Fonte da Vida

Such a beautiful film that goes so, so deep. For me, it was a truly spiritual experience to watch this film again after 8 years. The images are beautiful, unique and the thousands of match cuts connecting the film's inner spiritual layer with the real life of the characters (in a non-linear manner) is just sublime. For me, this is poetry and a beautiful testament to love, pain, life - and the never ending cycle of life.

Tomas searches Mayan country, seeking the legendary tree of eternal life that offers him the chance to free his captive queen. A medical researcher pushes the bounds of professional ethics as he attempts to extract a natural cure for his dying wife. A traveller in deep space attempts to make it to a dying star wrapped within a nebula in order to spend eternity with his destined love.

The Fountain got mixed reviews when it came out for a short cinema run in the UK. Perhaps understandably because, although he is hailed by some, he is dismissed by others. So far my experiences have seen me fall into the middle ground as Pi didn't totally win me over the way it did others but I did find Requiem for a Dream to be as impressive as I had heard. So I came to the Fountain unsure of what I would find and not sure if I would like it or if I would struggle with how impenetrable the ploy summaries and comments did make it sound. At first glance it does seem this way because the link between the three stories (and the nature of at least two of the them) does make it seem like a concept to be cracked and pieced together. I do think coming at it like this will only lead to frustration. It is my belief that the modern section is real and that the other two exist within the book – this explanation helped me as it allowed me to focus on the emotion and themes within these sections rather than trying figure out the exact narrative reason for a bald man inside a spaceship that looks like a bubble.

By doing this I was left with a film that I found interesting from start to finish, with the theme of movement from life to death and perhaps rebirth being one that was explored visually as much as it was in the material. To say it like this does run the risk of making it sound corny but rather, with this approach, it does work really well, layering ideas and themes to awesome effect. The central relationship holds the film together and, although some have criticised the other two threads as weaker, I personally saw them as being as much of the main thread as the main scenes were themselves. I was surprised by how touched I was at points and found myself watching a sci-fi with an intense human story running throughout it (or vice versa – I'm not sure).

Some have said that Aronofsky's style as director is a bit cold and distant from his subjects. Technically I agree with that, which is why the performances are all the more important here. While the camera may not be about the heart, the performances must be and accordingly we get a pair of tremendous performances from the two stars. Jackman dominates the film. It must have been difficult to find his character in the midst of so many effects and concepts but he does it and, while you can see a lot of effort is being put in technically in some scenes, he never loses the focus on what he is trying to do. Weisz has less time and less of the material but she does almost as well – really connecting with Jackman and making her acceptance of transition seem convincing – something I saw as key in the delivery. Burstyn has a small role, while famous faces such as Thomas, Margolis, Curtis and Suplee provide solid turns even if their time is limited.

Although he is cold as a director there is no doubting that Aronofsky is a skilled director with a great creative force. His control of the theme across the film sees Libatique producing a wonderful control of light that I cannot even begin to comprehend how he created what he wanted and managed to capture it on film. The space sequences will catch the eye most but I was just as impressed with the use of light in the present-day scenes as the use of distant light, being just out of the light etc was an excellent visual extension of the theme.

As I expected, on the surface of it this is not an easy film to crack and, although not inaccessible, it is understandable why it didn't rip in a massive mainstream audience. However at its core it is a simple and touching tale, that is cleverly expanded thematically across the bookend threads. While the director and talented crew seem to focus on the technical delivery of the themes, they are matched with a masterful turn from Jackman – meaning that the emotion is right there the whole time, holding us in a story that is inventive and technically impressive as much as it is human.

It is essential to let go of needs and allow for something new, something more peaceful, to take its place. The main issue for people is not to advocate any specific worldview or philosophy, but rather to show that death is natural to life and something that everyone has to face. It is when people find some way of reconciling with mortality that they can fully be present and not be too worried about the world around them. Our lives are brief and are at the mercy of forces beyond our control, which can suffocate consciousness and delude people into falsehood.

This is one half of a review. Some films need to be seen more than once to be fully grasped. This is one of them.

I would like to read Paul Schrader's review of this film. Not because he wrote the screenplay for Taxi Driver, but because he wrote a book about "Transcendental Style in Film" and "The Fountain" is certainly in this category of film-making.

Because of Schrader's book, I've been viewing as many films by Dreyer, Ozu, and Bresson, that I can lay my hands on – especially those by Robert Bresson. There are many parallels between Aronofsky's film and Bresson, and yet their style is completely different – it's like comparing a Tintype photograph with a Van Gogh: Bresson is understated while Aronofsky is over the top. Yet, both directors create films that are best viewed more than once. Both styles leave a lot to the imagination which can be frustrating on the first viewing. I certainly was. This is why I consider this to be one half of a review. I've only seen this film once.

The Fountain has three story lines: one set in the past, one in the present, and one set ostensibly in the future. The three timelines weave in an out of each other like a Chinese puzzle. The past is poetic, the present is realistic, and the future is plausible. Moreover the future be either a real future (as cinematic futures go) or merely a dream of the future. So, this could be a very subjective story that takes place now. It is ambiguous, mysterious, and subject to personal interpretation. In this regard, The Fountain, is very much like the films of Bresson.

Bresson once mentioned that he intentionally avoids the obvious in his film; it is the mystery that propels the viewer's interest forward. Often later scenes reveal the mystery of that earlier enigma. This is a very literary form of film-making. Last night, I was surrounded by people in the audience who wanted every plot detail handed to us on a silver platter. As this was a sneak preview, we all got in for free. Some were probably expecting the extremes of "Requiem for a Dream". A group next to me left early. As I was leaving, I heard a teen say into her cell phone "don't bother to pay for this film – wait for it when it is on TV … for free". And I agree: if you can tolerate a lot of commercial TV and prefer magazines to books, then you may not like this film. If you read some of the reviews, for Bresson, you'll get some of the same impatience. These are films which break with what you'd expect from a film. Forget that you're in a movie theater; this piece will reward an open mind.

The acting in The Fountain is very dynamic but there was not enough breathing room for empathy. There is only one break in the tension when there could have been more. Instead, to serve the three story lines, the tension feels like one continuous climb. A tearful moment, from one storyline, leads to another tearful moment in another storyline. The group next to me – the one that ultimately left – were snickering. It feels like overacting, even though each performance is convincing, on its own. So, I felt my empathy in suspension. A different edit would have added more power to the emotional timbre of the acting. I find myself wishing for another 20 minutes of story to draw me in.

The music blended very well with the story – they never stood apart, which is ideal for a cinematic score. The visuals, however, did break the suspension of disbelief, on a few occasions. In one case, there was a tracking shot that uses a unique point of view that took me out of the story, thinking "wow, cool shot!", instead of thinking "I wonder where he is going". There is a certain amusement ride feel to some of the cinematography and Special Effects which detracts from the story. But, these shots are not gimmicks. They're premonitions and echoes of action in other sequences. They are crazy bold, like Van Gogh's brushstrokes tracing out a landscape. These bold strokes are the first thing that I notice, about "The Fountain". But, upon reflection, they paint a picture that is rather calm.

I look forward to seeing this movie again.

Fantastic in every sense. This film is indeed poetry, and a beautiful testament to love and the cycle of life, and the impermanence of death. Wow. The script is tight, and the non-linear presentation works very well. The scene compositions were exquisite. The score enhanced without being overbearing, which is so often the case in contemporary film.

The acting is absolutely superb, but then it's got Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz. I can't imagine Brad Pitt doing any sort of justice to this film. Darren Aronofsky lucked out in the long run by getting someone who has the range to portray the vast emotions required for Tomas/Tommy/Tom. Weisz has the depth for regal intrigue and spirited grace. Their chemistry makes their stories even more entrancing.

This film does require a thinking brain to be appreciated.