[Ro]

The MacGuffins are extremely happy to select, with their 6th team selection and 141st overall pick, for entry in the Drama category:

Requiem For A Dream

Harold, I'm gonna be on Television!



An excerpt from Roger Ebert's review of the film:

The movie was given the worthless NC-17 rating by the MPAA; rejecting it, Artisan Entertainment is asking theaters to enforce an adults-only policy. I can think of an exception: Anyone under 17 who is thinking of experimenting with drugs might want to see this movie, which plays like a travelogue of hell.

A travelogue of hell indeed. Based on the equally graphic and disturbing book by Hubert Selby Jr., Requiem For A Dream tells the harrowing tale of four drug addicts falling under the spell of addiction with a blunt force that leaves most viewers spellbound. I watch the entire credit roll after most good films, but after seeing this film I always feel like I need to take that time to try and recover emotionally. What a depressing ride this film is, but oh is it worth it.

Some may consider this one an odd choice, as it's a difficult movie to endure from almost any standpoint. Technically, it's heavily stylized- split screens, slow motion, sped-up montages, time lapse photography, fades/dissolves, an emphatic and operatic score (IMO, one of the most memorable you'll ever encounter), distorted images, and some horrifying kitchen appliances. The acting is powerful (Burstyn gives a performance for the ages- she was robbed of the Oscar), and as the characters experience the ups and downs of drug use, we as viewers see the impressive range of emotions the actors are able to convey. That said, from an emotional standpoint, it's a tough cinematic experience, as the characters are nihlistically left to wallow in their pathetic addictions (the film has been criticized for this). Primarily, however, is the story, which is like a blow to the head with a mallet- there are no depths the characters will not seek out, and the jarring transitions from drug-addled bliss to deprived hysteria are exhausting.

So what is there to like? Well, it's not a fairy tale- it's an unflinching and brutallly honest look at the plauge of drug addiction. Once the viewer comes to grips with the fact that there can be no happy endings, it's all about the filmmaking and the acting. There is a compelling beauty in the grotesqueness of it all that makes you want to turn away and keep watching all at once.

As Aronofsky has noted, there are three distinct acts, or cinematic "requiems," and the subtle changes in mise en scene before and after each sequence are most intriguing. Things are all rosy right up to, and even during, the hit (or the breakfast, or the "score,"), and things are not so hot on the way back down. The background music ebbs and flows with the story, and when not soothing the characters with a false sense of calm, acts as an ominous predictor of things to come. The lighting changes from a glowing optimistic hue to a filtered, dark, cold one. The colors go from stark and vibrant to dull and depressing. From sunsets, kisses in elevators, and red dresses to prostitution, jail, amputation, and dementia, everything leads to a terrifying, dizzying conclusion after which most viewers are left shocked and silent. It is at this point that I had no choice but to forgive the script's shortcomings regarding the somewhat one-dimensional characters and its extreme views about the consequences of drug addictions, and simply applaud the powerful filmmaking.

Requiem For A Dream is a modern gem, and The MacGuffins are proud to add it to their squad.