There's nothing tepid about Darren Aronofsky, and I love him for it. "The Fountain," his grand mythical fantasy that interweaves three tales about the fear of death and the quest for eternal life, is a terrifically ambitious spectacle that Aronofsky commits to completely. I have no idea how critics and audiences are going to receive it (I never do), but it's exhilarating to see somebody go this far out on a limb for his vision.
Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz appear as versions of the same characters in all three narratives. Dr. Tommy Creo is research doctor studying brain tumors while his wife Izzy (or "Iz," as in "is") is dying of one; as Spanish conquistador Tomas Creo, serving Queen Isabella during the 16th century terror of the Inquisition, who is sent on a quest for the Tree of Life in a story called "The Fountain," written by Izzy; and as some kind of monk/space traveller hurling toward a nebula with the ancient tree in what looks like an interstellar snowglobe, haunted by the ghost of Izzy.
It could have been as silly as (again) "Lady in the Water," if Aronofsky had suffered the same kind of failure of nerve that afflicted M. Night Shyamalan. But never fear. As you might expect from the director of "Pi" and "Requiem for a Dream," Aranofsky goes all-out and damn those who don't want to keep up with him. You can feel the filmmaker's passionate commitment to every moment in the movie. This guy knows what he's doing, and he's trying to put it across, and he'll do absolutely whatever it takes. Maybe even more.
In its delirious momentum, "The Fountain" reminds me not only of Aronofsky's previous films, but of the Ken Russell of "Altered States" or the John Boorman of "Excalibur." Because he's not afraid to go "out there," and to risk looking ridiculous by grappling with gigantic philosophical concepts, the movie works. There are a few rough spots, but the energy doesn't flag and it carries you along. And, in the bargain, "The Fountain" serves up some resonant mythological imagery you won't soon forget.
It begins, and ends, with the simple idea of a tree over a grave -- an image that (to me) perfectly encapsulates the yin-yang nature of life and death. I won't say anything more about it for now, except that Hugh Jackman's career should be reborn; and Brad Pitt was a fool to abandon this film -- especially for "Troy."
I'm so glad you liked this movie. It might be my favourite so far at the fest.
I'm just too jealous to continue reading your blog while you are at Toronto.
Philip, I'm fighting the same pangs of jealousy. But Jim's coverage is just too good. I love how he talked about For Your Consideration without giving away a bunch of jokes (and I also liked how he took pride in that afterward). For those of us who can't be there, Jim, thanks for all the great posts. All of the sudden there is so much more to look forward to film-wise than I ever expected from the "Fall Preview Issue"-type coverage regularly offered by Premiere and Entertainment Weekly. I like to think of reading your blog right now as a character-building exercise in delayed gratification!
JE: Dennis, you are too kind. I really am trying hard to talk about the movies without spoiling anything. One of the things I love most about film festivals is being able to go into a screening without knowing anything about the film, except maybe who directed it. I often know nothing about the genre or the story or even the cast. (I didn't even know who starred in "The Fountain" until I was watching the movie and figured out who the lead actors were.)
BTW, one of the highlights of my festival this year was actually meeting Girish, who spotted me in a line. We didn't get to talk more than a few seconds before the line started moving -- I went into one move and I think he was going into another -- but I hope we'll both have some time later in the week to sit down briefly and compare notes about the festival!
Yes here I am after saying I would be gone. The one thing that ET Weekly doesn't get is that these movies with directors who care passionately about their movies, be it, Borat or Fountain, are really the ones worth seeing. Not the "this Oscar or that Oscar" movies. The films that Hollywood churns out on demand. The movies Jim seems to be focusing on are the ones worth seeing! Thank you Jim (as I sneak out the back door hoping no one saw me here.)
Oh, and thank you for making the Brad Pitt comment. If only we each had a chance to slap these actors over the head for making such terribly stupid decisions.
What a moron, Troy, more money, cool role. BUT COME ON IF BRAD PITT WOULD HAD TAKEN THE ROLE MAN... Would have being a +
If Brad Pitt had taken this role, plus his role in Fight Club and Snatch, he would have imploded in coolness.
I like Jackman better, he has more "emotional range" I think.
I just added a film review column to my blog, and the first movie is "The Fountain". If you want to see it, it's here:
http://extrapolater.com/entertainment.html