Pi
Tags: mystery, avant garde, psychological, cult, atmospheric, insanity, psychedelic, philosophical, suspenseful

Plot synopsis:
Max Cohen is the story's protagonist and unreliable narrator. Unemployed and living in a drab Chinatown apartment in New York City, Max is a number theorist who believes that everything in nature can be understood through numbers. He is capable of doing simple arithmetic calculations involving large numbers in his head, a skill that impresses Jenna, a very young Chinese-American girl with a calculator who lives in his apartment building. Max also suffers from cluster headaches, as well as extreme paranoia, hallucinations, and social anxiety disorder. Other than Devi, a young woman living next door who sometimes speaks to him, Max's only social interaction is with Sol Robeson, his old mathematics mentor who is now an invalid.
Max begins making stock predictions based on the calculations of his computer, Euclid. In the middle of printing out its picks, Euclid suddenly crashes after spitting out a seemingly random 216-digit number, as well as a single pick at one-tenth its current value. Disgusted, Max tosses out the printout of the number. The next morning, he checks the financial pages and sees that the pick Euclid made was accurate. He searches desperately for the printout but cannot find it. Sol becomes unnerved when Max mentions the number, asking if it contained 216 digits. When Max questions him about the number, Sol indicates that he came across it many years ago. He urges Max to slow down and try taking a break.
At a coffee shop that he frequents on a daily basis, Max meets Lenny Meyer, a Hasidic Jew who coincidentally does mathematical research on the Torah. Lenny demonstrates some simple Gematria, the correspondence of the Hebrew alphabet to numbers, and explains how some people believe that the Torah is a string of numbers that form a code sent by God. Max takes an interest when he realizes that some of the number concepts Lenny discusses are similar to other mathematical concepts, such as the Fibonacci sequence. Max is also met by agents of a Wall Street firm who are interested in his work. One of the agents, Marcy Dawson, offers Max a classified computer chip called "Ming Mecca" in exchange for the results of his work, which Max eventually accepts.
Using the chip, Max has Euclid analyze mathematical patterns in the Torah. Euclid spits out the 216-digit number before crashing again. When his computer refuses to print out the number, Max begins to write it down. Midway through the writing, Max realizes that he knows the pattern, undergoes a sudden epiphany, and passes out. Thereafter, Max appears to become clairvoyant and is able to visualize the stock market patterns he had been searching for. But his headaches also increase in intensity, and he discovers a strange vein-like bulge protruding from his right temple. Max has a falling out with Sol after the latter urges him to quit his work.
One evening, Dawson and her agents grab Max on the street and try to force him to explain the number. They had found the original printout that Max threw away and had been trying to use it to manipulate the stock market in their favor, but as a result, caused it to crash. Although Max is held at gunpoint, Lenny drives by and rescues him. However, Lenny and his companions make similar demands on Max to give them the number. They take him to a nearby synagogue where they finally reveal their intentions: they believe the 216-digit number was meant for them to bring about the messianic age, as the number represents the unspeakable name of God. Max refuses, insisting that whatever the source of the number is, it has been revealed to him alone.
Max flees and tries to visit Sol, only to find out from his daughter, Jenny, that he has just died from another stroke. Max searches Sol's apartment and finds mathematical scribblings similar to his own, eventually finding a piece of paper with the number. Back in his own apartment, Max is driven to the brink of madness when he experiences another headache and resists the urge to take his painkillers, which causes him to destroy some of the parts of Euclid. Believing that the number and the headaches are linked, Max tries to concentrate on the number through the pain. After passing out, Max has a vision of himself standing in a white void and repeating the digits of the number. The vision ends with Max hugging Devi, who turns out to be a hallucination. Max stands alone in his trashed apartment. Max burns the paper with the number and blithely performs an impromptu trepanning on himself in the right cerebral hemisphere with a power drill.
Later, in the final scene, Jenna approaches Max in a park asking math problems, including 748 ÷ 238, which is an approximation for Pi. Max smiles and claims that he doesn't know the answer to them. No longer able to solve complex mathematics or experience headaches or paranoid thoughts, Max sits on the park bench and observes the trees blowing in the breeze, at peace.

Review: Pi is the oddest, hippest, most chilling account of the descent into the abyss.Following mathematical clues derived from an analysis of the stock market, Maximillian Cohen begins his descent into madness as he attempts to discover the nature of everything through the peculiar numerical entity known as Pi.Thrilling enough, but then combine with generous amounts of Kaballistic mysticism, black and white footage and a soundtrack like an audible fractal, and you have a sensory snare which drags you along for the ride into Max's impending breakdown.Obsession has never been so exciting.Pi is an utterly gut-wrenching, mind expanding phenomema.
Some viewers may be put off by the bizarre fits the main character faces, or the intrusion of complex mathematics into film, forcing the viewer to think, but if you watch this film, you will be rewarded a unique movie-going experience few other films will give you.
Directed by Darren Aronofsky with a ridiculous budget of $60,000 - which I first thought was a mistake in the figures, since I couldn't believe such a movie could possibly be made with that amount of money.Most of the cast and crew later re-united to make "Requiem for a Dream (2000)" - one of the best movies made in the last few years.
It's a shame we don't see his talent in more movies.Mark Margolis (Mr. Rabinowitz in "Requiem") is excellent as Max's mentor and all the other cast is doing a great job too.Like in "Requiem", technical aspect is top-notch: Excellent black-and-white cinematography (Matthew Libatique) and the innovative use of the Snorricam, lightning, editing (Oren Sarch), and music (Clint Mansell, frontman for Pop will Eat itself).The director's commentary for this movie is fascinating.
After hearing it you'd appreciate the effort and heart that were put into this movie a lot more.Look for guest/cameo appearances by Samia Shoaib (the nurse in "Requiem") as Devi, Max's nextdoor neighbor; Clint Mansell (the movie's composer) as the photographer; and Abraham Aronofsky (Darren's father) as one of the men delivering the suitcase at the door.One last word.
While some aspects presented in the movie - such as the Hebrew numerology and mathematical concepts - are correct (that is, the explanations of Hebrew numerology are not made-up; That _doesn't_ mean I actually believe in any of the meanings attached to them), I suggest you to use your suspension-of-disbelief instead of trying to find logic and mistakes in them.10/10.
(It's not a long movie.) Overall, I thought this "added up" to an intriguing film, but if you give it a try and hate it, don't blame me..
Darren Aronofsky is a filmmaker I first got into through Requiem for a Dream, which now years after I saw it I want to revisit again upon the soon to be released the Fountain and especially after now seeing Pi. Before with 'Requiem', I did like the movie a lot, but felt a little apprehensive about deeming it that old term 'masterpiece' as the editing, while ultra fast for a purpose, almost came off as too "MTV" for me.
In this particular case, Pi is also the kind of movie that warrants a second look at the director's other films.
And it's not just to show off; he truly does get inside a psychology through subjective camera AND editing, to a degree that might impress Hitchcock, albeit with some whiplash.Max Cohen played by Sean Gullette is the protagonist of the story, who's main foe is none other than the universe itself, in a sense, all through one number.
And spirals, by the way, seem to also figure into the film, as well as a secret technology firm (with a woman who reminded me of Condaleeza Rice look-alike), and especially a near undercover Hasidim ring where they need the numbers *in* Cohen's head to unlock some big secret to God. But even with all of this pressure, Cohen can't shake what's dogging him around, in his own cramped, wire-ridden apartment, with many bugs crawling around.The key for this movie really is atmosphere, in the acting (if it makes you uncomfortable sometimes that's the point too, and it's probably the strangest performance of a lifetime for Gullette), the production design (that apartment and the subways), the grainy, spectacular photography by Matthew Libatique, the editing to be sure- which here, unlike the breakneck 'Requiem', does take a break from the cuts so quick they almost past subliminally (which isn't bad)- and the moody music that is so slight you almost forget its there.
Aronofsky also makes a point of some hallucinations/dreams adding to the ambiance, skidding almost towards the pretentious, and thus creating a world all of its own in Pi for Max, and for us as well.A film that I shall certainly seek out again when I can, if only to see if I can understand some things a little more (or maybe not as case might be), and to see such a powerhouse performance from Gullette.
Watching this film, one can tell from the subdued effects, grainy black-and-white filter, and guerrilla-style filmmaking that this must be a low-budget independent film - NOT to try and downplay its impact, as many independent films can clearly surpass any typical Hollywood movie, in terms of style and subject matter."Pi" is a perfectly concrete example of how the relative absence of special effects, explosions, etc.
Its style seems rather modern, rather hip...at times it reminded me of "The Matrix" (which, ironically, was released the FOLLOWING year) what with its slick techno musical score and its flashy opening credits.To shy away from this film simply because of its math content is to be completely shallow and ignorant.
He looks into patterns in the stock market only to find his ability sought by both a Wall Street trader, Marcy Dawson, and a Hasidic, Lenny Meyer, who both want the code for different reasons.Before I saw this I must admit I heard a lot of hype but no actual details  so I was half-expecting an intense `Usual Suspects' thriller mixed with maths.
The subject matter is different enough to be interesting and the telling is clever  I for one can't wait to see what the director does with Batman: year one, it certainly won't be a camp Joel Schumacher film anyway!Gullette (who also co-wrote) is good in the lead and is totally convincing.
The rest of the cast are good  but really the star here is the director as he manages to put us in Max's mind and involve us in the paranoia so thoroughly that we're not sure what is real and what isn't.Overall this isn't as masterly as the hype suggests but it's different enough and compelling enough to be more than gripping for 90 minutes..
Unlike Eraserhead however this effort has "student film-maker" written all over it, which is not to detract from the entertainment value of the movie.The movie's protagonist thinks mathematics can provide the answers to the big questions, but finds out the painful way that it cannot.
To me, it is the best possible example of style taking over a film, because this is a film with no real substance:  instead of a plot, we are simply supposed to believe that this guy has gone insane because of math (with a bunch of pictures from some book to illustrate the possibility) and that he's being chased by mad yiddish people.
I was not surprised to see that older voters on IMDB have not rated this film so highly -- they have seen enough movies with quality and substance to know when the director's just putting a mickey over on the audience.
While not quite as insanely successful as "The Blair Witch Project" (which came out the following year), unlike the filmmakers of this other project, Aronofsky has gone on to greater things--including the wildly successful and critically acclaimed "Black Swan" as well as "The Wrestler".Describing the look of the film is VERY difficult.
The movie looks like a film student's attempt to create some MTV version of 1940s film noir.After 10 minutes, you keep waiting for the story to develop, but it never goes anywhere.
I watched it to the end only because a good friend recommended it, but so little actually took place, that I found I could read the Sunday Times at the same time.While the film was made in 1998, the computer complex looks like something from the 1970s which just adds to the lack of any believability.
Oh well, no one expects movie makers to have any real brains, anyway, right?But this movie didn't compensate its lack of mathematical intrigue with ANYTHING else - it was just a bunch of meaningless dialog between characters too shallow to be even worth caring about - that is, when the viewer wasn't being subjected to miles of footage of the protagonist picking his nose (literally!), or some equally idiotic and boring behavior.As far as movies concerning math, a MUCH BETTER movie is "A Beautiful Mind." If you're looking for a movie about crazy mathematicians, save your time and money and go to see "A Beautiful Mind" instead..
The real focus here is that the main character is going insane and this gives the director the opportunity to portray that insanity through art-full direction.Example: Several times during this film the main character is working at his computer, entering data.
Shot on a handheld camera in black and white, it has the jitters like a 14 year old wired on Espresso from Starbucks.The visual style of this film sets it apart from the crowd at the first available moment.
It may not be your usual fare, but the powerful filming, editing, and offbeat scoring keep you involved throughout the 85 minute run time.Darren Aronofsky has made a truly unique film, one that put me in quite the same mood as Eraserhead or Videodrome, which I think is more of a compliment to Lynch and Cronenberg given that PI was more riveting, and thought provoking than either of them.8/10 - PI Will soon be added to my own collection....
Bad hand held high contrast black and white photography filled with pointless camera gimmicks is no substitute for true film art.
I have never been a big fan of the more indie/artsy film, and this film was in serious danger of disappearing up the director's own bottom, it was self-adulation to the point of obscurity and a complete waste of my time.Man seeks a golden 216 digit number that holds the key to existence, it sounds like it had the potential to be quite interesting....maaaaaaan, how wrong could I have been?
According to the commentary on the DVD I rented, the director stated that he wanted to "let viewers see this movie from the perspective of Max's brain." I think a better question is why anyone would _want_ to get in Max's paranoid, delusional, headache-prone brain.The film attempts to bond together the Kabbalah (Jewish numerical mysticism), the stock market fluctuations, pi (and its randomness) and Nature's cycles.
I was put off by the silly mathematics, the cheesy props, (Max's "computer" is a collection of 1970s era ICs placed randomly in a 19" relay rack), the total lack of production values, ("Pi" makes the majority of this year's independent productions look like "Titanic"), and the silly plot.Ostensibly this is a movie about obsession.
Before this guy does another movie about oncoming insanity, he should sit through Roman Polanski's "Repulsion" at least three times in a row.Max's growing insanity is shown by increasingly bad camera angles as the film progresses.
Max doesn't realize at the time but later in the movie when he's saved from a gang of Wall Street goons by Lenny and his Hasidic friends that the number of God in the Talmud is exactly 216 digits!
Very weird and at the same time interesting film by Darren Aronofsky about math and what math has to do with the working with the universe and how someone can become so obsessed with it that it can destroy him and everyone else that he comes in contact with..
This is a very ambitious outing from first-time filmmakers Aronofsky and Gullette and I give them much credit for creating a work of art I've never seen the likes of before.RATING: UNCLASSIFIABLY Good.
If we were to retrocede back to the times of Lumière when cinema consisted of the beauty of muted black and white photography in motion, and then watched Pi under that light, i.e. as a choreography of moving images, then this film wouldn't be bad at all.
Pi seems to have a very interesting plot as the film starts, however, sets off in the wrong direction thereafter.The story surrounds the discovery of a man named Max, a genius mathematician who spends what seems like all of his time on his computer looking for a pattern in numbers that none of his predecessors could find.
Sticking to his obsession with numbers would have been more effective and probably a lot more interesting since these groups are not at all menacing.The use of grainy black-and-white film was a nice touch here.
Many people who criticize this movie on this comments board were obviously looking for particular things in Pi instead of appreciating it for its whole, which in my mind is a thought-provoking masterpiece.Better yet, there are dozens of ways the lesson in finding beauty comes across, from the subtle (ant squishing) to the obvious (brain drilling).
the stark black and white contrast used worked excellently to illustrated the movie's theme mathematics and nature.
I think there were good concepts in this movie about Math and Number Theory, but the scenes with his hallucinations and drilling into his head were unnecessary.Watch Naked Lunch if you liked this movie..
I do not want to comment on the film as a whole, but only on one aspect of it, namely on how it depicts the central topic of mathematics.The main problem with this movie is that it deals with potentially very interesting stuff, but in a rather imbecile way.
The result is irritating.The "genius mind" of Max Cohen looks like pictured by a 10-year-old child: he knows how to multiply and divide large numbers.
The "mysterious" ideas he is haunted by fall in two categories: some are merely common knowledge, or at least they are very old and all the people interested in the subject generally know them (e.g. the golden ratios, Galileo's ideas about the mathematics as a language of nature, etc.); the remaining ones are merely ridiculous: the search for the number that is the key to the universe, i.e. the old Pythagorean idea taken literally, rid of the context in which it can make sense.Unfortunately, this film deals with no mystery.
There is a subplot with corporate monsters and a religious sect each trying to exploit Max's talents, but these scenes felt like they were tacked on to fill out the running time.For the record, I am not a fan of movies that contain lots of explosions-yes, I can think.
The number pi doesn't really even figure in the end - I got a bad feeling it was just a 'cool' symbol the makers thought would market their film well, like the bat symbol.
It is best understood as a movie used at film school to understand the affect of good shot making.
Movies are pictures in motion and sound, we usually use it as a medium to tell a story.They director filmed it in black and white.
Even though the movie looks like it takes place between 1980-1990 (while it's filmed in 1998).
As soon we're told about the topic of the movie (the whole creation can be put in an equation) ,we eagerly wait for what's following.And there's the rub: religious speculations -Admittedly,people like me who do not know  the Torah certainly cannot understand all the subtleties of the script-abound and drown the maths out.And however the mathematical topic was enthralling .The Fibonacci series was a great idea,because we find it in the nature.And pi is really an universal number,since it appears in the bell curve formula ,queen of the probability.Outside beautiful shots,it left the spectator unsatisfied.It leads to nowhere.The ending is merely a repetition of what we learned at the beginning.The thriller side is botched.The black and white cinematography ,granular and dirty ,recalls that of David Lynch's "Eraserhead",an indie too at the time.The brain does too.The mathematical movie remains to be done..
Due to his research, Max is chased by a Wall Street company with obvious interest in the results of his studies, and by an orthodox Jew follower of the Torah, who believes that this long string of numbers is a code sent from God."Pi" is an intriguing and hypnotic cult movie, with an original story, great music score, fantastic black and white cinematography and bizarre atmosphere that in some moments recalls "Brazil".
Some pseudo-intellectuals think it's enough to use black and white to make an art movie, but then please don't overexpose and shake the camera willingly: for me junk art is simply junk and not art, and this film is unpleasant even from a technical point of view.
For the first half hour we are forced to sit and watch as various mathematical phenomena are explained, which to anyone like me who doesn't really have an interest in maths would find boring.The plot doesn't really develop anywhere either, and at the end of the movie you'll be left thinking about all the other things you could have done in that 90 minutes..
Mr. Aronofsky has shot "Pi" in black and white that is grainy as he seems to emphasize in what's going on in the mind of Max Cohen.
It works well because using colors would have distracted our attention, perhaps, and it wouldn't have left the lasting effect he achieves with the use of the black and white cinematography.Sean Gullette, as Max Cohen makes an immense contribution to the film, which clearly, having been co-written by him, shows he had a complete understanding of what the director intended him to do.