I love this movie.

It's deep and beautiful on all levels. Photography, story, music.

Moving this video to enoch's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

I think this was a beautiful movie, but I didn't get half of the stuff that went on.

this is too awesome both visually and musically to not be sifted.
*PROMOTE!

Post cannot be self promoted by original submitter enoch because enoch does not have enough Power Points. (You can always purchase more Power Points.)

*quality, got you covered, mate.

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by gwiz665.

>> ^gwiz665:
quality, got you covered, mate.


thanks brother!

Soundtrack is excellent, listened to it endless times. Never seen the movie though yet

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I'm probably in the minority, but I did not enjoy this movie. Lots of quantum flapdoodle and a muddy story.

My interpretation of the movie is that tom's contemporary wife was writing her book based on memories of a past life. Current day Tom discovered the tree of life and used it to "cure" death, becoming immortal himself, but too late to save his wife. He planted a seed from the tree on her grave, and hundreds of years later I guess he's become rich enough to pay for an Alcubierre bubble ship to take himself and the tree, which now houses her soul, out to the supernova for a reunion. The conquistador's unique death, after ingesting the tree of life's nectar, created some kind of open tunnel for his soul to move between lifetimes. That's the only explanation for the most confusing part of the movie for me: when space-Tom appears to the mayan guard. I know it's not supposed to be literal but part of me wonders if immortal Tom has not truly re-incarnated 1,000 years back in time, and now has a chance to cherish every moment with the next incarnation of his true love.

I wonder how many years in earth time passed during his journey? Could be millions. Who's to say what's happening to the passage of time inside tha bubble?

>> ^dag:
I'm probably in the minority, but I did not enjoy this movie. Lots of quantum flapdoodle and a muddy story.


Not at all dag, I tried watching this movie in it's entirety on two separate occasions but simply couldn't do it. The plot is rubbish and confusing at best. Movies that don't make any sense tend to be bad movies. It is more of a cinematic attempt at art than an actual movie imo. Also, it gets negative points for heavy religious overtones.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Glad I'm not alone. It was billed in the promos as "epic science fiction", but I left the cinema feeling like I'd just been to a viewing of "The Secret". Blech>> ^syncron:
>> ^dag:
I'm probably in the minority, but I did not enjoy this movie. Lots of quantum flapdoodle and a muddy story.

Not at all dag, I tried watching this movie in it's entirety on two separate occasions but simply couldn't do it. The plot is rubbish and confusing at best. Movies that don't make any sense tend to be bad movies. It is more of a cinematic attempt at art than an actual movie imo. Also, it gets negative points for heavy religious overtones.

I love it when people have strict requirements for their art. There's lots of spoon-fed fiction out there for you plebes. This is a work of art (how ignorant\pretentious do you have to be to call it an "attempt at art?" And the story is right there on screen if you're willing to watch and listen and stop waiting for an explanation. In fact the story is rather clear it just leaves some things open-ended as to what's real and what's part of a book within the story. Yes it's a tone poem, but it has a plot which I could describe to you succinctly. It's a helluva lot more straightforward narratively than anything by David Lynch.

Also have to disagree on the religious overtones (are you referring to the tree of life?). There's lots of spirituality but very little religion in it.

I will give my interpretation of the movie.

I believe the movie to be about death as a natural and needed event, and coming to terms with that.
In the conquistador times, he searched for the tree of life to please the queen and help defend Spain. But he failed to learn the lesson the native was trying to teach him. Death is needed, and should not be averted. And that's when you get the first clue to the meaning of all this. He drinks the sap, and he dies, but new life grows out of him.

In the modern days his wife is dying, and he does everything he can to avert death. He says so himself. "death is a disease". Eventually he finds the cure, but too late for his wife, and he never comes to term with that. He planted a tree over her grave. Hundreds of years later (I wanna believe the 3 parts of the story are set about 500 years between each other, so the future part would be somewhere in the 25th century) he is still alive, having cured death, but he still grieves over the death of his wife, and can't let go, and his tormented by that. And the tree he planted is now dying as well.

In the end he comes to realize that only by dying can life be renewed, and does life have meaning. When he dies the tree comes back to life. Nothing is lost, everything is transformed. Everything must die, so that new life may appear. And it's also about accepting death. Not wishing it obviously, but accepting that it will come for you, and everyone and everything else. Everything dies, even stars. But because your atoms carry on to something else, you also truly never cease to exist. You know... "We are all made of star stuff" kind of message. I don't find the movie religious in the slightest.

Don't forget the coolest part: there's almost no CGI in The Fountain. It's old-school optical effects.

I think a lot of people struggle to embrace this film because they probably believe they need to overthink the story and what the movie is trying to say. The simplest interpretation is that the past and the future, while non-linearly juxtaposed with the present, are the fiction in Rachel Weisz' character's book. Sure, the movie's core message is one of the immortality of life, energy, the spirit, etc... but in the end, the viewer does not HAVE to think that the movie is suggesting a real Tree of Life exists, or that one can float through the cosmos in a sphere. The movie's spiritual message is designed to stand apart from that.

I adore this movie. I also think that Mansell should have received an Oscar for the score, as it is one of the finest motion picture soundtracks of all time. As is said in a comment above, the interpretation of things is left fairly open-ended, and I'd hate anyone to overlook this movie because they felt they had to accept the possibility of some of the more fantastical elements of the film in order to appreciate it.

my interpretation is eerily close to EMPIRE's and i also agree with budzos in the fact that not every film need be a hand-holding narrative.
i consider this film art DUE to it's open interpretive nature and mansell's score is just amazing.

Upvote for Clint Mansell

Too weird for me.

Never name your kid Clint unless you want people to misread his name as "cunt" about 5% of the time.

Could not agree with Dag more; they should rename this movie to 'quantum flapdoodle'

Seriously, the opening montage, with the bubble and the tai chi guy silkscreened on space; if you're not laughing at this point, your brain has fallen out.

The rest of the movie is a New Age group handjob ; some beautiful shots, but utter garbage for content.