The Fountain

[Pozer]

for what it's worth, i loved the shit out of it.
course i loved the shit out of the new world too.

[pete]

yeah he didn't eat sushi with us, therefore the movie SUCKED.
I asked him about animating the tree and the stars, he said the tree required thousands of sketches 'cause it was hard to animate something organic, but no CGI was used.  As for the stars, they worked with a microscopic filmmaker in England that filmmed chemicals or something in place of the stars.

[xerxes]

I really liked it as well. I do agree that it had a lot of flaws, but, with the possible exception of the tai chi against the stars moment, I wasn't really bothered by them all that much.

[modage]

i think i loved this as well.  the film wasnt what i expected it to be, but even what i expected changed SO MANY TIMES over the years of waiting for it to arrive.  the best possible thing that could've happened for me was the small wave of mixed reviews in the past few weeks that lowered my expectations accordingly so they could actually be met.  the film exists in a kind of vacuum that doesnt resemble reality in the slightest.  the entire film was very dark, their home, his work, the hospital all apparently lit by a few lowlite lamps but it gave an incredible mood and atmosphere.  it could also be called Giant Fucking Face as most of film seemed to either be a closeup or an overhead shot.the film was a bit melodramatic maybe, but this is my kind of melodrama.  it mixes in with some new elements to create something a little different which i'll take any day of the week over brokeback mountain's old fashioned melodrama.  there werent any lines that stuck out for me as cringeworthy, no moments that didnt work and because of those reviews in recent days here i was looking for them!  i kept waiting for the film to hit a wrong note but it never did. 

in the beginning there were comparisons to kubrick and 2001 that this would be a 'smart sci-fi film'.  but its pretty much the opposite of 2001 and kubrick in general.  because through melodrama it reveals that aronofsky has a heart and that it is the heart that guides the story.  he wants you to think but moreso he wants you to feel.  its for this that he and the film will likely be slaughtered by critics.  i think generally when someone puts their heart on their sleeve and it is not received well it is received awfully and booed and hated.  because you can either find your connection to it and it affects you or you cant.  and if you cant there is little there for you here.  the ideas are loose at best, so its not something you're going to watch over and over to dissect the ideas and the meanings.  its a love story and a film about death and hinges on the viewer caring about what happens.

the film did remind me a lot of Soderbergh's Solaris and like that film, The Fountain will flop and flop hard.  huge respect to warner bros. for putting out this film and pouring millions of dollars into something that will not make them any money.  if it caused a modern day Heavens Gate and all the new auteur directors were never again allowed to stretch with bigger budgets i wouldnt be any more surprised than i would if this grossed 100$ million.  but its good, and i'm glad its here. 

[matt35mm]

Oh sure, make me look like a heartless bastard or something.

Anyway, I just saw a TV spot for the film where they just showed the 16th century stuff, as just a story of a man who's willing to fight to the death to find the fountain of youth for his queen.  So that's how they're going to advertise this.  Wow.

EDIT: Saw the TV spot again, and thought I should quote this: "On November 22nd, a hero will risk everything for the adventure of a lifetime!"

[MacGuffin]

Here's a site that lets you futz around with music and images from Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain:

http://www.thefountainremixed.com/en/welcome.php

[modage]

From Here to Eternity
For Darren Aronofsky, the road to filming his ambitious sci-fi epic ''The Fountain'' was littered with fickle stars, wasted millions, and broken dreams by Daniel Fierman

For starters, it wasn't supposed to be this goddamned cold. And there was supposed to be lots of jungle. Hell, for all the crew of The Fountain knew, there would have been dancing kangaroos and oilcans of beer on every corner if they had only stuck to the plan and shot down in Australia. In fact, the only people who look happy today are the Mayan villagers — flown in from Guatemala for six weeks of filming — who have spent their time marveling at the white puffs that gust out of their mouths in the frigid Canadian air. They've never seen that before. The production, on the other hand, has seen just about everything.

''This movie,'' says producer Eric Watson, looking decidedly unimpressed by the billowing steam that trails his words, ''has not been easy.''

The story of The Fountain is the tale of how pulling the plug on a movie put hundreds of people out of jobs, pushed a mega-talented filmmaker to the brink of a breakdown, and left years of work in ruins — and how that filmmaker willed the whole thing back into being. It would take writer-director Darren Aronofsky six years, three financing partners, two sets of stars, $53 million ($18 million of which was totally wasted), and one infant named Henry before he would see his third movie in theaters.

But on this moon-cold Montreal day in 2005, he seems surprisingly placid about the ordeal. He chats with his visiting parents and whispers in the ear of his leading lady (and partner) Rachel Weisz. He lopes along, greeting cast and crew, picking at Hugh Jackman's beard. It's only when he arrives at his director's chair — the one he has waited over half a decade to occupy — that a sour note creeps into his voice. He stops, sighs, and laughs in disbelief.

''Do you see that?'' he asks no one in particular. ''Warner Brothers spelled my f---ing name wrong!''

In 1998, no one in Hollywood knew how to spell Darren Aronofsky's name. He hadn't made a movie. He didn't know a soul. He was just another hyper-smart Harvard grad who wanted to be in pictures. Then came Pi, his paranoia-soaked debut that won the Directing Award at Sundance. And Requiem for a Dream, which won a bevy of raves and an Oscar nod for Ellen Burstyn. The hyperbolic praise came in a torrent. He was a borderline genius. The new Kubrick. The new Scorsese. (You could practically hear his agents gloating, ''It's A-R-O-N-O...'') Everyone knew Requiem was important, and everyone wanted to be in the Darren Aronofsky business. He was one of the most in-demand young directors in Hollywood and developed a massive roster of potential projects. Only one really mattered to him: The Fountain.

''The night of Passover dinner Jared Leto and I went to The Matrix,'' says Aronofsky. ''It blew me away. I remember thinking that the Wachowski brothers took every great science-fiction idea of the 20th century, plus a few new ones. 'Here we are on the cusp of the 21st century; what is the next sci-fi?' That was the beginning.''

The idea that evolved was the product of Aronofsky's anxiety over turning 30, his parents' recent bouts with cancer, and a series of visits the director paid to his old Harvard buddy Ari Handel's laboratory at NYU, where the Ph.D. candidate was conducting research on live monkeys. The movie that emerged sounded a little bonkers — a spiritual triptych following a conquistador, a modern research scientist with a dying wife, and a cosmonaut 500 years in the future, all searching for never-ending life and all played by the same actor. There were to be Mayan temples. New Age spaceships. Massive Spanish Inquisition sets and battle scenes on the scale of Braveheart. But at its core, The Fountain was an overgrown art movie — a rumination on life and death dressed up in genre clothes.

It made no real sense as a studio picture. Everyone knew it. But almost no one knew about the secret showing of Requiem for a Dream that had been set up at CAA's Beverly Hills headquarters back in 2000. The screening was for just one person. According to multiple sources, when the movie ended, Brad Pitt stood up and spent the next two hours walking around the block. Then he came back and asked to see the movie again. When it was over, he ordered his agents to get him a meeting with Aronofsky. Their first meeting took place at Pitt's bungalow in the Hollywood Hills. ''We took the script over to his house and said, 'Call us when you're done reading it,''' remembers Eric Watson, Aronofsky's longtime friend and collaborator. ''We were driving back and Darren's phone rings. Brad's 40 pages in and he's crying. He's like, 'I'm in.' We started jumping up and down inside the car, because at that point we knew we were making a movie.''

The duo rang up Lorenzo di Bonaventura, the then president of worldwide production at Warner Bros., who had expressed an interest in the project, and gleefully announced that their art film had a big, fat star. Scouting trips to Central America followed. A shoot in Australia was arranged, and cast and crew were hired. Seemingly endless script meetings to satisfy the story needs of Pitt and the studio were held. Cate Blanchett signed on to play the female lead in a pay-or-play deal worth millions, and Burstyn took a role written just for her. As Watson devised a budget that accounted for every possible expense — some of them wholly fanciful — the potential costs shot past $70 million. ''We called it the Chinese menu theory. We had a menu of everything [that you could spend money on] and I'd eventually get to say, 'Okay, I want that, that, that, and that,''' remembers Aronofsky, whose biggest budget had been Requiem's paltry $5 million. ''It was ridiculous. Money that would never, ever get spent.''

It was an unorthodox way of doing business — and it was also a colossal mistake. When the suits in Burbank got a look at the ''Chinese menu'' budget in June 2002, Aronofsky and Watson were ordered back to L.A., the crew was fired, and the studio held a stone-faced meeting with the filmmakers where it told them that unless a cofinancier could be found, Warner was turning off The Fountain. (According to a studio source, the filmmakers were surprisingly stubborn about cutting items from their ''Chinese menu.'') Worse, Pitt — without whom there never would have been a green light in the first place — was starting to waver, worried that he'd wasted the better part of a year developing a movie that would never get made. ''We finally went to Brad and [said], 'Do you want to do this or not?''' remembers Watson. ''He said, 'I want to do this. I commit to doing this. Let's figure out how to do it.'''

So Watson set to work begging for money from independent production companies. He still had a pass for the Warner Bros. lot and a key to The Fountain's now-vacant visual-effects office. Every day, he'd slink into the office and start dialing for dollars, banking on the Warner Bros. phone prefix to lend his pleas an official air. As Watson's calls became increasingly desperate, Aronofsky spent his days working on the script and reassuring his star. Finally, in March 2004, Regency Enterprises, a company with a reputation for cofinancing projects with high price tags — they did Daredevil and Mr. & Mrs. Smith — announced that they were picking up half the budget. It wasn't long before construction began down in Australia.

Watson was in an Australian petting zoo with his girlfriend when his phone rang. It was August 2002 and The Fountain was set to start shooting in weeks. CAA was on the line: Pitt was out. At the time, no substantial reason was given. He was just...out. (In a statement released to EW, Pitt says, ''Darren and I worked together for a year plus, but as the start date loomed and with the budget at $60 million, it was my belief there still remained many questions that we had not yet answered and we simply were not ready. It was my realization I would have to step in front of the freight train and take the hit, understanding my financial responsibilities to Warner Brothers and the risk of my friendship with Darren, whom by this time I'd grown to love and respect. Thus the end of my time on The Fountain.'')

A scramble ensued. The studio prepared to pull the plug for good, telling Aronofsky that unless he and Watson found a star to replace Pitt, the movie was done. The duo came up with three names: Mel Gibson, Russell Crowe, and George Clooney. ''Only one was available,'' remembers Watson. ''Crowe.''

The script was overnighted to the Master and Commander set. Crowe read it the next day. The actor was interested, but after a long conversation with Aronofsky he passed, saying he was spent from the demanding Peter Weir shoot. And with that, the movie died. Cate Blanchett was cut a check and sent home. The Australian crew was fired for a second time. Word spread that The Fountain was a financial debacle — it had, in fact, lost upwards of $18 million — and soon the Mayan temple that had sprung up on the Gold Coast of Australia was razed. Watson and Aronofsky watched the demolition, heartbroken and stunned.

It was about then that Darren Aronofsky had something close to a nervous breakdown. He got home from Australia, packed a bag, went to China, and got lost. ''I don't remember how long he was gone,'' says Weisz, his companion since 2001. ''Weeks. He was just gone.''

When Aronofsky got back, he was depressed and withdrawn. Weisz was shooting a movie in New Orleans, and he went to live in her rented mansion, hanging out on the veranda in his underwear. Pitt called one day and asked him what he was going to do next. (The two, remarkably, have remained friends.) Out of spite, Aronofsky told him he was doing The Fountain. ''I was just, like, giving him guilt or something,'' says the director, with a trace of shame. It was the first time he'd seriously considered the idea that the movie wasn't dead.

A year passed. Aronofsky and Weisz were back in New York, reconnecting with the city. As the months ticked by, people in the industry started to wonder what Aronofsky and Watson were up to. Finally, in late summer 2004, Watson's impatience boiled over. ''We'd spent three years not making a movie. I just said, 'What are we going to do?''' says Watson. ''He said, 'I want to make The Fountain.'''

Then one night, Aronofsky awoke and wandered into his home office. On the bookshelf above his desk were all the research materials for the original script — books like Bernal Díaz del Castillo's The Conquest of New Spain and Eduardo Galeano's Genesis trilogy. He stared at them for a while and then started to write. Over two weeks later, he handed in a new draft of The Fountain, which had been reconceived as a $35 million indie. Warner Bros. execs were flabbergasted. ''I had no expectation that this would go again,'' says Warner Bros. production president Jeff Robinov. ''None at all.''

And so it was that a film about the search for life everlasting found life again. Hugh Jackman was approached after Aronofsky met him at a performance of The Boy From Oz on Broadway. ''I said, 'I heard about what happened with The Fountain. I'd love to read it,''' remembers Jackman. And the leading lady proved a snap to find: Aronofsky had his first child with her, that boy named Henry, earlier this year.

The shoot was an uneventful 61 days up in Montreal. And when it was over, for all the moxie it took to get The Fountain made, Cannes passed on the film. So did the New York Film Festival. Its premiere at Venice was reportedly met with a mix of cheers and lusty boos. It's obvious to everyone today — including Watson, Aronofsky, and Weisz — that The Fountain simply may not connect with most moviegoers. This nags at Aronofsky. You can see it as he discusses the screenings, the fans who love the film, and his struggle to reconcile the critical reception with that of his first two movies. The question seems simple: Was it worth the blood it took to make this movie? Was it worth interrupting one of the most promising careers in Hollywood?

Aronofsky pauses to think about this and his mind drifts back to the first day of shooting — a moment that should glow with triumph. ''I always do the circle, where everyone holds hands — the grips love that part,'' Aronofsky says with a laugh. He pauses and his eyes darken. ''It was emotional. It was very emotional.''

[modage]

saw aronofsky at speak and answer questions for 1 1/2 hours at the Apple Store tonite.  it was a lot of fun.  some tidbits...

- aronofsky said though he hadnt thought of it before, recently he realized the film is basically a fairy tale.  the moderator pointed out that the center of the film was a melodrama but not in a bad way and aronofsky agreed.

- aronofsky said (somewhat jokingly) the greatest invention of the 20th century is the closeup.  because while you talk to people you rarely look them straight in the eyes without getting self conscious but on film to be able to look and see just what paul newman is thinking is amazing.  and also that 95% of people who see the film will watch it on a TV or an ipod, so better get close.

- he also mentioned that he wanted to stay away from the visual style he had become known for in Pi and Requiem with the POV, editing style etc. and conciously moved in a different direction with this film.  he said it was weird for him to even compare his 3 films in regards to which one is their favorite.  but mentioned if you loved Requiem this film may not be for you.

- said he was a huge fan of sci-fi, and between himself and his close collaborators had probably seen, read every major sci-fi piece of entertainment.  and that he tried to stay away from certain cliches of the genre like the spaceship looking like a big piece of metal etc. and make something that hadnt really been seen before.  he also liked the idea of like a good sci-fi novel you read the first 80 pages or so without really having any idea whats going on, so the first 20 minutes of the film are really staged that way on purpose before you start to get a handle on whats happening.

- when asked about Batman, he said he never had much of an interest in superhero comics and basically took an interest in the project to try to get WB to make The Fountain.

- said there is NO CGI in the film.  everything was filmed. 

- WB had again sent along a few clips from The Fountain but they were short and devoid of context.  i'm really glad i had already seen the film beforehand.

- he also REALLY REALLY wanted people to go see this movie.  he said its a good date movie, its PG-13 so you can bring your family, and they really dont make movies like this very often and he hopes people will go see it.  and i hope that by some miracle they do.

- got my Requiem For A Dream DVD signed = me   

[picolas]

if you loved Requiem this film may not be for you.

like people who love requiem may only be able to love drug movies with the same structure and lots of pov shots and quick cuts. that's just a dumb thing to say/crap justification for making a bad movie.

edit: actually i guess it's true. in other less intentional words, if you love good movies you may not love movies that aren't good.

[Pubrick]

if you loved Requiem this film may not be for you.

i took it to mean that he knows requiem is a movie assholes love, and he doesn't think the fountain is bad so he is telling himself that the bad reviews are coming from assholes.

[picolas]

if you loved Requiem this film may not be for you.

i took it to mean that he knows requiem is a movie assholes love, and he doesn't think the fountain is bad so he is telling himself that the bad reviews are coming from assholes.

possibly. in that case i'd say it's wrong to dismiss the reviewer because they're an asshole/loved another movie for weird reasons rather than because of why they don't like the movie in question. "i intended it" is not a defense for a bad structure/story/characters.

[modage]

if you loved Requiem this film may not be for you.

like people who love requiem may only be able to love drug movies with the same structure and lots of pov shots and quick cuts. that's just a dumb thing to say/crap justification for making a bad movie.

edit: actually i guess it's true. in other less intentional words, if you love good movies you may not love movies that aren't good.

i think he meant it to say that people who liked requiem because it was a dark drug movie with fast cutting etc. will not neccesarily be the same crowd to fall for The Fountain, which is a love story and a very different sort of film.  he was talking more about fans than critics.  it was my fault in the translation.

[MacGuffin]

Life And Art Collided In Fountain
Source: Sci-Fi Wire

Darren Aronofsky, writer/director of the upcoming SF epic The Fountain, was reluctant to cast his real-life fiancee, Oscar winner Rachel Weisz, in the starring role, until co-star Hugh Jackman suggested it. "When we first started dating, me and Rachel, I was like, 'Look, you know, if we date, we can't ever work together,'" Aronofsky said in an interview in Beverly Hills, Calif., last week. "Because I felt crossing that line between professionalism and your personal life was not professional [laughs]. But Hugh kept pushing for a meeting, because we had a list of women, and he was really curious about working with Rachel, because they're both stage actors and he really respected her work. So, finally, I gave in, and I said, 'OK, just meet.' And when they connected, it was one of those things that, as a director, you're always looking for when you see two actors that link. And they just held on to each other."

Weisz plays Isabel, the ailing wife of Jackman's Tom, a neuroscientist in the present day. Jackman also plays different versions of himself 500 years in the past and 500 years in the future, all of whom are striving for the secret of immortal life.

Aronofsky said that he tried to draw a line between personal and professional life while working with Weisz on The Fountain (the two also recently celebrated the birth of a son). "I think it worked out fine," he said. "We worked really hard. We had a tremendous amount of communication beforehand. We didn't live together during the shoot [in Montreal]. ... So we'd see each other on the weekends, which meant that Saturday we'd have a big fight, and Sunday we would make up before we start shooting on Monday. It was tough, you know, because, ... you know the person in a personal way, and then suddenly you're directing them, and it's strange."

For her part, Weisz said that she was unconcerned about the hazards of a couple's working together on a movie. "I'm a very unrealistic person; that's why I'm an actor," Weisz said with a smile. "So I'm just like involved in make-believe all the time. ... I was like, 'Ahh, he's a realist. He sort of ... thinks ahead, and he thinks, "Well, this could happen. That could happen."' I'm not. The future tends to kind of, like, bang me in the face as I come up to it. Which I'm trying to kind of get over. So I [was] just like, 'Nah, it's going to be fine.'"

[Ghostboy]

I finally saw this, after years of waiting and waiting and hoping and waiting, and rather than put the final results of all that time spent into a few paragraphs, I'm just going to wait to see the movie again next week. For the time being, I'll say that....the streak continues! I think I agree with everything modage said about the film.

I really want to get ahold of the original draft now. I just went back and read Moriarty's old review of it at AICN, and it sounds fascinatingly different...

[modage]

I really want to get ahold of the original draft now. I just went back and read Moriarty's old review of it at AICN, and it sounds fascinatingly different...

yes i want to see it again next week too.  and also was interested to see what the differences were in the original draft and the finished film.  i was going to ask aronofsky at the Q&A but remembered that the original script was made into that graphic novel so i definitely want pick that up.