Requiem for a Dream - 2000
There are a select few films for which one could bifurcate my perspective into “Before ___” and “After ____.” Requiem for a Dream, the madcap drug horrorfest creation of Darren Aronofsky, is one such distinct work of art. Amidst a bout of early 20’s weekend ennui, I borrowed it from a dormmate’s DVD rack because it “looked cool,” and he kept good flicks around. Expecting a diversionary tale, I instead was shaken to my core on multiple levels. After seeing it again all these years later, most of the evisceration remains.
First let’s talk about cinematography. This WAS my introduction to camera pyrotechnics. Not the French New Wave. Not QT. Not Scorsese’s Goodfellas. Requiem. I had never seen anything like it, and I was completely blown away. Split screens in the opening sequence. Steadicams popping up everywhere. Mounted cams on action sequences. A sleek series of edits repeated ad nauseum to showcase the euphoria of getting high. And finally, a whole swath of varied approaches to messing with time, whether it be speeding hours of shooting up into a compact two minute segment of cleaning the house or slowing a walk down a crowded street and doctor’s visit to a grinding halt. Never have “uppers” and “the crash” been so convincingly depicted. While space forbids me from exploring the score at length, it too has this CONSTANT menacing presence.
But this isn’t just about camera tricks and funereal string arrangements. In fact, my one criticism about Requiem on rewatch (with years of great film technique watching now under my belt) is that this “kitchen sink” approach is SO in your face and all the time that it almost distracts after a while. It serves its purpose of getting us into the four main characters’ heads and experiences of their drugs of choice, but then begins to almost take on a separate life of its own. What first embellishes walks too closely to detracting.
Fortunately, the story arc here is so strong that it overcomes these obstacles. This is the story whose arc actually mirrors the experience of drug addiction. So we have the onset of use, the experimentation and highs, the delights of the pursuit, and the unabashed euphoria. The user becomes dealer and the dealer becomes rich off the “fat of the land.” But soon want turns to need, the supplies run thin, and downward spirals begin. It’s a credit to Aronofsky that he allows his rich characters to fully experience the highs and then does not cut them short of their free falls toward destruction. The ending is cataclysmic, and the last shots of the protagonists (spoilers aside) will remain etched in my mind forever. As far as I’m concerned this should be required viewing for any user trying to get clean. Maybe it will keep the rest of us on the straight and narrow.
Opmerkingen