User Reviews (2,436)

Add a Review

  • This movie is about how drugs can affect your life. Watching this movie really hurts. If you want to convince someone to stop doing drugs / live more healthy this is the movie to do it. Great acting (especially by Ellen Burstyn) and a realistic / convincing story but man is it painful to watch. This is the kind of movie you are happy to have watched at some point but you don't want to rewatch it because it is a real mood killer.

    9/10 would recommend if you are looking for a heavy, dramatic movie.
  • You will not so much as want to take a sip of wine after watching this mesmerizing film about the horrors of drug addiction. I was not a fan of director Darren Aronofsky's debut film "Pi," but with this movie he proves to be a filmmaker of unlimited vision and style. Four characters in Brighton Beach, Brooklyn are all driven to despair due to their drug abuse, the saddest being Ellen Burstyn as a nice Jewish widow who unwittingly becomes addicted to prescription diet pills that help her lose weight but drag her into a world of hallucinations and paranoia. Burstyn is superb. It is so refreshing to see such a great veteran like her in such a challenging leading role, one in which she goes through a hell worse than that in "The Exorcist."

    But this is a director's film if there ever was one. Aronofsky knows how to tell a story in a way that is dazzling in its use of sound, editing, and cinematography. The score by the Kronos Quartet and Clint Mansell is the most striking movie music I have heard in a very long time.

    "Requiem for a Dream" is not a movie for everyone. It is the essence of independent filmmaking, a daring, engrossing, artful film that stays with you long after you leave the theater. Hollywood bubblegum this ain't.
  • Requiem for a Dream (2000) - Directed by Darren Aronofsky

    This film is a human-character-study. Darren Aronofsky's, crazy, rollercoaster, drug-induced Requiem for a Dream (2000). Aronofsky gives that 1980s feel to the viewer throughout the film. It has a fantastic calling to old-Hollywood-style film-making. The best component to the film is the acting.

    Ellen Burstyn is Sara Goldfarb, a retired couch-potato, who is addicted to a bad self-help TV show that cons her into believing she can lose weight if she uses certain drugs, Pharmaceuticals that eventually destroy her mind and create a horrible addiction. Meanwhile, her dead-beat son, Harry (Jared Leto), comes up with the brilliantly dumb idea of creating a haven for himself, his friend, Tyrone (Marlan Wayans) and Harry's girlfriend, Marion (Jennifer Connelly), by getting into the street-drug-business. Unfortunately, he and his friends are all now junkies and things don't go so well as planned.

    This film is not for the squeamish. It involves many horrible aspects of life, the terrible things humans are capable of doing to themselves and the consequences of such poor decisions. It does manage to pull at the heart-strings and makes you feel very sorry for these people. I won't say anymore, but there is a reason why Ellen Burstyn was nominated for the Best Actress Oscar that year. The directing, camera-work and editing is fantastic and quite fitting for the drug-incited delusions seen in the film. The film is rated R, but could have gone even further. Jennifer Connelly's performance is staggeringly good. She definitely leaves her comfort zone for this film. For myself, this film shocked, brought out many emotions and contained a life-lesson we should all pay attention to.

    9.0 (A- MyGrade) = 9 IMDB
  • Warning: Spoilers
    It's difficult to know what to say about Requiem For A Dream. I first saw it in the cinema when it was released in England and I have never seen an audience react to a film like this one. The climactic sequence, where the protagonists are effectively destroyed by their addictions, seemed to trigger a bout of heavy breathing in the audience. As it was ending I heard a few people crying. My girlfriend and I didn't say a single word to each other on the bus home.

    I bought the film on DVD the day it came out, but it took me around six months to watch it again. And only then because a friend of mine was curious. If anything, the impact was heavier than the first time I watched it and I've vowed never to watch it ever again.

    Yet I have still awarded a rating of 10 on imdb and would definitely assert that it's one of the three greatest films I have ever seen. Why? The acting is just amazing. Jennifer Connolly gives the best performance of her career (not too tricky considering the movies she's been in) and remains stunningly beautiful (in a haggard sort of a way) and noble even when she's roped into a gang bang to fund her heroin habit. Jared Leto annoyed me intensely in Fight Club but he's perfect as hapless junky Harry - forever exuding an air of kindly incompetence that endears him to the audience but that will ultimately destroy him. Marlon Wayans is equally brilliant - wearing a beaming smile for the first half of the film and a compelling look of confusion and betrayal for the rest of it.

    As for Ellen Burstyn... never has an actress been so unfairly cheated out of an Oscar (and I've seen the atrocity that won Marcia Gay Harden that Oscar for). She is just the picture of sadness the whole film through - a heartbreaking example of what loneliness can do to vulnerable people. The scene where she complains to Harry about being old is honestly one of the most tragic things I've ever seen and it makes me want to break down just thinking about it.

    As such, I can only recommend this incredibly important movie with certain reservations. If your favourite film is 'You've Got Mail' steer well clear. If 'Snow Dogs' has been your most thrilling cinematic experience of this year then put this film back on the shelf. Trust me, it'll save the costs incurred by those expensive therapy sessions.

    However, if you believe that cinema is an important tool in helping us understand ourselves and that we will only achieve self awareness by plumbing the absolute depths of despair and self-destruction then you must watch Requiem For a Dream.
  • devinbrown-1909116 November 2019
    This movie is the most disgustingly beautiful and horrifying movie.
  • I'm not going to waste space with a synopsis, as every second or third review provides one. A good indication of a challenging and original film is the number of 1/10 and 10/10 reviews, where the 1/10 reviews consist of just a few lines. A pretty sure sign that those folks weren't able or willing to watch with an open mind. Which is a good sign for casual viewers to give this film a wide berth.

    I wish everyone I care about would see Requiem for a Dream. Not because they will like it, or that it will teach them something they did not already know, but that it's a rare piece of work that will challenge and probably change them. It's a film that has never been made before, with nothing to compare to it - a rarity these days. I often find myself recommending films to people that I am unable to briefly describe. These are usually the most involving and affecting ones. I'd like my family to see this, but can't *recommend* it to them. I've recommended it to two friends, and they both had the same reaction: I am glad I watched it, but I doubt I'll be in the frame of mind to watch it again, knowing what you feel.

    As I sat watching the credits roll, I began crying, but I'm still not sure why. Partly in reaction to the devastatingly tragic ending, partly the beauty (yes) of the film, partly my gratitude for good things in my life. I watched it again the same night with my girlfriend, not because I wanted to upset her, but I felt that I had to share it. After the credits rolled, we both were silent for a good ten minutes. I found that I had thoughts I wanted to express, but could find no words. This is one of the few films that are painful to experience, but I feel compelled to share with people I care about. Some others in that short list include The Thin Red Line, Happiness, River's Edge,and The Deer Hunter.

    These films all share a quality that's difficult to name. No one likes feeling disturbed or shattered by a film, a work of art, a piece of music, but I feel experiencing these emotions and being asked to think, not just be entertained, is important now and then.

    "Favorite" does not apply to this for me - this isn't about entertainment. One of the most devastating and beautiful experiences I've had watching a film. One of the top five films I've ever seen.
  • Jared Leto, Marlon Wayans, Jennifer Connelly and Ellen Burstyn all star in this incredibly painful film about four people who are chemically dependent. When the film begins, the first three folks are all using heroin yet seem to be reasonably functional. Over the course of the film, their lives begin to disintegrate badly. At the same time, Burstyn plays an older woman who becomes addicted to amphetamines because of an irresponsible doctor who tosses out pills like candy...and she goes from a relatively normal lady to someone who seems like she's crossed over the line from sanity to oblivion.

    "Requiem for a Dream" is an exceptional movie and there's nothing else like it. However, it's a film that I am happy did not spur on other similar films, as it's also a visual assault on the senses and very difficult to watch...and I would hate to see film after film made like this Darren Aronofsky project. Using rapid intercutting (far, far more than normal) of scenes, fisheye lenses, exaggerated sound effects, shaking lenses, multipanes, television characters that come popping out of the screen and other strange gimmicks, he makes the viewer feel as if they, too, are stuck in the throes of addiction and, eventually, insanity! It's mesmerizing as well as unpleasant...and it's appropriately so considering the subject matter. In fact, I don't think a better film has ever been made about the hellishness of addiction...it sure captures it in all its vivid awfulness!

    In addition to the incredibly clever use of all these films techniques, the movie has a lot going for it. The script, though very episodic, works well...and is made all the better thanks to some amazing performances, particularly by Burstyn. My only complaint about the film, and it's very minor, is that Jennifer Connelly is just way too pretty to be playing a woman who is that addicted. Sure, over time she falls apart...but she still looks model beautiful during most of the film. She would have been better looking skankier...or an uglier actress might have worked better!

    So who would I recommend should see this film? Well, anyone who loves films and longs for something different should certainly see the film. Also, despite all the nudity, violence, vomiting and nastiness, I actually recommend parents consider showing it to their kids (especially if the teens have begun dabbling in drugs or thing it looks cool or fun). It will do far more to discourage them from using drugs than any pat message or sermonizing!! It shows drugs in all its sleazy awfulness....no holds barred. I challenge you to find a film THIS difficult to watch and effective when it comes to presenting the effects of drugs. I am not sure how the film received an R rating, as it seems more like something that should be NC-17. Horrible to watch...especially as the film progresses, so don't say you weren't warned!! By the end, I was in tears...

    I should note that the ECT (electro-convulsive therapy) they show in the film is similar to the type done decades ago. They do NOT do shock treatment like this today and it is a relatively benign sort of treatment for folks who simply won't respond to other treatments for depression...thank goodness.
  • murkyfish29 March 2001
    I just saw Requiem For A Dream and I have to say, I was blown away. Not since 1995's The Basketball Diaries, has a film so accurately portrayed the craving and depravity of a person dealing with(or succumbing to) addiction. It is a beautifully articulated piece of artwork, intricately presented on a silver platter. Director Darren Aronofsky shines in his brilliant direction and style, in this depiction of the downward spiral of the lives of four people, living with their respective addictions.

    Jared Leto, gives an excellent, solid performance as Harry Goldfarb, a man living an inch from his life, always in search of a fix. In an emotional powerhouse of a performance, he proves to audiences that he can shine through in a major role as opposed to previous smaller roles in Fight Club and American Psycho. However, it appears to be a Hollywood in-joke of sorts in that it seems he has a penchant for mutilation or at least the roles he seems to take on seem to have for him. In Fight Club, he had his face rearranged and in American Psycho, his head cut off. In Requiem however, it is the mutilation of his life, his whole character, that takes centerstage, ending in a satisfying climax of gargantuan proportions in which he gives the audience more than their money's worth in his power-packed performance.

    However, the real star of the film lies in the talent of Ellen Burstyn. Audiences will wonder at her appearance at the beginning of the film, not really knowing if it is, in fact, her. Her performance as a television, sugar and eventually, diet pill-addicted mother of Harry shows that she's still got it after all these years. If you want to make a comparison of her thespian skills throughout the years, watch the revived version of The Exorcist. She can only get better. She takes on the role of Sarah Goldfarb with gusto, never backing down for a second. Totally throwing herself into the role, you tend to forget how she really looks like, given only fleeting moments in the film which suggest her real appearance. I have to say, she's got guts. How many female actresses her age would dare to have a camera strapped to her person(as Aronofsky so creatively did), an inch away from her face with a wide angle lens? She definately deserves her Oscar nomination, if not, the Oscar itself, for her tour-de-force performance.

    The other characters themselves hold their own with the two abovementioned powerhouses. Jennifer Connelly and Marlon Wayans both realistically portray their respective roles as Marion Silver, Harry's girlfriend and rebellious suburbanite chick, who degenerates to prostitution for her fix and Tyrone C. Love, Harry's best friend and fellow pusher. Here, Wayans shows that he can lose his comic edge if needed, to portray a boy trapped in a man's body, just yearning for his mother's approval but seeking it instead, in drugs. Connelly as well, who has been taking on smaller roles and projects over the last few years, is finally given enough room to play with her character and gives a winning performance in Requiem.

    The cinematography of Matthew Libatique gives total light on the chracterizations of the people in habiting Aronofsky's sick world, from the sliently flickering sick-green flourescents to the exaggerated wide angle shots and the beautifully sad and haunting Coney Island picturesque of the pier which suggests a certain beauty amidst all the sadness and depravity. A Downer Picturesque, as portrayed by the photographs of Robert Frank and the Frank influenced cinematography of Darius Khondji in Seven. In my books, Matthew Libatique has just joined those ranks.

    Jay Rabinowitz' editing stands out as well, with in-your-face smash title cards(emphasising the downward crash of the character's lives through the seasons), as well as the close-up constructions of the drug taking process. The latter sequences, edited so tightly and seamlessly, make the moment so beautiful but so fleeting, as is the case with drugs. The sequences are almost like a drug, making you crave for more of them, a fix which you get, whenever the characters get their own fix in the film. Lots of people might misinterpret this as glamourising the drug culture but these moments are so fleeting that they're over before you even know it, and then it's back to Harry, Marion, Sarah and Tyrone's sick and depraved search for the next fix, which very accurately portrays the twisted quest of a true and sincere addiction.

    The film is also superbly scored by Clint Mansell and hauntingly performed by the Kronos Quartet. A series of hauntingly shocking, yet mind-numbingly beautiful pieces which linger in your head long after you've left the cinema.

    Lastly, the direction of Aronofsky, brilliant, beautiful, empathic. There are not enough words to describe his direction or this film and I think the best way to say it is that I am speechless. Aronofsky has shown me that, jaded by so many films, something can still prompt me to sit up and take notice. To see something that I have never seen before or learn something I don't already know. The ending, is sheer power. A masterpiece of all the elements of what filmmaking is about, mixed together in some sick souffle and thrown into your face, burning hot and scalding. The film leaves a deep impression, in fact, a huge scar. And it is a scar I am proud to wear.
  • This ranks up there as one of the three most powerful movies I have ever seen in my lifetime (Full Metal Jacket and Grave of The Fireflies being the other two). This movie shows the brutal honest side of addiction and over-indulgence. Not just drugs, although it heavily shows drug addiction. Also shows how one addiction can lead to another and how damaging it can be for you. I watched this alone, and felt so stunned afterwards, I had to call a friend just to calm my nerves. Seriously, this is a brutal (one more time) BRUTAL film. The acting is wonderful - Ellyn Burnstyn and Jenniffer Connely are just wonderful in this movie, and Marlon Wayons was such a shocker in a serious role. Everyone must watch it, for it's entertainment value, and more importantly, it's educational value. But it leaves chills down your spine for it's honesty and unforgiving lessons.
  • I watch this movie like twice a year and it gets to me every time. By far my favourite movie ever. Instead of a regular review, here is everything this movie does perfectly.

    Character Development: this could really be separated into three biopics. The way The film is spliced between three main characters that evolve an enormous deal over 100mins is a work of art within itself.

    Plot structure and timing: This film is the pinnacle of an effective slow burn. At no point does the runtime seem to drag on, but it is slow enough to make the payoff incredibly valuable. Plot structure and timing are two of the most difficult things in film making, and they were executed perfectly in this one.

    Sound and score: one of the most effective scores to date. The ups and downs of this film are only expressed further with an extremely effective and catchy score. At no points does it feel obnoxious or out of place, and you'll be thinking of it long after your viewing.

    Cinematography: The beautiful mix of cinematography that are found throughout this film is perfect. Extreme close ups, split screen scenes and snapshots are all used to express the films ideas in a beautiful way. It does an excellent job to break up the story and to show you the multiple perspectives.

    An incredible third act: So many great films fall down during the third act. Many-a-film has been ruined by a less than average third sequence, but this one ties up the whole story in a beautiful, non-abrupt way. I couldn't think of a better ending.

    Performances: Each and every main performance in this film is done with grace and respect. I am always super surprised at Jared Leto's performance, as I've never seen him as an excellent actor. He steals the show here, with a genuine and emotional performance.

    I really cannot think of anything I don't like or would change about this film. Incredibly engaging, beautiful story and told excellently.

    Do yourself a favour and watch this masterpiece of filmmaking
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I had been looking forward to Aronofsky's follow-up to his critically acclaimed art-house film, Pi, of a few years back and when it did finally open in 1 theatre in Toronto, I gathered a bunch of friends to go down and see it. Some have never even heard of Pi before. For others, this would be their first Independent film experience. However, coming out of the movie, we all agreed that it was one of most powerful piece of contemporary cinema that anyone has seen.

    "Requiem for a Dream" tells the story of 4 people, connected either through blood or some kind of personal relationship, whether it be family, girlfriend, or business partner. Although the characters lived far from what you and I would consider to be normal lifestyles, they shared something in common with each and every member of the audience; hopes, aspirations, dreams. Sara Goldfarb (played so wonderfully by Ellen Burstyn) dreams of one day being on a TV show, and one day, gets her chance. She fantasizes about how she could wear her favourite red dress, that she wore to her sun's graduation, on television. However, upon trying to wear the red dress, Sara discovers that she has gained some weight over the years and tries desperately to lose her weight, eventually resorting to medication. All of the characters have drugs (the bad kind) affect their lives, which eventually take over their lives. The movie documents how for each of the 4 people are effected and eroded by drugs.

    The look of the film is extremely stylized, but justifiably so. Aronofsky uses surreal imagery as a vehicle for realism, something that really works when done well, and done well it was. By using a combination of slow and fast motion shots, extreme close-ups and more edits than you can shake a stick at, Aronofsky successfully brings the audience into the world and mind of someone with a drug problem. The audience visually experiences first-hand what it is like to be 'scared' or 'high' - all this in 3rd person; all this in the comfort of the theatre chair.

    Of course, all of this effort would be in vain if it didn't mean anything at the end. The film leads the audience down a spiral of addiction until the grand finale, which features a montage of graphically intense scenes and images with more edits per second than any film. The pacing at the end, when compared to earlier parts of the movie, was so fast I started to find it hard to keep up, and literally took my breath away as the credits came up. All in all, the effect was amazing, and something that I have not personally experienced when watching any film before.

    As the title indicates, "Requiem for a Dream" does not contain a happy ending. It is in no way optimistic, and only gives the audience faint pieces of hope and happiness. However, It does show what desperate people are willing to do, and how desperation will change someone's life to its entirety. It is in the recognition of desperation where hope lies.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This will likely be the most modest review you'll read of this film in the first few pages of a sea of 10s. I nonetheless, am convinced a 7 is the highest the film deserves. Aronofsky creates a unique film about the horrors of four characters spiraling into a chaotic conclusion due drug addiction. However, his reliance on creating an extreme, hyperbolic film undermines the movie's appeal. The film seems to be an example of pushing the boundaries simply for the sake of pushing boundaries, as no real message. It would be similar to calling a horror movie a 'classic' because the director showed a bloody decapitation after bloody decapitation or a romance movie being considered a 'classic' because it has 1/2 hour of real sex. Nonsense. The best films are the ones that leave the gory or gruesome details to the imagination yet leave you with an extraordinary impact and a message. I really got no message from the film which is heavily focused on torturing four miserable characters again and again....and again and again. What's the point? The four main actors in the film are phenomenal. Marlon Wayans surprisingly gives a stunning break out performance for someone known for starring trivial and mediocre pop culture comedies. He may have given the best or second best performance of the four. Jennifer Connelly gives a credible performance as a desperate and loyal girlfriend forced to do unthinkable sex acts. The actors strengths are their modesty and ability to succumb themselves to the most demeaning things possible.

    The music of the film is memorable. The film has one main theme song, but it is the most memorable and haunting theme song ever I've ever heard. I downloaded it immediately after the film. The music emphasized the tone of the film.

    The major weakness of the film, despite the great acting, are the characters. There's no bones about it, the characters are pure idiots. The fact that they're idiots leaves me little ability to sympathize with them, and I was trying my hardest. Furthermore, despite other reviewers efforts to paint them as "tragic heroes", the main characters are not heroes in any form. It's even a stretch to suggest that they're good people. For instance, Connelly's character initially seduces an older man simply to get money. Leto's character upsets his mother repeatedly by selling her television set. Yes, they all do this to subdue their addiction.. but the term hero cannot be thrown around aimlessly. They're simply dubious protagonists. Yeah, they try to aim to get out of the drug culture and start prosperous lives. The characters have great chemistry with each other, they are somewhat slightly charismatic, but they don't do anything remotely generous or pious in the film to warrant praise as "tragic heroes."

    You can watch this film and immediately see the end coming. Part of you naively and helplessly hopes the film takes a sudden right turn into brighter pastures, but that is simply not the case. Aronofonsky might tease you in the beginning, but he brings you to the most overly dramatic conclusion like a car crashing into a brick wall. Ironically, while many critics bashed 'The Passion' for overemphasizing torture and maiming of Christ again and again and again and again over other aspects of Christ (and rightly so, that film has its flaws as well), it surprising these critics praise similar methods of repetitive "how can it get any worse" torture done to rather shady characters nonstop.

    I'm not saying this film needed a happy ending to be a good movie. But if it has a tragic ending, it should have a message. If it's just "don't do drugs", than that's a grave disappointment and waste of time for a supposedly deep experimental film.

    To his credit, the director utilizes a neat and impressive artistic style known as "hip hop montage." The surreal spinning directing was a doozy but a great asset to the film.

    This film I guess is worth a watch once. But once is only time I've seen it, and I'll never sit through that film all the way through again. Period. I'm pretty confident in saying that most of those "10s" people have only seen it once and will make an excuse not to see it again. The only people who will see this film again are overly depressed and eccentric, pessimistic types.... A classic has to be more than a overly nihilistic novelty act.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    It baffles me how Aronofsky has managed to fool audiences and critics to rave about not one but two nonsensical stories in the last few years. If you manage to keep your cool under the barrage of imagery thrown at you from frame one you should be able to spot plot holes in this film so large that they'll make Pi's nonsensical ending look like plausible narrative.

    What bothers me most with these, apart from the fact that they make this film essentially pointless, is that they are all there simply to justify some supposedly shocking visuals. I can't help it, I must provide a list.

    SPOILER SPACE (you shouldn't care, but it's the rules)

    * * * * * *

    1. Harry goes to a hospital to get his obviously gangrened arm cured. A doctor spots him as a drug addict and calls the police WITHOUT TENDING TO THE ARM FIRST. The weirdest thing about this is that the poor guy is later sent back to the hospital to have his arm cut off. The good part for Harry is that he should become a rich man in no time, after suing the doctor, the hospital and probably the police.

    2. A dealer won't sell heroin for money, but he will trade it for sex. He could hire all the hookers he wants with the money he'd earn selling the heroin, specially considering he's the only provider for the whole city at that time. Still, all he wants is to see some lesbian sex live. Apparently, this is in the movie only to create tension between the lead and his girlfriend. Well, and to show Jennifer Connelly naked.

    3. A previously healthy old lady is allowed to degenerate mentally to the point of being confined and given electroshocks without receiving any help, even though she's been shown previously socializing with many other people. For some reason the only person who realizes she's sick is his son, who doesn't care much for her anyway. Not that he does anything about it, either. Strangely enough, there's a shot of her friends waiting in the asylum looking worried while she receives electrical discharges without anesthetics.

    4. Even though heroin can be injected practically anywhere, the lead will do it always in the same place. Even when the spot becomes a purulent wound he'll still do it the exact same position. Not an inch above, not in the other arm, not in a leg. Right in the middle of the wound.

    * * * * *

    END SPOILERS (but there are more of these, believe me)

    You know, I wouldn't worry about plot holes that much if the filmmakers had set out to create just a series of disgusting images to show them around. The thing is they didn't. They made an attempt to create something vaguely resembling a storyline, they even had a shot at a subtext. They simply failed miserably. Let's see, this film seems to be about addiction. The points made about addiction in the film are:

    a) Many people have addictions of different kinds.

    b) Addictions aren't good things.

    c) Disgusting things happen when people let their addictions go out of control.

    and maybe, just maybe...

    d) With addictions at first you'll feel good, but then you'll feel bad.

    So much for depth.

    But we might also have some character development, right? We could neglect story and subtext and still have strong, compelling characters.

    Just we don't.

    Even the best of the characters we're shown is one dimensional and flat. Everything the characters are or do is put there to be dismantled later, which makes it all feel like a cardboard building in a Godzilla movie. It's fake and cheap. Everything. The leads' love story, the mother-son relationship, friendship between Harry and Tyrone, and between Sarah and the other women. Nothing feels real because Aronofski only cares about the next cool shot.

    This film might get you distracted enough the first time you watch it and make you to believe there's some depth behind that nauseous feeling in your stomach. In the end, it's just empty imagery planned to create a nauseous feeling in your stomach.

    If you want imagery go and see the latest summer blockbuster. It might at least be some fun.
  • being someone who had a history with drugs, i found this movie to be slightly more than ground-breaking. i saw this film in the midst of a downward spiral, and it turned me right around! having friends with the same plans, such as sell drugs to buy more drugs..it made me look at my life and theirs and see exactly what the future had in store.

    now, every time i see this movie since escaping that life, i cry. i cry for my past and those who still live in it. this movie has more to say to people my age than any drug education movie we were afforded in school. honestly, i wonder when the school systems will wisen up to what is really going to get kid's attention; movies that show that pros as well as the cons of drugs, or a movie that shows the complete and utter devastation drugs will bring to your life, and the lives of those around you. honestly, had i seen this film before my sophomore year of high school, i would have never even dreamed of taking more than the prescribed dose of advil.

    granted, my little summary or comment of this movie does not entail anything informative about the movie itself, i must say, i feel this is the best way i know to express my views.
  • Every single thing in this movie is made perfectly. The acting is perfect, they all acted so good i felt it all The directing is spectacular, they way things were directed and delivered to us is perfect The sound effects are full of suspense and thriller. The last 20 minutes i was so stressed through them all and feeling everything with each one of them. It touched me. And it you watch a movie and you get the message now that's a good movie. If you watch a movie and it left you speechless and brain freeze now that is a perfect movie.
  • Fantastic, Oscar Worthy Acting. Beautiful Directing. Must Watch.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "Requiem for a Dream" is an American 100-minute film from 2000 and probably still the most known work by director Darren Aronofsky, who also worked on adapting Hubert Selby Jr.'s novel for the screen here, actually with the late Selby himself. The cast includes Ellen Burstyn, already an Oscar winner at that point, the super stunning Jennifer Connelly, briefly before her Oscar win, and Jared Leto, a recent Oscar winner, so acting talent is certainly enough in here. Still this is a film that is really a lot more about the story and the overall picture than about individual performances, even if Burstyn managed to get nominated again, which was her most recent nomination at the Oscars, maybe even her final. I find it pretty shocking though that the movie did not get any nominations for other cast members (Leto and Connelly would not have been undeserving), for the direction, for the script, also for the make-up and for the truly memorable soundtrack. It is without a doubt one of the very best films from the first year of the new millennium and besides Gladiator it is also probably the most known from that year.

    There are so many excellent aspects about the film it's tough to decide with which to start first. Maybe Burstyn's performance, who is certainly one of the best portrayals of loneliness and delusion I have ever seen. The whole red-dress story-line is extremely heartbreaking and her one scene with Leto is a definite contender for best-acted scene of the year and probably also the main reason why she was nominated for an Oscar. I'd be honestly very surprised if I end up liking Roberts (the winner) more than Burstyn. The main theme is a piece of brilliance and not only utterly catchy, but also very fitting to the story in terms of the contents. I just used the word "heartbreaking" and this is pretty much what can be used to describe the fate of each and every character in here. Their addictions to whatever they are addicted to is destroying their lives. The four central characters lose their dignity, their limbs, their sanity, their friends, their businesses, their freedom and a lot more because of how they cannot get away from their drugs. So they lose basically everything except their lives eventually. All the final shots from the characters in their moments of biggest agony are really memorable of course, but I like to mention the one with Connelly's character especially as we see her lying down after this fateful night and we see that it's not Leto's character in her arms, but that all her love is for her drug now which is the movie at its most depressing. And if you see the very final scene with the television appearance and mother and son being reunited as something positive only because Burstyn's character does and she is somewhat happy in her own fictitious right, that's up to you of course.

    All in all, I think no matter from which perspective you see this film, it is a true piece of art. I also think it is a really important film because honestly I could not think of a better anti-drug and anti-addiction film than this one here. Is there anything wrong with it? One needs to dig very deep to find flaws here. Maybe Wayans' character is a bit of a filler to be honest as his story was basically a poor man's version of Leto's character's story and did not add too much. But it's not bad either and maybe just forgettable because everything else about this film is so outstandingly memorable. A bit on the filler side perhaps. Anyway, if there are still people out there who have not yet seen these slightly over 1.5 hours more than 1.5 decades after they came out, then it's high time. This movie is a must-see and it has aged brilliantly in a way where you really don't want to miss out. That is if you don't mind the very graphic aspect in here when it comes to violence, drug abuse and other stuff that is not too beautiful to watch like vomiting scenes. But it belongs to this film like everything else and just results in more realistic elements overall, which is definitely another reason to give it a thumbs-up. Nothing about this film is for the sake of it. Highly highly recommended. Aronofsky was only around the age of 30 when he made this, his second full feature film and what an achievement for such a young director.
  • I respect and admire this movie, even though (and perhaps because) it is complex, occasionally irritating and often very hard to take. Frankly, I avoided seeing it for a long time, but now am glad I did. To complain that the film fails as a realistic portrayal of addiction is, I think, to miss the point. Far from being the mere depiction of a collective downward spiral fueled by drugs, the movie is in fact a meditation on loneliness, greed, corruption, desperation, and the pervasiveness/banality of media, among many other things.

    The subtleties of the text are communicated, first and foremost, by superb acting. The performances of Ellen Burstyn, Jared Leto, Jennifer Connelly, and Marlon Wayans are all revelatory. In particular, I was knocked out by Burstyn, who is almost comically pathetic in the beginning, but who manages by the end to convey her character's utter devastation in the truest, most heartbreaking manner imaginable. The others are absolutely perfect as well; I was simply astonished by Leto and especially Wayans (may he eschew "scary movies" forevermore). Connelly has perhaps the most difficult role in the film, with opportunity and motivation galore to go over the top, and she delivers not a single false note throughout.

    My only real quibbles with the movie have to do with certain instances of the split-screen and jump-cut techniques, which struck me as somewhat gimmicky and repetitious, respectively. That being said, overall the style of the film is impressive and appropriate. The cinematography is beautifully conceived and executed, and the score is every bit as haunting as the performances (thanks largely to the work of the Kronos Quartet).

    In sum, regardless of whether or not the subject matter itself shocks you, this movie will put the viewer through the proverbial wringer. Give it a chance, and you will connect with the characters and then witness their destruction (spiritual and otherwise). It is a punishing but unforgettable experience. I'm not sure whether I'd necessarily recommend it or not; it all depends on your personal tolerance level with regard to an unflinching portrayal of human nature and behavior at their most extreme and, ultimately, tragic. For my part, while I don't expect to watch this film very often in the future, I'm sure glad it'll be on the shelf.
  • No one can deny that the message in this movie was powerful. It reveals consequences to drug addiction that are unfamiliar to the general public. One consequence that I overlooked until now is that society would rather punish drug addicts than help them. It was interesting to watch those in positions of power as they abused addicts, took advantage of them, and showed utter indifference towards human life and dignity. I would have rated this movie with a 10/10, but one essential element was missing, backgrounds. Out of the four main characters, the movie only delved into the addiction history of one. It would have been nice to learn about the introduction and descent into drug dependence among the other main characters. They all seemed so beautiful and loving, but viewers would be more sympathetic if traumatic events were used to explain how life can take a turn for the worst.
  • Funk Doctor25 July 2001
    Well, I´ve seen "Pi" and was fascinated. Now, there´s "Requiem for a dream" and my expectations were very, very high. That can be the downfall for a movie, but in this case I wasn´t disappointed. Aronofsky proves not only that he can direct a "bigger" movie, he also shows how one can do so without selling out. To be more precise: "RFAD" is one of the most disturbing and depressing movies that came out of the US for a looooong time. From the opening scene to its final curtain it´s...well, a requiem for the characters, who are all perfectly portrayed by their actors. Ellen Burstyn is unbelievable. The power of her performance can only be compared to that of Björk in "Dancer in the dark". Aronofskys direction is even more experimental than in "Pi" and some of his ideas, like his combination of sound and picture are really innovative and give his movie a musical feel -without creating a long music video. On the downside, you could say that this movie offers no hope, no solution - but then, this would´ve been a lousy compromise.
  • davidegede_74431 July 2008
    Warning: Spoilers
    First of all, don't watch this film if you are weak at heart. this is one bad trip. And it only gets worse until an unsatisfying ending. What is the point of this story? DON'T DO DRUGS. Jared Leto plays a junkie, Jennifer Connoly plays a junkie. Ellen Burstyn plays a woman who becomes a junkie. Junkie Junkie Junkie. Fast Paced clips does not help either. It is like those girls who comes out of the TV in all those very modern scary movies. Well it's well made and well casted. And if you are a sucker for drug movies, this is the one. Well one of them, not the best not the worst, but it's there. 6 out of 10, sensation is by far the word I would use. Pain is the answer to this movie. Pain to be alive, how much more emo could you get.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Oh my, where shall I begin? Experimental film making bursts into mainstream in this dramatic tail of 4 people who find themselves spiraling down the abyss, after experiencing a rendez-vous with the inevitable consequences attributed to drug use and the ill effect it has on its addicts. This one has no happy ending. There's no sugar coating here. Albeit this film packs a harsh, blunt, and sometimes overwhelmingly genuine depiction of the havoc drug addiction can reap on its victims. Despite the disturbing message of the film, I never the less couldn't help but remain fascinated with it's experimental/avant-guard visual style: A smooth, elaborate and languid progression of cinematic eye candy orchestrated to almost resemble a shockumentary, complemented by an impressive and well composed soundtrack. Some of the visual techniques were similar to the ones Aronofsky used in his directorial debut "Pi", such as split-screen shots and the use of body cameras filmed at varying speeds. At times, the film seemed more like an acid trip than a feature film. A cry for help is clearly felt throughout the film, from its innocent and promising start, to its hauntingly chilling conclusion. The one scene that really blew me away was the scene where Marion (played by Jennifer Connelley) had just sold her body off for a bag of heroin...As she walks out the door of the apartment, along the corridor, into the elevator, down to the street: one can't help but feel the characters disgust with herself, filthy to the core, what it must feel like at..."ZERO". The acting performances, especially by both Ellyn Burstyn and Marlon Wayans are simply breakthrough performances that earned critical acclaim across the board. Enough said. If this review alone does not compel you to experience the Film, I will just have to spell it out: PLEASE EXPERIENCE THIS FILM - it may cause an uneasy stomach, but is well worth it - YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED!!! 11 out of 10.
  • thisisnothere-111 June 2008
    This film is great in it's artistry, cinematography...but WAY overrated. Very cliché plot. The acting is good though, the best I've personally seen from Wayans. But aside from simply being very disturbing, which was an obvious desire of the director, it's just kinda boring. Lots of drug usage scenes. Get's pretty old. Im sure that was a desired effect so they could show how deeply they were getting into their usage, but after awhile its just like "ok...here we go again. Borrrring." Feels stale after like...the 3rd, 4th, 5th time. And it occurs a LOT more than that. A fairly typical ending. May be very disorienting to watch for some. Good film but definitely overrated.
  • I really can't see what's so great about this movie. It was a big disappointment to me. I really tried to like it but I just couldn't. I think after seeing the reviews on here my expectations of the movie was way too high. The first 20-30 minutes of this movie was incredibly boring, I thought that maybe it was just to make us get to know the characters so I gave it some more time. Then after an hour had passed I realized that this wasn't going to get any better. (somehow the same feeling the characters have about their own lives in the movie) It seems like the moviemakers didn't want to make a movie, they wanted to make a masterpiece. It's like the movie is saying "hey look at me, have u seen anything better?!? Look at these cool camera-angles and these amazing close-ups. And I don't only look good I'm deep too." Anyway I don't buy it. Just because you show close-ups of an eye and pills thrown into mouths it's not automatically a great movie. I'm not impressed. Anyway I've noticed that with IMDB the newer the movie is the higher ratings it gets. If you want to see a movie about drugadiction watch "panic in needle park" or the german movie "christiane f" both those movies are far better than this one (and rated lower). I don't hate this movie but I can't for my life understand how so many people can love it. I'm giving this a 1. That might be unfair but it's just as unfair as the 8.5 that it has on here. If I see it again I sure hope I discover something new since it feels like I'm the only one in the world who's not impressed with this. Over 40% voted a 10 for this.
  • I went to this movie hearing plenty of buzz about how graphic the content was. Over the course of the movie you see just how Aronofsky wants to send his message to the audience. The characters start off with somewhat mild addictions and then next thing you know the four main characters are living in hell. I couldn't believe how low they all fell. This movie may be the greatest anti-drug message of all time. I dare anybody to watch this and to not be touched and frightened by these characters. Before the movie started I noticed the audience was quite loud and garrulous, but as it ended and the credits rolled the whole place was stone cold silent. It was amazing.

    As a whole I felt the movie was excellent. The visuals were well done and the editing was outstanding. The actors really put themselves into their roles. Jared Leto and Jennifer Connelly had very good chemistry, while Marlon Wayans showed he is a talented actor and not just a talented comic. Ellen Burstyn. Wow! She was amazing. I can't believe an older woman would allow herself to be filmed like that. She has some serious guts. Hands down the best female performance I've watched this year, not even close. I was totally amazed by her.

    All in all, I would say Requiem For a Dream is a great movie. It had a profound impact on me and I haven't been able to stop thinking about it since I watched it on opening night. I definitely recommend this movie to anyone. This is a movie everyone should see, but unfortunately not enough will.
An error has occured. Please try again.