Monday

I went to see The Fountain knowing perhaps the least about it than I have known about any film. All I knew was the director (Darren Aronofsky), and that it was something about a tree and love. This, apparently, was more than some people: two or three left halfway through, and I heard someone saying on the way out 'that was absolutely sh*t'. Why did they? I knew that the film would not follow a conventional narrative formula, but I'd say this was his most conventional movie so far (although I have not seen Pi and Requiem for a Dream in a long time). Undoubtedly people were put off by the three story lines, and especially the third. I too, was disconcerted, and found this uncomfortable. But I was lulled, as I often am, by the excellent music. I can't say for sure I understand the intentions of the director, but I did enjoy the film - I was compelled by it. I did think afterwards, however, whether three story lines were necessary. Couldn't the same message be conveyed with only one? I would say some filmmakers use multiple story lines to appear complex: to mask their lack of body by tripling it. I'm not sure that is the case here, but I did feel the central storyline would probably stand alone as a good film. It compelled me, and I would recommend seeing it if you have the time. There are not many filmmakers doing this sort of thing.

(I saw this at the Odeon West End.)