[As a preface to Jeremiah's review of what will certainly become the most talked-about and overrated film of the year, I'd like to reiterate the extremely graphic and nauseating imagery -- to the point where many audience members find themselves physically sick -- that Requiem for a Dream relies on to tell its story. Jeremiah is absolutely right in his analysis that ultimately, the film has absolutely no message to give. It's all right there in the title: this is simply a 102-minute eulogy, mourning the death of a dream -- or rather four dreams -- of people trying to make something out of themselves and failing miserably at it. Aronofsky has style, but he's left it to the viewer to fill in the substance. That may be the kind of movie you want to see (unlike, say, Trainspotting), but you'll have to figure that out on your own. You'll also need to decide if nausea is an appropriate response to take away from any film. This critic gives Aronofsky points for sheer guts, but there's no excuse for avoiding a story. -Ed.]
Imagine Trainspotting without any trace of humor and you're on the right track. Picture Pasolini's Salo: 120 Days of Sodom shot by some MTV music video kid interested in the novelty of his new camera. Darren Aronofsky (Pi) stacks one degrading sight atop another without implicating the viewer, nor providing any framework or reference for his visual rape of his audience - all smoke and mirrors disguising a great, vapid emptiness.
Continue reading: Requiem For A Dream Review