"When college came around I wasn't very prepared. I hit the library and tried to learn. But Selby fucked everything up. From sentence one I was done, and so were my finals." - Darren Aronofsky, director of Requiem for a Dream.
I must admit, for a few minutes after watching Requiem for a Dream I could not really understand why the film was called so. Thankfully, my mental blank didn't last long and I quickly realized that it meant a requiem for quite a few dreams, not just the obvious ones that are referred to in the movie (the section titled Summer epitomizes that for me) but the dreams of any life gone (or going) wrong; of America perhaps, but that is probably stretching it a bit.
When I sit back and try to think about why I drew that blank, I begin to realize that it was mostly the experience of watching the movie itself that had numbed me. That is not to say that the movie is bad. Quite the contrary in fact I think this is a very good movie. But any good piece of Art (music, books, a movie) always tends to elevate one from the immediate and into much larger consequences, those of life (mostly of one's own). Then one is too deep in that process to distract and respond to such minor considerations of what a movie's title signifies, although classes of students will perhaps write papers about exactly that.
Before I launch into a more detailed examination of the movie, it's interesting to think about all the reasons why I chose to see this movie: A former-junkie friend of mine told me this was a life-changing movie, and I believed him (he gave up drugs after seeing the movie); Critical reaction was generally positive (especially Ebert's, who by the way is my favourite film critic); Jennifer Connelly is in it, and She is one actress who has in recent times not only looked fantastic but has also taken projects that have been challenging (yes! yes! I suppose her doing an ass-to-ass dildo sequence must have factored into my decision somewhat); friends have recommended that I read Hubert Selby Jr's novel on which this movie is based, and from experience I know to see a movie before I read a book (that way the movie does not disappoint you); and finally I had heard it had innovative camera use and a great score. An interesting mix of reasons, no doubt. Now, having seen it, I am thankful that I did. It is much better than I expected.
The film follows four main characters from Brooklyn, NY: Sara (Ellen Burstyn) is an old woman who lives alone and the high point of her day is watching TV, she gets a prank call telling her that she has been selected to appear in a TV show, this brings some much-needed interest into her life - she begins dieting in order to lose weight and fit into her favourite red dress - until she starts taking diet pills (which gradually turn into an addiction); Sara's son Harry (Jared Leto) is a junkie who steals visits her mother occasionally in order to borrow her TV set and pawn it for drug-money (the movie opens with a sequence of Sara having chained the TV to a radiator in order to prevent him from doing so, Harry says it's only for a couple of hours because as usual once he is gone Sara'll go and get back her TV anyway, and takes it); Harry's girlfriend Marion is also a junkie and so much so that her (relatively wealthy) family has severed all ties with her, her only connection is through the shrink Arnold (who occasionally gives Marion money in exchange for Sex); and Tyrone (Marlon Wayans of Scary Movie fame in a surprisingly good performance) is Harry's best friend and they hang out (and take drugs) together.
Tyrone and Harry discover some good shit and along with Marion decide to start a little trafficking business of their own. The Summer sequence shows that the organization is doing well, and so is Sara (because of her TV call; she dies her hair and begins dieting in right earnest, eventually visiting a Doctor who prescribes diet pills). Harry decides to help Marion open her own clothes-store (we find out that she does some fashion designing). Gradually, as Summer passes, things start go bad. A gang war breaks out, Tyrone is arrested and the Drugs and money is lost. Meanwhile, Sara develops a full-blown addiction with the diet pills. As Fall and then Winter come in, things get progressively worse and each of the character's recedes deeper and deeper into their addiction. Even the wonderful relationship between Harry and Sara becomes soured because drugs are no longer close at hand.
The movie does a great job of capturing the descent into addiction as well as conveying what the people feel like when they are under the influence. Another movie that conveyed the effect well was Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, although I think this movie does a much better job of it. FLLV was also unclear about what the message of it was. Yes it was cool as a drug-trip movie but other than that it wasn't much. I don't know if that is also a reflection of Hubert Selby Jr's writing being superior to that of Hunter S. Thompson's (I have a feeling that it is, but cannot pass judgement until I have read Selby's work).
A number of things go into conveying that experience. The camera use is of course paramount, the use of fast-forwards, jump cuts, efficiently edited montages backed with wonderful sound effects/editing, fish-eye and following an individual character with a steady camera on the character's face. And through this all is the fantastic score, which moves up and down along with the mood and is more than effective in enhancing the entire movie beyond being just merely good. There is also an underlying sense of rhythm (which speeds up when characters are on a trip) primarily created by the score but also by the wonderful editing, which is exhilarating (which may not be the right word for this movie).
The movie is more than successful in what it sets out to depict. That the descent is not only personal, physical but also moral (as character's do things they would not do in a normal state of mind). The acting is wonderful, all four actors have wonderful performances. One is no stranger to Ellen Burstyn. But all the other three were revelations (including Connelly, although She has had many wonderful performances through her career). The direction is wonderful. What I found particularly good about Aronofsky's direction was his restraint. As evidenced in a movie like FLLV one can literally go off the top with material like this. But Aronofsky is in complete control. Even the much-hyped dildo sequence is done in such a way that there is nothing remotely erotic / pornographic about it (and that is a shame on all those souls out there in cyberspace who have written volumes about it - so what if it is JC?)
Overall, I give this movie 9 on my personal scale of 10. The only short-comings for me are that it could have been shorter by 10 minutes (although I would not hazard guessing where, maybe the drug trips are one too many, and the TV sequences involving Tappy), that it does not have any semblance of hope for its characters and that in effect it does not offer any of the characters a choice, addiction only seems the logical way-to-go and that is much too hopeless for me. But definitely recommended for anyone but the squeamish.
P.S. The special edition DVD that I saw had an NC-17 rating and that is completely unreasonable. For one thing, as Ebert points this is something teenagers considering the drug-route need to see. For another, I find it completely baffling that Grindhouse that I saw yesterday had an R rating. My rant about censorship in general is forthcoming.
No comments:
Post a Comment