Pi - movie review

[Inthacup]

This movie blew me away. It was very well directed, the subject was fascinating and the acting was excellent. I watched it for the first time Saturday. Since then, I've watched it 3 more times and watched the directors commentary. There is a lot below the surface that you get to figure out after several viewings.

One thing that I think would be an interesting note for discussion: I think his theory about order in nature applies to poker as well.

Has anyone else seen it? If so, what did you think?(Sorry for the short review, I'm leaving for work)

[Homer]

I absolutely hated it, but that doesn't mean much, as I hate 90% of movies that I see. It is certainly possible that I was tired and couldn't deal with this kind of movie at the time. I think you have to be in a certain mood to watch this movie. Also, as you said, it might be one of those movies that grows on you with each additional viewing.

-- Homer

[Warren Whitmore]

I gave it an 8 on a scale of 1 to 10. I was with a big group of people when I saw it though and most of them hated it. Its one of those movies you need to have a basic appreciation for math for it to make sense.

[Easy E]

what types of movies DO you like, Mr 10%?

Any examples?

[TimTimSalabim]

I posted my review of this movie on netflix once, which I will reprint here (with my own permission):

Pi: Faith in Chaos (One star out of Five)
If you have an opportunity some evening to either a) watch paint dry or b) watch this movie, definitely choose a, because although it will be boring, it won't be agonizingly painful to watch. And paint drying has no pretense that it's actually art.

[DPCondit]

The movie was very strange and demented.

I liked it. I really get sick of the typical Hollywood "formula" movies.

If you liked "pi", check out "Requiem for a Dream", which was directed by the same guy. Very demented and disturbing, of course (what else would you expect from this guy?), but pretty entertaining.

Don

[J.R.]

requiem for a dream- you have to respect it for its artistic courage, its originality and the means thru which the cinematography subconciously imbued the viewer with the bleak melancholy of one lost in the nether existence of substance dependancy. (Great empathy). Very troubling, and crashes pop society's notions of the glamour of drug use. Its like a car crash- its sick, but you want to look. That said, the movie killed my buzz and blew as a form of escapism or entertainment.

If you saw woody allen's "hollywood ending", you can compare the main character's sightless production to requiem for a dream- everybody knows it sucks, but the french (who have a high tolerance for pain and a masochistic appreciation of the arts) love it.

[DPCondit]

Yes, it was very disturbing. I wouldn't exactly call it a "feel good" movie. Forrest Gump it wasn't. I wonder why I enjoyed that, but I hated Trainspotting? (Probably because from the advertising for Trainspotting, I wasn't expecting that sort of movie, so it pissed me off).

Don't see Requiem for a Dream if you want something happy, and/or lighthearted, it is a bit intense, and not the happiest sort of movie. It really draws you in, but takes you to a not-so-happy place.

I haven't seen the Woody Allen movie, are you saying I should, or shouldn't?

A disturbing scary movie that I liked, "Donnie Darko". Very strange and scary. (I must be slightly demented to enjoy movies like that /forums/images/icons/grin.gif ).

Don

[Mark Heide]

Inthacup,

It was an interesting movie. I enjoyed it, but I don't think it's for the masses, but due to it's unique plot, I think it will be considered a classic in the future.

Mark

[Jeffage]

This movie is great...I love the claustrophobic sense you get watching it and how you almost become a part of Max's obsession (I love the scenes with the shady investors after him lol). GREAT, GREAT flick...I'd write more if I wasn't dead tired and running late but I have the DVD...I actually have a unique collection, I think I will put up a couple tomorrow hopefully.

Jeff

[Cyrus]

The movie's synopsis at Amazon.com goes like this :

"Patterns exist everywhere: in nature, in science, in religion, in business. Max Cohen (played hauntingly by Sean Gullette) is a mathematician searching for these patterns in everything. Yet, he's not the only one, and everyone from Wall Street investors, looking to break the market, to Hasidic Jews, searching for the 216-digit number that reveals the true name of God, are trying to get their hands on Max. "

This is what good Science Fiction is all about! I adore good S.F. Taking us round all the wrong corners and to all the dead ends. Asking all the important "what if's".

I'm saying this because, as we have learned (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/039330700X/qid=1051708491/sr=1-12/ref=sr_1_12/102-5913577-3928113?v=glance&s=books), it is very probable that the doings and undoings of our cosmos are products of pure, unadulterated chance, and nothing more than chance. There is no grand purpose behind it all. Not the slightest amount of determinism, not even behind homo sapiens and his artifacts! We's just the luckiest s.o.b.'s ever. ("Patterns" exist only in "small scale".)