the become released on DVD. But a “flop” in Variety terms is definitely what we have here. At 2.3k per theatre it pulled in less than Santa Clause 3 last weekend (a inferior film) and The Queen (a much much much much much CHEAPER film). The cost to income ratio is enormous.
And Tim May, (In my own opinion) 1. Dont be too quick to call this the greatest film of all time before you score some Antonioni on your brain and 2. Dont write off the mainstream audience they are alot smarter than they seem sometimes and 3. In my Opinion a movie can not be the greatest of all time if it is inacessible to a large majority of the movie audience. It is why Manet and Van Gough rank higher than Mondrian and Buckley.
That said, I thought the fountain was great if you could stay awake for the whole thing
I still want to see as I loved Requiem but just didn’t get around to it. I did manage to see Casino Royale again though so I guess that says it all really….It just hasn’t caught me.
I wasn’t even aware that it came out this weekend. When I saw the trailer, and saw that it was directed by Arnofsky, it instantly caught my eye because Requiem for a Dream was a movie that really rocked my world. I think it was a combination of bad bad marketing, and the lack of word of mouth.
The film is an absolute masterpiece. Easily the best movie of the year, and one of the best of all time. Mainstream audiences wouldn’t get the movie though.
If I had to guess, it didn’t do well because there isn’t some comic book douchebag with a cape and tights in it.
The title. Very non-descriptive and very boring. ‘The Fountain’? Now ‘Requiem for a Dream’ *there’s* a title.
I agree with Jagmir; John you’ve had it out for this film for a while now and that is pathetic. You judge stuff based on trailers and other people’s opinions. Here’s a thought: Develop your OWN opinion and stop letting other stuff get in the way of you seeing something. Some movie fan you are.
About the movie itself…I saw the movie a few days ago and I can’t get it out of my mind. It is one of the most interesting movies I have ever seen. I think the reason that it hasn’t been that well-received is that it requires a lot of patience from the audience. Like Kubrick’s 2001, this movie has sparse dialogue but has incredible visuals and a haunting score. Most of the reviews have mentioned how “ambitious” this movie is…and it’s true. Aronofsky covers a lot of ground, but the problem is that the movie is only an hour and a half long. Nonetheless, I am convinced that Aronofsky is one of the most ingenius filmmakers around. This movie is epic, beautiful, and complex. It probably requires another viewing but I’m still trying to digest the first one. I think Clint Mansell deserves special recognition here as well. If for no other reason, you should see the movie for the soundtrack alone. I really think it’s one of the 5 best of all-time.
I think TJ is right. To the online film community and most critics, this was a “highly anticipated” movie. Most people who want to see this movie are either fans of Requiem for a Dream and/or Pi, or they have heard good things about the movies and Aronofsky. The average moviegoer hasn’t seen either of those movies and probably has never heard of those movies. That would make the film’s main draw Hugh Jackman…but one look at the trailer and poster and the average moviegoer would expect a “weird” movie (definitely not conventional or Hollywood). Being released during the Holidays, this isn’t a fun/funny/family film that most people would see. It’s not an Oscar bait movie either which usually does ok during this time of year. I think the majority of the people who go to this movie are the ones who have been waiting for Aronofsky to follow-up Requiem.
Hey John, since when does it necessarily mean that film is a flop if it doesn’t do well at the theaters on opening weekend? It sounds to me that you’ve had it out for this flick even before its release.
don’t forget this is the holiday season…people are shopping their asses off.
My opinion on why it flopped? Poor marketing, for one. I didn’t see much buzz about it in the general public. Plus the press about booing and walking out probably didn’t help.
Plus, it’s just not a film that many people go see. Especially during a holiday season. If this were released in January, it might actually have done better, in a time when films usually get poor openings. I dunno.
I’m not sure how I feel about the film yet, personally. It was very well done, but I just don’t know if it was effective in what it set out to achieve. It certainly is a thinker, and elaborate. But it could also be quite pretentious. I need to see it again, I think.
Well I don’t really think it was that highly anticipated. I mean yes to the online movie community it was but to anyone I know that is just a casual movie goer they had no idea this movie even existed. For those you did didn’t even understand what they were looking at. I am still excited to see it no matter what a critic or general audience says. The public just wasn’t well informed and from what I’ve heard the marketing was horrible and the trailers misleading. i’m a bit curious on wether the movie is hated be cause it is actually bad or because it has been mismarketed so people were looking for something different. This is definietly a film though that everyone will need to come up with their own opinion on because a public opinion on a film like this doesn’t really work that well.