Aronofsky Thoughts 2010 – π

LOL CONTENT!!!

Yes I am aware how silly this seems now. I had fully intended on setting this up for Tribeca reviews and other random posts but guess who got too lazy for that. And yes I am aware that I left my /film commenting profile linked to this for 7 months when there was nothing here. So I figured I would start now while I’m still not quite too lazy to really get into this project.

I figured I wanted to start this off by talking about one of my favourite filmmakers working today. Not only because he has a new film out but because I want to look at why I do like him so much. And it’s little secret I’m bonkers for the guy. Some of his earlier work played a large part in me wanting to get serious about film as a medium. A path that has lead me halfway into a film studies undergraduate degree. And yes, that does mean you get half thought out academic approaches from time to time if I feel like throwing it into a write up. And I hold the right to be totally wrong about basically anything. I’m using this primarily as a means for me to create more cohesive thoughts on the subject of films. I also will likely change opinions on just about anything at any point.

I figured it would be best to start at the beginning of Aronofsky’s career and then bounce around his filmography as I see fit with little rhyme or reason. But that doesn’t mean any particular write up is bound to a film. I will be constantly cross referencing them throughout this project. So I suppose that finally brings us to the main film of discussion today, π (1998).

Now I should have a big old soft spot for π. It’s known for many of the qualities I find favourable. Visually it is shot in a lovely grainy black & white. It’s a look I find incredibly appealing. Some of my favourite films share the aesthetic, see David Holzman’s Diary (1967) for my personal favourite. ***EDIT THIS IS UNFINISHED WILL CONTINUE SOON***

Welcome To Cale’s Film Thoughts

Welcome to Cale’s Film Thoughts, a blog which I use to practice thinking critically thinking about all the films I watch. I could use the practice for my film courses. I should acknowledge that I am a film theory student so you may see some awkward analysis of some of the stuff I am learning in class. I acknowledge that this study does not automatically make me smarter than the lay person but it means I know more than most of you. But most people are dumb so.

For now this blog is going to start with my Tribeca reports and then turn into a series of what I hope are slightly unique features. I am thinking of doing an auteur series on the work of Jim McBride. Because I’m quirky like that.

Throughout the series I will run I will throw up random reviews of stuff I see here and there. They probably won’t be proper reviews but more of a set of musings. Maybe I’ll focus on a single scene or element or maybe the film as a whole. So I hope the no one that reads this enjoys the site.

Oh, and spoiler warning for everything in advance. Non spoiler discussions are largely worthless in my opinion.