Herald the new Wunderkind.

Rating: 10/10 (3 February 2001)

I saw "Requiem for a Dream" yesterday and it has barely left my mind for five minutes since. First of all may I say it's very positive to see the standard of reaction to this movie in the other user comments, I expected a fair amount of backlash.
This movie is a piece of living, breathing cinema. It is new, fresh, daring and okay I'm being hyperbolic - but what I'm saying is that this movie whether you liked it or not, will produce a reaction from you. The audience I watched it with were drawn in by the characters and the flashes of humour and then ultimately disturbed and left shaken. I have never heard so many genuinely shocked audible reactions from an audience.
So how does director and co-writer Aronofsky achieve this? He achieve it by using every tool available to a film. Writing: a heartbreakingly juxtaposed story of a mother and a son and their dreams which are ultimately shattered. A very original take on drugs, which ultimately places it within a wider social context than many other films that rarely take on the greater implications.
Acting: Ellen Burstyn, Jared Leto, Marlon Wayans and Jennifer Connelly all deliver top rate performances. Burstyn in particular is amazing, it is one the most heartbreaking performances you will ever see. It is wonderful to see a role written for a middle age person with depth and edge, and performed so electrically. How Burstyn lost and will lose to Julia Roberts (for Erin Brokovich) is beyond me. Roberts delivers a fine performance and probably the ultimate of her career, but I think you have to award someone for the actual quality of the performance not in terms of some career achievement. I think it is up to us lovers of this film and Burstyn's performance to keep campaigning, keep writing on the message boards so that hopefully some of the voters might see what the public want for a change. The distributors of "Requiem" cannot compete in terms of campaigning, but we can. Sorry I've gone of track again. In terms of the other performances they are all very good, it is particularly pleasing to see actors like Wayans break away from his usual screen persona and deliver a fine performance, it is a big risk for him and it paid off. Leto and Connelly also invest huge amounts, but if there is one criticism it is that the "you are the most beautiful girl in the world" scenes come off a little awkward.
Music: This has to be some of the best use of music in film. Clint Mansell again produces another fine off-centre score, beautifully offset by the work from the Kronos Quartet. Music and sound almost penetrates the whole film never letting you settle, so that when there is little sound it is very noticeable. It is also crucial to the end sequence. Mention also should be made about the TV show. The repetitive chants and exclamations, brought home for me the notion of television as the new religion, the TV show is made to seem like a religious fervor, and Christopher McDonald plays a very effective "Evangilist".
Cinematography: Washed out colours, Steadicam, warped angles, sped up, slowed down. Everything is put to use. Some of the most interesting camera work that has been seen for a long time. And who will ever forget the first shot of "winter", it is forever planted in my mind.
Editing: Well if the editing on this movie doesn't receive an Academy nomination they may as well stop the whole event. This has to be one of the best editing jobs EVER. Hollywood seems to give awards for seamless editing, well whoop-de-doo, how about using editing to enhance the movie, how about giving an award for daring, revolutionary editing. They won't and it's sad. P.S. They should congratulate the editor for having such a strong stomach to be able to edit this movie.
Direction: What can I say? Think about how one man can bring all these ingredients I've mentioned and more, together to give what is one the most narratively and visually fulfilling movies you will ever see. The most effective thing that Aronofsky uses to keep the audience with the movie is pace and the withholding of shock. The movie gradually and gradually builds pace until the climax, this allows us to go into the minds of the characters as they gradually spiral out of control. The withholding of shock is also well used, because the audience is not distanced from the movie to early and when the director has them, then he shocks them. It is a great piece of film making.
"Requiem" does have its faults. However, they are more than compensated by the standard of film making, the risks taken. I was left emotionally drained at the end of this movie, but also invigorated to see a new, exciting and original film.