flimilm

[arguchik]

glaucon and i watched requiem for a dream last night.

it's quite an interesting bit of filmmaking, and i definitely appreciated its visual experimentations. it's an excellent film, but it's also one of the grimmest pieces of anti-drug propaganda i've ever seen. in case you haven't seen it, it consists of an interlocking set of narratives, each focused on an individual character's particular experience with drug abuse. at the beginning of the film, harry goldfarb, the central character played by jared leto, has a relationship with each of the other major characters: his mother, sarah goldfarb (ellen burstyn, who turns in an amazing performance); his girlfriend, marion (played very well by jennifer connelly); and his best friend tyrone (marlon wayans, also an excellent performance--rent the DVD and watch the deleted scene that shows him impersonating jar-jar binks.). as the film progresses, each character's trip through drugland takes a very specific, isolating turn, so that each one ends up alone in his or her own personal hell.

my verdict: i think this is well-made, interesting film. but it's grim. as propaganda it is heavy-handed--which is not an idictment, by any means. the propaganda genre kind of demands heavy-handedness. still, i was ready for it to end, and i couldn't stay while glaucon watched the deleted scenes (though he convinced me to check out the aforementioned jar-jar impersonation). sarah goldfarb's MD-orchestrated addiction to diet pills is my "favorite" storyline, if only because it gives a perspective on drug abuse, and on the medical establishment, that we don't often get. it's one flew over the cuckoo's nest-esque in its absurdity. her downward spiral strikes me as particularly tragic in a way that the younger characters' stories don't--perhaps because their youth itself engenders a hope for the future. (here comes the biggest spoiler...) at the end of the film, all 4 of these characters are still alive, though each is firmly anchored in a Very Bad Place which may or may not be rock bottom--and that ambiguity, as to whether or not there might be a deeper level of hell waiting for each of them, is also one of the film's strengths. as glaucon pointed out to me, this film doesn't give you the "rehab redemption" uptick at the end that's typical of the drug drama (e.g. trainspotting). the thing about the ending, though, is that it's possible to imagine that each of the 3 young characters could potentially find his/her way out of that VBP, whether through rehab or whatever. for sarah goldfarb, though...and maybe i'm just a pessimist, but it seems unlikely that she'll ever find her way out of the medical labyrinth into which she has tumbled. that her spiral is initiated and powered by her faith in doctors and medical science makes her situation especially poignant to me. when she finally starts to protest how she's being treated, it's too late--the birdlike motions of her hands and her incoherent verbalizations leave no visible impression on her attendants.

one bit of filmmaking technique that particularly impressed me: the short, snappy sequences that signify those moments when characters drug themselves. i don't know what that technique is called (simply "montage"?)--the sequences consist of jumpy montages of clips showing the pertinent drug paraphernalia (spoons, cotton balls, needles, rolled dollar bills, mirrors, white powder, razor blades, pills, coffee filters and grounds, coffee in a cup, a hand popping a pill into a mouth, a joint being rolled, smoke, etc.) along with science-y shots of blood flowing through veins, pupils dilating, etc. at the end of a jumpy sequence, you hear a deep sigh, and it's followed by a super-calm shot of a freshly drugged character. the sharp contrast between that calm and the preceding jumpy, noisy, fast bit of montage is particularly effective.

one very small bit of acting that impressed me: toward the end, ellen burstyn's character (sarah goldfarb) is given an injection of some kind of sedative. the change that comes over her face, and the muddy/fleshy/extremely vulnerable look on her face after she's drugged, is incredible. you see her intellect and her sense of agency lose focus.

and then...there's a really cool scene in which jennifer connelly's character lies in a face-down fetal position in a bathtub, with her face under the water. it's very calm and floaty...and then she screams underwater. the imdb entry for the film says that this scene is a replica of a scene from the animated film perfect blue. apparently aronofosky bought the remake rights to the film just so he could do that one scene.

fascinating, horrifying film...

Comments

[fr-defenestrato.livejournal.com]

I believe (if I recall correctly from the commentary) Aronofsky calls those montages "hip-hop montages" but I'm not sure why. The director's commentary is WELL worth listening to: for example, to learn that your admiration for Ms. Burstyn's incredible, sedative-inspired face-change was not really acting at all: it was CGI on her face (the only CGI in the movie).

Having seen this movie a few times, I recall that, while it was largely effective in its grimness on first viewing, the bit with the refrigerator very nearly undid the spell. Sara's descent to that point (the disappearing food, the time-lapse/real-time superimposition, the creepy muffled slomo scene in the Dr.'s office) had worked fine, and the merging of the self-actualization show with her reality did as well; but having her stalked by a mobile, carnivorous refrigerator was, methought, perhaps one small step too far.

[glaucon.livejournal.com]

I see your point, but that fridge scared the shit out of me.

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

Ms. Burstyn's incredible, sedative-inspired face-change was not really acting at all: it was CGI on her face (the only CGI in the movie)

well that's disappointing. also, i feel like an idiot--doesn't it figure that i pick out the one bit of CGI in the film. that said, even if it wasn't acting, it was still effective. and i'm sorry to say this, but there's no way i could sit through the director's commentary on this one.

i can definitely imagine this film losing a lot on a second (or more) viewing.