is it possible and if so why did you?
>>69111370
Saw it in 2005 for the first time.
Rewatched it in 2014, because the music is probably the best score ever.
Also prime Conelly.
>>69111509
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qea78IVQq2E&list=PL321856357EC96790&index=5
Forgot link
Ive seen it exactly twice.
>why?
Because I liked it.
several times
i usually do when i want to have a good cry
>>69111370
requiem is too depressing to watch more than once
except for two bums scene
>>69111370
because.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0m67tvx_C4
tfw this film spurred my ass to ass fetish
>>69111370
ass 2 ass m80, its worth watching a million times just to see that scene
![de3cee40_asstoassguy[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/rt9Bjdq.jpg "de3cee40_asstoassguy[1].jpg")
>>69111777
>>69111798
>>69111370
Yeah I watched it a bunch of times. Great movie.
is there a point to this movie beyond PSA-tier "dont do drugs" moralizing? i only watched it once not because it was "depressing" but because it was fucking stupid
>>69111370
yes watched it about 5 times, mostly just to show friends who havent seen it before.
Still gets me every time
>>69111370
No, not for me. Requiem For A Dream is one of those movies that is so good it borders on bad because it's so fucking well done that it makes you depressed as shit for a long time after the movie is over.
>>69111370
couple of times.
i dunno why...
>>69111370
I saw it for the first time about 11 years ago when I was 15 and probably watched it three times during that year. I've watched it maybe twice since but I'm not as affected by it even though it probably has more relevance to my life now than it ever did. I'm not a drug addict but several of my close friends are and have suffered in similar ways, facing severe and life long consequences as a result of their actions. They are making better choices but all of them have extreme psychological problems that are nearly impossible to address with them without causing a barrage of accusations and denial in the opposite direction. I've yet to see a movie that tries to address the not so glamour aspects of sobriety as opposed to painting it as a rebirth. I haven't seen one person really come out of sobriety with a solid mental aptitude and adjustment that I often see depicted.
>>69111867
Requiem for a Dream (2000), based on a novel by Hubert Selby Jr, is a nightmare of a film that follows the nightmares of the four protagonists: Harry, his mother, his friend Tyrone and his girlfriend Marion. The film gets more and more sinister, more and more apocalyptic, as it follows their endeavours to achieve their dreams. The film is not so much a sequence of failures as one gigantic failure that the director analyzes in deeper and deeper detail. The film is not so much a sequence of delusions and one gigantic sense of desperation that grows and grows and doesn't seem to know limits. That is what makes so horrific. But the real assett of the film is the directing technique, the neurotic cut-ups and split screens and whatever else. There is hardly a scene that does not evoke neurosis with a barrage of acrobatic cinematic tricks. Aronofsky overlaps slow-motion and fast-motion, pastes together a rapid-fire of frames, unleashes an onslaught of imaginative montage.
Literally watched this over 50 times sophomore year. Roomates would come home to see me sprawled out on the couch intently staring at the screen with Lux Aeterna blaring from the speakers. They'd probably be able to identify me from this post alone.
It was cathartic. In hindsight, I was experiencing pretty severe derealization and depersonalization and the only things that helped were intense sorrow and cough syrup.
>>69112144
The stories interweave and never completely merge. At the end they are even less united than they were at the beginning. The four protagonists have lost each other, apparently forever, and they are all losers.
All four are heroes, because all four trying to avoid their inevitable, stereotyped destiny: Sara has to die alone because she is getting old, Marion has to become a prostitute because she is living with junkies, Tyrone has to spend the rest of his life in jail because he has joined organized crime, and Harry has to lose both women because he has not respected either. But Aronofsky does not treat them like heroes: he treats them like sexy cinematic objects.
Aronofsky shows no mercy for his characters. On the contrary, he is a voyeur who enjoys seeing them sink lower and lower, chronicling their degradation. His clinical portraits are each an onslaught of humane feelings. The narrative gets more and more disconnected as the degradation proceeds. The escalating abjection is matched by a crescendo of counterpoint.
Aronofsky is not only interested in the milieu of drug traffickers, he is interested in representing the progressive loss of control by drug users. He equates this to the progressive loss of control by two women who are let down by Harry: their broken dreams are a form of addiction, that eventually lead them to an equal loss of control and destruction of their personality.
>>69112144
>>69112180
So the answer is "no" then?
>>69111867
I think there is something to get out of it if you break it down. I don't think it is meant to be watched or was made with a particular moral to get out of it, other than that drugs will always have a problematic closure. The mother's character has a narrative that would suggest more than just telling the audience to not do drugs as her addiction concerns body image and television. I would suggest viewing Requiem For A Dream along the lines of any other American Dream narrative where sycophantic pleasure and the illusion of promise counter-intuitively mingle.
I didn't like it.
Found Trainspotting to be a much better film,the baby scene fucked me up more than 2 hours of this shit.
yes, when i lived with my crippled-couchbound grandmother she would re-watch movies several times over.
I saw it when I was a teen and had the usual shocked reaction "omg this is some serious shit" saw it again as a 30 yo and yawned.
Honestly I think it's a shit movie presented in stellar cenimatography and a great Jared Leto but that's it. I have never seen such a try hard tear jerker. No one in the film does ANYTHING for me to care about them.
I watched it a few times. My second watch was probably within a year of my first watch. Why? Because I thoguht it was a fantastic movie. The final 10 or whatever minutes are some of the most intense I've ever seen.
Damn, I need to watch this again.
I thought the one scene where the mom was hallucinating went on for way too long. Like where people start dancing in her apartment. Also it was too goofy to take seriously. Too bad, I sympathized with her the most.
they had us watch this in the 8th grade
some kids actually asked to leave the room lel
>>69112180
>he is a voyeur who enjoys seeing them sink lower and lower,
nah. to sink or go down the spiral or whatever you need to risk something first and lose it. Aronofsky (whom I consider a hack) does this with all his movies, his protagonists risk nothing, they have no reason or better, no right to dream. His protagonists are more or less divas who hope to catch lightning. Why am I supposed to feel bad for people like Harry or the Wrestler who start at the bottom... and stay there ?
