unbeliever said:

It's like being punched in the face with sadness and tragedy. But in a good, visually appealing sort of way.

---

Syle said:

sad and tragic? no way, uplifting, inspiring and encouraging!!!

---

psilocyberin said:

I watched the fountain last night... twice, because I wanted to make sure I wasnt getting something.... but the movie was obscure. There was no "mass" to the plot, it was like one moment in time relived over three periods.
Maybe I am missing the "underlying" meaning... maybe something that will click, but nothing.
I mean, it was visually amazing, but the storyline did nothing for me.

---

nightkrawler said:

unbeliever said:

It's like being punched in the face with sadness and tragedy. But in a good, visually appealing sort of way.

---

Syle said:

sad and tragic? no way, uplifting, inspiring and encouraging!!!

---

well, i'll just have to see it one of these days.

i really didnt like requiem at all honestly. ok to watch once i guess, but i wouldnt want to watch that shit again. i saw pi in high school, didnt like it, but i feel like maybe i just wasnt ready for that one. i noticed my dad has pi netflixed, so i'm sure i'll watch it again.

---

if yo udidn't like Requiem or Pi, then you might not like this, I won't say yes or no either way.

Just go into The Fountain with an open mind and an open heart and you can't go wrong imho. The music alone is to die for

Syle said:

psilocyberin said:

I watched the fountain last night... twice, because I wanted to make sure I wasnt getting something.... but the movie was obscure. There was no "mass" to the plot, it was like one moment in time relived over three periods.
Maybe I am missing the "underlying" meaning... maybe something that will click, but nothing.
I mean, it was visually amazing, but the storyline did nothing for me.

---

watch it again.

---

psilocyberin said:

Syle said:

psilocyberin said:

I watched the fountain last night... twice, because I wanted to make sure I wasnt getting something.... but the movie was obscure. There was no "mass" to the plot, it was like one moment in time relived over three periods.
Maybe I am missing the "underlying" meaning... maybe something that will click, but nothing.
I mean, it was visually amazing, but the storyline did nothing for me.

---

watch it again.

---

I would love to hear what some of you "took" from the movie, because as of right now, I think it is some sort of Emporers New Clothes type shit.
See, one of my favorite movies is Primer, which is a movie that almost everyone hates and doesnt understand.... granted it takes about 30 full watchings to fully comprehend how deep the spiral goes down in that movie.

SPOILER ALERT!!!!




see, I have heard people say that it is in three different time periods of existence, but the conquistador period (which I dont understand at all) was him reading a story, while the other two time periods were actual occurences.
so, please, someone give me a synopsis, or some insight that they gained.

---

Quote:

Jeremy Dawson and Dan Schrecker, who had provided visual effects for Darren Aronofsky's Pi and Requiem for a Dream, returned to The Fountain to help the director with the film's effects. The pair were assigned with the task of creating as little computer-generated imagery as possible, a difficult task with a third of the film taking place in deep space. Aronofsky chose to avoid effects that would make the film look dated in several decades but instead hold up as well as a film like 2001: A Space Odyssey. Dawson said, "Using CG is really the easy route because it's so prevalent and the tools are great. What it did was really force us to come up with creative solutions to solve a lot of our problems." One creative solution was uncovering Peter Parks, a specialist in macro photography, who had retrieved deep-sea microorganisms and photographed them in 3-D under partial funding from the Bahamas government. Parks brewed chemicals and bacteria together to create reactions of which Schrecker and Dawson shot 20,000 feet worth of film in the course of eight weeks for The Fountain. To create the effects, Peter Parks had taken advantage of fluid dynamics, which affected the behavior of the substances that he photographed. "When these images are projected on a big screen, you feel like you're looking at infinity. That's because the same forces at work in the water—gravitational effects, settlement, refractive indices—are happening in outer space," Parks said. The specialist's talent convinced the film's creative department to go beyond computer-generated imagery and follow Parks' lead. Instead of millions of dollars for a single special effects sequence, Parks generated all the footage for the film for just $140,000.

---

psilocyberin said:

it was like one moment in time relived over three periods.

---

sirbojangles said:

this movie was great

such an amazing experience

i just had to post this because some people didnt like it and i cant understand why

---