The Fountain

9

roxwordroxwordJun 29, 2007

Sometimes I'm amazed by all the closed down minds on this planet. this film is a love song, a deep tone poem about mortality, heart, soul and science and their relationships to each other. perhaps that's too much for the averageSometimes I'm amazed by all the closed down minds on this planet. this film is a love song, a deep tone poem about mortality, heart, soul and science and their relationships to each other. perhaps that's too much for the average viewer to absorb, but this viewer could have watched another 2 or 3 more hours of this. I'll probably end up buying it and screening it over and over and then I'll wish I had given "the fountain" a ten. don't miss it.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful

9

JustinGFeb 1, 2008

The Fountain is a 'love-it-or-hate-it' sort of film. It has only one undeniable quality: it's beautiful. Color and texture come together beautifully; the dark, rainy Mayan jungle, the snow-covered fields of modern America, and The Fountain is a 'love-it-or-hate-it' sort of film. It has only one undeniable quality: it's beautiful. Color and texture come together beautifully; the dark, rainy Mayan jungle, the snow-covered fields of modern America, and the Orion Nebula's golden nuclear rain are breathtaking to behold, especially in HD. Unfortunately the film tries to answer questions that some people go to church for, so those with strongly-held beliefs about the nature of life, death, and God might end the film feeling confused, threatened, even offended. Those of us who, like Aranofsky, are looking to reconcile the illusory conflicts between science and spirituality will likely find it an intensely rewarding experience.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful

9

DanielH.Jul 27, 2008

Wow! Incredible film, really. The more I attempt to analyze it, the more I am reminded that this is a love fantasy. It is like a 10th century French poem depicting chivalry and mortality. Beautiful.

2 of 2 users found this helpful

9

MeredithL.Dec 7, 2006

I thought that this movie speaks to Aronofsky's daring filming techniques. I think that he really sets the bar for other directors to live up to.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

JimS.Feb 18, 2008

I look forward to one day seeing the complete, uncut film.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

BertS.May 22, 2008

A sensory masterpiece intertwined with deeply emotional storylines (esp. if u ever spent time with a loved one with cancer) with an overall sci-fi fantasy blanket. Wayyyyy too ambitious but if you're in the right mood - it will take you A sensory masterpiece intertwined with deeply emotional storylines (esp. if u ever spent time with a loved one with cancer) with an overall sci-fi fantasy blanket. Wayyyyy too ambitious but if you're in the right mood - it will take you somewhere special.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

DavidM.Sep 28, 2008

Completely polarizing - and I certainly know why. But, beautiful, intelligent and nothing but ambitious from start to finish. Remember folks, this is "science fiction"...it's not a documentary, it's "science fiction". Clint Completely polarizing - and I certainly know why. But, beautiful, intelligent and nothing but ambitious from start to finish. Remember folks, this is "science fiction"...it's not a documentary, it's "science fiction". Clint Mansell's soundtrack is one of the most amazing pieces of music ever composed.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

NandoP.Nov 24, 2006

Masterpiece with one of the most beautiful and meaningful message of life in the foreground (although not many critics worry to understand) (or, as David Lynch said, "the movie is its own explanation"). A urgent contemporary manifesto of art Masterpiece with one of the most beautiful and meaningful message of life in the foreground (although not many critics worry to understand) (or, as David Lynch said, "the movie is its own explanation"). A urgent contemporary manifesto of art for life with technical excelence. Applause.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

jamesm.Nov 30, 2006

It was a bit confusing at the beginning, but everything fell into place eventually. in my opinion is not about a man in 3 seperate lives, as most people say. but instead 1 man's life from 3 different perspectives. very interesting. a must see

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

DavidH.Dec 11, 2006

I honestly can't figure out why this one is getting such a panning from the critics. I think many of them are defensively rating this low as to not be accused of being pretentious. The film is fantastic though, and not nearly as I honestly can't figure out why this one is getting such a panning from the critics. I think many of them are defensively rating this low as to not be accused of being pretentious. The film is fantastic though, and not nearly as confusing as people are making it out to be. I went in with my attention cranked up to ten, expecting something along the lines of 2001: SO, but honestly this movie is actually slightly guilty of spoon-feeding the viewers it's symbolism, and shouldn't be confusing to anyone with the least bit of an attention span. The ending could have been edited slightly tighter, though, maybe ending five minutes earlier or so.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

JoeC.Feb 18, 2007

I loved this film. As I walked out of the theatre, all I could think about was seeing it again. Does that make it good? Not necessarily. But it changed the way I view cinema. And that is just fine with me.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

EricC.May 16, 2007

The bad reviews are suprising, since critics were suckers for Aranofsky's first two films, also complex and surreal. Shockingly beautiful, and yeah, occasionally confusing as all hell, but doesn't deserve the brutal reviews. How The bad reviews are suprising, since critics were suckers for Aranofsky's first two films, also complex and surreal. Shockingly beautiful, and yeah, occasionally confusing as all hell, but doesn't deserve the brutal reviews. How can you praise someone for doing something twice before, and then try to punish him when he does it again with even more grace and skill? Mark F is right. It doesn't topple 2001 as the deffinitive mind-bending sci-fi epic. But if you give it a chance, it'll come pretty close. Just don't overthink it.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

ChrisP.Dec 28, 2008

This film has really hooked me, despite its flaws. Tommy and, especially, Izzy are too broadly drawn as characters: in the DVD commentary, Aronofsky admits he wanted them to be archetypes, so their love story lacks the little details and This film has really hooked me, despite its flaws. Tommy and, especially, Izzy are too broadly drawn as characters: in the DVD commentary, Aronofsky admits he wanted them to be archetypes, so their love story lacks the little details and specificities that might have made it really emotionally vivid and put the film over the top for those critics who hated it for the complicated and ambiguous trio of timelines. Really the movie isn't about Tommy and Izzy, but about Tommy and his own denial of death; Izzy's mortality is just a vehicle for Tom to confront his own. So it's another movie in which the female lead is basically a masculine projection, and that maybe is its real flaw. But Tommy's journey through grief to ... well, you'll see ... is still moving for me. And, yes, it might be because of the soundtrack, which works for this film as no soundtrack ever has before, tying together the three separate timelines into one emotional arc. It's also visually gorgeous; during production the planned use of computer graphics had to be scrapped for macrophotography for budgetary reasons, and thank god, because the results are beautiful and unlike anything else I've seen on film. Overall, even though I could't put the pieces together logically as I was watching it, I found that there was an emotional logic to the film that was deeply satisfying. Although I like to analyze the heck out of films, this is one that really does work well if you just let it wash over you.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

PhilR.Apr 19, 2008

A truly amazing film like no other. I admire the directors effort, but I feel his one failing was not fleshing out the two main characters and their love for each other. Had he done this the viewers would have been able to identify more with A truly amazing film like no other. I admire the directors effort, but I feel his one failing was not fleshing out the two main characters and their love for each other. Had he done this the viewers would have been able to identify more with the underlying story of love and how it relates to death. Anyhow a movie that need multiple viewings to understand. And one of the most incredible scenes in recent memory. The part where Tomas drinks from the tree of life. Mind blowing imagery and allegory in an unforgettable climax. It is hard to believe the film was shot on such a low budget.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

A-robNov 23, 2006

I could talk all night about this movie. If it has any flaws, I forgive them. The concept and visuals alone are enough for me to fall in love with it.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

JakeR.Nov 26, 2006

It's not perfect. But what movie is? The Fountain is beautifully shot, well-acted, compelling entertainment. It's only hard to follow if you're used to having your stories spoon-fed to you, as some critics seem to be. I It's not perfect. But what movie is? The Fountain is beautifully shot, well-acted, compelling entertainment. It's only hard to follow if you're used to having your stories spoon-fed to you, as some critics seem to be. I can't recommend The Fountain universally, but a good metric is this: if you enjoyed Solaris, you'll like this one. If you thought Solaris was "pretentious" or "silly" for daring to put a little romance in their sci-fi (or vice-versa), then turn Deal or No Deal back on and skip this one.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

MelcherOct 9, 2011

Easily one of the best films I've ever seen on so many levels. Visually alone it is incredible, but when you add in the story, themes, direction and character portrayal it just becomes magic. Aronofsky captures something incredible in hisEasily one of the best films I've ever seen on so many levels. Visually alone it is incredible, but when you add in the story, themes, direction and character portrayal it just becomes magic. Aronofsky captures something incredible in his portrayal of 3 parallel story-lines about life, death, and love. It is a deep film and can be interpreted in many ways and is a treat to watch every time.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

SkulbSep 25, 2014

Sometimes being intelligent is a problem, which Aronovsky found out when he released The Fountain. Because roughly half of all human beings are completely incapable of noticing allegory, or any other complex language activities for thatSometimes being intelligent is a problem, which Aronovsky found out when he released The Fountain. Because roughly half of all human beings are completely incapable of noticing allegory, or any other complex language activities for that matter, the movie was criticized up one side and down the other by an army of nincompoops. But they can be safely ignored as usual.

The Fountain is presented as three separate alternating stories, with Hugh Jackman leading all three of them, and Rachel Weiss with him in two of them. The first is presumably in the present, where Jackman is a biologist who is trying to save his dying wife by experimenting on monkeys. The second is set in the 1500s, with Jackman as a conquistador looking for immortality on behalf of the Spanish queen, and this is actually the book Rachel Weiss`character is writing, a detail many people seem to have missed. And the third is a sort of astral allegory of life and death, and one of the weirdest damn things I`ve seen in a while. But really, all three are the same story, dealing with the same topic from three different angles. The second aspect of this triple allegory is that it is not just multiple angles on the subject of life and death but also represents different levels of reality. Because Weiss` fiction (The conquistador part.) is obviously less real than the present day narrative, the implication is that the astral part of the movie is more real than it. Or in other words that spiritual and conceptual reality is superior to physical reality, which again is superior to fiction. Read some Plato and then watch The Fountain again and you`ll understand this part of it.
The result is a tad confusing at first, like time distortions and multiple levels of reality tend to be in movies. But a second viewing cleared most of it up for me.

The movie is otherwise wonderfully cast and directed, visually distinct and has some of the best music I`ve heard in any move. For much of the movie I was convinced that it had to have been made by Current 93 or perhaps Michael Cashmore, but as it turns out the man responsible is Clint Mansell, one time singer in pop Will Eat Itself and collaborator with Trent Reznor. All the complaining about this movie does for me is make me lose faith in humanity, or at least the intelligence of large portions of it. God forbid anyone should try and tackle a difficult subject in a movie, or to be so rude as to do it in a challenging way! Now where`s my twelfth Transformers movie in five years????… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

2hip2beahipsterSep 29, 2011

Ambitious and beautiful. That's all I can say. How one man love turns into his hatred towards death and search for immortality, and how once immortality is finally reached, man will long to die, and be with the one sent him off for the questAmbitious and beautiful. That's all I can say. How one man love turns into his hatred towards death and search for immortality, and how once immortality is finally reached, man will long to die, and be with the one sent him off for the quest of immortality in the first place. Aronofsky shows great skill and ingenious by writing up this script. Also, the cinematography is stunning and extremely well done even 5 years after the movie was filmed. Underrated and overly criticized. I think the ambitions of the movie are what made the critics expect something more, but what else they were expecting? Beats me. Great flick.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

ZiggyStardustJun 16, 2011

Darren did an amazing job on this movie. I sincerely do not understand its low score, contrary to other movies like "Requiem for a dream" that get ridiculous good reviews. If you really enjoy movies and aren't a close-minded individual youDarren did an amazing job on this movie. I sincerely do not understand its low score, contrary to other movies like "Requiem for a dream" that get ridiculous good reviews. If you really enjoy movies and aren't a close-minded individual you should watch this movie, because you'll enjoy it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

saucyninja007Sep 18, 2017

In my opinion, this movie is a masterpiece, but that isn't to say it is without faults. The biggest problem with the movie is the way it is told. To be cutting between 3 story lines taking place at different times and telling each individualIn my opinion, this movie is a masterpiece, but that isn't to say it is without faults. The biggest problem with the movie is the way it is told. To be cutting between 3 story lines taking place at different times and telling each individual story slightly out of order can be a little confusing and ruins the narrative flow at times. That being said, I found the film to be profound and emotionally moving.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

Anwar-MkayedJan 2, 2015

Can be interpreted on many levels, or enjoyed superficially as just a 'film'. However, for many who watched it, the depth of it can not be felt immediately but rather reflect upon as one might do after a mystical dream, and even enjoy it evenCan be interpreted on many levels, or enjoyed superficially as just a 'film'. However, for many who watched it, the depth of it can not be felt immediately but rather reflect upon as one might do after a mystical dream, and even enjoy it even after The End.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

Carol_reviewsApr 22, 2019

Like Alejandro Jodorowsky before him the Fountain balances kitsch and art. Not everyone will be pleased. But those who love cinema should be excited for this is Aronofsky tapping in to the things that make cinema great.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

9

JohnCLasherasMay 8, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Fountain Review and Analysis
by John Cravo Lasheras
Rating: 9.7/10 (Second viewing)

The Fountain is the story of Tommy Creo and Isabel “Izzie” Creo, who are a married couple both researching a cure for death and aging. Tommy is more literal in his approach, as he is technically in the movie a scientist, a doctor, a generalist and specialist in terms of the science of aging and gerontology. Isabel is Tommy’s love in life and the movie centers around their deep bond for one another in the face of death, and literally so, wherein Isabel dies because of cancer later on in the movie. The movie takes place in two different superimposing realities at once, one version is real life wherein Tommy is trying to save humanity from death by researching a cure for death and aging. Another, is within the pages of The Fountain, which is Isabel’s book, that she has been writing as a function of being inspired not only by Tommy, but through her acceptance of fate, through her creative license to merge history, fiction and reality in the now, into a masterpiece concerning the futility of immortality, and the inevitability of death, and how through death, there is the ultimate release from the suffering of life. These superimposing realities loop back into one another, cinematographically, through almost instant jump-cuts, merging of such realities with different costume design, mise en scene, but functionally cover the same superimposed and merged storylines.

The real reality that Tommy and Izzie live in is revealed throughout the movie, and the periodicity of such instances in the movie converges closer to zero, as the two realities intertwine with one another, effectively becoming Tommy’s life. The reality of The Fountain bleeds into the real world and as Izzie requests of Tommy, he finishes her incomplete book when she reveals this later to him, on her deathbed. Tommy is left to decide the metaphorical fate of The Fountain, deciding ultimately that he will try to find this cure, and he accepts his merging with the dying star Xilbalba, which metaphorically represents (and ironically enough), creation through death.

The superimposing and looped in realities converge and diverge often throughout the film, detailing in reverse, the fate that Tommy chooses, wherein he decides to ironically enough, kill the tree of life that is sustaining him, and life, generally, to ascend the suffering of life, but through the creation of death.
Quite often we are shown his journey to Xilbalba in the context of Izzie, in real life, wherein Tommy is experiencing flashbacks to the fate that he decides, at the end of the writing of The Fountain. One of the most tragic ironies in this film is that many people die on the way to eternal life, but they justify such things even before they die, by as side characters, reminding Tommy (through Isabel’s writing) that death is an inevitability. One good example of this irony exists in the character of the Inquisitor, who is trying to kill Isabel in the story, wherein Isabel writes herself in as Queen Isabella of Spain (I believe at the time, in the 1500s, it was Aragon & Castile which had fought for power over the Iberian peninsula).

The Fountain as a movie is a technical, metaphorical and spiritual masterpiece by Darren Aronofsky, his crew, the actors within the movie and everyone else who made Aronofsky’s vision come to fruition. It teaches us a lesson about the futility of immortality, especially in the face of when we lose who and what we love most, and it gives us a chance to recollect on the existential and ontologically based questions, of the peculiar fate, and of more importantly, a peculiar beginning that comes from the ending and beginning of all things. I am left wondering if Tommy is optimistic or hopeful at the end, but I am instead conflicted, thinking that he wants to give the gift of immortality to everyone, but his everything and everyone in life, the love for Isabel and Isabel herself are now gone. Tommy, in my opinion, probably did not make himself immortal, but chose to live in suffering, alone, desiring to see Isabel in Heaven, preparing himself for the creation that comes after death.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

JeremyWillmottFeb 11, 2007

This movie is gloriously pretentious and unapologetically incomprehensible, being mired in philosophy and religion. Most of the movie goers left scratching their head or laughing. For me though this movie was a lot more than that. It is This movie is gloriously pretentious and unapologetically incomprehensible, being mired in philosophy and religion. Most of the movie goers left scratching their head or laughing. For me though this movie was a lot more than that. It is flawed for sure. But the essence of the message is something that resounds deeply within me. Gorgeous art direction and underpinned by a sumptuos score by Clint Mansell, this film is a must for film fanatics. It feels much like the personal movies of the 60's. It explores themes of love, death and immortality whilst touching on old testament stories such as the Tree of Life from the garden of eden (the other tree was the tree of knowledge that Adam and Eve ate from). If The Fountain doesn't leave you chattering about the meaning of life you probably shouldn't have gone to see this movie in the first place. It is cerebral. It is challenging. But ultimately very rewarding. Did I mention it was beautiful to look at. Check out my full Aronofsky review over at tweenbetween.blogspot.com… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

HenrikO.Mar 29, 2007

Criticism was also hard on Kubrick's "2001" in its day. I wonder whether there is some connection to this, another wildly philosphical piece of film art, and its criticism - similar to "2001"'s - and again, not supprisingly enough, Criticism was also hard on Kubrick's "2001" in its day. I wonder whether there is some connection to this, another wildly philosphical piece of film art, and its criticism - similar to "2001"'s - and again, not supprisingly enough, by old farts.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

JohnB.May 18, 2007

Movies this deep don't deserve to be seen by people who don't wish to better understand it and what it stands for. This movie is really something to wrap your head around and it even leaves enough room for imagination left for the Movies this deep don't deserve to be seen by people who don't wish to better understand it and what it stands for. This movie is really something to wrap your head around and it even leaves enough room for imagination left for the viewer. The visuals in the Fountain are an absolutely stunning work of art. Now I could easily call this movie pretentious yet at the same time without that pretense, there wouldn't be much to see here. My only complaints of the Fountain were the excessive amounts of scene changes which I felt were not properly executed, and the poor script that neither worked for the characters or for the audience. Those mistakes alone take this down a notch from being truly exceptional but a movie of this magnitude deserves to be seen provided you are willing to go into it with an open mind.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

JoeAverageMay 26, 2007

It's too bad Aronofsky deals in pretty images (thematic and visual), rather than develop his arguments (yes Darren, I have questions on Immortality, Life and True Love as well, but what's your take?) At least in Pi, he attempted to It's too bad Aronofsky deals in pretty images (thematic and visual), rather than develop his arguments (yes Darren, I have questions on Immortality, Life and True Love as well, but what's your take?) At least in Pi, he attempted to tackle his subject matter straight on. It's all a lovely trip to soak in though. Although, all the lotus position stuff does look rather stupid and out-of-place.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

AnonymousHMay 29, 2007

Jimmy stop giving 10's to movies just because they are original. If you really like a movie give it a 9, especially if you admit there is argument for flaws. It's people like you that rate movies 10's or 0's that give Jimmy stop giving 10's to movies just because they are original. If you really like a movie give it a 9, especially if you admit there is argument for flaws. It's people like you that rate movies 10's or 0's that give objective criticism a bad name. The movie is good and original. Not perfect. Check it out.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful

8

JimmyC.Nov 22, 2006

I've read a number of preofessional reviews stating that the film is difficult to follow and that the ending is way beyond anything we lowly movie-goers might be able to grasp. I went into the film prepared to leave utterly perplexed-- I've read a number of preofessional reviews stating that the film is difficult to follow and that the ending is way beyond anything we lowly movie-goers might be able to grasp. I went into the film prepared to leave utterly perplexed-- but this was simply not the case. The film is not difficult to follow, and the ending is quite satisfying. There are obviously a number of metaphors throughout, but they are not so complex as to be beyond one's understanding. Certain parts of the film may be interpreted differently, but as a whole it has a rather straight-forward and powerful message about love and death. The visuals and acting are great. The music was appropriate. It's not the best movie of all time, but it's definitely worth seeing.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

DanB.Nov 23, 2006

It's not exactly entertaining, but it *is* good. Or, it's not good, but it's kinda great? I don't know, really. Aside from some high-emotion moments that came off as mawkish rather than affecting, this movie was It's not exactly entertaining, but it *is* good. Or, it's not good, but it's kinda great? I don't know, really. Aside from some high-emotion moments that came off as mawkish rather than affecting, this movie was definitely worthwhile. For it's flaws, it's a hundred times more interesting/better than 90% of what's on screen.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

SG.Nov 24, 2006

Incoherent? Head scratching? Pretentious? Hard to follow? Did I watch the same movie as many of these critics? I don't want to take any unnecessary or pointless swipes at intelligence, but I cannot help but wonder what was so confusing Incoherent? Head scratching? Pretentious? Hard to follow? Did I watch the same movie as many of these critics? I don't want to take any unnecessary or pointless swipes at intelligence, but I cannot help but wonder what was so confusing about this movie. To me, this was simple story. A movie about the most basic human experiences (love and death), and as such is naturally expansive due to the timelessness of these themes. It echoes the feel of the folklore it is based on. There is nothing pretentious or confusing about that. Perhaps the narrative was unclear at first, but it does not take long to determine what the significance of each narrative strand is. While I do argue that the 16th century narrative was the essential flaw of the movie, I will let others feel out their own opinions there. This movie should just be felt and experienced. It is our humanity that makes it easy to identify with the moment we stop trying to make it something it isn't. It is not puzzling, confusing or pretentious and in my opinion not even mind blowing. A visual feast and a simple myth with a sci-fi edge. Abandon the critical analysis and let your gut feel this one out.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

ChrisB.Nov 25, 2006

I didn't really like it, but the imagery was beautiful and I left the theater feeling very different than when I went in.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

AlexNov 29, 2006

The Fountain, for some, is a movie that has to be seen a couple times before its finally understood. for others, its a visual masterpiece that actually lets you think freely about what it was really all about. it probably would have done a The Fountain, for some, is a movie that has to be seen a couple times before its finally understood. for others, its a visual masterpiece that actually lets you think freely about what it was really all about. it probably would have done a little better on the independent film circuit, since there are some concepts in the movie that the mainstream probably won't be able to grasp, and some will probably pass it off as a "thin plot". in order to truly enjoy the movie, you have to think deep, and keep an open mind. some of the acting was a little over done in certain places, but the overall feel of the movie grabs hold, and stays until long after the movie is over. 8 out of 10.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

Andys_ReviewsSep 29, 2012

I have to admit this is the second time I

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

CooterPatooterMar 22, 2012

Aronofsky's unique eye and Clint Mansell's near-perfect scoring highlight this bold film about mankind's eternal struggle with the concept of death. The three stories flow together seamlessly and help each other weave a tale that takes placeAronofsky's unique eye and Clint Mansell's near-perfect scoring highlight this bold film about mankind's eternal struggle with the concept of death. The three stories flow together seamlessly and help each other weave a tale that takes place over a thousand years. The Fountain will break your heart many times over before it's through and you won't ever forget it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

Penelope1970atxDec 13, 2013

Just watched The Fountain and I loved the romantic part, mostly because I long for love like that. Anyway, I came to my own interpretation before reading other reviews and to make it short: The scientist struggled with immortality, espJust watched The Fountain and I loved the romantic part, mostly because I long for love like that. Anyway, I came to my own interpretation before reading other reviews and to make it short: The scientist struggled with immortality, esp after his love died. But through finishing the story I think he realized, by tapping into his spiritual side, that even though our physical bodies are not immortal, we all have immortality in the way of our spirits. Planting the tree on her grave was a symbolic gesture, and a way to express his new realization in his human, physical, though ego driven, self.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

8

bfoore90Nov 14, 2020

t's a film seemingly about many things from death to love to acceptance, the point of The Fountain is seemingly that it's about many of life's questions. Like most of Aronofsky's filmography, I found the film to be a poignant, compelling andt's a film seemingly about many things from death to love to acceptance, the point of The Fountain is seemingly that it's about many of life's questions. Like most of Aronofsky's filmography, I found the film to be a poignant, compelling and creative tale about a man's obsession with death and saving his wife from it. Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz are incredible in this and the visual effects and Clint Mansell's score are extremely effective in this tale about a man who doesn't want to lose the love of his life. Also, Clint Mansell's score for Mass Effect 3 was phenomenal.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

amirsJan 20, 2014

انسان و مساله‌ی بودن یا نبودن

مرگ مهم‌ترین دغدغه‌ی ذهنی بشر از گذشته‌های دور تا به امروز به حساب می‌آید و همیشه با ترسی عظیم هم‌راه بوده. انسان از زمانی که موجودی مرگ‌آگاه شد همیشه به دنبال رهایی از چنگال این شبح عظیم بوده که در لحظهانسان و مساله‌ی بودن یا نبودن

مرگ مهم‌ترین دغدغه‌ی ذهنی بشر از گذشته‌های دور تا به امروز به حساب می‌آید و همیشه با ترسی عظیم هم‌راه بوده. انسان از زمانی که موجودی مرگ‌آگاه شد همیشه به دنبال رهایی از چنگال این شبح عظیم بوده که در لحظه لحظه‌ی زندگی هم‌راه اوست و همین هم‌راهی همیشگی انسان را در تعلیقی ابدی نگاه می‌دارد. چیزی که این قدر به ما نزدیک است چرا باید موجب هراسمان شود چرا به آن عادت نمی‌کنیم؟ دلیلش ناشناخته بودن مرگ است. از بعدش هیچ نمی‌دانیم همین ما را می‌ترساند.
البته وقتی درباره‌ی مرگ حرف می‌زنیم باید این را در نظر گرفت که خود مرگ مد نظر است یا پیامدهای آن (منظورم از پیامد؛ مواجه شدن‌مان با مرگ دیگران، خاصه عزیزان‌مان است).
مرگ و زندگی ‍‍پیوسته در کانون آثار برجسته‌ی هنر و ادبیات جهان قرار داشته. شگفتی ندارد اگر نخستین کتابی که از تمدن‌های بزرگ باستانی به دست ما رسیده است، کتاب مردگان مصر و نخستین افسانه، افسانه گیل گمش بابلی باشد که در تلاش و تکاپو برای یافتن گیاه جوانی و زندگی جاودان بود، و کهن‌ترین هراس یا آرزویی که از انسان آن روزگاران شناخته‌ایم، هراس از مرگ و آرزوی نامیرایی باشد.
در طول تاریخ؛ بشر مدام سعی بر آن داشته تا خود را از چنگال مرگ برهاند. گاه با مواجه نشدن با آن تا زمانی که از سایه درآید و رخ نشان دهد، گاه با نفی کردنش و باور به حیات پس از مرگ (بازتولد در اشکال مختلف)، و گاه این اواخر به کمک پیشرفت علم، مرگ را بیماری دانستن و این که هر بیماری درمان دارد به مبارزه با آن رفته. در تمامی این راه‌های مواجهه با مرگ که با یک‌دیگر متفاوت‌اند، یک چیز مشترک وجود دارد و آن هم عدم پذیرش مرگ (آن طور که هست یا حداقل نشان می‌دهد) و میل به جاودانگی است. البته در این بین بوده‌اند کسانی که دانسته‌اند از مرگ گریزی نیست اما از هراسش چرا.
فیلم چشمه ساخته‌ی دارن آرنوفسکی فیلمی است درباره‌ی مواجهه با مرگ (البته من این طور دیدمش) هر چند که شاید به دلیل زمان کوتاه فیلم (برای چنین مساله‌ای) آن بخش پیامدهای مرگ (از دست دادن عزیز) بسیار پررنگ‌تر است.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

alejandro970Nov 27, 2016

A mind- bending, hallucinatory experience of a quest -in the name of love- for the fountain of eternal youth. Hugh Jackman shows by himself there is live beyond Wolverine. A bit confusing but worthwhile.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

FilipeNetoAug 22, 2018

This film is quite intellectual and philosophical and, thus, cannot be seen with the same eyes with which we see mainstream commercial cinema. In my point of view, specialized critics should be the first to take this into account when they'reThis film is quite intellectual and philosophical and, thus, cannot be seen with the same eyes with which we see mainstream commercial cinema. In my point of view, specialized critics should be the first to take this into account when they're writing but, judging by what has been said about this film, it seems they're paid to speak badly and not to judge fairly. The movie isn't the trash they said, though I didn't like some script options. But it's eminently metaphorical and philosophical character will displease the overwhelming majority of the public, who normally seeks out films of easy digestion, for pure entertainment.

The action happens in three distinct timings, using non-linear narrative to intertwine it through metaphors and linking elements. The pace is purposefully slow, allowing the powerful soundtrack of Clint Mansell to elegantly harmonize with perfect cinematography and astonishing visual effects. That may seem surprising given the relatively modest budget with which everything has been achieved. The work of Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz is absolutely impeccable, particularly his.

Now let's go to the script. This is the point where, for me, the film is less interesting. Addressing very complex issues from a philosophical and existential perspective (transcendentality, mortality, what is beyond death, our relationship with the Sacred etc.), it raises a series of questions that never answers in order to let each viewer think. But truth is the film points the way to the answer, as if it wanted to do it but didn't have the guts. This gave me a sense of dissatisfaction, of absence of closure. Then there are small details in which the script clearly makes beginner mistakes, such as putting the Maya alive and well during the arrival of the Conquistadors, when we know that the Mayan civilization disappeared before the year Thousand of the Christian era, five hundred years before Columbus. I know it's a minor detail, but as a historian I don't like to see things like this.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

a-certified-dumJul 12, 2021

Personally one of my favourite movies. Tells a very touching and compelling story that has a lot to unpack.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DW.Dec 7, 2006

You have to give this film high marks for aspiration, even if it fails to be truly engaging. At least Aronofsky isn't parlaying his success into making competent sequels of comic book movies, and is trying to move us forward. Beautiful, You have to give this film high marks for aspiration, even if it fails to be truly engaging. At least Aronofsky isn't parlaying his success into making competent sequels of comic book movies, and is trying to move us forward. Beautiful, elemental, just maybe too many closeups of earnestness rather than people nakedly engaged in the struggle. Next time, Darren. I'll be there.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

7

NickA.Aug 20, 2007

Darren Aronofsky, through his long and tedious struggle to bring his most cherished script to the screen, had accumulated some serious hype around what would eventually become 'The Fountain.' Just under seven years from its Darren Aronofsky, through his long and tedious struggle to bring his most cherished script to the screen, had accumulated some serious hype around what would eventually become 'The Fountain.' Just under seven years from its conception in the mind of the film… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

7

TroelsS.Oct 19, 2008

I have got to say, that the music is the reason why I really like this movie. Yeah, the film itself is different and pretty (and I respect the director and writer of The Fountain, cause it's so easy to follow - a film like this can I have got to say, that the music is the reason why I really like this movie. Yeah, the film itself is different and pretty (and I respect the director and writer of The Fountain, cause it's so easy to follow - a film like this can easily lose focus), but especially the music supports the scenes in a perfect way. Clint Mansell might be the one of the best filmsoundtrack-makers of the decade. But I'm not saying the movie would be bad without the great soundtrack, cause it's a really touching movie, which deserves better grade by critics.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

7

MatthewF.Jun 17, 2007

While it seems like a rather illogical, incoherent, and too smart to grasp film, Darren Aronofsky

1 of 1 users found this helpful

7

foutainJan 16, 2009

Nice movie to have ... met. It is hard for me to understand some of the critics. Many say The Fountain is complicated, but I see no point in discussing any lack of understanding in terms of a movie review -> Concerning this movie, Nice movie to have ... met. It is hard for me to understand some of the critics. Many say The Fountain is complicated, but I see no point in discussing any lack of understanding in terms of a movie review -> Concerning this movie, understanding means feeling. If someone doesn't get it, well, you are human, are you? Be it possible there are inhumane critics. Be it possible many like to pose simple questions in order to irritate people. Don't ban a movie for what it does with you because as long as it does affect you, it is useful. 3 levels of time - that a problem? I'd say: it's a must if you ever try to bring up a universal message - three at least. Good number. What else is remarkable: We surely don't need all the footage and top-secret background info, who cares? Art is which works! All you fans, be aware that strongly recommending to buy a ticket or dvd is the uttermost thing to do. Re-telling the whole happening looks like stuffing the internet. Back to the roots: I like the movie from a consumer's point-of-view for its deep passion. I appreciate it from a writer's point-of-view for a daring entreprise. I love it from a male romantic's point-of-view for its (somehow psychological) precision. I can easily recommend you to buy the thing, but I will add: Aside from other laudations spoken out over time, perhaps truly earned, I suggest you prepare for something different from what most people think how a movie should develop and towards something that allows you to let go and feel a specific meaning you always assumed to be ... out there. No, my name's not Darren. Keep whispering. *chuckle*… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

7

drlowdonApr 7, 2018

The Fountain focuses primarily on Tom Creo, a biologist who faces losing his wife Izzie to cancer. Intertwined within this story are the tales of a sixteenth century conquistador and, what appears to be, a space traveller in the twenty-sixthThe Fountain focuses primarily on Tom Creo, a biologist who faces losing his wife Izzie to cancer. Intertwined within this story are the tales of a sixteenth century conquistador and, what appears to be, a space traveller in the twenty-sixth century. Exactly how these three stories are linked is open to debate, even amongst those that have seen the movie.

If you’ve ever seen any movies by director Darren Aronofsky (such as Requiem for a Dream or Black Swan) you’ll be familiar with the way he plays around with the structure of the stories he tells and leaves many aspects up to the views to interpret, and that has never been more true than it is here. Critics have always been hugely divided on the merits of this movie and I can imagine some will absolutely love this movie whilst others hate it.

Personally I did find a lot to enjoy here with excellent performances by Rachel Weisz and Hugh Jackman and visually the movie is spectacular in places. The central concept, revolving around the way we handle death, is also tackled in an original manner and its admiral to see filmmakers take a chance with their movies. Yes, things arguably become a little muddled in places, and some may accuse The Fountain if being style over substance at times but flawed ambition is always more interesting than generic competence in my book.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

StaticSpineOct 1, 2013

The storyline is decent and somehow interesting and philosophic. The visuals and the soundtrack both are outstanding. Hugh Jackman is great, he made a passionate and possessed character, but the most huge letdown for me was the role ofThe storyline is decent and somehow interesting and philosophic. The visuals and the soundtrack both are outstanding. Hugh Jackman is great, he made a passionate and possessed character, but the most huge letdown for me was the role of Rachel Weisz, she is a real beauty indeed, but I didn't feel compassion to her character, I didn't care, her role was so bleak and shallow, though all the plot was spinning around saving her life.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

HIramG.Jun 11, 2007

Director added too many things that takes you out of the main theme of the movie.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

6

NINJul 24, 2007

I give it a 6 for making me feel like I had some barbiturates. The concept is amazing but unfortunately it was not captured in the film. It would have been a better film if they stuck and focused on one lifetime. I bet Hugh Jackman himself I give it a 6 for making me feel like I had some barbiturates. The concept is amazing but unfortunately it was not captured in the film. It would have been a better film if they stuck and focused on one lifetime. I bet Hugh Jackman himself didn't know what his own film was about. It was crazy, a big mess and a definite waste of time. I could definitely live without watching this film in my lifetime.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

6

TyeN.Nov 26, 2006

Okay....I'm giving this film a six out of ten. Here's why: It drove me mad! It's the first film I've ever seen where nearly everyone in the theater booed when the credits started rolling. I heard someone shout, "I want my Okay....I'm giving this film a six out of ten. Here's why: It drove me mad! It's the first film I've ever seen where nearly everyone in the theater booed when the credits started rolling. I heard someone shout, "I want my money back!", and others yelling about how "This movie is horrible!" Here are my problems with it. First of all, the cinematography is moody, and I get that, but it's almost too dark that it becomes depresssing. The movie makes you work harder than any other film only to reach your own conclusion without any real sense of closure on it's own merits. This is maddening. But the most maddening aspect? The overall theme. What is it? Is it a morality tale about whether you should live forever if given the opportunity? Is it about love and it's endless bounds between two soul mates? Is it about the cycle of life and death? All of these themes pop up, but none are clearly designated to the plot. Speaking of which, here it is (without any real spoilers): Tommy Creo (Hugh Jackman) is a scientist who is working on a cure for a cancerous tumor that is killing his wife Izzi (Rachel Weisz). This is the central plotline. The second is the story of a conquistador named Tomas (again, Hugh Jackman) searching for the tree of life to save Spain and his queen Isabel (Rachel Weisz again). This story is actually a book that current day Izzi is writing, but can't seem to find an ending for. Finally, the third storyline is set in the future and is given no explanation at all. All you know is that Tommy (still Hugh Jackman) is floating through space in a clear bubble with nothing but a tree. He keeps having flash backs of Izzi and the book she was writing. Now that all of that is out of the way, let's get to what's good. I like that Darren Aronofsky is trying to do something different and epic. This is a romance that spreads across time and beyond. However, the execution just isn't as good as it could have been (or tries to be). The real high point is the acting. Weisz is beautiful and effective as Izzi, but her character just doesn't have the time to become three dimensional. She makes her affectionate and still worth caring about. But the real star and the film's highest point is Hugh Jackman. This is definitely his finest performance. He brings menacing anger to Tomas, and subtle beauty in the futuristic scenes. But the central plotline is where he shines. Tommy is a complex man that is so in love with his wife that he is willing to do the seemingly impossible. After 'The Prestige', Hugh Jackman deserves to be nominated for Best Actor for this film. He gives stand-out performances in both, but he owns the screen in 'The Fountain'. The other big stand-out is Ellen Burstyn. Her screen time is fairly short, but she is fierce as Dr. Lillian Guzetti, the head of the project that Tommy is desperately leading. I think that she is more Oscar worthy for Supporting Actress than Weisz is. I think that the film is worth seeing for sure, but it is not the masterpiece that Aronofsky so stubbornly believes it is. But if he keeps trying, I think he may eventually make that masterpiece.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

6

BarryR.Dec 2, 2006

1 of 1 users found this helpful

6

Voodoo123Feb 5, 2023

Potent somber imagery abound, an hour and a half of visual poetry asks the viewer to interpret the vagaries of a scientist's obsession with saving his dying wife while she authors a book exploring a man's obsession with the legend of a treePotent somber imagery abound, an hour and a half of visual poetry asks the viewer to interpret the vagaries of a scientist's obsession with saving his dying wife while she authors a book exploring a man's obsession with the legend of a tree of life.

In tandem to this we also seems to explore a visual manifestation of her own novel of a conquistador as he attempts to find an elixir of life for his queen (also played by the same actors). Fascinating but for me things felt too over cooked to enjoy consuming.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

bataguilaNov 12, 2019

Es muy buena la forma que aborda la cultura y la mitologia maya, aprendes bastantes cosas. El problema de este director es que nunca es redonda sus historias, siempre las deja abierta. en este caso abre 3 hilos dramaticos y solo cierra 1

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

DawdlingPoetNov 27, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This had the look and feel of a low-ish budget sci-fi film, with lots of scenes featuring the main character in different ages and settings, trying to make sense of things. I was attracted to it due to the fact it deals with themes of mortality and questions what the future may bring. Its reasonably mysterious in tone and Hugh Jackman gives a decent performance as the main character, Tommy. However, I thought that his wife, Isabel Creo (played by Rachel Weisz) looked almost young enough to be his daughter - in fact at first I assumed she was his child but maybe thats just me(?). If your a fan of Hugh Jackman then there are some scenes that you might enjoy in terms of being aesthetically pleasing. The special effects are ok, not brilliant but ok. There is quite a lot of mystical symbolism present, which might not be the sort of thing to appeal to all film fans or even sci-fi fans in general but there is, so I thought I ought to mention that. I would have preferred it if there was less of the scenes set in the medieval times personally but of course, others may feel differently.

I liked the themes (loss, control and mortality mainly) and I enjoyed this film for the most part, although it did seem a little rough around the edges and I can't say I fully followed all plot elements/angles (plus there is some definite cheese present at times due to the script but the performances are, for the most part, quite decent), its not a bad film as such and so I'd recommend it, especially to other fans of Hugh Jackman. Oh and I should perhaps also include a trigger warning - self harm is depicted if but briefly.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

SameirAliDec 31, 2021

From my favorite director, The Fountain is not very favorite movie. It was a great experimental film though. Many impressive visuals are there as usual. But, as a whole, the struggle and the three generations where to clubbed together toFrom my favorite director, The Fountain is not very favorite movie. It was a great experimental film though. Many impressive visuals are there as usual. But, as a whole, the struggle and the three generations where to clubbed together to provide an amazing experience for the audience.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

MarkF.May 15, 2007

First off, my rating is VERY generous. Even if Aranofsky is considered a visionary, this is one of the darkest, most downbeat, isimplistic, yet incoherent messes of a "film" I've seen recently. I've heard from several college age First off, my rating is VERY generous. Even if Aranofsky is considered a visionary, this is one of the darkest, most downbeat, isimplistic, yet incoherent messes of a "film" I've seen recently. I've heard from several college age students that this is this generation's "2001". Well, if this is true, that's even more pathetic than this film is. I will admit that I only give Aronofsky's previous films a 6, so maybe you can go ahead and make fun of me now, but I've never clipped for any money or pretended that I had anything to share with you except for common sense.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

5

IanPMay 31, 2007

Unquestionably a bad film, despite its visual splendor. Not bad in a way you can sink your teeth into, bad for its incredibly vague, cloyingly sentimental, new agey, breathtakingly empty, pseudo-philosophical jibber jabber. Bad in a way that Unquestionably a bad film, despite its visual splendor. Not bad in a way you can sink your teeth into, bad for its incredibly vague, cloyingly sentimental, new agey, breathtakingly empty, pseudo-philosophical jibber jabber. Bad in a way that makes me suspect that the people who made it don't really know the difference between a powerful statement about life and death (however ambiguous: that is NOT the issue here) and a conglomeration of impressive images hung together on the feeblest and most pretentious of threads. Which would make this a horrof film, of sorts, but emblematic of an age that will doubtless be remembered above all for its sheer vacuity.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful

5

J-ShapAug 27, 2011

Aronofsky is adventurous in ways that many filmmakers are not. He is able to be bold, grab an idea by the horns and take it where he wants to, and choosing to do so in the methods he sees as the most clear. The Fountain is a misfire on thisAronofsky is adventurous in ways that many filmmakers are not. He is able to be bold, grab an idea by the horns and take it where he wants to, and choosing to do so in the methods he sees as the most clear. The Fountain is a misfire on this concept. It is a film disconnected from any sort of root (which is odd, given that trees show up a lot in it), the audience or it's own story. It has all of its interests into itself, but never bothers to actually care for what it's trying to do, because it's too busy thinking. Can't it just stop to smell the roses. Kubrick could do that.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

DoehlMar 25, 2012

Aronofsky creates a metaphoric and meditative experience for his audience, but when he tries to create poetry, his results are more corny than they are compelling

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

SpongeeeDec 8, 2006

Requiem was a classic, The Fountain is not. Bad story, script, sets, drama, music, camera work, even acting. Besides the cool galaxy/star images toward the end, the movie was an overall bore. Maybe Aranofsky took all the praise from Requiem Requiem was a classic, The Fountain is not. Bad story, script, sets, drama, music, camera work, even acting. Besides the cool galaxy/star images toward the end, the movie was an overall bore. Maybe Aranofsky took all the praise from Requiem to the head because he seemed to make this movie with no regard except for the fact that he thinks anything he does has to be good. Half the crew/and 1 actor were hold overs from Requiem...and Huge JACKman...I knew it was too good to be true when I saw the poster, but at least I gave it a shot.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

WesJ.Dec 5, 2006

Visually appealing but the muddled plot kept me from enjoying it. Perhaps if I had seen it in a better theater I would have enjoyed it more.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

4

TJW.Feb 12, 2007

Ah, Mr. Aronofsky...where did you go wrong? The director of two of the best films of the last ten years, Pi: Faith In Chaos and Requiem For A Dream, released his latest, the $80 million dollar sci-fi epic The Fountain this week, and while it Ah, Mr. Aronofsky...where did you go wrong? The director of two of the best films of the last ten years, Pi: Faith In Chaos and Requiem For A Dream, released his latest, the $80 million dollar sci-fi epic The Fountain this week, and while it starts off pretty well, it finishes up by proposing 500 different questions and not answering ANY of them. The movie tells three different stories; of Tomas, a 16th century conquistador searching for the tree of life; Tom Creo, a man desperately searching for a cure to his wife's brain tumor before she dies; and Tommy, a 26th century astronaut who is trying to do...something. The movie starts off pretty well, as it focuses mainly on the story of Tom. As he spends all his time searching for a cure, trying to extend his wife's life, he doesn't realize that he is wasting all the time that he does have with her, and is going to regret it in the end. I really liked this story (it was one of the few things I did like in this movie) and I think, had he not tried to do so much and instead JUST focused on this story, he could have had a great modern romance story on his hands. Unfortunately, he decides to stick two other stories in; this is where the movie completely fails. No one I know who's seen this really understood the point of either of these stories, and, sadly, there are going to be plenty of people who saw this movie who claim that you aren't supposed to understand everything, that's how it's supposed to be; don't believe them. This is just a copout because no one wants to admit that this great director has made a bad film. The acting here is pretty good. Rachel Weisz, who won an Oscar last year for The Constant Gardener, is great as Tom's wife, who is eternally optimistic about her death, although she cannot convince her husband of the same. Ellen Burstyn is also good as the fellow doctor of Tom, trying to convince him that he needs to embrace the time his wife does have instead of trying to create more. Hugh Jackman, however, is a different story; as Tom, the obsessed doctor trying to save his wife, he is pretty good, but when he switches to Tomas or Tommy, he makes some facial expressions that, although they are meant to be deep and moving, end up being almost laughable. The script is a completely muddled mess; Aronofsky tries to toss in deep theological question after deep theological question, but the script just ends up just coming off incredibly pretentious with lots of complex babble. One thing, however, almost completely redeems this film; the cinematography. Included are lots of Aronofsky's trademark EXTREME close-ups, which gives a lot of the scenes more life. You also see some amazing shots where the camera starts upside down, seemingly under the ground, and as a vehicle speeds over it, it completely flips to a normal shot; VERY cool. And the 26th century story, while it never makes sense, and is never explained what is going on, is absolutely beautiful; you'll stare at awe at some of the effects here. In the end, however, The Fountain is a complete disaster; had Aronofsky not attempt to tell the most epic story ever, he may have had a good film on his hands. As it stands, however, it is nothing more than a good-looking film with a completely ridiculous story.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

4

MikeKNov 30, 2006

While the imagery is admittedly impressive at times, it simply cannot carry the weight of an overly ambitious, DRAGGING plotline. The movie transitions are abrupt, and the slow points truly crawl...to the point where you want to roll your While the imagery is admittedly impressive at times, it simply cannot carry the weight of an overly ambitious, DRAGGING plotline. The movie transitions are abrupt, and the slow points truly crawl...to the point where you want to roll your eyes. Jackman does a great job, although for me Weisz was over dramatic and fake.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

4

KeithJNov 3, 2007

I think this movie might be better on a second viewing. I enjoy complex movies (my recent favorite is Pan's Labyrinth, for example); however, as I watched The Fountain, I really had little idea what was "real" (in the movie's I think this movie might be better on a second viewing. I enjoy complex movies (my recent favorite is Pan's Labyrinth, for example); however, as I watched The Fountain, I really had little idea what was "real" (in the movie's logic) and what wasn't. There are three storylines. There is a bizarre and fantastic one set in the past; then, we are transported to a bizarre and fantastic one in (I guess?) the distant future; then, we segue to a relatively normal one in approximately the present day. In retrospect, I think the present and future realities were "real", and the one set in the past was fiction/metaphor. However, as you go through the movie, if nobody tells you that, you have no firm ground to stand on; you spend your time trying to decipher the basics, not appreciating whatever truths it is trying to convey. I am tempted to rent the movie and watch it again, because I think I'd enjoy it more knowing what I know now. However, I feel compelled to give it a fairly low mark anyway, because I think it's a flaw of the movie that the viewer has to waste so much mental energy on unimportant things (which part is "real") that it takes away from the rest.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

4

beingryanjudeAug 31, 2014

The Fountain is a visual tale, told by Darren Aronofsky in a typical, complex fashion. The art direction may be Oscar-rate; however, the film makes a few missteps along the way.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

imilhoferDec 26, 2013

This film is too clever for its own good, and came across forced and disjointed. In all honesty, I had no idea what was happening for the majority of this corny film, and it wasn't a pleasant lack of understanding (Mulholland Drive), but aThis film is too clever for its own good, and came across forced and disjointed. In all honesty, I had no idea what was happening for the majority of this corny film, and it wasn't a pleasant lack of understanding (Mulholland Drive), but a lack of understanding that led me to question whether watching it was a good use of my time or not. Burstyn offered some class, and Aronofksy is blatantly talented, but here he pushed it too far, and produced a contrived hour and a half of nonsense, worsened by Rachel Weisz's sheer dullness.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

Onlyclassicvg1Jan 31, 2021

This movie was absolutely beautiful. I just loved it so much. There's something fantastic about it, but it seems everyone doesn't get it based on some reviews I've read. I found The Fountain to be intense, emotional, touching and…

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

leirisJan 6, 2007

You have got to be kidding me. Aronofsky seems to be trying to prove something with this one, but it falls flat on its face. But you've got to give him credit for trying something different...at least he is not just pumping out some You have got to be kidding me. Aronofsky seems to be trying to prove something with this one, but it falls flat on its face. But you've got to give him credit for trying something different...at least he is not just pumping out some generic tripe like most young directors.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

RichardK.May 28, 2008

Yes, it may be visually intriguing, but with a main character that shows no true depth or connection to anything around him, I found this movie equally difficult to connect to.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

UnImpressedAug 29, 2009

I'm loving the fact that there are so many reviews on here claiming to understand this film and dogging those who didn't. Interestingly enough, I don't think I read two of those reviews that agreed on what the film was about, I'm loving the fact that there are so many reviews on here claiming to understand this film and dogging those who didn't. Interestingly enough, I don't think I read two of those reviews that agreed on what the film was about, or very many that attempted to explain it at all. I understand that many of those people and others will say that is the beauty of the film, that it can mean so many things to so many different people. But when something 'can' mean so many things to so many people, then it ultimately means nothing, doesn't it? I'm an open minded individual and watched this film, first of all thinking it was going to be something else, but then to read how long it was and ask myself "It was ONLY 96 minutes long?" I don't know, I'm sure many people could have a hayday with my review, but when a film feels an hour longer than it actually is, and when it ultimately , in my humble opinion, means nothing, then it is not a masterpiece, but a garbled mess of something that can't be explained. But of course, I know I have a more analytical than creative mind, so take it for what you will.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful

3

MikeDec 10, 2006

I loved the music from this movie! Great job. The acting by Hugh Jackman is amazing! What an amazing actor! this guy gets better and better the more movies he play in! But here's the bad part, the Director failed at putting it all I loved the music from this movie! Great job. The acting by Hugh Jackman is amazing! What an amazing actor! this guy gets better and better the more movies he play in! But here's the bad part, the Director failed at putting it all together. Kind of like Lynch had so many failures till Mulholland Drive. I think it is the same with this movie. The director, just didnt deliver what he wanted, I was waiting for the movie to get more deep, but it didn't happen.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

3

PunkR.Nov 27, 2006

I went for the visuals and I was not impressed. The story line is thin and the dialog sappy. Everyone here giving the film a 10 must have seen a different movie or they are PR plants. Honestly not worth seeing.

0 of 2 users found this helpful

3

RobertDec 24, 2006

A pretentious mess of a movie. Every line is either whispered or screamed to add nonexistent weight to an already sloppy script. Basic narrative techniques are eschewed for the sake or "artiness," but without them, the film becomes a A pretentious mess of a movie. Every line is either whispered or screamed to add nonexistent weight to an already sloppy script. Basic narrative techniques are eschewed for the sake or "artiness," but without them, the film becomes a mishmash of unclear scenarios and one dimensional characters Although some scenes were visually impressive, the flatness of the characters and the one note performances of the leads left me cold. .Jackman cries or acts bitter for the entire film, and Weisz basically stands around and smiles. How can I care about the characters when they have zero personality and development? Basically, I thought this movie had a rather simple idea (death is only the beginning, the circle of life, etc.) that reeked with self-importance, making the concept seem more insightful than it actually was. None of the questions Aronofsky poses are answered, which, instead of leaving room for the viewer to interpret things, is simply sloppy film making. The viewer shouldn't be spoon fed all the answers for a film, but the director, when dealing with weighty concepts like life and death, should provide more than just a cache of flashy images with little to no context. Giving the audience no explanation of the who, what, where, when, and why of a scene and forcing them to sort out the details is plain irresponsible. This is a movie designed for the self-congratulatory art house crowd. Those who like it feel "smart" and those who don't are made to feel "stupid" or inferior in some sort of way. I've never seen a film so convinced of its own importance. Instead of fretting over striking angles and nifty camera tricks, Aronofsky should have actually directed his actors or added some coherence to his screenplay. This was an overly ambitious movie that was hurt by its own ambition.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

3

ThazariFeb 25, 2023

Feels like it tries to be a Cloud Atlas kind of movie with interconnected lives and multiple timelines, but the execution falls flat and doesn't really have anything meaningful to say. Dialogue was poor and characters unlikable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

RyanMJun 2, 2007

Darren Aronofsky

1 of 5 users found this helpful

2

WilliamB.Jun 27, 2007

It was a complete mess, not engaging at all, and there was no chemistry between Jackman and Weisz.

0 of 2 users found this helpful

2

nwbroncoJul 21, 2007

The only reason that I did not vote zero was the cg effects. E for effort. Aside from that, what do you get when you mix a little bit of opium, death fantasies, astronomy, eastern religion and no hope?? Anyone? You get 96 minutes of your The only reason that I did not vote zero was the cg effects. E for effort. Aside from that, what do you get when you mix a little bit of opium, death fantasies, astronomy, eastern religion and no hope?? Anyone? You get 96 minutes of your precious life ROBBED from you! Don't bother. Anyone with Judeo-Christian beliefs may get irritated at the ending. That is all.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

2

AnonymousSeattleJun 3, 2007

Although visually stunning and stylistically beautiful, this was a terrible film. It was the kind of movie that "looks really good" and then has no plot, cheesy and insincere feeling characters, and goes absolutely nowhere. And I'm not Although visually stunning and stylistically beautiful, this was a terrible film. It was the kind of movie that "looks really good" and then has no plot, cheesy and insincere feeling characters, and goes absolutely nowhere. And I'm not one to usually need a lot of plot or action to be enthralled. This was deeply disappointing- it seemed more like an art project than a film.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

2

seancriswellApr 5, 2013

The tree of life and the fountain of youth. The possibilities for themes and visuals are endless. Unfortunately Aronofsky chooses to bog us down in a melodrama with two characters that he never gives us a chance to connect with. This film isThe tree of life and the fountain of youth. The possibilities for themes and visuals are endless. Unfortunately Aronofsky chooses to bog us down in a melodrama with two characters that he never gives us a chance to connect with. This film is trying very hard to be complex but the story arc is simple. A doctor is trying to save his dying wife. She knows what he will not accept. The rest is surreal visuals revolving around the afterlife.

All of this would be a great idea if there were characters involved that I cared about. My second issue with the Fountain is the visuals. For a film that is relying heavily on visuals they are pretty bland here. If there is a bright spot I think it is Jackman's performance. I don't think I have ever seen him convey emotion in such a believable way. The Fountain had some promise but in the end never delivers.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

1

howellg.Nov 22, 2006

A visually interesting film cannont compensate for inane dialogue. The level of writng seems appropriate for a high school project. A major waste of time.

1 of 3 users found this helpful

1

BenJ.Nov 29, 2006

This movie is terrible. There is three stories, but only one makes sense, and all are very depressing. The only redeemable quality is Hugh Jackman, but even he can't save a movie this bad.

0 of 2 users found this helpful

1

RoryP.Dec 29, 2007

I agree with Ryan D. a frustrating experience to watch. To anyone who is contemplating seeing this film, please heed the following advice - With respect to all things artistic and lacking bullsh*t, do not watch this film, it would be a I agree with Ryan D. a frustrating experience to watch. To anyone who is contemplating seeing this film, please heed the following advice - With respect to all things artistic and lacking bullsh*t, do not watch this film, it would be a laborious waste of your valuable time. Trust me on this, such a critique is not down to the stroppy interpretation of one mere mortal long since out of college, this is not about me making a point for the sake of coming across as superior or smart-every ounce of sanity in my body tells me It is a bad film: Lending any connotations of pretension to The Fountain would be doing it a favour-Its got nothing to say about life that couldn't be said in five minutes in the same sloppy format-its got nothing to say about life that hasn't been said better in other vastly superior films (i don't know, badlands or the thin red line by Terrence Malick for example). To anyone who likes this film, i apologize for saying what i am about to say because i am sure you are a intelligent sensitive and loving person who has done nothing malicious enough to deserve such a harsh appraisal of your sense of self, but seriously, YOU ARE DELUDED.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

killdarrenMay 8, 2009

Darren Aronofsky...a director who holds his audience or anyone for that matter, at absolute contempt. His films do NOTHING but divide critics and audiences and this pretentious hack is laughing all the way to the bank. Enjoy!

1 of 5 users found this helpful

0

DianeR.Feb 13, 2007

This film poses as a education on alternative faith while borrowing fact from the Original. The Tree of Life is Biblical, but here it seems like it's alternative medicine. In dealing with the fact people physically die and our This film poses as a education on alternative faith while borrowing fact from the Original. The Tree of Life is Biblical, but here it seems like it's alternative medicine. In dealing with the fact people physically die and our powerlessness to stop it will not be solved by diverting our attention to think powerful thoughts. The connection between the couple seemed beautiful, but time wasted on trying to be her savior instead of savouring their last momments was irritating and egocentric. In the end, it seemed like mind-trip escapism was the only thing left to do to cope with the loss. How sad.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful

0

ScottGMar 1, 2008

One of the worst movies in the history of bad moviemaking. No genuine important ideas were examined, no sense was made of a senseless storyline, and it was just plain silly.

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

MikeC.Dec 8, 2006

A turgid, pretentious, pseudo philosophic mess. Nothing here is credible, nor moving or interesting. Dialogues are often ridiculously laughable. Simply because they won't be able to understand the movie, or because they will be A turgid, pretentious, pseudo philosophic mess. Nothing here is credible, nor moving or interesting. Dialogues are often ridiculously laughable. Simply because they won't be able to understand the movie, or because they will be fascinated by the "visuals", some "intellectuals" will say it's brilliant or fantastic. It's completely shallow and poorly written. The "oeuvre d'art" of a fart.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful

0

MonicaSFJun 28, 2007

This was the worst film I've seen in long time. Can't believe two of my fav. actors (Jackman & Weisz) and the director of Pi & Requiem for a Dream (I absolutely loved both movies) could make such a BORING film! I hate MTV and fast This was the worst film I've seen in long time. Can't believe two of my fav. actors (Jackman & Weisz) and the director of Pi & Requiem for a Dream (I absolutely loved both movies) could make such a BORING film! I hate MTV and fast paced modern visuals, but this movie sucks big time!!!! The story set in the future is meant to be a space ship!? Give me a break! And I'm the sort of person that never leaves a movie theatre or stops reading a book half way through. I'm so upset for the time wasted on this.... grrr.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

JoeNov 26, 2006

Sure, The Fountain has some great visual scenes and is filled with themes and zen principles. But for me it was not movie, there was no plot or reasoning for any actions that take place. While you may compare this to 2001: A Space Odyssey, Sure, The Fountain has some great visual scenes and is filled with themes and zen principles. But for me it was not movie, there was no plot or reasoning for any actions that take place. While you may compare this to 2001: A Space Odyssey, don't. 2001 was a great movie that could be watched by anyone and not just for it themes or beliefs. This is probably why The Fountain currently scores as a 50 and "2001" scores at an 86 on Metacritic. Whats even worse is that I wasn't able to fall asleep with all the screaming and choppy scenes that kept waking me up. Personally, if this wins an Oscar, I'll feel like stabbing the closest person. Do not go to see this if you want to see a good movie.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

AlexA.Feb 11, 2007

Who are the retarded dweebs who are impressed by this picture? Rarely have I seen such a laughable, adolescent, poorly wrtten, style over substance ego-trip. EXCRUCIATING.

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

AnnR.Jun 29, 2007

I'm usually intrigued by time travel movies, which is why I purchased this DVD, but The Fountain was simply awful. I think the producer was on drugs, it just didn't make any sense. Worse 20 bucks ever spent!

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

RyanD.Sep 8, 2007

This film is like a cheerleader. Very pretty, but very dumb.

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

MarkMNov 23, 2006

The 10

0 of 3 users found this helpful

0

JenniferNov 25, 2006

This movie is like the naive romantic fantasy of a precocious and pretentious11-year-old girl who is writing about topics that she hasn't actually experienced. It may be the most pointless movie I've ever seen. Insulting to This movie is like the naive romantic fantasy of a precocious and pretentious11-year-old girl who is writing about topics that she hasn't actually experienced. It may be the most pointless movie I've ever seen. Insulting to everyone, especially the great actors who signed on for this silliness.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

LondonTrueloveNov 8, 2010

I thought The New World with Colin Farrell was the worst movie I would ever see in my life....then I saw this heap of steaming feces. If I could give it a negative score I would.

2 of 11 users found this helpful29

All this user's reviews

0

vibor123Feb 16, 2011

Like all Arofonsky movies, this is **** up too, but is very bad way. It is very boring, confusing and badly directed, story is bleak and too deep for most people. I am not suprised that this movie was box office flop..

1 of 7 users found this helpful16

All this user's reviews

0

AngryAlienDec 20, 2022

Good for people who never seen anything really great like Space Odyssey or One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Cliched, boring, lying, and racist movie. Nobody even noticed that the movie is about the woman - Queen of Spain, who concurred LatinGood for people who never seen anything really great like Space Odyssey or One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Cliched, boring, lying, and racist movie. Nobody even noticed that the movie is about the woman - Queen of Spain, who concurred Latin America and exterminated Mayans (as well as her own people) in order to get an eternal life. And this is the love you are praising? The love for a woman who is evil herself, and see nothing except her to be worthy of living. I am not surprised the World is in deep trouble. When majority of people cannot see truth because it is hidden behind a beautiful romantic picture. By telling that this movie is about love, you agree - it is OK to go around and kill a couple of millions so that my love can live. Moreover, if you kill enough, you will find the tree of life and become like GOD!!! This you call a great movie?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

The Fountain

User Reviews