Requiem for a Dream

[Preston_79]

I don't think I've ever met someone who's seen this movie and said they didn't like it, or love it. They tell others that if they haven't seen it they should, it's so great.

My belief is that many, not all, so called fans of the movie are only so because of popular opinion. When my friends look through my movie collection and they see Requiem it's, oh this movie is awesome! Then I'm like, you want to watch it, and the answer is always no. My gut tells me they have no desire to watch the film again, and I don't blame them. It's often like an R rated after school special with a good soundtrack.

Seriously though, how can you recommend a movie, profess your love for it, but would probably pay money out of your wallet to not have to watch it again? So then why are you recommending it? I'm going to have to call out many supposed Requiem fans as posers.

[Roy Batty]

I own all of Aronofsky's films--Requiem of a Dream is easily my favorite--and I wouldn't consider myself a 'poser'. I enjoy watching the film when I'm in the mood to go on an emotional roller coaster. Otherwise, the film isn't really meant for a group of friends hanging out, eating some pizza and having a good time. However, I do understand what you mean when people call themselves fans of something but when offered the chance to watch it, they prefer not to as if a one time viewing is all they need to be considered a fan.

[Bourne101]

Originally Posted by Roy Batty

I own all of Aronofsky's films--Requiem of a Dream is easily my favorite--and I wouldn't consider myself a 'poser'. I enjoy watching the film when I'm in the mood to go on an emotional roller coaster. Otherwise, the film isn't really meant for a group of friends hanging out, eating some pizza and having a good time.

This. I watch it probably once or twice a year and while entertaining isn't exactly the right word for it, it's a very emotionally engaging film that is easy to watch even if it's not "easy to watch", if you catch my drift. It's extremely well-paced, emotional, and energetic. However, if you're getting together with your friends for a good time, something upbeat and fun will probably take preference over something like Requiem for a Dream (although watching it high is always an interesting experience).

For some people though, I can see the movie being too emotionally overwhelming to have the desire to watch it again. In that case, they may say that it is a great film that they would recommend, but it's not something they would re-watch like they would something like Pulp Fiction.

[Dirtyfrog]

Requiem for a Dream is a great film but it is so fucking depressing that no one should willingly want to re-watch it.

I bought the dvd after i saw the movie in theater and only really watched it once in like 10 years. This movie is so powerful that one viewing is enough.

Just watching the GMS - Juice video gives me shivers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKzPH-9G-7Q

[creekin111]

Rewatchability is not the only factor you go about measuring how much you like a film.

[Dirtyfrog]

Originally Posted by creekin111

Rewatchability is not the only factor you go about measuring how much you like a film.

i thought that was my point

[psycheoutsteve]

I pretty much agree with what's already been said. It's an excellent film, as are the rest of Aronofsky's films, but it's so emotionally draining that it doesn't really beg for a watch when you're hanging out with friends.

[Herald]

Don't people just like it for the ass-to-ass scene?

[creekin111]

Originally Posted by Dirtyfrog

i thought that was my point

Who me?

[Dirtyfrog]

i guess so .. because it's a reply to your post

[creekin111]

Oh ok mine was a reply to the OP.

[creekin111]

Schindler's List is my favorite film of the 90's but its far from my most watched film.

[jaw2929]

Originally Posted by Herald

Don't people just like it for the ass-to-ass scene?

So HAWT!

[echo_bravo]

the last 15 minutes of this film is flat out insane.

Love this film and I try to watch it at least once a year. Its one of my favorites from the 2000s and the best film(imo) of 2000 . That said, I wouldn't recommend this to an avg movie goer(way too hardcore). But to a serious film buff? Oh hell yes.

[Badbird]

Maybe I'm a bit weird, but I don't really think this movie is as dark and difficult to watch as everyone makes it out to be. I can easily look past the heavy subject matter and all I see are virtuoso acting performances all around. Ellen Burstyn got so fucking robbed on an Oscar for this.

[echo_bravo]

Originally Posted by Badbird

Ellen Burstyn got so fucking robbed on an Oscar for this.

Agreed. Who the hell won it that year anyways? Julia Roberts for Erin Brockovich? Such bullshit

[KillerKlown]

Amazing film. I recently upgraded my copy to Blu last month. It's a film that I can only watch around once a year, as its very depressing.

[Dirtyfrog]

Originally Posted by echo_bravo

Agreed. Who the hell won it that year anyways? Julia Roberts for Erin Brockovich? Such bullshit

true dat ! and yes i checked ... Juila Roberts did win.

The main problem i think was screentime ... while Julia is that Erin movie , Ellen is just another character in the bunch. She does nail the speed-induced paranoia like a champ. Would have won easily if nominated in a supporting role.