comment #1

erniesouchak says ...

Pretentious, boring movies like The Fountain are easy to deride for reasons that have nothing to do with romance.

comment #2

donnyboy says ...

I don't mind emotion in movies like when the guy in Claire Denis's THE INTRUDER lets his dogs run free. That was sad. Really sad.
It is just that in most Hollywood movies you have some hammy score trying to get you to feel sad or happy to distract you from
the fact that the writing, directing, and/ or acting was weak.
The Fountain had multiple so-so stories, when good one would suffice. What was sad about it?
The idea that the movie was about love seemed strained. All that Jackman and Weiss' characters do is look at each other while emoting all over the place like a running faucet--and the obligatory bathtub scene--if that's all Aronofsky thinks love is about. Well then, that is SAD.

comment #3

JD says ...

This argument is ridiculous. Horror movies are by far the most negatively-reviewed genre of movies and you can hardly argue that The Fountain was dismissed by critics because it was too upbeat and optimistic. Critics have an aversion to dishonest, sentimental thinking -- and rightly so -- but I don't think they have a natural aversion to emotion or optimism. Just like humour has to be earned in any great comedy, emotion needs to be earned in any great drama. You can't just show the audience a little kid crying and assume that they'll be touched.

This is why movies like Forrest Gump get slammed in some circles. His best friend dies: cue the tears. His mom dies: cue the tears. His childhood sweetheart dies: cue the tears. Not only does this movie lie about basic human relationships, it also lies about the history of the United States... all in an effort to touch people. Critics should hate movies like that, goddamnit! Not because critics are cold, but because the movies are dishonest and manipulative.

comment #4

austin111 says ...

I haven't seen The Fountain and so I don't really have any feelings about it one way or another, whether it's good, bad, trippy or whatever, but I do know this --- anything that panders to the bigger emotions in anything other than with a vague or outright crabbed cynical approach is indeed considered suspect and liable by most of today's critics, even by bloggers on sites that pretend to be serious critics. It's become sickening to see how some films get sideswiped even when the emotions have some connection to reality. Of course, some films pander so clumsily that it does bring out the teeth and claws. What makes me less likely to take some of these same critics seriously is when they go gaga--googoo over, say, a Pirates of the Carribean while laying waste to something that might actually be a helluva lot more.

comment #5

Rod32303 says ...

I also have not seen "The Fountain," but I have, like the world, seen "Forrest Gump." What I remember most about that movie, as well as other tear-jerkers that most "serious" critics find dishonest, is the collective FEEL of the audience - as one. Does this make sense? Like we were all TOGETHER in that movie theatre, all, for the most part, experiencing some of the same emotions, same feelings. That's why I'll always, ALWAYS go to the movie THEATER. Because I can sit next to a person I don't know, and we both "get" what's happening in front of us - I feel connected...even to perfect stragers. I've felt connected in recent films like "Babel," and "Brokeback Mountain," and "Saving Private Ryan," of course, but I also remember the euphoric feeling from the audience I saw "Mr. Holland's Opus" with or "Jerry Maguire" with - no one nitpicks (not until later, anyway) and, unlike most critics who sit in a small room alone or with their ilk, we all walked in, paying a lot of our own money, with our arms OPEN ready to WANT to love the film. That's the thing most critics don't do - they walk in with arms crossed, with a "okay, PROVE IT TO ME" attitude, and, if they like it, then their arms are open and loving. Most paying audiences come IN with goodwill, and then are either gratefully moved or touched, or pissed because their good will was squandered by some bullshit.

comment #6

le corbeau says ...

You mean everyone else felt extreme irritation at seeing the tumultuous history of the 60s reduced to the story of a retard, too?

comment #7

donnyboy says ...

Rod32303

I agree with you about Opus I remember seeing that and feeling some sort of communal thing. But as I've gotten older and started writing scripts when I go see hacky Haggis's Crash and see a fake gun pulled out by a child in slow mo and alalallalaallalalhh arabian music used to trick the audience, I just get up and leave, it's just too much bs to handle. The thing is, there is a huge swath of movie going audience that stopped going to the movies 10 years ago that simply only go to the movie once a year, as over thanksgiving I talked to such people that work outside of the media. They like movies. They want to go to them. But they are so rigged, that the loyal viewer is made to feel not wanted by the amount of arrogant tripe that is tossed out to the movie audience as if they are dumb. So they stay home. They have better things to do. And I can see why. Daily.

comment #8

Rod32303 says ...

Who the hell thinks "Forrest Gump" was about the tumultuous history of the sixites? And, uh...no, everyone else didn't feel the same irratation or whatever you said. Look at that film's grosses...be elitist if it's your nature, or think you're smarter than the average bear, but movies that are popular are popular for a reason, which usually amounts to the way they make people FEEL. If certain movies that the public find endearing or fun make you heave, hey, it's a free country.

Well said, Donnyboy. I am one of those people - I used to go to the movies every weekend. I've seen a total of six in the theater this year. But I still hold out for the hope of being astonished and amazed...and still, sometimes I am.

comment #9

le corbeau says ...

"Who the hell thinks "Forrest Gump" was about the tumultuous history of the sixites?"

Sorry, must have been some other movie in which a retard shows up at the I Have a Dream speech, a folksinger club, Vietnam, on TV with John Lennon and Dick Cavett, etc. etc.

comment #10

PaulKolas says ...

The Fountain vies with Alexander as being the most self-indulgently worst film of the decade. The worst films are not those that are obviously bad, but those that are delusional enough to think they're actually good. Babel is another example, but Babel is Citizen Kane compared to the incoherent mess that The Fountain is. What in the hell was Aronofsky thinking? That sheer imagery and an incessantly "soulful" Philip Glass score would compensate for a woeful excuse of a screenplay and story. I LOVE to be moved at the movies, even at those times when I know the filmmaker is manipulating my heartstrings, as long as he or she is doing a good job of it. There is nothing wrong with sentimentality as long as there is a shred of honesty in it, but The Fountain was a muddled disaster, another sad case of a once (and hopefully future) boy wonder allowed to indulge his so called "vision" (Michael Cimino and Heaven's Gate anyone?). Brad Pitt must be smiling hugely that he passed on this one.

comment #11

dre says ...

Not to get into a battle over The Fountain (it's a fucking masterpiece) ... I think his point is movies with darker, less hopeful aspects do not get accused of manipulating the audience as much as a film that celebrates life.

comment #12

dre says ...

By the way, Paul Kolas...The Fountain does make sense. You might consider giving it another chance. It not only makes sense, but it makes sense a couple of different ways. It depends on how you choose to view it.

comment #13

The Movie Man says ...

Many people strongly dislike The Fountain and that's fair enough. Like any film, especially one of that nature, there is going to be a fair amount of disagreement, as everyone is bringing their own interpretations and baggage to the table. I feel the film actually welcomes this. But please, let's not equate the movie with Forrest Gump, a completely unambigiuous, insulting, pandering, offensive piece of garbage that's false and self-congratulatory even by the Academy's standards. The Fountain, warts and all, no matter your opinion, does not deserve that.

comment #14

Rod32303 says ...

Would this be the same film that also shows the same "retard" at the Watergate Hotel, creating the 1970's "Have A Nice Day" t-shirt, dons a faux-Nike running shoe (late 70's/early 80's); deals with the loss of a loved one during the AIDS crisis - all of which took place when? Oh, that's right...during the 1960's? If what you remember of that film is just the middle 60's section, so be it, but it emcompassed more than that. That was my point.

Look, "Gump," especially on reflection, is a bit of a mess - at the time, it seemed less so, and I just remember the BUZZ - the audience reaction at the sold-out showing I saw. People who are involved in this site aren't the only ones who see films. I don't compare it to "The Fountain," or any other film - my point was trying to stay in line with Jeffrey's point about mainstream highfalutin critics, and that sometimes, like "Gump" and "Pirates of the Carribean 2" the regular joe finds worthy things in a film that some others don't.

comment #15

The Movie Man says ...

Rod-wasn't specifically calling you out, or saying that you were comparing FG to The Fountain. I was just addressing the thread in general, and wanted to make the point that a film can be very emotional without being as false and earnest as Gump or the typical "Oscar film" is.

I generally agree that the critics tend to underestimate films that have a positive message, but films like FG are probably the reason they tend to have a bias against those types of movies. Of coure, its a person's right to enjoy Gump if they want to, and I'm not suggesting otherwise. Though its also my right to despise what I consider a movie that reduces 20 or so years of American history into a pat Hallmark cartoon. Like I said, that's just me, and to be fair, Forrest Gump is a movie that I REALLY hate, so it may bring out a little more vinegar than usual in my responses. We all have our pet peeves and for me, movie wise, Gump is near the top of the list.

comment #16

le corbeau says ...

That's right, it's actually the movie that makes the point that a young, ambitious woman from a small town is better off marrying the nearest retard than going off in the big wide world where she's sure to 1) have to strip for a living, 2) get beaten, 3) do drugs, 4) get knocked up, 5) and get AIDS. Because, of course, none of those things exist in rural America-- only in the big city.

Sorry, Rod, don't mean to beat a 12-year-old horse, and I agree with your underlying point-- critics would rather snipe at something sincere than risk being thought unhip-- but I LOATHE Forrest Gump as a pernicious attempt to rewrite the cultural history of the preceding 30 years with cutesy horseshit.

comment #17

Rod32303 says ...

Points well taken by all. Lots of shit coming out of studios, still...in all genres. Always will, I guess.

I still hold out for the magic, though...

comment #18

Craig Kennedy says ...

I don't know if you'll find magic Rod, but give The Fountain a chance. It's only 'pretention' was to show a man dealing with the denial, rage and grief over a tragic loss. The friggin' nerve of Aronofsky!

The film is not without its flaws, but for PaulKolas to call it "the most self-indulgently worst film of the decade" is hyperbole. The Fountain has the balls to wear its heart on its sleeve and it should be rewarded for it.

comment #19

The Movie Man says ...

Thank you cjKennedy, I don't understand why the portion of the community that dislikes this film outright HATES it so much. It's personal and utterly unlike anything I've seen so far this year in a year where I've been underwhelmed by virtually every major release. (I really liked The Departed but there's something intangible that's keeping me from wholesale loving it, it may be that it seems so calculated a comeback, I don't know.)

I walked out of The Fountain knowing that I had seen something, had actually felt something. And what is so pretentious about the movie? As cjkennedy said the film wears its heart on its sleeve, and is very blunt about what it's about. The Fountain pretends to know nothing and bravely courts potential absurdity and that takes balls, as cj just pointed out. And honestly people if you pay attention at all the film is very straight forward, is being asked to pay the slightest bit of attention to a movie that offensive?

comment #20

nola says ...

How Movie Man feels about FG is how I feel about Pretty Woman. I am the only woman in America that hates that movie and what it's about? I remember in college rational, smart women loving that movie and Julia Roberts.

Don't get me wrong, I love romantic comedies but to me there was nothing romantic or funny about that freaking movie.

comment #21

MovieBob says ...

Count me among those dissapointed by The Fountain. My issue isn't so much that it's overly sentimental (it is) but that it's sentiments are so trite and cliche'd.
http://moviebob.blogspot.com/2006/11/review-fountain.html

Once you cut through all the narrative trickery (which isn't as impenetrable as it wants to be) and film school symbolism (quasi-Buddhism for the "transcendance" portion? Wow, WHERE did he get THAT!!??) "The Fountain's" overall themes and messages are just the same Hallmark Card memos you've heard from every other movie about the quest for eternal life: "eternal life wouldn't be a good thing," "you need to let go," "death is just a part of life" and a little bit of "love never dies" just for good measure.

It's not BAD, but it seems to believe it's some kind of "2001"-level mindfuck and it's basically just "Tuck Everlasting" meets "What Dreams May Come."

comment #22

Dixon Steele says ...

Any truth to the rumor that Aronofsky's next is CHARLIE'S ANGELS 3: THE APOCOPLYPSE.

P.S. Screw all you cynics, I LOVED Forrest Gump!

comment #23

Craig Kennedy says ...

I wouldn't go so far as to say the message of the movie is trite, but I can't argue with MovieBob's complaint that it's not especially new or complex. There's a difference though between simple and simplistic. For me the message of The Fountain was elevated by Hugh Jackman's wrenching, emotional performance.

If you want to, most movies can probably be reduced to a Hallmark card sentiment, but the difference is in the telling.

Movie Man, one of the reasons I think this film sets itself up for the hate is because unlike most popular culture these days, it isn't protected by any kind of self-knowing irony. It's a raw open wound and it's not asking you to think it's cool. That was one of the huge charms of the movie for me, but it makes it easy to pile on especially in an era of film criticism where it's fashionable to look smart by snarkily tearing something down.

That's not to say there aren't perfectly valid reasons not to like the film. It's not for all tastes.