Darren Aronofsky loves when religious, when confused, and when emotional. These motifs and qualities are traced to varying degrees of expressiveness in each of his works, and in the vivid parable “Fountain” they are present exceptionally strongly. An hour and a half picture shoots heavy fire from its themes at the widest audience: who, if not every conscious person on Earth, are familiar and important questions raised in it about the finiteness of life and the fear of death? However, neither the universal mixture of ideas and plot, nor Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weiss in the lead roles, nor the beauty of the picture and sound could save the film from the cold reception of critics and box office failure: the fees barely covered half of the money spent on the production. Despite this, the "Fountain" does not suffer from a lack of audience love, it is still remembered with warm words, and it has a decent rating. Why is that so?
I think Fountain is a film about an idea. It is the visualized reasoning of the author on a specific topic, as a set of theses and conclusions depicted through figurative and situational metaphors. All of them seem to be much more important than any other side aspects of the plot, the main line of which is tied to the solution of the conflict more philosophical than at least some everyday. The main idea is death and the attitude of a person to it: acceptance or rejection of the finiteness of life. In the film, death is reconciled, fought, feared, hated, and perhaps even won. Aronofsky inventively approached the depiction of this through three parallel stories in which the hero Hugh Jackman is the central figure: in one he is a conquistador in medieval Spain, who is trying to save the state and its queen from the tyranny of the Inquisition, in another he is the keeper of the Tree of Life, located in timelessness on a dying star, in the third he is an oncologist Tom, who has thrown all his energy into finding a cure for his terminally ill wife Izzy. The director really beautifully woven them together, drawing each of the stories the same picture, but in different colors. Their complementary and depictive scenes make the form of the film multifaceted and rich, which I think is the greatest strength of The Fountain. But there is only one idea left from the first to the last minute, and unfortunately for me it ran out pretty soon: for an hour and a half I saw only sentimental reasoning about how difficult it is to accept the inevitable. And even if this painful theme resonates in the souls of many people from the beginning, evoking reflection or providing support with its consoling conclusions at the end, it still becomes clear from the middle of the film that the picture will offer nothing else. It can easily make you feel like you’re watching something so straightforward, simple and superficial that even having three stories can’t keep you interested. This feeling reinforces the fact that with the abundance of images, the director could not escape from repeated literal repetition of the same scenes. Aronofsky, armed with colorful images, told with their help too little and too simple words.
The picture throughout the film has a noticeably uniform and therefore interesting style: a constant orange-brown color scheme and rhyming visual motifs accompany the entire action. Most ingenuity is seen in dream-space scenes, where the shimmering nebulae and flames of stars were created by macro-imaging chemical reactions. In this way, the director wanted to reduce the cost of computer special effects (which, as stated earlier, did not help him much in the matter of payback), especially since, as he believed, the computer technology of the time would become obsolete in a few years, and he wanted the film to stand the test of time. And although he is right about the speed of technology obsolescence, his decision has also aged markedly: the chromakei is visible to the naked eye, and the frequent use of blur evokes a slight sense of budget. The test of time passed, perhaps, but not the picture, but the plot. Clint Mansell, a good friend of Darren Aronofsky’s, is the composer for most of his films, and the touching sounds of the Kronos Quartet string quartet playing his scores create much of the mood here just as they did in their previous work together, Requiem for a Dream. Sentimental music sounds in the “Fountain” sensually, sometimes to the pathetic emotionally, strictly maintaining the tone of the narrative, and its combination with the main theme of the work, especially during the climax, as if trying to squeeze all tears from the eyes of the viewer. Whether this is intentional or not – only the director knows, but even if you do not drop a drop, you will still be saturated with tears on the screen: close-ups of swollen, reddened and wet with tears characters will show more than once or twice. And if there are no complaints about the acting of Jackman and Weiss, then the long scenes of copious sobs can cause enough doubts about their necessity. Perhaps Aronofsky had a goal to break into the hearts of even the most unempathetic viewers, but if so, he chose a straightforward path.
If you consider the trace that the film left in the world and in people, then his experience is not the most common. With the financial failure mentioned at the very beginning and dislike on the part of critics, although he did not become a cult, reborn in audience love as, for example, “Donnie Darko”, but still has a consistently positive reputation among the ordinary viewer. I believe that the noticeable difference between the assessments of professional reviewers and soft folk love is not the ability to see and understand anything. “Fountain” aptly aims at the sensitive emotional gut of a person in front of the screen and regularly falls directly into the most natural and familiar experiences. No matter how powerful the concept was created by the director, the story accompanying it, fell to the liking of an impressionable wide audience, and then not even immediately. In any case, this film took its place in the world of cinema, did not fade into oblivion and was remembered as an emotional and piercing parable about accepting the inevitable.
The film consists of three narrative lines, closely intertwined with each other. In the first of these, Dr. Thomas Creo, in an experimental laboratory setting, looks for a cure for a brain tumor from which his wife, Izzy Creo, is slowly dying. The name Thomas Creo refers to the biblical Thomas an unbeliever who could not believe in the resurrection of the Lord, until he was convinced of this by putting a finger in his mortal wounds. Also, the original meaning of this name - the twin - plays the fact that in all the storylines of the main male characters (conquistador, doctor, last man) plays one actor Hugh Jackman. The name Izzy Creo can be translated from Spanish as “yes, I believe”. Thus, the names of the main characters are antithetical and symbolize a polar attitude to the fact of the finiteness of human existence. If for Izzy, “death is the road to awe,” then her husband Tom is convinced that “death is a disease.” On the binary opposition of the possible attitude to death (acceptance and rejection) is based the entire dramatic pathos of the film.
The second storyline takes place in Spain during the time of the Holy Inquisition and the great geographical discoveries. The country was engulfed in church terror under the leadership of a fanatical and ruthless Grand Inquisitor. Queen Isabella sends the conquistador to the jungles of Mesoamerica, where supposedly in one of the secret pyramids of the Maya Indians hidden tree of life. The juice of this tree gives eternal life. The parallel of the enslaving Inquisition and the body-killing cancer is an expressive metaphor for the film’s director and screenwriter Darren Aronofsky. Through his filmography, there is a consistent criticism of Christianity (for example, in the films Noah, Mother!).
In the third storyline, through the vastness of outer space, while in a transparent sphere, Hugh Jackman's character heads to a dying star. The working title of the film was The Last Man. It is evidently here, in the cosmos containing a dying tree and refusing to die, that we meet the last man. He is the last man because he refuses to accept the reality and inevitability of death. When everyone has long accepted the fact of the finiteness of his existence, he is the last one who still resists. It is a metaphor for the human will to live. This will, in its denial of death, is ready to endlessly transcend space and time, escaping the inevitable finiteness of its foundation.
From a realistic point of view, it is easy to interpret the film in such a way that only 1 line is “real”, while 2 line is fiction written by Izzy, and 3 line is Dr. Creo’s dream. But the more productive position is that all three lines are “real” and equal. From this point of view, in different places of time and space, the eternal “drama of man” is played out: confrontation and acceptance of life and death. For more clarity, you can imagine the structure of the film in the form of a diagram: The storyline - a specific threat - a support - an absolute threat
2 line, action takes place in the past - Inquisition - Christianity - austerity (renunciation of the present)
1 line, our time – tumor – science – death (inevitable future)
Line 3, action takes place in the future – guilt – Buddhism – memories (i.e. past)
From this diagram, it is clear that events are repeated in Spain during the VGO, modern times, the space sphere of the future. The Inquisition, cancer and guilt are the ultimate threats to human life. What unites them is that they are part of the whole that they destroy. The Inquisition is a church that turns against Christians. Cancers are uncontrollably dividing cells that kill their bodies. Guilt is a destructive experience of a person, destroying his psyche. In each of these cases, the characters find a foothold (Christianity, science, and Buddhism). In the first case, not all clergymen turned their backs on the Queen. There is a monk who is ready to help the kingdom. He points the way to the tree of life that is written in the Bible. In the second case, Dr. Creo relies on the power of science to help find the panacea. In the third case, the last person appears as a Buddhist monk. Buddhism as a doctrine of liberation and extinction is obviously its spiritual guide. The ultimate threat is an absolute threat. In Inquisition-era Spain, this threat is austerity. But what is austerity? This is the life of the Hereafter, the life of the Hereafter. As the Grand Inquisitor says, “Our flesh is the prison of the soul... the soul is liberated after death.” So the absolute threat to life is asceticism or the rejection of the present. In our time as a threat is cancer, that is, death. Death for man is the inevitable future. The fear of death makes one abandon the present, fearing the future. In the cosmos of the future, the last person suffers from memories. And memories are shadows of the past that lead away from the present.
Meaning
Thus, the absolute threat to life is not death itself (this is a necessary condition of life), but the rejection of the present in favor of the past, future or austerity. Individual immortality is inaccessible to man as a way of keeping his form unchanged in eternity. The only eternity given to man is the eternity of the present moment. If we think in this way, it is easy to understand that what is valuable is not what is invariable, but that by repeating again and again in every moment, it is worthy of returning to eternity. Thus, every moment of time acquires an absolute value and must be lived as if it were to repeat itself forever. Thomas tells his dying wife, “You should be with me.” It implies a continuation in the future. Izzy replies, "I'm with you, look." Her answer implies that I am with you here and now, there will be no other moment. The wise answer is full amor fati – full acceptance of one’s destiny.
So Aronofsky affirms the concept of amor fati through the character Izzy. The concept of “the eternal return of the same” is affirmed through the very structure of “The Fountain,” as well as in visual refrains – a key scene in the film where Izzy invites her husband to take a walk, enjoy the present moment. Obviously, the concept of “superhuman” fits Izzy’s character, as she accepts fate and remains to live in eternity, overcoming her illness and limb. And Tom's character is the last person to deny life: "I'm not going to die - not here, not now, never." The use in the “Fountain” of the concepts of amor fati, superman, eternal return refers to the philosophy of life of Friedrich Nietzsche.
Image
Visually, "Fountain" is incredibly beautiful. Recurring and rhyming symbols: the tree of life, the ring, stars, candles and lamps, a ray in the dark, snow – create a deep and beautiful visual canvas of the film.
10 out of 10 – The film is worth watching over and over again
I like complicated movies. I love it. "Reading" such a work is like recognizing a person. Fascinating. And a challenge. I'll hit the hoof and go ahead.
Fountain is my favorite movie in the world. Just as I watched it with my spine back in 2007 in a movie theater that's gone, I continue to watch and understand it with my gut. No one else gave such emotions. It's really a work of art.
Fascinating shots, special color, the most beautiful music of Clint Mansell. There's a high level of empathy, because we're physically feeling Tommy's longing for Izzy. How he keeps track of years without a loved one on his body. And what a true and sensual bed scene of the spouses, the best of its kind, a benchmark.
It is impossible to view Western art in isolation from the Bible. Aronofsky in his films often explores or directly quotes the biblical story. The color was chosen not by chance. This divine gold (remember Byzantium, and our temples), which shines on the dark thick earthly colors. It is noteworthy that death is white (all colors at once).
“And when you return, I will be your Eve. We will live together forever.
First of all, this is a film about the eternal love that the couple carries through the centuries. About the possible finding of the “right” is your beloved, to which everyone aspires. Aronofsky tries to make sense of relationships and roles in relationships. Heroes are perfect, like Adam and Eve in Eden before the Fall: they live together, in their warm cozy, despite the circumstances, world. But the realization of the value of such relationships is possible only through the acceptance of its limb. Death is like a shadow, unavoidably near, even if we are in paradise and are not yet aware of it.
We see that Tommy is obsessed with saving Izzy, it takes all his time, all his thoughts. He is exhausted by anticipation, lack of results, work for wear and tear, worries for his wife, because he is a doctor and knows perfectly well what awaits her. He fights violently, but he does it out of selfishness. It's for me. Tommy takes care of his wife like a bird with wings.
The book Izzy writes is a direct projection of her life (and which writer doesn’t?). The Inquisitor is the tumor, Izzy is the Queen of Spain, Tommy is the conquistador, the tree of life is the cure for death. This is clear.
At some point, we discover that Tommy is alone, even Izzy is no longer afraid and yearns for this new experience, death, or rather rebirth. The solution to his super task is not in demand. And he'll refocus it on himself.
The tree in Christian art symbolizes life, immortality, the connection of earth and heaven, and the evergreen tree symbolizes the risen Christ. Remember the scene when a tree so old, almost dead, reaching Xibalba, blooms.
Although Tommy is the main character, through him we see the plot, the film emphasizes his “secondaryness”. What he's doing is he rescues Izzy, runs her errands. In any of their lives. But to reduce the "Fountain" to the scheme: the maiden is in danger and the battle with the dragon - to simplify. How to compare the stick-stick-a-boorechik with "Naked" Renoir.
In the film, it is clearly shown that a woman distracts a man from his service (or from what he believes to be true service), but instead gives true meaning.
By not going for a walk with Izzy at the beginning of the film, Tommy closes the door to finding a solution quickly and easily. It's a matter of trust in life. The hero is constantly faced with a dilemma: persist or go just to live. How difficult it is when you see only the goal ahead, because consciousness is narrowed. In the end, when Tommy makes the right choice, he finds a solution without tension.
You know. You will.
Aronofsky emphasizes that a woman is “above” a man. She sees further and feels deeper. The wiser guides him along the path in which he should grow. Tommy literally feeds off of her to move on. After all, Izzy is not just a woman, she is the source (that is what the fountain has to do with it), she is the tree of life (both as a phrase and as the meaning of each of the words separately), the director shows this directly: the parallelism of hairs on the neck and on the trunk. Tommy accepts the position: "Take me away." Show me!
Self-development books teach us to achieve goals, to be persistent and focused. Aronofsky recalls the Eastern Way as the most effective, not by chance "waiting" Tommy spends years in meditation, qigong and reflection.
Analysis is complicated by mythological narrative: the interweaving of times and situations. The mind is used to linear stories. But it is the mind shutdown (as Guy Ritchie does in Revolver, for example) that allows us to expand our perception of “death as an act of creation.”
PS: I will not repeat myself about the male female Hindu; the Christian and mythological passage of time; and Plato. It's here too. Who is interested, read my essay for the film “Mother!”, because these two works in the work of the director are inextricably linked.
The ring is a symbol of unity and eternity, the wedding ring is an indissoluble union.
Perhaps not once, but a hundred thousand I will return to this strange, touching and sensual film.
Yes, this parable will always find its viewer and empathizer to the main characters, but the fact is that the deep meaning touches those threads of the soul that are invisible. I go back to this movie and watch it like it was the first time. The main character Isabella is sick and every second of life is given to her with incredible work, every breath of air seems more necessary than usual, and every day lived - happiness. Her husband is a neurosurgeon who tries to save his beloved every day, every second, exactly goes through nine circles of hell and at the same time experiences paradise happiness until everything ends in tragedy. Soon his wife dies, and poor Tom struggles to understand where and when he made a mistake, why he let her die.
Watching this film, for the first time in my life, I lived in the feelings of the characters: harmony, love, illness and awareness of loss. The struggle in such naturalness as life and death is constant every second. And then the emptiness, the loneliness of Tom, the search for eternal life through death. I cried with the main characters, as if everything happened in reality.
The film is amazing even though it has an awful lot of philosophy and meaning about death and the tree of life, about rebirth through death. The book that Isabella writes is the basis of the plot, as well as her illness, but gradually overgrown with everything that happens around, including Tom's vigilant care and vigilance.
The brilliant play of Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weiss allows from the first minute, if not seconds, of the film to be imbued with the main characters and their trouble, problems, joys and happiness. Everything is so harmonious that you feel the whole cosmos.
They say that there is a lot of philosophy in Fountain, but I hardly found it, although I tried. The film is devoted to the theme of life and death and claims to be profound. But true philosophical films encourage reflection - and here morality is simple and predictable.
The action takes place in different eras: modernity, the Middle Ages and Timelessness. These stories echo and intertwine - sometimes surreal, as in a dream.
The form of the film resembles a clip: many pictures, but few events. Scenes change often and chaoticly, and sometimes even repeat several times. The plot at the same time practically does not move, and there is a feeling of drag.
Technically everything is fine: beautiful, spectacular, a lot of attention is paid to detail. But, despite the interesting views and dramatic plot, the film for some reason does not catch, does not take by the soul. Mentally empathize with the heroes - but you do not feel any emotions. The film seems to be missing something very important. I don't know what it is. But in the end it seemed bland, dull, unexpressive. After watching, there were no impressions or new thoughts. Only a slight disappointment and bewilderment: is this the masterpiece that everyone praised so much? Maybe I don’t understand something yet.
I think "Fountain" is created specifically for those who have lost a loved one or are mortally ill. It eases grief, helps to come to terms with the inevitable. It is a cure for mental pain – and for another purpose it makes no sense to look at it.
“Spain is on fire. The Grand Inquisitor smiles, he thinks... No one can live forever. However, the Queen of Spain and Dr. Thomas Creo dared to prove otherwise.
To save his beloved from the approaching death, the Conquistador is ready to do anything. Even if you have to give your life for the invention of medicine. But, unfortunately, in an attempt to escape death, he slowly loses moments of life that can not be returned. In his air bubble, an inferior semblance of real life, Dr. Creo runs to infinity, on the move trying to catch the elusive time with the beautiful Queen of Spain. Sooner or later the end will come, and she knows it well. The difference between the two is that she is able to recognize and accept the inevitability with her head held high, while she is fiercely denying reality and believing in the impossible. Paradoxically, it is this contradiction that brings these two together in the Afterlife - on the star Shabalbe.
Life... Death... Eternal themes. "There's so much snow outside!" Wouldn’t it be better to put your head in it? Feel her cold touches, it is easy to touch delicate skin and hair. Remember all this and repeat it there – when the last chapter is finished, when the Fountain of Life from the Tree of Knowledge fills everything.
A beautiful video series gives real pleasure when watching this movie. It’s really interesting to watch the characters, because you believe them, you empathize with them, you live with them. All day I was impressed by what I saw and I can say that this is a film that is worth watching for anyone who has ever loved or thought about the inevitable.
Is there life after death? Can we beat her? The universe. Love. Understanding. Vera. Really. How many souls in the world will not find peace without getting answers to the main questions of their lives?
When a person creates, it seems to me that he wants to touch the part of the human soul that touched his creation. It's the author. Therefore, when I watch films, especially author’s films, I do not try to understand what the author put in them. I want to find something for myself. Everyone sees everything in their own way. From the height of flight, knowledge and experience. My height is small, but this did not prevent me from having a tremendous pleasure watching another piece of art by Darren Aronofsky.
The Fountain is a book, a life, or whatever is left. It is the world, history and boundless light. She has cancer. He's a surgeon looking for a cure. What's life? What's the salvation? Being with her, living every moment? Or to believe that there is a cure, leaving it alone? But to be there, far away, just for her. Choice. Power. Vera. Love.
I love believing in life on screen. When the director presents an amazing story through himself. He chooses the people to make the world appear. Actors, footage, depth. Darkness and light.
Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weiss were excellent in their characters. In your emotions, eyes, color.
Music, as always, is in the heart.
Each scene is built so beautifully that it is a pleasure to just watch.
And an incredible selection of "special effects." Space is divine! Big in small, small in big. The director is great when he collects a film, which will become relevant at all times, thoroughly thinking through every visual moment.
I'm not very good at religion, but I felt philosophical truths throughout the picture. Are they right? It's not that important. Only that there is nothing that can bypass love and understanding. What is there today, and you are a grain of sand in a vast universe. Now there is life, tomorrow it may not be, but you will give a new one. The universe is infinite. A man is given to be just a man. To be born and die because Eve made her choice. Nothing good will come of wanting more than this world will allow you. Humility. Understanding. Meditation. Immersion. Infinity. And a million times love.
A lot of questions that probably don’t need answers. You already know everything.
“Fountain” is a film that you want to watch to understand more and more every year. Digging and diving. Enjoy and savor.
Darren Aronofsky, in an incredibly short time through his works, was a discovery to me. He is a true artist who creates his own stories, telling a unique understanding of life. Not afraid, experimenting, going to the end.
The film is full of feelings, colors, beautiful music, not fake subtleties that sharpen attention, and smoothness, it is in this film binding. Smoothness is the juice of the tree of life, forming the integrity of the whole picture.
A lot of reviews with delight from this film, all about the same feelings, tenderness, fragile love, emotional play, and of course directorial work, but... All of this, not for these actors, I couldn't, for the duration of the film, feel the essence of it when I saw Hugh falsely expressing pain, or Rachel, a play that didn't really feel like it.
According to the original idea of the author was to play, Brad and Kate. If that were the case, the film would take possession of people, not only beautiful pictures, music and emotions, it would be a fiery sword, which would be looked at with awe, and this splendor, by right, can be considered not created by man. But we could only survive at the expense of other actors. Sometimes such a mistake as the divergence of the “interests” of the actor and the director, play a role more important than the production of the whole film.
Darren found a way to save $40 million, but found no compromise with Brad.
Hugh has a lot of respect. And the director before that, among other things, shot the most powerful “Requiem for a Dream”. The scores of this film are modest, but not bad - 7.5/7.3. It was recommended by many people, they say, a good and difficult film. And the trailer was interested, it turned out that there is love, mysticism, different eras and a curious visual range. Why not look at it?
We saw it. Yeah, it's really not easy. But it's on the verge of understanding. This is a philosophical parable with elements of a feature film. There are many thoughts and references. What's the movie about? About many things, but the main idea is the search for the meaning and key of the universe, which Aronofsky began to explore in Pi. True, he did not limit himself to contemplation and moved closer to the topic.
There was room for drama. The visual series is curious but repetitive. Played well. The only thing that ruins the film is the leisurely dynamics and repeated elements a la Groundhog Day. So, alas, 7. I would not recommend everyone, but fans of something new, unusual and tired of the flow of stupid blockbusters - quite a salvation.
It’s one of those movies that is rarely left in the middle. He either likes and people find for themselves thoughts, meanings and emotions, or do not like completely, and from the first frame. As you can see, it failed at the box office, but it has a good rating on two leading film sites and a nomination for the Venice Festival. Here who will come, the main thing: do not expect much and remember that this is a serious movie (perhaps too much).
To summarize: a philosophical parable with a curious visual series. Unfortunately, there are a lot of repetitions and a little dynamics.
Who should not watch: those who do not like sophisticated and leisurely films
7 out of 10
The film Fountain I wrote to myself once as a film with a stunning soundtrack from Clint Mansell. I’m excited about his main theme in the movie Requiem for a Dream, and I was hoping to find something similar here. In addition, it turned out that the director of the film is the same, and Hugh Jackman plays there. In short, after downloading the film, there were many surprises, and I was anticipating something completely unusual from the film.
Unfortunately, the repetition of the frightening Requiem by dream failed. To my taste, the film was not bad, but rather banal and predictable. I did not have such a flurry of emotions and thoughts from watching the film, although I counted on them. There is a rather banal game of pity, but the predictability of the plot greatly mitigates the effect. We see two parallels, the past and, conditionally, the present, in which we immediately feel that we will not get anything positive. Plus beautiful pseudo-spiritual filming with the thought that death is life. Yeah. The death of one is the life of another and what do you want? Resources are finite. But is everything so bad despite the disappointment?
Aronofsky tried to minimize computer graphics while filming the film. The beautiful fractals that we see are bits of the macrocosm. It was very interesting to read about the idea that the graphics will go forward, and the macro world will not become obsolete. It really looks interesting and original. The music is very beautiful, although no track has caught me as much as Lux Aeterna, and I have enjoyed the music immensely.
The actors were happy too. To be honest, I didn’t expect this level of play from Hugh Jackman. Habituated to Wolverine, I thought he was an actor like Stetham, always one expression. Ahn no! He can play! Not bad either. Anger, surprise, suffering, love - in this film he had to demonstrate the widest range of feelings. Rachel Weiss did a good job, too. But in historical hypostasis, it very much resembled its role from the Agora. Here I missed the game, but it’s more of a problem in my head.
The movie is for sensitive people who like to get a tear out of them. I didn't like it very much.
The picture leaves a double impression. On the one hand, his psychedelicity and depression, on the other - moments of enlightenment and touching.
The film is unique, although emotionally and heavy. The main idea of the film and the behavior of the main characters are simple and clear: The true love of a man and a woman. She is mortally ill and humble, he – on the contrary, we cannot try on his head in search of a cure. The film makes you unwittingly think about many life topics, far from related to the deadly disease. Repeatedly, the director emphasizes the requests of Izi to her husband to be with her. Very often in pursuit of the “earthly” people forget about the spiritual, about how we are constantly needed by our loved ones. We are always missing something for complete happiness: time, mood, health, money. We often push moments of joy away from spending time together to the endless “later”, while life passes here and now. And how tragic are our feelings when the old time will never return.
The picture touches on the biblical theme through the tree of life, but is revealed extremely vaguely, mixing both the ancient Mayan civilization and the cosmological model of Hawking’s Big Bang. It was too much for me. The protagonist Hugh Jackman appears in the episodes in an unusual form - absolutely bald. It's quite unusual. Rachel Weiss, who played a cancer patient spouse, is absolutely perfect both externally and internally. Overall, the film is good, but definitely not for the general public.
Darren Aranofsky is an interesting and talented director, but he has one feature that spoils the impression of his work. He is too fond of form, sometimes completely forgetting about the content. This shortcoming has not spared even The Black Swan, in my opinion the author’s most intelligent and best work. Even there, a good half of the “glitches” of the ballerina performed by Natalie Portman is explained, apparently, only by the desire of the director to twist the plot more forcefully and fill the film with bright, but not always meaningful details. And, of course, in the “Fountain” this negative side of the creative temperament of Aranofsky revealed more than in any of his other creations.
Let me remind you that the story is divided into three parallel lines, dedicated respectively to a surgeon trying to find a cure for cancer; a Spanish conquistador searching somewhere in the wilds of Latin America for the mysterious Tree of Life; and a mysterious astronaut, “combating the expanses of the universe”, being inside the capsule with this Tree. And here's the thing: Darren really likes this plot, developing in parallel in three different temporal and spatial dimensions! It's like walking around, gay! And let's hang a capsule with an astronaut over his head with an Aztec (or what?) shaman, so that he's amazing! Now let's throw the surgeon's wedding ring into the astronaut's capsule! Wow! How cool! It's all awesome!
And as a result, the film, which should – and had every chance – to awaken in the audience the desire to philosophize with himself on eternal themes, to talk about the meaning of life, about pride and humility, this film is so bloated with mysterious and sometimes simply inexplicable details that it leaves mainly a sense of mystery and inconsistency. And involuntarily comes the thought that this very “non-agreement” and became in the end the main goal of the author, who too savors the visual beauty (special effects on the level, bravo!) and dashing plot twists and somehow forgot that it is necessary, in the end, at least a little to satisfy the curiosity of the viewer, remaining in complete perplexity.
Of course, the puzzle is very elegant, but too twisted, and even after three views (I tried, honestly) can not believe that even half of the details will finally fall into place. I appreciate Darren Aranofsky and, in principle, even to the “Fountain” I am warm, but it is very sad to see how a wise parable under the pen of a gifted, but too carried away author is hidden by a whole wall of riddles, many of which, I am sure, I will never get an intelligible answer.
6 out of 10
This is the kind of movie that raises the question, “What was that?” That's right. And also a huge desire to Google and really deal with all this damn symbolism. I want to bury myself in a huge Talmud, where everything will be easily deciphered.
Despite all this wisdom, I liked the film. Probably even for that reason. He makes you think, strain your brain, remember other movies, books, history, some personal experiences and life circumstances. It leaves an aftertaste. Not sugary, not sour, not bitter. It's like pastis, anise vodka, which is very much loved in Marseille, and also my husband. Although he didn’t like the movie, he fell asleep in the beginning. And pastis, because the impressive taste palette and the amateur.
Directed by Darren Aranofsky. Good. Lately, I've been going through the filmography of directors and actors that I like. This greatly increases the likelihood of seeing something worthwhile. Now Aranofsky is on my shortlist. The next one was adopted by his “Pi”.
Actors. I will write corny, but they are truly beyond praise. The Jackman-Weiss duo was very powerful. Beautiful, sensual, so deeply experiencing and living their lives.
And more. My inner aesthete was very happy with the picture. And especially impressed by the camera move to shoot a moving object (car or horse) upside down, and then sharply unfold the picture.
8 out of 10
So, the Fountain is about God. I must warn you that my review is not a religious appeal, but a vision of the film from the point of view of many books I have read and listened to lectures on karma, reincarnation, the laws of the universe.
The person whose life is told, or rather I would say the Soul, which is told in this film, is shown to us in three human images.
To avoid confusion, we'll give the soul the name Tom. Tom is a conquistador, Tom is a scientist, Tom is on another planet. In many reviews of Tom on another planet is called Enlightened, I do not think so, he becomes enlightened at the very end, but about everything in order.
First story.
Tom is tasked with finding the magical tree of life. It is not someone who commands, but the Soul in the form of the Queen of Spain, Tom's karmic love in all rebirths. It's karmic. We are told about three reincarnations (perhaps to emphasize the sacred number three), but I am sure that in past reincarnations Izzy and Tom (before the conquistadors) were also inseparable together.
Tom-conquistador at the beginning of the film runs with a sword to the tribe of Indians with the cry “I will not die, not here, not now, NEVER!”, that is, he understands one of the main ideas of the film that the Soul is eternal. But he is far from God, he kills people, he sheds blood, he is cruel, the purpose of his life is to serve the country, to serve the queen, but not God. Shedding the miraculous elixir of the tree, he first of all thinks about himself, saturates himself, his body, his wounds. He's being punished for that. For not seeking the highest meaning in life, he is punished.
Second story.
There is another picture for us here. Tom is a scientist. This profession is also not without reason, because as we know, people of science do not believe in the existence of higher forces, do not believe in God. Tom's beloved wife, Izzy, is terminally ill with cancer. She's writing a book about Xibalba. The Qur’an is the resurrection of believers in the world and the resurrection of believers. Although in the film the presence of God is veiled, and Xibalba is called the other world, the world where the souls of the dead are reborn.
Tom-scientist is looking for the elixir of immortality, which for Izzy is meaningless, since for her the immortality of the soul is obvious. When Izzy dies after trying to open her husband’s mind, Tom begins to mourn the loss of his wife. In Buddhism, grief for the dead instead of the joy of the ascension of the neighbor to the divine world is selfish, because first of all a person thinks about himself, he thinks how he will live without a loved one. And Tom, without taking a lesson, continues to struggle with death and aging in vain. Being ignorant, or rather ignorant, Tom is punished. For denying God, for denying the laws of karma, for denying the immortality of the soul, he is punished.
Third story.
Tom is on another planet, in search of the laws of existence. Tom lives asceticly as a monk, with Izzy, the same karmic love, but this time Izzy was reborn in the form of a tree because she believed it was possible, and the Tom Scientist also wanted to believe it, planting a seed on his wife’s grave.
Tom on another planet says to the dying tree, “I will not let you die,” meaning he has not yet understood the higher laws, he still believes and hopes that he can influence life and death, and, as in the second story, he seeks to prove himself right, he longs for victory. Tom still lives in denial. Deep down, he knows he's up there. But Tom's stubbornness is higher. It is only at the end of his spiritual delusions, ordeals, and wanderings that he says, “OK, I believe you, show me.” He is speaking to God.
And God is showing him. Tom finds faith and, enlightened, goes to Xibalba.
Also, at the end of the film, it is shown how the enlightenment of the mind in one incarnation can affect the past, present and future. Karma is purified, consciousness is purified. Instead of going for surgery (read: instead of fighting windmills) Tom chooses to spend the rest of his time with his beloved wife.
Rotation in a circle.
As previously noted, there is symbolism in the film. Samsara wheel. No one knows what kind of incarnation we have in this life, because the circle is infinite in itself.
Summing up, if a person could not find God in this life, love and faith in him, if he does not accept the laws of the universe, in the next life such a person will continue to search (in the form of life lessons and trials), and this will happen every time, in each new rebirth. Until his soul finds firm faith.
For what profit does a man acquire the whole world, and to destroy himself or to hurt himself?
The director of the great film “Requiem for a Dream” Darren Aranofsky shot some weird picture – “Fountain”. It's weird, because during the film you don't understand what the Fountain has to do with it, if the film talks about the tree of life where the fountain is. You know, I immediately started to distrust this film, because it starts with fantastic shots with Jackman’s character who is chemical with a tree.
All right, what's the plot? The main character tries to find a cure for his wife, who has cancer and at the same time he does not notice her at all, and she wants to spend time with him. Good plot for a good social drama, develop it. But what does Aranofsky do? He stuffed the film with all sorts of incomprehensible scenes of the Middle Ages as the Inquisitor tries to destroy the Queen. These are good shots for a separate movie about the Inquisition, but what does it have to do with a movie about a cure for cancer? And so the whole film consists of these shots, shots of a knight looking for the tree of life, as he finds it in some whirlpool. What does this have to do with the movie?
No, I've certainly heard that all these medieval flashbacks are an allusion: the inquisitor is cancer; the queen is the wife; the knight is the protagonist; the tree of life is the medicine. But in reality, the conflict is that the main character does not spend time with his wife, but is stuck in search of a cure, and in the Middle Ages the queen herself sends a knight to find a tree. So somehow the allusions do not converge, logically the Queen should say to the knight: "Stay and protect me," and he: "No, I will find a way to fight the Inquisition."
As a result, the film turned out to be very, very boring, blurry, with repetitive scenes, it is unclear why. And instead of a good social drama, it turned out some meaningless set of shots from different eras with surrealism.
Good day, everyone. Review of the film “Fountain” I, perhaps, will begin with a description of the plot, acting, picture.
In the story, the hero of Hugh Jackman Thomas Creo, very much loves his wife Izzy - Rachel Weiss, a brain cancer patient, and, being an excellent scientist, he tries to find a cure for this ailment in order to save his beloved. And without spoilers, that's it. In general, this plot with its philosophy and morality, from my point of view, could fit into a short film, but director Darren Aronofsky went the other way, placing it in three different times, in which I saw the reality of what was happening, the inner world of Izzy and the inner world of Thomas. All this is “seasoned” with a great picture, sometimes even slightly sterile, for example, the heroine Rachel Weiss looks too good for a seriously ill woman, but given the course and tone of the narrative, this is even more of a plus and, personally, I did not spoil the impression. The actors coped perfectly, however - at first I believed them only in real time, when the action of the plot moved to other locations, this faith periodically disappeared until I caught the essence. But, to be honest, one point in the plot is still unclear - is how the salvation of Spain depends on the immortality of the Queen? I guess I'm a blonde. Simply put, when I put the film ten, I was a little overheated, there are shortcomings and it pulls 7-8 points no more, but what has already been done, is done.
But whether this film is worth watching, when to watch and whether at all – the questions are complex. When I watched The Fountain yesterday, I realized I had seen the film before, but I guess it didn’t impress me. This is like, for example, with books: when I was in school, we were forced to read Chingiz Aitmatov’s “Flame” and, I remember, in those years I did not like it at all, but with age I drank not only “Plakha”, but also “Jamil”, “First Teacher”, etc. Perhaps with this film, as they say, “grown”. And whether you like this creation of Darren Aronofsky or not, will depend not only on age, but also on the worldview, character and other aspects of a rich human personality, because people of the same age can see in the Black Square. Malevich is different, who is a deep subtext and philosophy, who is just a square, and someone as the author of the painting of a black rectangle (by the way, written before the Black Square) “Battle of Negroes in the Tunnel”. So you decide and draw conclusions, I personally liked the film.
Darren Aronofsky makes amazing films that leave behind a long aftertaste, his paintings do not go out of his mind for a very long time, forcing him to analyze the characters and imbue them with their fates. But “Fountain” is something amazing, I even dare to call it Aronofsky’s best film. But why?
It is impossible to briefly explain the essence of the film, as in the case of the book “Three comrades”. The less you know about the painting, the more emotions. The film will show three stories, so different but so similar. Perhaps in its entourage "Fountain" can be compared with the film "Labyrinth of the Faun", when the fairy tale and reality merge together. While watching, you do not want to search for secret meanings, morality, the idea that they are trying to convey to us. We simply observe the lives of individuals, as if we were becoming them. Each actor brilliantly played his character, Hugh Jackman so generally raised his bar above nowhere. They empathize, sympathize with them, believe them.
The picture neatly and unobtrusively tells us a touching story about love, death, despair, eternal life. But he does not interpret something specific, each viewer will perceive the film in his own way, everyone will get his own awareness. From that it is more interesting to discuss this film, learning other people's opinions and amazed how the same thing is perceived differently.
“Fountain” is unlikely to appeal to a wide audience, the film should be watched thoughtfully, focused. And the surroundings and style can scare away many. But for the sake of this touching and incredible story, it is worth accepting the conventions of the world in which they occur.
Conquistador, experienced surgeon, monk Tree of Life, Ordinary Girl, Queen of Spain What do we have in common? Where are the stories, where are the lines between them? This is for you to judge.
Musical accompaniment at the height, melodies literally permeate you, they will not be iconic, but cut into memory.
“Fountain” holds until the end of the credits, the end of the film is tangible with a farewell to an old friend. The film does not go away for a long time, but unlike “Requiem for a Dream”, it does not leave an unpleasant aftertaste, but on the contrary squeezes out a nostalgic smile from the viewer.
Such films are rare. "Fountain" gives an unforgettable experience from watching, conveys a huge number of different thoughts and ideas. Each replay feels like the first time. This is a true masterpiece of the film industry. It is recommended for everyone to watch.
To me, Darren Aronofsky is one of the most enjoyable, diligent and talented filmmakers and screenwriters in the world of cinema. Let him be criticized, called a failure and shouted at the top of his throat about the fact that no animal was involved in the filming, as well as “Black Swan”, which allegedly in the eyes of some is overrated, not deserving of its awards (including “Golden Globe” and “Oscar” in terms of the female role). Each Darren project is unique, unlike the previous ones and interesting in its own way. One of these magnificent projects is “Fountain” – the third full-length project with Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weiss, who by that time was the wife of the master.
Thomas Creo is an experienced doctor who works in the sweat of his face to find a cure for a brain tumor. He is looking for it not so much for the sake of science and prestigious awards in this field, but for the sake of his wife Izzy, whose disease is progressing every day.
For director Darren Aronofsky, this picture was supposed to be a new leap, a consolidation of success in the work. The film, which in the plot, in style, in all other components, does not resemble past projects, is more like life dramas. “Fountain” can also be called a drama, but it has a lot of meaning, melodrama, and fantasy. Darren distinguishes not only the style, but the very vision of the tape, proceeding in three stages, where, regardless of time, the main thing is only love and the struggle for the life of the beloved. The conquistador is ready to give his life for the sake of his queen, Tom is ready to sacrifice everything for Izzy, as in the distant future it does the same Thomas. Three stories, but they are all connected by one idea. In the same script director and Erie Handel seems to border on fantasy, but there is more meaning than imagination. Screenwriters do everything that would be filled with the right atmosphere, penetrating into every cell of the viewer’s skin. What is the meaning of the story of the Conquistador and the Queen? And the fact that one story clearly shows another, filling in the gaps: The Inquisitor is more like an oncoming cancer battling a queen. Every day the lands of Spain (Izzy’s life) become weaker, and the Inquisitor cements the victory with blood. A great deal of attention is paid to the tree that gives eternal life - in each story it exists, but it looks different. In the first story it is an impregnable land, in the second, the tree is very, very far away, and in the third it is very close. One can think for a long time about the fact that the “third world” is a dream, the inner consciousness of Thomas, and the “first world” is not just a fairy tale, but something more – a rebirth of the soul. In their work, Darren and Erie say, “May the world change and hurry forward, but one thing remains the same: love.” Love is timeless, and if there are people like Tom and Izzy, they will live forever. The script is very unusual, fascinating, and the tricks of the editor Jay Rabinowitz at first glance try to confuse us, but after watching you understand that it was done to maintain the very magic of the film, gives time for persistent reasoning. Magnificent camera work Matthew Libatik brings the tape its independent style and the desired effect. The libatical very beautifully emphasizes the contrast of black and white, which can be seen throughout the film: Tom's black shirt and Izzy's white coat in the second world, black sky and bright white stars in the third, a dark room illuminated only by small lumens of bright light. Predominant in the frame and the golden color is the outfit of the Queen, almost the entire third world. Fills the picture with the emotionality and composition of Clint Mansell. Every track, every second of this music imbues the film with feelings, tenderness and lightness, making the project weightless in terms of viewing. This is a very unusual feeling that you rarely experience.
There is no doubt about the cast, even if the script is very unusual, heavy. The main thing was to show exactly that love through time, the actor who performed Thomas to show all the drama of the character’s position, burn, the feeling of loss, while the main character should show the drama of the fact that she is here – here she will weaken. The duet of Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weiss fit perfectly - both smart, skilled actors who know how to play the character. Hugh and Rachel are really beautiful together, they show a natural, high-quality game that you want to follow and worry about their characters. Only this duet will be watched by the camera, only their story is important, so the supporting actors are essentially everyone else, except the main actors. Very competent and excellent acting!
The film failed miserably at the box office (even if this creation was not created for the public), and the awards, too, alas, did not collect. The Venice Film Festival nominated the project for the Golden Lion, Saturn gave 3 more nominations (" Best Science Fiction Film, Best Actor, Best Special Effects), Golden Globe was not indifferent to the soundtrack (sorry that the award did not give), and the domestic award Georges gave the nomination in the category Best High-Budget / Spectacular Film. Of course, the film is very spectacular, though high-budget with its $35 million budget can hardly be called.
Total:
“Fountain” is a real fantasy, a real magic of the world of cinema from Darren Aronofsky, with a surprisingly easy and semantic script, great cinematography, an emotional soundtrack, as well as a beautiful play of the cast. This film should not be seen only with eyes, it should be seen with heart, soul, to feel the rhythm, lightness of each movement and word. It's a miracle, ladies and gentlemen, it's impossible to say otherwise. I recommend getting acquainted with fans of independent cinema, fans of amazing and unusual projects, Darren fans, the cast or just those who are looking for a tape with meaning. "The Fountain" is more than a movie.
Thank you for your attention and pleasant viewing!
Have you thought about creating a cure for death? Nope? But in the lyrical parable “Fountain”, which tells us about the search for the elixir of eternal life, the main attention is focused on this question. The plot moves like a pendulum, sometimes jumping from one line to another (there are three of them), one of them knows about the Spanish conquistador sent in search of the tree of life, the other is focused on the doctor (Hugh Jackman), the third is the concept of a soul. And all of them are fused with the salvation of love, and finding inner harmony with oneself, and, probably, I think, with the world itself.
Starting with a dark introduction in the spirit of Aguirre’s wanderings from the cult journey of Werner Herzog, replacing with paintings from the memories of the main character, it reminds itself. Memories, seeing which I saw something familiar for myself, and from those very shots full of romance and fleur, I remembered those who I abandoned. And when watching involuntarily compressed the heart, and no matter how pathetic it sounds, all its beauty fills the void inside. What is especially interesting is the opponents and those people who did not like it at all, and those who noted its incoherence and weakness, in which it is difficult to understand the plot itself. While it wasn’t really worth it, it would have been worth giving in to an atmosphere similar to Malik’s. After all, the “Fountain” is created for people who dream of harmony with the world around them, and most importantly, they do not understand its sacred meaning, said by some philosopher. You just need to put it in your heart, and there his music will sound forever, and that’s enough for me to call it a pure semblance of the poetry of cinema.
Amazing movie, delightful, and so sympathetic, able, most importantly to heal mental trauma, makes you fly, even despite the lack of wings, to climb up from the Earth, for a moment, forgetting everything that happens in real life. And for such a feeling, it is not a sin to forgive the film a couple of inaccuracies in terms of the presentation of the story itself, because here the theme of love plays a major role. This is like in the same “Lobster” Yorgos Lanthimos (where Rachel Weiss also plays), also loved by unsociable singles and people deprived of happiness, which in reality is quite small, and in order to somehow brighten up their loneliness they either watch a movie or hope for the best. It must also be said that if Requiem for a Dream hits and kills you, then Fountain is full of the optimism we all need.
In the film The Fountain, the most important thing is not the process of viewing, but an attempt to understand and contain what you see.
The story told in the film has a lot in common, architecturally common, with the novel 'The Master and Margarita' M. Bulgakova. They are similar to a composition of three intertwined stories, one of which is a novel, the other is an event in reality, and the third takes place in a mystical space. Both stories are based on the main biblical stories, only different. ' The Master...' is the story of the crucifixion from the New Testament, and the Fountain is the story of the Tree of Knowledge and Life, the Fall and the Expulsion from Paradise from the Old Testament. In fact, this plot is an ancient Old Testament, it is the basis of the most ancient religions. Read more about ' The World Tree' in the religions of the world you can read in this article. The Master is a story of sacrifice: both Yeshua and Margarita voluntarily sacrifice themselves, the Fountain is about death itself.
The inner construction of both works is hermetic, paradoxical in the cosmic sense and multidimensional. It resembles a symmetrical ancient puzzle carved from a single piece of stone or wood. And this seamlessness of this multidimensional story does not fit into your head. This design seems too complex and perfect to be created by a simple man. This is how the composition of the novel Bulgakov in the wiki is described:
When analyzing The Master and Margarita, researchers pay attention to the “certain proportionality” inherent in the composition of the novel. It consists of two parts, in one of which different storylines "reach" to the Master, in the other - to Margarita.
... a clear distribution of "proportions" in the two halves of the work: for example, if the first part is replete with questions, then the second reader receives answers; in the first there are narrators, in the second there are figures. There is a clear correlation between sin and retribution, separation and meeting, punishment and resurrection. ? . . . )
The strict symmetry of the work is also indicated by the inclusion in each of the parts of two excerpts from the novel by the Master (...). Harmony and proportionality are created not only through “paired strokes”, but also “through a game of repetitions”. To this can be added the effect of a gentle transition from domestic scenes to chapters of the novel, when words from the story about Yeshua flow into neighboring chapters. The same complexity and, at the same time, internal consistency is characteristic of the Fountain. And the symmetry of the narrative and the deep nature of the connection between the stories are all the same. And the most important thing is the general basis: an ancient mystical plot directly affecting events in the lives of the heroes (the sacrifice of the divine son of the Bible in the Master and the Mayan Tree of Life in the Fountain), beginning in a book written by the master by Bulgakov and 'Margarita' in Fountain. By the way, the characters in these works are similar, only their gender does not match. In the fountain, the heroine corresponds to the image of the Master. It is she who has a connection with myth, she writes a novel and is reconciled, like the master, with death. The hero of the Fontana corresponds more to Bulgakov’s Margarita: he does not resign himself to the misfortune that befell his second half, fights and sacrifices himself, but in the end he passes the way and unites with her in another world.
Other works by Bulgakov, 'Fatal Eggs', 'Heart of a Dog', 'Morphy' and others were written only by a talented Soviet writer. And if there were no #39, there would be no such fame, there would be no such museums. As they do not have a wonderful writer Olesha or Prishvin. ' Master...' written not even one, two levels above. Both the complexity of the composition and the level of biblical history are quite different from the rest of his texts. Even in the master’s drafts, the main edits and variants were not about the chapters with Yeshua. Hard to believe it was an accident. Like Aronofsky, other movies are just tough. What ' Noah' that ' Black Swan' that ' Wrestler' These are all linear stories about stubborn people. There is nothing close to the mysticism and complexity of the Fountain. It would be interesting to think of other similar books or movies or music with a similar fate.
The hero of the Fountain unites a man who has tasted from the forbidden tree of life, a man who brought immortality to mankind and a man who was forced to know the mystery of death. This contradiction, this paradox, leads him to enlightenment. After all, even inventing a vaccine, he personally remains with death in his life and his karmic task, which his wife pointed out to him, is to accept death. And when he accepts her (as symbolized in the scene where he throws after the heroine), he is enlightened. The whole film is a parable about accepting death, it is a chain of episodes where in each subsequent hero takes it a little more, until he comes to enlightenment from denial.
The heroine of the film The Fountain personifies the feminine, feeling. She asks for sympathy and intimacy, accepting her death before she even came to her. The hero gives her not empathy, but pity and regret, he tries to help the cause. But in addition to the death of the heroine, her physical illness, which turned out to be impossible to overcome, there were also her feelings - loneliness and depression.
Man and woman are always Adam and Eve. Each couple has their own story and mythology, so what about the heroes of the film narrative? Lovers are in paradise, as long as their love lives, they think that they are immortal, but one day the path to the Tree of Life is blocked. Terrible in itself, death rarely comes to both at the same time; animal-mystical fear is joined by the fear of separation. Husband and wife are one body, in any religion, without religion; if the body feels a part cut off, the pain is unbearable. For lovers, death is the greatest enemy. “You will blossom, and then I will live,” and not otherwise. The first concern of the loser is to hold. This is the first, partly selfish, but the feat of love, which wants to conquer death as an enemy. Just to keep it alive, then with a sweet soft face and radiant eyes, then teasing like a fiery tongue. Do not let go to the last, hold your hand, look into the eyes, whisper spells to naughty hairs on the back of the head.
Izzy, a young writer, is slowly fading from brain cancer. Thomas, her husband is an oncologist. His brain is also sick in its own way: the idea-fix is the search for a drug that can kill evil cells. Accidentally discovered properties of the substance from the juice of the Guatemalan tree give hope, but it is fragile. Meanwhile, Izzy invites her husband not only to read her novel, but also to write the last chapter in it; the previous one ended with the word “death”. The story underlying the film, the title of which (the title of Isabelle’s book) could be translated as “Primary Source”, is commonplace, but the director turns it into a parable, leading the narrative not along a line, but as if on the trunk of a tree rising from the roots to the very tops. Not the world of the film - worlds strung on the eternal world tree. The three levels, the three times, the three layers are the three of Kabbalah, the number of harmony; the twelve chapters of the book are the number twelve, the number of the philosopher’s stone, the symbol of immortality.
And the film becomes a creation about creativity: a story and a story in a story. Izzy and Thomas Creo are not only husband and wife, but also two artists, two creators, creating their own universes. The creative power of the woman has created an alternative history; the intellectual effort of the man carries him to other realms of thought and spirit. Wherever the lovers are, they continue to be themselves. Her garments are white and gold, his are dark; she is peaceful, he rebels; she wants to regain the privilege of a vessel filled with light, he abides in the twilight, he does not dare to go beyond her shell, to the whiteness of light and snow. He killed everyone by searching, say companions in one lifetime: his struggle for life can kill. Both face death, and both desire immortality for their love; but for him immortality is the eternal existence of a shell, spiritual only to help it; for her immortality is a dissolution in being, a merger with the living world, and the physical only to help it. It reaches out to the mythological star cluster, the Xibalba of the Maya people, the world of dead souls becoming stars; it dreams of destroying Xibalba in order to stop not rebirth - dying at all. But no murder can stop death.
I don't play, I don't learn the rules of games, but I know I still have to, maybe blindly, go through levels, maybe one of them right now; after all, even I'm free to rewrite this twelfth chapter and co-create this story.
And the movie becomes a game. This is a game of the brain, a madness that is perhaps more right than reason. Favorite game of an enthusiastic researcher of border states, sleep, meditation. The game, the levels of which must pass both the heroes and the viewer. A game that never ends; times and worlds exist simultaneously, and the future affects the past as much as the other way around. This is a game inscribed in the incredible beauty of the scenery: the characters seem to live all the time in view of not just death, but in view of Xibalba, they are inserted into a heavy, dark-tree frame of darkness, surrounded by the glow of stars, pretending to be Moorish patterns or divorces on the doors, then hiding in lamps, then running around the lights of the night city. This is the Game, the word that in Judaism and Kabbalah is called the interaction of the Creator and creation. The game has laws and rules, but neither the characters nor the audience are instructed; you have to go back to the lower levels, make choices, die and resurrect, sacrifice others and yourself to come to the desired finale, destroy the shell of your own limitations.
I do not see well, I do not understand perhaps a hundredth part of what has been said; it is difficult for me to decipher the unruly signs of someone else’s wisdom. But I will not end with death, so I will have enough time.
The film becomes a receptacle of wisdom learned by the director, transmitted to him. In terms of hermeneutics, this story of one death – or one overcoming death – can be interpreted directly, allegorically, and mystically. The film is filled with symbols: the pen Izzy gave to her husband becomes the only weapon he needs, the tool of creativity, not murder, as in a previous life; when he gets a tattoo, Tom interferes with the ink with blood, as if infusing creative forces into the blood and betrothing his wife differently. The Inquisitor’s map is symbolic, like a snapshot of the brain in which cancer takes possession after possession, and he himself personifies the second strongest fear after the fear of death: the fear of immortality, misunderstood. The film contains mystical overtones: the dichotomy of the male and female in Kabbalah and yoga, the sexual undertones of the interaction of drugs with human tissues are clearly expressed by the actions and inaction of real men and women. The Tree of Life, at the beginning declared as the Tree of the Torah, given to the First Father from without, turns not only into a mystical Tree, a scheme of the structure of the world and man, but also a Tree of the traditions of the Maya people, a Tree that grew from within, out of the body of the sacrificed. So the burial becomes a seed, so the tree of its own body, saved from death, withers, dries up and perishes, but given to another Will, breaks through the shell, comes out to the light and blooms. Thus the dry tree of selfish love becomes the green tree of higher, spiritual love.
I can accept or reject the wisdom of this parable. I can believe it or be disappointed. But I cannot remain indifferent to human tears and tenderness, to the tears of sorrow and the smile of reconciliation. I can go my own way, but I will not forget your confused ways.
And even though I don't fully understand you, I believe in you, love. I reach for the simplicity of your earthly expression, I want to die feeling the touch of my hand, the warmth of my lips. But I need the greatest feat of love, and when I leave, give strength to the lover to let me go! For our attachment is not an attachment to life, but to death; and death stands between us only as long as we cherish its image.
Your courage can save us. Together we will live forever.
I first watched The Fountain when I was 16 on the recommendation of a friend. I wasn’t in the mood to watch the drama that day, but I did because of my beloved Rachel Weiss. The painting made no impression on me. After the film, I could only say that Jackman and Weiss, as always, confirmed that they are beautiful.
Three years later, I thought about this movie again, and probably not by chance. Many people look at things differently over the years, feel and think differently. Newly read books or watched movies open up all new things over the years.
There. As expected, the second time I saw the film very differently. Now he did not seem dull, incomprehensible and boring. This time I saw the depth of the idea. Probably, only films with tragedy, in a melancholy mood can break into consciousness and stay there for a long time. Yes, it is sad, but still full of light and tenderness.
Izzy's heroine. All the power of heroism and courage is concentrated in it. She's ready to face the eternal. She is dying, but more filled with life than ever. Izzy is the subject of Tommy's happiness and grief. She's his point. The mystery of the cycle of life in this story is that they live forever. The Queen and her conquistador, who will overcome time and worlds again together.
Hugh Jackman is expected to play very well. When you look at his face, you absorb all the pain and sorrow; hatred and despair; madness and hopelessness. There would have been no tears, no tears! And the composer C. Mansell, in turn, diluted this drama with his chic music, which eventually nicknamed my coldness, and all sentimentality flowed out.
In this film, I saw love and mystery, magic beyond the universe. High-quality shooting, beautiful dubbing, atmosphere... and full immersion in the film. I don't know what else you need for a great movie.
No matter how perfect modern technologies are, and no matter what dizzying theories scientists excite the world, it is not yet possible to subordinate the course of time and reverse it. It is the last guarantor of the relative harmony in which our planet still exists. Exactly forty years ago, Jean-Michel Jarre presented to the public his debut album “Oxygen”, which instantly became a classic of electronic music. The expression “before the time” in those years could be considered cliched, and, nevertheless, to the creation of the French composer it was worth applying. Darren Aronofsky's parable film came out thirty years later, and opinions about it are polar, unlike Jarre's legendary Oxygen. Is the Brooklyn director a genius? Or maybe he’s just a fanatic with a camera, unable to unravel his own rolled ball of world history, modern medicine and the basic foundations of Buddhism? Aronofsky himself has long ceased to explain his “Fountain”, condescendingly emphasizing only that the picture can be interpreted in countless ways. One thing is certain: Hugh Jackman’s hero found something great in the labyrinths of his own consciousness. It may be happiness, joy, enlightenment, or the total madness to which family grief has led. The golden light of the fictional star Xibalba does not allow you to forget about it so easily, "Fountain" is not suitable for the traditional classification of cinema, and the main reason is the same - it was ahead of time.
Creating the most famous of his albums, Jean-Michel Jarre kept philosophical motifs in mind. It could not be otherwise, because the Frenchman tuned his listener to a meditative wave, gently demanding to relax, not to look for historical background in memory, but simply to go along the road to harmony. No one knows how much debt it owes, but Aronofsky made a successful, as is now quite clear, attempt to measure it. The plot of the film is simple, and is like morning dew on juicy growing greenery. Oncologist Tommy Creo tries to save his beloved wife Izzy from a deadly disease, for which he puts risky experiments on sick monkeys. Botanists don’t know the tree that Jackman’s character uses to treat cancer, but this is the only thing that can be considered an absolute fiction in the film. Darren Aronofsky has created three distinct entities that guide the hero along three paths along the same meditative wave. The only difference between them is that one incarnation of Tom is ready for enlightenment, another is on the way to it, and the third denies things that it is not yet able to understand. The fateful hour has struck, and the unfortunate doctor neglected to communicate with his dying wife in order to create a cure, but how mythical are the attempts to find it, he can not even guess. Death is a disease, Tom firmly believes, and not some road to awe, as his wife gently objects to him. It is difficult to renounce beliefs, an unexpected symbol can help in this. Aronofsky found one for his hero - a manuscript book with a concise title "Fountain".
Jarre didn’t rely on history when he composed brilliant music, he just felt it. It was much easier to assign a connection with the Earth’s atmosphere than at the stage of creation. Aronofsky followed a similar route, his pseudo-historical scenes with Hugh Jackman as a conquistador - just a variation on the theme of the same search, capturing a man to the last cell of his body. The free interpretation of the biblical myth, the very peculiar attempts to portray a true Buddhist director can be reproached with many tricks, but the end result is fascinating. Aronofsky had to resort to various tricks to realize the conceived, but the amazing beauty of the “Fountain”, made possible by ordinary chemical synthesis, convinces us that this movie came out in such conditions that allowed us to accurately reflect its philosophical essence. A stubborn conquistador, a stubborn doctor and a stubborn Buddhist merge into a single person, reaching for the source of life. Tommy Creo clearly understands why he needs this touch to the unknown Tree, but the problem is that harmony has its own laws, and she will always be able to protect them from violation. Man, as always with Aronofsky since the time of Pi, is secondary to nature. No matter how noble the mission of the next seeker is, it is not up to him to decide when higher knowledge will open before him. Four adventurers from Requiem for a Dream chased the myth and only ruined unhappy lives, but Tom Creo is destined for another fate, provided that he respects the incomprehensible force that governs the cycle of life and death.
Jean-Michel Jarre was somewhat easier than Darren Aronofsky - Oxygen was the beginning of one outstanding career, and Fountain became a kind of Rubicon of another. The French musician gave masterpiece after masterpiece, many years ago immortalized his name, and the American director regularly faced with the search for means that would allow him to present the next film in its proper form. From the very beginning of his career, Aronofsky walked thorny paths, and in this sense the Fountain is like a giant tree, each leaf of which is filled with its own meaning. The resulting movie brings life, death, love into a single triangle, and its bright light is easily detected in the starry sky. Some brilliant works are more lucky, they are accepted immediately and the absolute majority, but the difficult fate of the incomparable “Fountain” was an unexpected boon for Aronofsky, without which, as you know, there could not be a fantastically successful “Wrestler” and “Black Swan”. Of all the characters that the American director led along the bumpy path of trials, Tom Creo was luckier than the others. The dazzling smile of his wife, brilliantly played by Rachel Weiss, is proof of this. The tragedy has not lost a part of its devastating essence, but watching Hugh Jackman in the last minutes of the film, you clearly understand that everything was supposed to happen, fate again triumphs, and it is she who once again comes first.
Oncologist Thomas Creo (Hugh Jackman) with fiery fanaticism tries to find a cure for cancer, spending most of his time in research institutes. The reason for this zeal is Isabel Creo (Rachel Vines), Tom's wife, who has an inoperable, malignant brain tumor. The events of the film take place in three planes: reality (our days), Tom's dreams and the story of Izzy's symbolic book The Source. In order not to retell and spoil this great film, I will make this review somewhat trivial.
What role does love play in society today? Does this beautiful feeling have any place at all, at a time when the substitution of values has completely "digested" the most precious, that which is given to us by heaven (God, nature)? Are there people who can resist a deadly disease for the sake of love? Will they seek the tree of Eden in the name of salvation of love? And they will say, standing near the grave of a loved one, “Death is only a disease, like others.” And there's a cure! And I'll find him! Will he defeat the "Cherub of Eden" with a flaming sword in the name of "i"? The theme of incredible (real) love is one of the main ones in this work!
Death... We can only accept it in different ways, but the inevitable end is inevitable, as is the birth of a new life. It is very easy to say the phrase: “We will all be there” when you learn that an old acquaintance with whom you communicated the last time of the year has passed away. But if death affects the most expensive, it immediately acquires significance, uniqueness, for the object that loses the most expensive. And the bitterness of the inevitability of the death of a loved and dear person “bites” more painful than any of the “mental hornets”. Underestimating life (either one’s own or one’s own), every second of it, is the fatal mistake that leads us to even greater suffering when we have to look the “old woman with a scythe” directly in the eyes. Perhaps you should go for a walk on a wonderful, winter day with your loved one while he is still here, and not sit within four walls thinking how this person can bestow immortality. Perhaps we should reassess the concept of life? Only she can give us the most precious treasures and riches (love, the birth of a child, the opportunity to create, etc.)! And at the very end, we will not be afraid of the transition from one state to the as yet unknown to us, another.
These are the cross-cutting and core themes that the great director Darren Aronofsky revealed in his equally great creation. Interpretation of the film can be several... Be sure to watch this movie and answer the questions it will ask you!
P.S. I strongly recommend listening to all the soundtracks for the film “Fountain”
I will not retell and analyze the plot, I will share my impressions.
It's not just a movie. I'll even say it doesn't feel like a movie at all. It is an esoteric session of deep self-immersion. It’s not Hugh Jackman and Rachel Wise talking to you from the screen, it’s you who enter into a dialogue with your unconscious self and come face to face with the main fear of all life on Earth – the fear of death. The fear of your own death — as the fear of the unknown, the fear of the death of the people you love — as the fear of their irretrievable loss. Here the themes of love, life and death are intertwined in a tight tangle, and together with the main character you unravel it, thread by thread, in order to finally realize that death is the beginning of a new life, and therefore an integral part of it. And the love that binds everything together is the key to this realization.
The emotions I experienced while watching are hard to put into words. And I don’t really want to talk about them – these are deeply personal and even painful experiences. Most people will not appreciate the fountain. A friend of mine said of him, “Oh, yeah, I did.” Something about the tree ...” The fountain can be seen but never seen. Don't see the boss. Not everyone is ready to go on an existential journey within themselves. And without this soulful work, the film turns into an insanely beautiful, but delusional picture.
Stunning directorial idea, soulful acting, fascinating visual range. And a special thanks to Clint Mansell – the music has a direct hypnotic effect, it is so expressive that literally “speaks” for the characters of the picture. These songs immediately migrated to my playlist, and every time I hear them, a lump rolls up to my throat and it becomes painful to breathe.
Shocking movie. The final credits are on the screen, and I feel that in the last hour and a half everything has turned in me. And the most interesting thing is that over time, the effect produced by the film only increases. He does not let go, forcing him to return again and again to what he saw. And you will come to the point where you have to see him again.
10 out of 10
The film combines three story lines, three lines of one triangle, in the center of which is the Truth.
The director himself says that the film allows many interpretations. But I think all the viewers who appreciated this film will still come to the same idea in different ways.
What is Life? A series of events that inevitably lead to death. What is the meaning of death? It is an opportunity to create a new life. This film shows that these are synonymous concepts.
The film is filled with symbols, each of which has its own deepest meaning. Starting with the name. "Fountain" - from the English language is translated as "Source". The source of life, truth, harmony. Finishing with the last scene of the film, when we see the name of the main character on the grave of Izzy Creo, which translates from Spanish as "yes, I will believe."
Izzy found that harmony, lost her fear, got the point. By leaving the last chapter unwritten, she gave Tom an opportunity to realize what she was. We can see it when Tom, after finishing her book, accepts everything that happened and begins to believe what his wife told him. He's planting a tree on his grave. It gives you the opportunity to blossom life.
Everyone will reach Shabalba by being reborn into something even more beautiful. Surprisingly succinctly, the director connects many characters together, carries the idea through three time periods spanning a thousand years. But we know that after this thousand will come the next. And so - Infinite.
I love the movie. From acting, from camera work, from soundtrack. Everything came together, looping around in Idea.
His heroes must always be obsessed with something. Whether it’s Max Cohen (“Pi”), for whom his whole life was reduced to deciphering the number of the universe, or Harold (“Requiem for a dream”), once again taking out his mother’s TV to buy a couple of grams of heroin. This time Aronofsky is obsessed with the search for eternity, immortality and love.
Back in 1999, the American director wrote the script of “Fountain” and was completely ready for shooting. The budget was high, the actors were selected. But the traitor Brad Pitt left the team for the filming in “Troy” and 5 years later he, along with Cate Blanchett, was replaced by Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weiss. Accordingly, the budget was cut, the script was rewritten and chemical reactions of substances were filmed instead of special effects for space scenes. In this, too, you can look for some encrypted message of the author about how all the elements of nature are connected, about their similarity and about how the great arises from the small. But for the most part, this will already be fiction, because even without these conclusions, the author’s project is sometimes filled with excessive depths of philosophical meanings.
The action of the picture covers a millennium, divided into three phases. Each of them is about different characters, but the same desires. Middle Ages. Spain is captured by the Inquisitor and the Queen (Weiss) asks her conquistador (Jackman) to find the treasured Tree of Life that the Bible speaks of. Our days. Beloved scientist (all the same Weiss and Jackman) has cancer and he is desperate to produce a cure for death. Somewhere in the future. Deprived of hair, Jackman floats in a bubble with a tree through the expanses of space. Despite radically different stories, which are united by only one connecting thread - the question of death and immortality - Aronofsky skillfully combined them into one whole, from the previous story arises the next, from the subsequent - the previous. He raised themes for which he was called pretentious and pathetic. Why not? After all, he showed what mankind has been striving for for not the first century - to immortality, but reaching it, he perishes from his greed.
If there was a list of “Most Beautiful Movies”, then “Fountain” would undoubtedly be in the top 50. Most of the film unfolds in close-ups, the whisper of the hero moves the hairs on the neck of his beloved, in the palace of the Queen of Spain, hundreds of lights hanging in the air, creating the effect of twinkling stars, and all this happens to the charming music of Clint Mansell.
“Fountain” in many ways echoes “Requiem for a Dream”: the same angles, the same presentation of frames, after all, the same operator and composer. But if “Requiem...” was sharp as a blade, full of tension and a certain threat, then “Fountain” is just a soft fairy tale, like a bubble, which moves smoothly, slowly in the sky. But this does not make you want to sleep, oddly enough. The film gently plunges into its bowels, covering the viewer with a weightless veil.
You can either love this picture or not love it. But don't try to understand. Everyone will find an explanation for what they see on the screen. Some would think that this was a story about reincarnation, and the wife of the scientist Ezi only described the previous and future life in her book. Someone will look at everything as a dream that the hero of Jackman dreams. And someone will just be perplexed and try to pick the film up and down, read the symbols, interpret what is not there and can not be. But if you try to just look without asking too many questions, without thinking about “how”, “why” and “from where”, just relax, enter into a certain state of meditation with the hero, perhaps contemplating something will become that act of creation. After all, as soon as you begin to understand or try, then all this fragile structure will collapse right on its head and bury anyone in its remains, from which there will be no strength to get out, but only to flounder and flounder. If Darren Aronofsky hadn’t rewrote the script, it might have been much stronger.
After hearing a lot of enthusiasm for this film, I was intrigued and decided to watch it. From the first shots it became clear that the movie was made with a claim to reasoning about the Eternal. This alarmed me immediately, because in order to make a good picture about life, death, love and eternity, you need to be a brilliant director. I don't think it's Aranofsky.
At the doctor Thomas Creo (Hugh Jackman) young beloved wife Izzy (Rachel Weiss) is dying. Thomas conducts scientific experiments to find a cure that will save his wife. He is fully focused on his scientific research. And, setting a “high goal”, throws all his strength on its implementation, not being able to devote time to his dying beloved wife. The wife, in turn (apparently to alleviate their spiritual suffering), writes a book - a novel called "Fountain", which takes place in Spain of the XV century. In the novel, the Queen of Spain instructs her devoted conquistador to find the Tree of Life and thereby save her and Spain from the destruction that the evil inquisitor threatens them. Thomas, reading the novel of his wife, identifies himself with the conquistador, and her with the queen (and the illness of his wife is, apparently, the Inquisitor). But the filmmakers were not limited to this. And added a third storyline, where the hero of Hugh Jackman becomes a super-being and travels through galaxies, stars and the universe to awaken the Tree of Life. And all of these storylines are kind of united by a common goal: the search for immortality and the possibility of rebirth.
My God. Consider me a burnt-out cynic and a soulless beast, but I threw up almost as soon as I knew what I was talking about. And almost immediately it became clear to me personally that the Great Design had failed. Too much tinsel in the form of allegories, symbols and allegories. They're just oversaturated with the movie. It turned out some vinaigrette, because all mixed in one pile: science, the Maya tribe, the philosophy of Buddhism, death and love, duty and valor, the Inquisition ...
As a result, the impression is as follows: twisted, configured, filmed, of course, beautiful (albeit in some places and unnaturally somehow), and the idea in the film is banal to the edge. “We are alive as long as we love,” “There is no death for us,” “The soul is eternal,” and in general “We do not die, but become earth, grass, trees, and birds.” The eternal cycle of life. The eternal movement of life. But an attempt to remove a parable film from claims almost to a biblical one failed. The whole thing is too intrusive. The picture is overloaded with metaphors (not the most successful and sometimes banal) - so much so that it looked in places even naughty. I suppose I might be wrong. Maybe I didn’t understand or feel something. But I have always believed that truly brilliant films (and this movie is written in this way) take away “their” viewer immediately, from the first seconds. But that didn’t happen to me.
In general, as the unforgettable Ranevskaya said: “Let’s less pathos, gentlemen.” May the fans of this “masterpiece” forgive me.
5 out of 10 -
Movies that change something about you, that touch on things that are usually hard to hurt, movies that you understand not only with your head, but with something else – this is about “Fountain”.
Yes, no doubt, the film is hard to understand: all these three very strange storylines, hairs of the bark of a tree, Xibalba, the Inquisitor ... Most likely, some people it is not clear at all, and someone can hurt to the core. And most likely, it's just like that, what luck: understood or not. If you understand, you feel the whole film, think about it after, think about your life and the lives of loved ones, and you understand absolutely all the little things like the ring - the personification of the connection of the heroes, eating the bark shows that Izzy, who is personified by the tree, was more than just love for Tommy: she helped him live. And the whole film consists of many such details that combine and give together a stunning philosophical picture of life, death, love. And the whole philosophy is built into a stunningly beautiful film, masterfully shot with excellent actors.
Personally, I had a strange feeling after this film that made me think about a lot, these feelings got somewhere in my personal space. For example, one moment when a recurring Izzy appears in a line with Tommy's soul ball and he chases her away. This is Tommy's moment of regret and guilt that he didn't spend time with his wife, but worked. It's guilt that torments him, hurts him. It seems to me that many people who lose loved ones reproach themselves for such things. Is there any reason to think?
Bottom line: A breathtakingly deep, sensual and beautiful film with something inside. The movie is catchy, and it costs a lot.