User Reviews (595)

  • ben hibburd19 December 2017
    7/10
    Pi Review.
    I didn't really want to review this film as there's not a great deal to say about it that people haven't already. Darren Aronofsky's debut film is a bizarre, surreal, intelligent, paranoia fuelled film about a mathematician who's trying to uncover the patterns of the universe.

    The main reason I wanted to talk about this film, is that Clint Mansell's incredible score is in my opinion one of the best scores I've heard in any film. It's an expertly constructed piece of work that helps to elevate every aspect of this film. The score is perfectly intertwined with the central character of the film, and works as his inner monologue to reflect his different mental states throughout the film. From being eerie to panic ridden to sheer mania it's a bold piece of work. That when I found myself drifting from the film it was the score that kept sucking me back in with it's intoxicating atmosphere.

    The film on the whole is pretty good, but without the score I don't think this film would've worked nearly as well as it did. I would recommend watching this film for the soundtrack alone.
  • Moe Yasmine8 September 2017
    1/10
    Awful
    A cocktail of disturbing images and sounds. This is meant to be deep and abstract story but it fails in delivering that. The disconnect between events and various scenes don't add up. I tried hard to enjoy this but couldn't. A sat back and chilled but it annoyed me. The sounds and graphics have me a headache,p. The black and white doesn't help either. Wouldn't recommend it for any occasion
  • rod-ruger14 July 2017
    2/10
    Pretending to be deep
    For people who know little about numbers, this might be an interesting sci-fi movie. It is not. Pi tries to make mathematical patterns interesting. Patterns can be interesting, of course, but not mind-bending. This movie panders to pseudo-intellectuals/mathematicians. Watch it a pretend you get some subtle message. By doing so, you become a genius, supposedly. If you like to identify with smarties, you might better watch Good Will Hunting. Pi is a composite of weird sounds, funky camera shots, and B.S. that, to some, might make it appear deep. It is pap.
  • Joseph Sebastian14 May 2017
    8/10
    Pi accomplishes so much with stress and paranoia portrayed in its unique style.
    A mathematician struggles to find the relevance of a number that taunts him in his stressed out life. It gives him head aches, induces hallucinations and blurs the line of reality. The story progresses as he tumbles down in paranoia only to find peace. His craze to find the significance of Pi is troubled by the attempts of others who search for the same cause but for their own personal benefits.

    The movie is unique in its horrifically smart style and portrayal of a deranged mind and the actions it can make him take. With lots of close ups and disturbing music, 'Pi' is one black and white movie for the psycho-movie crowd.
  • elliott-4033215 March 2017
    9/10
    Frantic
    I love how this film makes you feel frantic. The black and white is darker than usual. The sounds are glaring sometimes. The pace that everything happens, makes you feel insane. This film is a masterpiece and shining star to what indie films can be if pushed to the extreme. One of my favorite films and love the story of the insane mathematician. Beautifully told.
  • TheHesh8215 March 2017
    8/10
    An unusual thrill-ride of mathematics and religion
    Warning: Spoilers
    A great soundtrack (Aphex Twin, Clint Mansell) and brilliant cinematography (think Tetsuo The Iron Man) combine to create a claustrophobic and slightly disorienting look into the mind of a mathematician looking for a way to predict the stock market. What Max ends up finding is sought by more than just Wall St and may end up costing him his life.
  • theocharous_an20 January 2017
    7/10
    A great debut feature
    Warning: Spoilers
    Pi was the debut feature of the now acclaimed director Darren Aronofsky. It revolves around the obsession of a charismatic, but troubled man named Max Cohen (Sean Gullette), who is determined to find a pattern that will decipher the stock market. His former professor (Mark Margolis), who had been chasing a similar obsession for years, tries to convince him against it. Max is obsessed beyond return though and soon he finds himself going after a 216-digit number that could explain universe and help him discover God.

    The film has some very interesting themes. It deals with the same idea that Black Swan did (the only other Arronofsky's film I watched), that while the relentless pursuing of an obsession can lead to success, it can also lead to self-destruction. Then there is the search of God as we have seen in many other movies before, most notably in Ingmar Bergman's filmography. Max is so infatuated with the idea of the secret key number, that before he knows it he loses control. He becomes a slave of his obsession as so many other people in our days.

    Arronofsky did a great job in Pi. I don't know for certain, but it seems like a low budget film with its relatively unknown cast and its black and white filming. The surrealistic, thought-provoking way the plot is unveiled though, is more than enough to redeem the viewer. The acting is not what we would call top-notch, but they're all doing a respectable job. Mark Margolis in particular gives a very good performance.

    I'll end this review with the optimistic message that I believe the ending scene attempts to deliver: there is beauty in simplicity. We don't need to understand everything, it won't make us happier. It would only serve to bury us even deeper in the universe's chaotic nature. Let your goals and ideas serve your life rather than making your life a servant of them.

    More reviews at: https://reflectingoncinemablog.wordpress.com/
  • kelvinkelvin-3975520 December 2016
    7/10
    Still great
    I recently watched this again, it had been maybe 4 or 5 years since I watched the film. It's actually a better viewing over time, so much of what is covered in regards to the themes and even the tech are as important today (if not more) than it was almost 20 years ago.

    The look even gets better with age. When I first saw the film the blown out black and white was a bit of a distraction but now I find the look so perfect with the subject matter that it's hard to imagine one without the other.

    If you haven't seen this yet watch it now and if you haven't seen it in a long time fire up the machine and rewatch this now sci-fi classic.
  • marktroisi13 December 2016
    1/10
    Awful
    Complete and total waste of time, maybe the worse movie I've seen in 40 years. There is absolutely nothing of worth to see here. Anyone trying to claim this "movie" as anything other than complete and total garbage is pushing an agenda, period. Boring to the point of putting an audience to sleep and finishing with a complete snore fest, an absolute embarrassment of a "movie". The only thing worse is the fact that this worthless site requires 10 lines of text in order to give a review. This movie is so bad it only needs two maybe three lines to warn viewers away from wasting their time on this mindless drivel. So many repetitive scenes of the same things occurring it was ridiculous.
  • anthonybratchet1 November 2016
    10/10
    Most amazing peace of art I have ever seen.
    Warning: Spoilers
    Be warned never watched this stones especially if you trade the stop market mind blowing! It truly breaks open the mind and explains what we see any question you've ever wanted to know about the stock markets mental makeup then this is the film to watch. Some films really push the boundary in explaining the deeper meanings of life. If your into bow bow bang bang half naked women then this isn't for you but if you want to open your mind and dive into the souk existence you name it. If you felt the Matrix was an eye opener not just action but the basic facts of what the films says then wow are you in for a treat. Almost spiritual how this made into such a crazy perfect diagram of almost everything almost like its own math equation.
  • Leofwine_draca9 October 2016
    5/10
    Intriguing indie, somewhat overrated
    Warning: Spoilers
    A tiring, slightly pretentious indie flick which makes up for its lack of budget with plenty of imagination on the part of writer/director Darren Aronofsky, who mingles such diverse topics as Jewish religion, complex mathematics, Greek mathematicians, mental illness, and Wall Street into a quirky and unpredictable whole. Although the film shares some of the same style and hyper-kinetic energy as something like TETSUO, generally it's a watchable enough movie with strong acting from lead Sean Gullette to make it worth sitting through. The heavy subject of complex number theory and advanced mathematics is an off-putting one, but don't be because the maths stuff is explained for those who aren't good with figures and generally skipped over anyway, shown without being too complex.

    PI takes in various elements from different genres. The idea that numbers can explain the universe is nothing but straight science fiction (or is it?) whilst there are many surrealist touches like the train station interlude where Gullette chases along a trail of blood only to discover a huge brain - his own - at the end of the line. The various moments in which he experiences horrendous migraines are pretty disturbing to watch, with the soundtrack full of ear-splitting screeches and upsetting visuals on screen (Gullette brains himself, and smashes his head into a wall repeatedly). The intense music used throughout the film adds to the experience and the visual look is made distinctive by some grainy black and white photography.

    On the downside, the ending is abrupt and something of a foregone conclusion. I was left thinking "was that it?". PI is a film that is deliberately complex and attempts to lose the viewer at every turn, and I don't think any person would be capable of understanding what everything means throughout. Sure, it's different, about 180 degrees from standard predictable Hollywood fare, but does this necessarily make it a good movie? I think not. It's original and the guys who made it were obviously talented, but this is not the masterpiece some people seem to think it is (all I heard about this were rave reviews for four years until I actually saw it).
  • thor-teague5 October 2016
    Not at all incredible... quite a bit of drollery in fact
    Warning: Spoilers
    Darren Aronofsky's first feature, Pi, is an overly ambitious undertaking suffering fatally from a number of different problems. Pi is more a psychological character portrait than anything--it fails as a thriller. The narrative overall is barely enough to keep me interested--and has little to no replay value for me.

    Max, a paranoid mathematician, is searching for a numerical formula that will express all the patterns of life and seeks to 'crack the code' of the universe. It is, in so many words, a quest for the Ark of the Covenant. It is not impossible to do this film, I don't think, but I do think Pi has failed.

    I did enjoy the style and felt it worked well. Stark lighting, manic cuts and camera operation, and surreal audio all add to the psycho paranoia that could have made this a great movie. It doesn't have a whole lot of technical flaws, in fact outside of the acting probably none.

    But the flaws are dealbreakers. The film's Achilles's heel is definitely its delusions of grandeur. Perhaps I've misinterpreted something--but the film seems to think its correct?! The Grand Unifying Theory of Everything? Nobody knows (yet), but I promise you it is not an inexplicable 216 digit integer. You are thinly veiling mysticism and numerology as science. The easiest way to solve this problem in the context of Pi, drop the bubblegum pop pseudoscience and, if you want to pretend that he found the correct Grand Unifying Theory of Everything, just leave it to the imagination. It should have been a complete MacGuffin. Or, make it clearer that Max is just plain bonkers. The film seems to believe its own drivel. Make it about Max's descent into insanity, and you've got a potentially good story. It may be successfully arguable that the film doesn't believe itself and is trying to portray Max as insane, but that's looking like a stretch from where I stand.

    The next thing is the bad acting from the supporting cast. Everything was at least working for me until the conspirators' trap was sprung, at which point I had to start wondering, "Are you kidding?" Overall my suspension of disbelief just fell like a house of cards at this point. Please note that I do however feel that Sean Gullette's performance was quite convincing and worked well throughout.

    And finally, I didn't care for the soundtrack. It hasn't aged as well as other successful electronica soundtracks of its day. Overall I have to describe Pi as being both self-righteous and pretentious.
  • Joker99319 September 2016
    8/10
    Surprised
    Warning: Spoilers
    I just watched this for the first time, it is a really intense movie, the story is not complicated and the whole movie was easy to understand. The main character played his role brilliantly; you can see the amount of pain he goes through as his health deteriorates. As a huge fan of 'Requiem for a dream', I had high hopes for 'Pi', since they were both directed by the same guy, and I can say that it was a really good movie. On the other hand, It is a little bit messed up to be fair; I felt that some scenes deserved further explanation, especially his delusions. All in all, good movie, great acting and direction. 8/10
  • Brian Berta22 June 2016
    10/10
    A very effective thriller
    I really like watching weird films. It's interesting to see all the imagination that Directors can put into their films. In fact, Eraserhead (1977) is one of my favorite films of all time. Seeing that Pi was a low budget debut film, I was curious what Aronofsky would be able to do with it, because I heard that it looked very good despite its budget. The film looked very good, and I found it to be a very interesting film.

    A paranoid mathematician named Max attempts to find a pattern in the Stock market which will also unlock the universal patterns found in nature. However, hallucinations continue to hinder his path and as the film continues on, it becomes more difficult to tell what's real and what isn't.

    Max goes through internal and external conflict in the film. His internal struggles are the hallucinations he experiences and the first phase of a deterioration of his body starting with a bump on his head. These symptoms often come into effect when he's at crucial points in his objective. If he's getting info from Lennie, he might have to rush home before it takes its toll on him. Also, if he's attempting to find the 216 digit number on his computer, the hallucinations and pain can make him lose his mind, scream at the top of his lungs, or try to destroy his equipment in a fit of range. If the hallucinations didn't effect his experiments, one could argue that they felt a little tacked on. However, director Darren Aronofsky was able to work them into the conflict he faced in the film, and he avoided having them feel gratuitous.

    The external conflict he encounters mainly comes into the film near the latter portion of the film. When it happens, it changes the film entirely, and it makes a lot of events make sense which we saw earlier in the film. It's a very interesting way of showing you how his simple task turned into something much, much more. It also makes the ambiguity of the films ending have a great impact on the viewer and it leaves you thinking about it, and what exactly Max did. The film takes a common weird trope for weird films, hallucinations, and it creates conflict in the film out of it.

    The hallucinations in the film are really well-done. The main reason why they work so good is because we are able to feel Max's pain during them. The sudden and striking sound effects which the viewer hears plays a main role at making the viewer feel these unpleasant emotions with Max. Sounds can sometimes effect our emotions more than visuals. You could always remove the sound and hope for the viewer to connect the dots at what the protagonist is feeling. However, a simple loud sound effect can frighten the viewer even more. This movie does a really good job at using this technique to terrify the viewer who's watching the film.

    Having a low budget can really take a viewer out of the movie if the director is not thrifty. Poor scenery and effects can be a real withdrawer and it can kill immersion quickly. However, despite having such a minuscule budget, the effects and scenery looked top notch. The computers and the setup of Max's room that Max uses look convincing and realistic, and since there's so many machines around his apartment which look high-tech, it looks like a believable work station for something so complicated that he's doing. Also, the effects looked very good as well. They looked realistic for a low-budget film, and they still hold up today pretty well. It's a great trait for a director to be able to do so much with so little. That's exactly what Aronofsky did here, and by doing so, he proved that he was a talented director.

    When some people watch a movie, they often like to kick back and relax. This movie doesn't let you. Sometimes, the movie can be hard to watch at times. It's not for everyone. Some people dislike Eraserhead for that reason. However, I love these kinds of films. I love the sprightly feelings that they evoke from the viewer. I feel like I can revisit them again and again, and every time I do so, they still impress me as much, if not, more than my first viewing.
  • SnoopyStyle30 May 2016
    8/10
    Aronofsky debut
    Maximillian Cohen is sickly and math obsessed. He is building his Euclid computer in his small New York apartment as a way to understand and predict the world. Sol Robeson is his mentor. Religious Jew Lenny Meyer introduces him to the mathematical nature of Hebrew and the Torah. He finds that the computer predicted the correct stock price. He is also hounded by Marcy Dawson from a powerful financial consortium. They offer him a supercomputer chip. The computer outputs a number and everybody wants it.

    This is a debut from Darren Aronofsky with great originality. It has great paranoid thriller vibe. The music, the style, and Max all build a great obsessive mood. There are some things to nit-pick. The camera work is strictly indie. The action scenes are a little dizzying and not in a good way. It's unlikely that Aronofsky had the equipment to do better although some low-budget indies do better somehow. The acting from some of the secondary characters could also be better. They are all understandable indie deficiencies.
  • grantss4 May 2016
    6/10
    Leaves you with more questions than answers
    Being a mathematical person (I have a Masters degree in Statistics) I was intrigued by the premise of the movie but in the end I was left with more questions than answers and was left hanging. The plot includes too much of the mathematical detail (and medical detail, listing all the drugs Cohen was taking!), often coming across as nerdy.

    The solution seemed too straightforward and practical, with many details lacking here (unlike in the build-up). I thought the final mix might include emotions, basically a more relationship-centric argument, especially as the plot did allude to the potential for something to happen between Cohen and his neighbour, but this didn't come up at all.

    This all said, Darren Aronofsky is clearly a very talented director. His use of the black&white medium and close-up camera shots in Pi were a stroke of genius - it certainly helped one get into Cohen's mind. Requiem for a Dream is an outstanding movie but Pi fails to deliver because he took on a very weighty and complex subject in his first attempt at a motion picture. The problem lies in the screenplay (which he co-wrote), and not his direction, however.

    It is interesting to note Aronofsky's use of some of the effects that he would later use in Requiem for a Dream, especially the fast- forward pill-popping sequence which was always worth a chuckle in both movies (in a dark sort of way).
  • blendax996 February 2016
    10/10
    After 16 years I had to write this review
    This is my first ever review. I saw the IMDb suggestion to write a review. I then started to think about what movie I would review. It took me about 5 seconds and the answer was Pi.

    When I first watched this movie I had no expectations at all. I was very open minded, so was the movie. It's a low budget indie masterpiece.

    It's about life, existence, god, genius and insanity. It's about the market and structure in chaos combined with a claustrophobic feeling.

    I don't like to mention more because you should not know about any movie before you see it.

    The movie really touched me deeply. It's one of it's kind.

    Still after 16 years I watch this movie every now and then because it's unique.
  • D' Francis19 December 2015
    8/10
    An anxious mimalist stylized black and white cult film.
    This is a love letter to pure mathematics, but you don't need to be a math expert to love it. Although the advertising for this one makes it seem like a cryptic mind-bender, it's less focused on plot twists and more focused on frantic emotions.

    The main character is a recluse mathematician who is very sick, barely gets sleep and relies on amphetamines to push himself to his limits of cracking the one formula that's the solution to the world. Of course, he is guided by his old wise mentor who practices his mathematical algorithms in the seemingly simple but very complex game of Go.

    As an indie film, it doesn't have grand locales, CGI or big-budget action, which is a good thing. It conveys tension purely in it's direction and editing. The black and white visuals are key to this film's striking visual presentation and in how it conveys tension ; They are heavily saturated and contrasted during the most thrilling moments to represent a break away from reality.
  • Dennis Laursen5 October 2015
    2/10
    Annoying black-white hell
    First of all, this movie is a annoying hell of blurred black-white scenes. I don't understand this want-to-be avant-garde way of making movies. Especially when it is possible to make clear colour-scenes now a days, also in 1998. Is this what bad directors do, to cover their incompetence, and cheat all the upper-class snobbish reviewers, who think that everything that is different from Hollywood-movies are great movies? I also get tired of Hollywood-movies - but there are also other bad movies, than the tedious stuff from Hollywood. Alone this drag the movie several stars down: DON'T MAKE BLACK-WHITE MOVIES WHEN COLOURS ARE INVENTED! And especially not as blurred and unclear as this. I can't barely see what happens in this movie, because everything is so dark and blurred.

    Furthermore, the story is also quite dull. It seems very interesting at first sight. But if you - as me - are patient enough to go through the entire movie, you will find yourself after the movie thinking: what's the point of this? What's the conclusion? What are this movie trying to tell me?

    I will go down to the movie store, sell my DVD-copy, and buy an other movie instead.
  • billcallinderscott-26074 September 2015
    1/10
    Pi?
    Warning: Spoilers
    A strange film that just don't do anything for me. It's called Pi but at the start you can see that it's not about mathematics since the number Pi as is shown is wrong. Maybe it was deliberate and there's a hidden meaning or it could be when Pi was displayed on a calculator it was only shown to a certain number of digits so the rest was made up. And then there's the line the mathematics "genius", Max, comes out with during some rambling monologue to a Rabbi, i.e. "It's just a number. I'm sure you've written down every two hundred sixteen digit number. You've translated all of them. You've intoned them all. Haven't you? But what's it gotten you? The number is nothing!" Well it seems that there's 9.9*(10^215) permutations of 216 digits and I leave you to work out how long it'd take to write them out but it's longer than Aronofsky thought.

    So it wasn't a film about the wonders of mathematics or why Pi is such a mind-blowing number when all it's just the length of the circumference of a circle divided by it's radius. However at some positions within the number Pi will be every possible sequence of 216 digits. Is it just about a man going mad, as some mathematics geniuses did, but without the distraction of mathematics? Whatever it is it's a film that many like but for the life of me I can't see why.
  • craigh0113 June 2015
    3/10
    Boring, tedious, pretentious, cliché, complete waste of time
    How do movies like this get a 7.5 rating and cause me to waste 84 minutes of my time? I'm not a mathematician but I know a little about science, I already know about the Fibonacci sequence and how it appears in nature, PI, etc. They just threw a bunch of mathematical clichés and threw it all together into a stupid, irritating mess that made no sense.

    I was waiting and waiting for something interesting to happen, nothing ever did. The ending was completely ridiculous and unbelievable.

    What I want to know is how does a movie like this get a 7.5 on IMDb? OK I started out giving it a 1, but in retrospect, since I'm still thinking about it, I'll up it to a 3.

    Unless you really like artsy movies I'd skip it...
  • dholliday16 April 2015
    9/10
    highly-enjoyable trip which only reveals its structure on a rewatch
    I've seen this film 3 times now: the first time, as it first came out, was an absolute trip of an experience (I may have been somewhat under the influence myself). It was very enjoyable, but I understood next to nothing.

    Couple of years later I saw another Aronofsky: Requiem for a Dream. As the fella shares my first name (although relatively common, it's somehow rarely seen in the arts) I was all up for supporting his second film. Alas, it was trash, saved from a dustbin score only by how well-made it was technically, and mostly by Ellen Burstyn's stunning performance. 5/10 in the end.

    Disappointed, I returned to Pi to find out if the hash was to blame for my enjoying it. Turns out not, I still really liked it, and this time followed some more of the story, tho' still felt slightly bewildered.

    In the intervening 10 years or so I've seen The Fountain which was a boring pretentious fart of a movie, not redeemed by the interesting visuals (3/10). Now just recently decided on a third watch of Pi, and this time I understood the whole film: the concept, ideas, narrative...it's so clear now! Reminds me very much of my experiences reading (and re-reading) Zamyatin's We. Any work of art which reveals more of itself over time is worth something special.

    Throughout all 3 watches Pi remained an excellent 9/10 experience. Best not to tell you anything about the story or characters, just that the:

    • acting is superb.


    • direction is dynamic and exciting.


    • high-contrast black/white is extremely effective.


    • use of sound is excellent.


    • concept is satisfyingly high-end.


    And it's got Hector from Breaking Bad in it :)

    If you enjoyed Requiem & Fountain, I really can't say if you'll like Pi. It's a difficult film to openly recommend as it is, and there's not much like it to compare to.

    I'll say if you enjoyed Eraserhead, you'll probably like Pi.
  • Al_The_Strange14 March 2015
    The syntax between the numbers...
    You might think a movie about numbers and math would be boring, but Pi is anything but. It is one trippy experience that mixes experimental expressions with a gritty neo-noir style to craft a sharp and punchy thriller that exudes paranoia.

    The film's style is what makes it consistently engaging. It's a very stark and gritty black-and-white picture with a lot of intricate sets, unique photography, and snappy editing. It's almost on the same level as Eraserhead, but with a production that looks like the first half of The Matrix. It's a pretty cool way to take an otherwise uninteresting subject and make it presentable. As the film goes on, the character becomes a target by various people, and he goes on the run in some mildly satisfying chase scenes. It all builds up to a climax that will come off as bewildering and extreme.

    The story's pretty simple: a bunch of people chase after one man who knows a special number. It is pretty novel to use a number as a plot device. What makes the story most interesting, however, is the subtext. The film draws strong parallels between mathematics, nature, and the man-made world, suggesting that through math and patterns, there is a correlation between order and chaos. This is what gives the plot its weight, and gives the characters a reason to struggle to figure out numbers. Fundamentally though, this is a story about a man gifted with great talents and insight, but descends into self-destructive madness due to the knowledge in his own head.

    Darren Aronofsky's debut film is made with very vivid black-and-white photography and editing. He employs some hip-hop montages here and there (as he later does in Requiem for a Dream), and it looks great. Acting is pretty good from the cast, and the writing gets the job done. The narration is pretty slick. This production uses pretty interesting sets, props, costumes, and locales. Electronic music is used throughout the movie, with a lot of beat and energy, and it is really cool.

    This film is pretty bizarre, but there is plenty to think about in this basic story and plenty to admire in the intense style. If you enjoy experimental films, then this should interest you.

    4/5 (Experience: Good | Content: Good | Film: Very Good)
  • Joseph Pezzuto14 March 2015
    7/10
    Reel Look: Pi
    Warning: Spoilers
    "When I was a little kid, my mother told me not to stare into the sun, so when I was six I did..." So repeats this line from our main protagonist and unreliable narrator throughout 'Pi', Darren Aronofsky's surreal psychological indie thriller and explosive directorial debut. But was newcomer Aronofsky able to tell story enough that could accurately and shockingly be told on a shoestring budget? Let's take a look.

    Shot in high-contrast black and white, we are thus plunged into the disturbed mind, madness and mechanisms of mathematics computer genius and number theorist Maximillian "Max" Cohen (Sean Gullette), of whom suffers cluster headaches, extreme paranoia, hallucinations and social anxiety disorder. Unemployed and holed up in a dreary Chinatown apartment in New York City, Max makes a breakthrough when his computer Euclid crashes as he makes stock predictions, the machine spitting out a seemingly random 216-digit number. Eventually discovering that what Euclid spat out was accurate, Max slowly descends from curiosity to obsession, confronting his old mathematics mentor Sol Robeson (Mark Margolis) to encountering Lenny Meyer, (Ben Shenkman) a Hasidic Jew in a coffee shop who coincidentally does mathematical research on the Torah. He even explains to Max that some people believe that the Torah is a string of numbers that form a code sent by God. From Wall Street agents to members of a radical Jewish Kabbalah sect, Max is thus thrown into even more turmoil as he realizes the pattern of the numbers as he writes them out on the brink of an epiphany as to why these people want them for their own extreme purposes. With the urgent monochromatic photography of Matthew Libatique,everything that follows seems to fade from the fuzzy uncertainty being the fine line of science-fiction into the maddening realm of the entropic unknown as Max sees it, thanks to the brilliant choice of the SnorriCam that provides the film with its unsettling, queasy edge on how he views the world around him slipping off into oblivion. Coffee and cream dance in a cup, waves crash, ants creep and crawl about. Patterns are everywhere, according to the Fibonacci sequence. Unlike it's own design, Max taps too far in to the very genius of his own subconscious and finds himself slowly spiraling out of his very own control. With the similarities of a Lynchian thriller such as 'Eraserhead' and Orson Welles' 'The Trial', 'Pi' is a paranoid pulse-pounding psych trip, racing along to Oren Sarch's rapid editing and Clint Mansell's cyberpunk score while maintaining to match the claustrophobic life of Max in turn. Remarkably gripping and frighteningly intelligent as well as constructed, 'Pi' proved maverick auteur director Aronofsky a promising career in films that would later probe our psychosis and thrill our senses beyond compare with some quite disturbing and otherworldly sights. Happy Pi Day!
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.