Are u kidding?

Rating: Null/10 (4 May 2004)

Is there really so much being said in this movie? Speed and Heroin are pretty dangerous - duh. And if this is really a "point" or a "message" in requiem (I don't think it is), it is made in a moralistic and patronizing way, as if talking to a child - by exaggerating to the extreme the warning, that is, the outcome of heavy drug use. Not exaggerating as a story of "what" happens to the disgraced four, but the sadistic way in which each drop of pain is squeezed and turned into visual impact.
But I don't think there is an anti-drug message motivating the movie. Or any message. Or a theme. At no time did this movie appeal to my intellect or my emotions - all it touched was my stomach. In the end the movie made me feel kind of a sucker - I just watched something that wasnt made for an audience, but for the sake of the director. Seemed to me just an exercise - of two things: - One: how can I (the director) take a character's fate and make it the most shocking, gruesome and disgusting as I can? Visual shock has priority over content in "requiem" as if Aronofsky wanted to prove he had the technique to shock as much as cinema can do. - Two: Just how many editing and shooting tricks can one insert in a film? There isnt 30 seconds of footage without a split screen, "that didnt happen" scene, character "floating" or whatever. Very annoying, since in 90% of the cases there is absolutely no reason for the trick. They add nothing to the scene, nor are called for. The director is just having his fun. In "Pi", Aronofsky spends the whole movie with plot tricks and turns that amount to nothing. Here he does the same exercise in editing. That may work for his entertainment, but my annoyance.
In short, this movie is a fraud.