Incredibly misinterpreted and misunderstood

Rating: Null/10 (16 April 2007)

(Originally posted on 29 March 2002, accidentally deleted on 16 April 2007 and re-added the same day)
Regrettably, I have not had the time to read all the user comments, but those I have read have disappointed me. People are analysing this film using their expectations of what they wanted to be shown. For example: those who consider it a good example of an art film praise its cinematography, and those who consider it to be auteur film praise its originality. Further still, those who wanted to see a technical masterpiece criticise its inaccuracies, and those who wanted a Hollywood flick were sorely disappointed.
I do not consider myself to be able to understand the film in any higher terms than those people who have already left comments; I also see everything that has been mentioned. Yes, the cinematography is simply beautiful to some people, not enough for others. Yes, there are many technical errors, inconsistencies and faults. BUT, many people are just not seeing what Aranofsky was probably trying to hint at.
This film is not a message, it is not meant to make you understand a specific thing, you are not meant to come away thinking "well, the moral of that is...". There are no morals; it is not a comment about paranoia, nor a comment about mathematics, nor a comment about nature, nor a comment about the futility of looking for the meaning of life.
What this film does is makes you think. You are not meant to draw any conclusions from it.
Tell me: how does each of you interpret the scene where Max is standing in a white screen, near the end? Most people have neglected to mention the importance of the Jewish contribution to the film. The Jews were interested in finding the true name of God. If you listen to what Rabi Cohen says to Max, you find out that in their belief, there was once one person who had to carry out a certain ritual in a certain place, and the key to performing that ritual correctly was to utter the true name of God. Max knows that name (the 216 digit number). Is this scene with Max in a white screen, his standing before God? Don't answer! You're just meant to consider the possibilities that the film presents. I wrote this one down because as far as I've read, nobody's considered it yet.
Also, Max does not commit suicide in the end - he lobotomises himself. If you notice, he maps his skull and identifies the part of his brain which is giving him the headaches. I don't know much about the science of this, but I'm told that he understands by this point that the reason the headaches give him paranoid delusions is because this part of his brain is damaged. He drills this part to cease the headaches, thus disabling his genius ability, but stopping the headaches.
In light of this lobotomy, was it ALL a paranoid delusion? Don't answer! Consider.
Also, a bit of technical misunderstanding to clear up: the film is called Pi because, as you probably know, Pi is an infinite number. As it is stated in the film (in reference to the game they play 'Go'), when something is infinite, the possibilities become smaller and smaller, and you will eventually be able to find patterns. The point is (and the reason that the inclusion of his old friend Saul is vital to the plot - if you can call it plot) is that Saul was investigating Pi. The 'special' 216 number occurs in Pi somewhere - it HAS to. Saul was investigating Pi, Max was investigating numerical patterns. Both directions led them to the same number. It is all interlinked. Thus you might give the reason for the title of the film as "The film is called Pi because Pi contains a number which the film considers as possibly the secret to the true name of God, or the way to successfully predict the stock market, or the meaning of life". Could that statement get any more ambiguous? Don't answer! Consider.
I would be interested to hear anybody's follow-up comments to my views here.