Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiwak
I didn't incredibly like either Pi or Requiem. They both seemed a little immaturely focused on style rather than imagery or composition. It was clear at least in Requiem that Aronofsky has talent that I'm sure will be put to better use as he gets older.
|
I don't exactly see that as a bad thing really, because
Requiem was a movie that thrived on rhythm and became a juggernaut punch in the face that resonates for a long time because of its style. Something like that cannot be reached with composition or strong imagery alone, both of which were present in
Requiem as well if you ask me. I've heard before though that people say
Requiem is style over content, maybe that is what you meant? I'd have to disagree with that as well. Aronofsky's style was what the story and the script were screaming for. The style here was what made this movie so brilliant, thought provoking and emotionally resonating. It's not a 'cool' movie, in the same way some style-over-content blockbusters might be considered, but it's confrontational, disturbing and, well, not very pretty. I like Aronofsky exactly because he doesn't hold back for the audiences sake, afraid to shock someone, but at the same time he never does it just for the sake of style, it's always in function of the story, characters and the effect he wants the film to have. David Fincher is similar in that way, both make movies based on the idea that the most interesting movies are the ones that scar. But then again, that's only my opinion.
