The Fountain on blu: in retrospect - Page 4 - Blu-ray Forum

aramis109 · 07-30-2009, 08:00 PM

Passed up this thread as I've owned "The Fountain" for a long time and thought it was just about the technical merits (or the unfortunate lack thereof). On topic, yeah the PQ is a bit soft. I believe this is due to an early release that's HD-DVD hamstrung and also the manner in which things are shot- with a soft, diffuse quality.

I like the "immortal Tom" concept of the movie. It's not one that I pulled out- mine more closely matches the very well-written one on Ebert's site that Squid pointed out. But I like the completeness and idea of love being eternal. There's absolutely nothing wrong with having different interpretations of the film. Until Arnovsky comes out and says, "this is what it is- here's the answer to The Fountain", I don't think it's fair to criticize someone else's interpretation.

That said... I'm now very curious to read the 20+ critique of the film. Are we going to get to see it or not?

Squall835 · 07-31-2009, 06:01 PM

So where's that guy and his 20 page analysis?

SquidPuppet · 07-31-2009, 06:28 PM

Lost interest I suspect.

Old Bones · 07-31-2009, 06:33 PM

PQ & AQ aside , this movie was dumb mess that I regretted spending $6 to rent

nolook · 07-31-2009, 08:11 PM

love the director but this one is his weakest

its strange he considers this his best work (heard him say it on howard stern)

jhiggy23 · 07-31-2009, 08:51 PM

haha sorry guys, I didn't even realize anyone had responded to what I posted. What I meant by saying that the film is virtually impossible to truly enjoy without understanding the film is that while one can easily enjoy the technical merits of the film and the ambition of Aronofsky, I can easily see why people would dismiss the film as convoluted and pretentious. That is not to say that a film cannot be enjoyed without understanding it. If that was the case, movies like Apocalypse Now and 2001 would not have as great of a following as they do. What I'm getting at is that people like these movies based upon their own interpretations of them, because they are meant to be multi-layered and open for interpretation. The same is true of The Fountain. Part of the reason why the film divided critics and viewers alike is because of its marketing campaign. Unfortunately, Aronofsky had nothing to do with the marketing of the film, and they decided to market it as a love story that takes place in three different time periods over 1000 years. I think even the most absent minded viewer would realize this was not the case.

So, what I meant was that while this film is open to interpretation (for which people like the film based upon a multitude of theories--even the three time period love story), I think that when so many little things so clearly lead to one explanation, the film can be even more greatly enjoyed and appreciated. The reason for this is that a greater appreciation for the depth, vision, and ambition of Aronofsky can be obtained.

Now, as for my interpretation. I obviously am not going to post the entire essay, and I may or may not send it to people who ask for it because it is part of a book I am writing about philosophy and nature in film. One poster asked me to summarize my interpretation in as short if a manner as I can. Obviously, the problem in doing so is that the abundance of evidence I have to support the theory will not be provided. So, I will do my best in just a few short sentences and my hope is that those who are interested will watch the film from this perspective and see many of the things that I saw during the months I studied it.

SquidPuppet · 07-31-2009, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

haha sorry guys, I didn't even realize anyone had responded to what I posted. What I meant by saying that the film is virtually impossible to truly enjoy without understanding the film is that while one can easily enjoy the technical merits of the film and the ambition of Aronofsky, I can easily see why people would dismiss the film as convoluted and pretentious. That is not to say that a film cannot be enjoyed without understanding it. If that was the case, movies like Apocalypse Now and 2001 would not have as great of a following as they do. What I'm getting at is that people like these movies based upon their own interpretations of them, because they are meant to be multi-layered and open for interpretation. The same is true of The Fountain. Part of the reason why the film divided critics and viewers alike is because of its marketing campaign. Unfortunately, Aronofsky had nothing to do with the marketing of the film, and they decided to market it as a love story that takes place in three different time periods over 1000 years. I think even the most absent minded viewer would realize this was not the case.

So, what I meant was that while this film is open to interpretation (for which people like the film based upon a multitude of theories--even the three time period love story), I think that when so many little things so clearly lead to one explanation, the film can be even more greatly enjoyed and appreciated. The reason for this is that a greater appreciation for the depth, vision, and ambition of Aronofsky can be obtained.

Now, as for my interpretation. I obviously am not going to post the entire essay, and I may or may not send it to people who ask for it because it is part of a book I am writing about philosophy and nature in film. One poster asked me to summarize my interpretation in as short if a manner as I can. Obviously, the problem in doing so is that the abundance of evidence I have to support the theory will not be provided. So, I will do my best in just a few short sentences and my hope is that those who are interested will watch the film from this perspective and see many of the things that I saw during the months I studied it.

Thanks. May I have those few sentences please? Very interested. Either here, or email, or via PM.

jhiggy23 · 07-31-2009, 09:22 PM

SPOILERS

Interpretation: I have no problem with the essay written to Ebert regarding the conquistador and present day storylines. It's readily apparent that the conquistator storyline was written by Izzi up until the little entryway where Tomas meets the Mayan priest. When Izzi dies, Tommy finishes the story for her, with Tomas drinking the sap and being overtaken by flowers, etc. Yes, I know that people will say that he continued the story and that the future timeline is really the end of the book. I understand that the evidence to support this notion includes Izzi saying on the snowy rooftop that the story "ends there" and that Tommy's motivation in writing that as an ending would be him living forever with Izzi in Xibalba. I also know that I probably just convinced many people that my following argument is wrong because of these two facts, but let me continue.

What is the predominant theme of the movie? The main theme of the movie is that we cannot stop death from occurring. Because of this, we must live every moment to the fullest and really do our best to appreciate the time we have. When Izzi was sick, all Tommy did was try to find a cure to prevent her from dying (an example would be when he left bed in the middle of the nite). In doing so, he missed out on the few moments he had left with Izzi while she was alive (remember also that he found some sort of cure right when she died). So, before she dies she asks him to finish the story for her. What was that story about? The conquistador story was meant to be a direct representation of Tommy in real life. The Inquisator (death) was closing in on Queen Isabella but Tommy leaves her to go search for a way to prolong her life (Tree of Life). This is exactly what happened in real life. That being the case, it is likely that Tommy would realize his fault and atone for it by killing off the greedy Tomas (who tried to live forever by drinking the sap) at the end of the book, thus showing that no one can really live forever and that we have to enjoy the time we have with the people we love. A further example of this theme is when Tommy puts the seed near the grave of Izzi. In doing so, he knows that the seed will turn into a tree and in that it will hypothetically live forever, like the Tree of Life. Humans, however, will not.

Now, the astronaut/future timeline. This would take way too much space to really get into, but what I found it to be was Tommy's mind/feelings. At a glance, I'm sure that seems ridiculous and confusing. However, do not judge it until you watch the film from that perspective. Evidence: when Izzi dies the scene cuts to the future with the tree dying (the whole time the tree represented Izzi, which was pretty easy to see). When Tommy tattoos his finger it cuts to the future with all the tattoos on his arms and him saying "all these years, etc." This is meant to show all the times that he missed out on being with his wife, instead trying to find ways to prevent her from dying. The ending when the bubble reaches Xibalba is an epiphany for him, and the scene cuts to him at the grave with the aforementioned seed. This is his realization that it is the time we have with people that matters, and that we should enjoy life instead of trying to prolong it. Another example would be when he is practicing tai chi. This scene comes at a time when he is at peace at work. Another would be when he is eating little pieces from the tree (Izzi), which is representative of Izzi dying a little bit each day and his contributing to it (not showing her love by being there with her). There are many more examples throughout the film.

To combat the notion that it is really the ending that he wrote for Izzi's story, I give you the following: let's assume it really is the ending. That would mean that Tomas did not really die and that the story went right to him in the future with the bubble on the way to Xibalba. What would the point of this be? Remember that Tommy finished the book after Izzi died. At this time he surely realized that he should have spent time with her instead of finding ways for her to stay alive. By having the story end with him finding a way to live forever and make it to Xibalba, it would show that Tommy really learned nothing from Izzi's death and that there is no moral, theme, or redemption in the film. To me, that would not make sense. Now, the small things: why would the future Tommy have tattoos if the story went directly from the conquistador to the astronaut (remember that the present day story was real, not part of the story, as evidenced by Izzi asking him to finish ONLY the last chapter)? Why would present day Izzi appear to future Tommy a few times, including with the hospital bed (which corresponds to the time that Tommy was with her at the hospital)? Etc. Thus, thematically it would not make sense, and the evidence does not support it.

There is obvious a lot more to my analysis, but I think what I provided is enough to prove my theory. At the very least, I think that watching the movie through this lens can prove just how beautiful of a film it is.

In conclusion:

Conquistador: Izzi's story up until meeting with Mayan priest. Tommy continuing and ending story with Tomas dying after drinking the sap.

Present Day: Real life storyline

Future/Astronaut: Tommy's mind/feelings

jhiggy23 · 07-31-2009, 09:25 PM

Squid: I greatly appreciate and respect your admiration for this film; it is evident from your posts. To me, this is really what film is all about. I think there is no greater form of entertainment, as it encompasses writing, art, acting, directing, lighting, etc. I love reading posts and talking to people that are not only passionate about a particular film, but about film in general. Thank you again for your interest Squid, and all can hope for is that you will continue to love this film as much as myself, regardless of what interpretation or theory you adhere to.

Josh

jhiggy23 · 07-31-2009, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monkey

Or is that all part of the time travel, they like it in the future...based on the passed reading of your 20+ page

report?

hahaha you got me good on that one, touche my friend

jhiggy23 · 07-31-2009, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vega2K

I've always wanted to hear the commentary. Do you know what the easiest way to do do this is? Is there a file I can download?

Thanks.

I have the file on my other computer. It is a great commentary. If I can find it I will send it to you.

vega2K · 07-31-2009, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

I have the file on my other computer. It is a great commentary. If I can find it I will send it to you.

Thanks.

Rhoq · 07-31-2009, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam_ME

the review claimed was that the HD-DVD has a 1.5 Mbps bitrate while the Blu-ray is 640 kbps.

This is true and was typical for many of the Warner releases. The 1.5Mbps is DD+, but the Blu-ray DD5.1 still has a higher bitrate at 640kbps than standard DVD. I doubt the differences in audio between the HD DVD and Blu-ray are noticeable. I wouldn't worry about it.

jhiggy23 · 07-31-2009, 10:11 PM

By the way, Vega, what you did with the ceiling of your room is absolutely incredible...I showed it to several of my friends the other day and they thought the same!

Lepidopterous · 07-31-2009, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Interpretation: ...

You have a very valid inductive argument on your hands. I will watch it tonight through your lens and provide feedback

Let me know about the book you are publishing. I'm interested as you have a very clear and efficient way of presenting arguments.

jhiggy23 · 07-31-2009, 10:31 PM

DJ, thank you for your comment. I really look forward to your feedback regarding the interpretation. Feel free to message me or post it on here, whatever works for you. Someone mentioned this being my magnum opus, but I assure you it is not! I just love movies, especially this one. My book was originally meant to be a series of published essays about the films of Terrence Malick (Badlands, Days of Heaven, The Thin Red Line, and The New World), but I've since decided to extend it to other films. The four films of Malick are my true passion and trust me, I have a harder time defending The New World as a great film than I do The Fountain!

surfdude12 · 07-31-2009, 10:40 PM

PQ is good, slightly above average. i'd give it a B- or 3.5/5
the DD 5.1 wasn't as bad as i thought it would be. it was tolerable.

movie was phenomenal. like other people on here, i didn't fully understand it (and still dont) after watching it all the way thru. i just knew it was something special. after reading the blogs (similar interpretation to the one on eberts site) and watching it the second time, 90% of the story fit like a glove and i was blown away.

this movie is perfect. a true gem.

SquidPuppet · 08-01-2009, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

SPOILERS

Interpretation: I have no problem with the...........

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

and all can hope for is that you will continue to love this film as much as myself, regardless of what interpretation or theory you adhere to.

Josh

Thank you.

Well it's obvious what I need to do tonight.

This ought to be a fun "workout". Regardless of the outcome, this will be a fun rewatch. Lots to chew on.

Thanks again.

vega2K · 08-02-2009, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

By the way, Vega, what you did with the ceiling of your room is absolutely incredible...I showed it to several of my friends the other day and they thought the same!

Appreciate your compliments - Thank you.

McGarnigal · 08-02-2009, 12:34 AM

Soooo glad he didn't get to revamp Batman!!!

07-31-2009, 08:11 PM	#65
nolook Senior Member Member since:Jan 2009 Location:Canada Blu-ray collection:32	love the director but this one is his weakest its strange he considers this his best work (heard him say it on howard stern) Last edited by nolook; 08-01-2009 at 01:59 AM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Your biggest Blu-ray related disappointment, in retrospect?	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	JJ	69	03-06-2008 07:12 AM
In retrospect...	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	beavis667	15	01-05-2008 08:55 AM
The Fountain Blu-ray Disc	Newbie Discussion	samlane86	3	12-22-2007 05:55 PM
The Fountain Blu-ray disc	Blu-ray Movies - North America	Steveiz	19	11-15-2007 01:13 PM
The Fountain on Blu-Ray disc	Blu-ray Movies - North America	Steveiz	0	05-03-2007 06:02 PM

07-30-2009, 08:00 PM	#61
aramis109 Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Mar 2008 Location:Milwaukee, WI Home Theater Gallery:10 4K collection:4 Blu-ray collection:360 Trading Score:18	Passed up this thread as I've owned "The Fountain" for a long time and thought it was just about the technical merits (or the unfortunate lack thereof). On topic, yeah the PQ is a bit soft. I believe this is due to an early release that's HD-DVD hamstrung and also the manner in which things are shot- with a soft, diffuse quality. I like the "immortal Tom" concept of the movie. It's not one that I pulled out- mine more closely matches the very well-written one on Ebert's site that Squid pointed out. But I like the completeness and idea of love being eternal. There's absolutely nothing wrong with having different interpretations of the film. Until Arnovsky comes out and says, "this is what it is- here's the answer to The Fountain", I don't think it's fair to criticize someone else's interpretation. That said... I'm now very curious to read the 20+ critique of the film. Are we going to get to see it or not?

07-31-2009, 06:01 PM	#62
Squall835 Senior Member Member since:Apr 2009 Location:Madison, WI 4K collection:2 Blu-ray collection:128 Digital collection:165 Trading Score:77	So where's that guy and his 20 page analysis?

07-31-2009, 06:28 PM	#63
SquidPuppet Blu-ray Duke Top contributor Member since:Dec 2007 Location:Club Loop Blu-ray collection:277 Blu-ray reviews:27	Lost interest I suspect.

07-31-2009, 06:33 PM	#64
Old Bones Power Member Member since:Jun 2008 Location:Port Coquitlam B.C. Canada Blu-ray reviews:8 Trading Score:1	PQ & AQ aside , this movie was dumb mess that I regretted spending $6 to rent

07-31-2009, 08:51 PM	#66
jhiggy23 Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Jul 2009 Location:Club Loop 4K collection:73 Blu-ray collection:630 Blu-ray reviews:6 Trading Score:13	haha sorry guys, I didn't even realize anyone had responded to what I posted. What I meant by saying that the film is virtually impossible to truly enjoy without understanding the film is that while one can easily enjoy the technical merits of the film and the ambition of Aronofsky, I can easily see why people would dismiss the film as convoluted and pretentious. That is not to say that a film cannot be enjoyed without understanding it. If that was the case, movies like Apocalypse Now and 2001 would not have as great of a following as they do. What I'm getting at is that people like these movies based upon their own interpretations of them, because they are meant to be multi-layered and open for interpretation. The same is true of The Fountain. Part of the reason why the film divided critics and viewers alike is because of its marketing campaign. Unfortunately, Aronofsky had nothing to do with the marketing of the film, and they decided to market it as a love story that takes place in three different time periods over 1000 years. I think even the most absent minded viewer would realize this was not the case. So, what I meant was that while this film is open to interpretation (for which people like the film based upon a multitude of theories--even the three time period love story), I think that when so many little things so clearly lead to one explanation, the film can be even more greatly enjoyed and appreciated. The reason for this is that a greater appreciation for the depth, vision, and ambition of Aronofsky can be obtained. Now, as for my interpretation. I obviously am not going to post the entire essay, and I may or may not send it to people who ask for it because it is part of a book I am writing about philosophy and nature in film. One poster asked me to summarize my interpretation in as short if a manner as I can. Obviously, the problem in doing so is that the abundance of evidence I have to support the theory will not be provided. So, I will do my best in just a few short sentences and my hope is that those who are interested will watch the film from this perspective and see many of the things that I saw during the months I studied it.

07-31-2009, 09:22 PM	#68
jhiggy23 Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Jul 2009 Location:Club Loop 4K collection:73 Blu-ray collection:630 Blu-ray reviews:6 Trading Score:13	SPOILERS Interpretation: I have no problem with the essay written to Ebert regarding the conquistador and present day storylines. It's readily apparent that the conquistator storyline was written by Izzi up until the little entryway where Tomas meets the Mayan priest. When Izzi dies, Tommy finishes the story for her, with Tomas drinking the sap and being overtaken by flowers, etc. Yes, I know that people will say that he continued the story and that the future timeline is really the end of the book. I understand that the evidence to support this notion includes Izzi saying on the snowy rooftop that the story "ends there" and that Tommy's motivation in writing that as an ending would be him living forever with Izzi in Xibalba. I also know that I probably just convinced many people that my following argument is wrong because of these two facts, but let me continue. What is the predominant theme of the movie? The main theme of the movie is that we cannot stop death from occurring. Because of this, we must live every moment to the fullest and really do our best to appreciate the time we have. When Izzi was sick, all Tommy did was try to find a cure to prevent her from dying (an example would be when he left bed in the middle of the nite). In doing so, he missed out on the few moments he had left with Izzi while she was alive (remember also that he found some sort of cure right when she died). So, before she dies she asks him to finish the story for her. What was that story about? The conquistador story was meant to be a direct representation of Tommy in real life. The Inquisator (death) was closing in on Queen Isabella but Tommy leaves her to go search for a way to prolong her life (Tree of Life). This is exactly what happened in real life. That being the case, it is likely that Tommy would realize his fault and atone for it by killing off the greedy Tomas (who tried to live forever by drinking the sap) at the end of the book, thus showing that no one can really live forever and that we have to enjoy the time we have with the people we love. A further example of this theme is when Tommy puts the seed near the grave of Izzi. In doing so, he knows that the seed will turn into a tree and in that it will hypothetically live forever, like the Tree of Life. Humans, however, will not. Now, the astronaut/future timeline. This would take way too much space to really get into, but what I found it to be was Tommy's mind/feelings. At a glance, I'm sure that seems ridiculous and confusing. However, do not judge it until you watch the film from that perspective. Evidence: when Izzi dies the scene cuts to the future with the tree dying (the whole time the tree represented Izzi, which was pretty easy to see). When Tommy tattoos his finger it cuts to the future with all the tattoos on his arms and him saying "all these years, etc." This is meant to show all the times that he missed out on being with his wife, instead trying to find ways to prevent her from dying. The ending when the bubble reaches Xibalba is an epiphany for him, and the scene cuts to him at the grave with the aforementioned seed. This is his realization that it is the time we have with people that matters, and that we should enjoy life instead of trying to prolong it. Another example would be when he is practicing tai chi. This scene comes at a time when he is at peace at work. Another would be when he is eating little pieces from the tree (Izzi), which is representative of Izzi dying a little bit each day and his contributing to it (not showing her love by being there with her). There are many more examples throughout the film. To combat the notion that it is really the ending that he wrote for Izzi's story, I give you the following: let's assume it really is the ending. That would mean that Tomas did not really die and that the story went right to him in the future with the bubble on the way to Xibalba. What would the point of this be? Remember that Tommy finished the book after Izzi died. At this time he surely realized that he should have spent time with her instead of finding ways for her to stay alive. By having the story end with him finding a way to live forever and make it to Xibalba, it would show that Tommy really learned nothing from Izzi's death and that there is no moral, theme, or redemption in the film. To me, that would not make sense. Now, the small things: why would the future Tommy have tattoos if the story went directly from the conquistador to the astronaut (remember that the present day story was real, not part of the story, as evidenced by Izzi asking him to finish ONLY the last chapter)? Why would present day Izzi appear to future Tommy a few times, including with the hospital bed (which corresponds to the time that Tommy was with her at the hospital)? Etc. Thus, thematically it would not make sense, and the evidence does not support it. There is obvious a lot more to my analysis, but I think what I provided is enough to prove my theory. At the very least, I think that watching the movie through this lens can prove just how beautiful of a film it is. In conclusion: Conquistador: Izzi's story up until meeting with Mayan priest. Tommy continuing and ending story with Tomas dying after drinking the sap. Present Day: Real life storyline Future/Astronaut: Tommy's mind/feelings

07-31-2009, 09:25 PM	#69
jhiggy23 Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Jul 2009 Location:Club Loop 4K collection:73 Blu-ray collection:630 Blu-ray reviews:6 Trading Score:13	Squid: I greatly appreciate and respect your admiration for this film; it is evident from your posts. To me, this is really what film is all about. I think there is no greater form of entertainment, as it encompasses writing, art, acting, directing, lighting, etc. I love reading posts and talking to people that are not only passionate about a particular film, but about film in general. Thank you again for your interest Squid, and all can hope for is that you will continue to love this film as much as myself, regardless of what interpretation or theory you adhere to. Josh

07-31-2009, 10:11 PM	#74
jhiggy23 Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Jul 2009 Location:Club Loop 4K collection:73 Blu-ray collection:630 Blu-ray reviews:6 Trading Score:13	By the way, Vega, what you did with the ceiling of your room is absolutely incredible...I showed it to several of my friends the other day and they thought the same!

07-31-2009, 10:31 PM	#76
jhiggy23 Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Jul 2009 Location:Club Loop 4K collection:73 Blu-ray collection:630 Blu-ray reviews:6 Trading Score:13	DJ, thank you for your comment. I really look forward to your feedback regarding the interpretation. Feel free to message me or post it on here, whatever works for you. Someone mentioned this being my magnum opus, but I assure you it is not! I just love movies, especially this one. My book was originally meant to be a series of published essays about the films of Terrence Malick (Badlands, Days of Heaven, The Thin Red Line, and The New World), but I've since decided to extend it to other films. The four films of Malick are my true passion and trust me, I have a harder time defending The New World as a great film than I do The Fountain!

07-31-2009, 10:40 PM	#77
surfdude12 Blu-ray Knight Member since:Jul 2007 Location:Club Loop Blu-ray collection:343 Blu-ray reviews:112 Trading Score:1	PQ is good, slightly above average. i'd give it a B- or 3.5/5 the DD 5.1 wasn't as bad as i thought it would be. it was tolerable. movie was phenomenal. like other people on here, i didn't fully understand it (and still dont) after watching it all the way thru. i just knew it was something special. after reading the blogs (similar interpretation to the one on eberts site) and watching it the second time, 90% of the story fit like a glove and i was blown away. this movie is perfect. a true gem.

08-02-2009, 12:34 AM	#80
McGarnigal Blu-ray Guru Member since:Oct 2008 4K collection:149 Blu-ray collection:329 Blu-ray reviews: 1 Trading Score:10	Soooo glad he didn't get to revamp Batman!!!

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals