An interesting and thought-provoking dichotomy of genius and mania.

Rating: 10/10 (27 March 1999)

I found Pi to be excellent. Some may criticize the science behind the premise of the movie, as well as its execution. Although the pace and timbre of the movie is frenetic, and at times disjointed, one might argue that this most closely mirrors the mood of the main character and is therefore intentional (and not just careless editing/cinematography, and so on).
The most salient concepts of the movie are based in scientific fact. There does indeed exist a subset of numbers that manifests itself in the design of living organisms throughout the phylogenetic map. From the nautilus shell to the honeycombs in beehives; from probability functions of electron orbitals to the structure and function of nucleic acids, a pattern of physical parameters converge and share a common thread- mainly that such designs might be explained in terms of their common mathematical attributes.

Maximillian Cohen is an obviously gifted man- an brilliant but eccentric mathematical genius whose intellect is rivaled only by the pervasiveness of his 'demons' (mainly his obsessive, unabashed desire to find a unifying theory grounded in the pure logic of numbers). At the same time, he is plagued by serious physical and emotional symptoms. This theme is neither novel nor purely fictional; many examples come to mind with even a cursory review of history (Van Gogh, Dostoyevsky, Newton, Galois, and the like). All these individuals were considered great intellects while at the same time were beleaguered by clusters of physical and psychological problems, hence the schism of intellect and affect.

Some criticize the film for its portrayal of Max's physiological symptoms, but from a medical perspective, not only are these symptoms accurate (delusions and hallucinations indicative of temporal lobe epilepsy, also migraines and epistaxis indicative of excessive cerebral vasodilation), but they also serve to explain the reasons for the director's choice of striking (and, at times, disturbing) visual effects. This mitigates the choice of camera angles and shots and serves as a window to Max's consciousness.
Mathematicians might not be satisfied with the paucity of details relevant to the mechanics of the thesis (calculus, chaos mathematics, analytical geometry, and set theory), and non-mathematicians unfamiliar with the concepts behind the thesis might argue that the intent is to glamorize the subject by taking liberties with the science of mathematics. However, in my own opinion, the film strikes a balance that allows both groups to catch a glimpse of the man behind the math, as well as the depth of his afflictions.
While dark and brooding, the cinematography perfectly complements Max's descent into madness. With deeper understanding of a unifying theory of nature comes the heightened realization that such information is in great demand, and those wishing to possess this information are obviously willing to do whatever it takes to get it. The result is a dizzying, and at times, terrifying glimpse into the world of chaos.
I think that the film is astounding. Rarely have I seen such an intriguing, intelligent attempt at making the science of mathematics interesting. You may love it, like I did, or you may hate it. But there's one conclusion that nearly everyone will share: it will make you THINK.