Asta 2

'The Fountain'

I meant to post this yesterday, but I got sidetracked by holiday card composing and Christmas shopping (online - I'm not crazy!), but I know at least one person was interested in my take on The Fountain. Overall, I enjoyed it. Hugh Jackman, imho, gave the best damn performance I've ever seen him give and there was a nice chemistry between he and Rachel Weisz. And there may be a scene in a bathtub I would highly recommend seeing. ;-) But while parts of the film worked very well, one point in particular left me going WTF?

If you've seen the commericals you know the film takes place in three different time periods. Tying together the past and present seemed to work successfully, largely because it was left to the viewer to determine if, in fact, Izie and Tommy were these same two individuals or they put themselves in the context of the story that Izie was writing. The neat thing is it works either way. It's the scenes set in the future that leave the viewer scratching their head. Some of it works if we believe it's Tommy and he's found a way to extend life far, far into the future. Stories and myths Izie told him in the present come into play and I like watching plot points come together. But even if we buy that Tommy lived hundreds of years beyond what is now a normal life span there is no way the human race is using bubbles to transport themselves through space. And the kicker is that Darren Aronofsky didn't have to even go to such far out means to get his point across, because the 'moral' of the story is something that deep down we all know already.

Still, if you are a Hugh Jackman fan as I am or like seeing really good performances or stunning visuals or like being made to think than I would recommend seeing this film. But be prepared to handwave and roll your eyes in some spots. Oh, and did I mention Hugh half dressed, wet, and in a tub with Rachel? ;-)
  • Current Mood: rushed rushed
Hee. That's a fairly accurate description. If the futuristic stuff hadn't been so literal I think it all would have hung together better. Still, I found it more interesting than a lot of films out there.
i've been wanting to see that since it premiered at some european film festival well over 6 months ago. i really really curious, and, frankly, i love "beautiful messes". :)

hugh is really awesome. i like most of his movies, but i'm yet to see him in something deep and profound. it looks like this might be IT. :)
but i'm yet to see him in something deep and profound. it looks like this might be IT.

Most definitely. Well, it tries to be profound. ;) I always knew Hugh could act, just look at what he brought to the role of Wolverine. That character could have been completey one note. But this is going to give a different type of audiance the opportunity to experience his talent. Thus far he's only been the action hero or romantic-comedy lead and this should open up a wealth of parts for him.

I think you'll enjoy the film. It's thought provoking, has great performances, and is beautiful to look at all of which seem to be important criteria for you. ;-)
trying is good enough for me. btw... the soundtrack is gorgeous. been listening to it all day. :)

i totally agree with you on wolverine. he really brought a whole new dimension to the character. he's a good actor, no doubt about it. i just hope he'll get the chance to prove it in good movies. :)
Okay, I had forgotten that the bubble part was supposed to take place in the 26th century. That makes even LESS sense than when I had forgotten about that part of it. While watching it, I was under the impression that the Hugh in the bubble was more of an astral body experiencing different eras of his life all at once. While the bubble still wouldn't make sense, more of the rest would as many pagan religions believe we live forever through our astral bodies, splitting time and place between our astral bodies and our various human bodies. Kinda like how Christianity places emphasis on the "soul," only with one human body (as far as we know - I say that the Holy Bible doesn't exactly rule out reincarnation).

Now that I've read this astronaut mess, it makes even less sense. Now I'm even *more* annoyed with those scenes. I think Aronofsky should leave the future to Arthur C. Clarke.
The astronaut stuff was totally lost on me. And even five hundred years from now will we be floating in bubbles in space? I think not. I like your take on it much better. And with Tommy being both a scientist and a man obsessed with remaining with his wife, it would make sense that he'd crawl up into his mind and not want to leave there.
Thanks for the write up!

I still haven't decided if I am going to see it. A "Bubble" you say? Oh my.

It certainly sounds pretty. I admit to being more of Rachel fan. ;)
Rachel was great too, I just naturally focus more on Hugh. ;)

Yes, a bubble, it was a very odd storytelling choice. Hey! But it has us all talking about it!
i saw this today and totally loved it. thought it was very poetic, true fantasy--even though aronofsky called it sci fi. anyway, yeah, hugh was pretty amazing. normally he bothers me unless he has sideburns and really sharp claws. and rachel. that bathtub scene. wouldn't that have been hard to film? your girlfriend in a tub with hugh jackman...... sucks to be aronofsky. still, i felt like i saw rachel weisz for the first time, though aronofsky's eyes. she was so lovely and wise.