What a terrible waste of film

Rating: 1/10 (30 November 2000)

Requiem for a Dream is a movie that has its heart in the right place, but not much else. Much has been made of the technical aspects of this film. And some of the technique does impress. The rampant use of split screen very effectively, quickly, and cleverly underscores the selfishness of characters. They are literally separated from one another within the film frame. The repetition of certain elements--the rapid fire images that accompany every hit of heroin taken by the characters--is cool. Less cool are these crazy point of view shots, lots of odd angles. Why are they there? They do not enhance the film in any way. They are as pretentious and unnecessary as any technical thing in film this year.
The other thing about this movie is that I didn't care about most of it. Jared Leto Marlon Wayans and the girlfriend--sorry, can't remember her name--go through all these horrible things. And we're supposed to sympathize, feel their pain. Oh, look what drugs have done to those poor creatures. But look: these people are junkies and dealers, spoiled brats doing their own thing and paying the price. As callous as it may seem to say this, they deserve what they get. But look, here's the other thing. Aronofsky is so heavy handed and obvious about one fact--that these characters WILL BE PUNISHED--that it becomes almost laughable. I mean, these are cliches that even most hacks would steer clear of. Simplistic, naive, are the words I would use to describe Mr. Aronofsky's take on this whole thing.
He goes so far over the top--and he does this in the other main storyline, involving Ellen Burstyn--that he undercuts the potential power of his own piece. It becomes a movie of bombast, a trite piece of audience manipulation. Look at what drugs have done to this person and that person. I love that Aronofsky tried to make a really powerful anti-drug movie. But I hate how incredibly he failed.