Darren Aronofsky Pi

[ChrisP]

Does anyone know what this was shot on and how was processed? I think this would be a real interesting look for some things (and only some things).

If anyone hasn't seen it, if you watch it on a big screen it literally has golfball sized grain and is very, very high contrast (its almost literally black and white, not black white and grey).

 

[d.keljikian]

IMDB lists the stock as 16 mm (Kodak 7278 and 7276, Black and White Reversal).

-Doug

 

[NickTrop]

I had the same question. Initially I thought it was processed video because of the blown out highlights and it was too grainy but actually it was shot on 16mm reversal film stock, the same stuff I thought was crap that they gave us in film school in the 80's - but it just goes to show you that if you have vision/talent you can make anything work for you... or if you "position" it as "a look you're going for" because if this was given to a distributor they would say it looks like crap (and it does) and hand the reel back to you. It's just a sh-t blow-up of crap black and white 16mm reversal film stock, blown up to 35mm... bleh. But it works for this film, "I guess". It certainly is different looking...

As for the film - I have mixed feeling about how it looks. I think it "too much" and dominates the film - not in a good way. Aronofsky seems to make the same film over and over again with the same theme of obsession leading to death and tragedy - it's getting "a little" old methinks but I'm always entertained by his films. In the case of Pi, it was the quest for "Pi"... But when one realizes what Pi is - the ratio of the radius of a circle to its circumference, which happens to be an irrational number... the proceedings happen to come off (to me anyway) more than a little silly. There's nothing mystical about it. It's just a ratio. The gates of hell are not going to open over it, and as an irrational number like any other irrational number there is no "end" to the decimal places, and any to the quest to calculate Pi to the Nth place is ridiculous. It's nothing to go insane over. It's just a ratio, like 2/3rds...

Anyway... 16mm reversal film stock, blown up to 35 to make it look even crappie...errr... more "aesthetic".

 

[ChrisP]

Thanks Nick

Thanks Nick

Nick,
thanks for your very opinionated reply. I agree its not fantastic for the film overall. Maybe he wanted to audience to have headaches from the blown hightlights just the like main character? Seriously though, I like the idea (and the fact that he worked with such a low budget on it, and from what you say that budget wasn't taken up by excess spending on film), I think grainy contrasty B&W worked for the film but it was overboard and distracting at some points. I do think that the style might work in some scenarios though (especially stills), as long as you don't have to look at it for 2 hours straight.

As for Aronofsky's films, I've only seen a couple, Requim, Black Swan and Pi, they do all have similiar themes (as you say obsession), but I like the fact they're very honest (or explicit) and don't hide things from the audience. I haven't seen the wrestler which is supposed to very good (maybe it has a different theme?). Overall I think you at least have to aplaud the guy, he brings something new to the very mundain world of mainstream movies. The fact that Black Swan required people to think (at least a little bit) but it was still in almost every theatre and made alot of money is a pretty big accomplishment in my opinon.

P.s. don't hate on irrational numbers, if it weren't for phi, who knows what shape 35mm negatives would be!

I had the same question. Initially I thought it was processed video because of the blown out highlights and it was too grainy but actually it was shot on 16mm reversal film stock, the same stuff I thought was crap that they gave us in film school in the 80's - but it just goes to show you that if you have vision/talent you can make anything work for you... or if you "position" it as "a look you're going for" because if this was given to a distributor they would say it looks like crap (and it does) and hand the reel back to you. It's just a sh-t blow-up of crap black and white 16mm reversal film stock, blown up to 35mm... bleh. But it works for this film, "I guess". It certainly is different looking...

As for the film - I have mixed feeling about how it looks. I think it "too much" and dominates the film - not in a good way. Aronofsky seems to make the same film over and over again with the same theme of obsession leading to death and tragedy - it's getting "a little" old methinks but I'm always entertained by his films. In the case of Pi, it was the quest for "Pi"... But when one realizes what Pi is - the ratio of the radius of a circle to its circumference, which happens to be an irrational number... the proceedings happen to come off (to me anyway) more than a little silly. There's nothing mystical about it. It's just a ratio. The gates of hell are not going to open over it, and as an irrational number like any other irrational number there is no "end" to the decimal places, and any to the quest to calculate Pi to the Nth place is ridiculous. It's nothing to go insane over. It's just a ratio, like 2/3rds...

Anyway... 16mm reversal film stock, blown up to 35 to make it look even crappie...errr... more "aesthetic".

 

[NickTrop]

ChrisP - I actually like Aronofsky's films, and have seen all of them including The Wrestler, which is also very much about obsession - same theme, and presented in the most linear/straightforward way relative to his other films. As a lover of cinema outre and the "psychotronic" and culty stuff I do appreciate having a guy out there whose a little out there in execution. Pi was good too - and also agree with you that 2 hours of that style was a bit much...

I watch scads and scads of movies... I walk 5 miles a day, 7 days a week about 1/2 of it on a treadmill. When I do, I have my portable DVD player hooked up with headphones... Movies take my mind off the sheer mind-numbing boring-ness of this activity.

 

[MC JC86]

As for the film - I have mixed feeling about how it looks. I think it "too much" and dominates the film - not in a good way. Aronofsky seems to make the same film over and over again with the same theme of obsession leading to death and tragedy - it's getting "a little" old methinks but I'm always entertained by his films. In the case of Pi, it was the quest for "Pi"... But when one realizes what Pi is - the ratio of the radius of a circle to its circumference, which happens to be an irrational number... the proceedings happen to come off (to me anyway) more than a little silly. There's nothing mystical about it. It's just a ratio. The gates of hell are not going to open over it, and as an irrational number like any other irrational number there is no "end" to the decimal places, and any to the quest to calculate Pi to the Nth place is ridiculous. It's nothing to go insane over. It's just a ratio, like 2/3rds...

Anyway... 16mm reversal film stock, blown up to 35 to make it look even crappie...errr... more "aesthetic".

I've felt that way about most/many of his movies.. maybe just most modern film . Seems genius at first, after repeated thought or viewing starts to seem more cliched and ridiculous. Reqiuem For A Dream especially.

Always interesting to know tech. details though.

My favorite Simpson's bit is when Homer is addicted to the Ribwich from KrustyBurger, has an excellent Reqiuem for a Dream spoof.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlIaown6Wpw&feature=player_detailpage

 

[NickTrop]

I've felt that way about most/many of his movies.. maybe just most modern film . Seems genius at first, after repeated thought or viewing starts to seem more cliched and ridiculous. Reqiuem For A Dream especially.

Always interesting to know tech. details though.

My favorite Simpson's bit is when Homer is addicted to the Ribwich from KrustyBurger, has an excellent Reqiuem for a Dream spoof.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlIaown6Wpw&feature=player_detailpage

Yes, I agree. RfaD was my least favorite... very dreary and depressing... I prefer the old-school auteurs. Goddard, in particular, of late. Now there was a cat who could play... Want to see true film art (and sumptuously photographed black and white cinematography)? the film is Goddard's tragically underrated Alphaville (now streaming on Netflix if you have it...)

 

[filmfan]

I really liked Pi, but yeah-- the high contrast got to my eyes a bit as well.
You like black and white films? Check out the very out there and New Wave film "Last Year in Marienbad" (L'Année dernière à Marienbad) by Alain Resnais. It's very enjoyable if you don't get fed up with it. I thought it was masterful in portraying the a dream-world.
With risk of straying off topic too much, I would like to mention that I just saw one of my new favorite movies of all time. It's called "Aguirre: The Wrath of God" (Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes) by Werner Herzog, although it's in color...

 

[regularchickens]

I watched Pi recently for the first time in about ten years. I thought it was the coolest thing ever when I saw it when it was new (and I was about 18). I expected it to fall apart with age, but I found myself enjoying it even today. The theme of obsession holds up very well, and the pseudo-math/science/compsci stuff is sufficiently blackboxed that it doesn't seem cheesy.

As for the look of the BW, I thought it suited Max's mental state and the grime of his Lower East Side/Chinatown environs very well. I don't feel like the film would necessarily benefit from a cleaner, larger-format, or color presentation.

 

[Rico]

I'm an Aronofsky fan if for no other reason than he has a brain in his head. The hard B&W style fit the subject matter of "π", even if the primary reason was budgetary. Another offbeat flick with sublime B&W vision is "Stranger than Paradise".

 

[RayPA]

Yes, I agree. RfaD was my least favorite... very dreary and depressing... I prefer the old-school auteurs. Goddard, in particular, of late. Now there was a cat who could play... Want to see true film art (and sumptuously photographed black and white cinematography)? the film is Goddard's tragically underrated Alphaville (now streaming on Netflix if you have it...)

Godard...now you're talking. To mention him in an Aronofsky thread is an insult to Mr. G. 😀 But truly, Godard really hits his creative stride with his color work. I saw a newly restored 'Made in U.S.A.' a couple of years ago and a newly restored 'Sauve Qui Peut (La Vie)' a couple of months ago—both on the big screen. Gorgeous. See the former for some wonderful use of primary colors, text, and graphics.





/

 

[ibcrewin]

He did something similar in parts of Black Swan which I thought was an awful movie. I like arthouse type films but Black Swan blew chunks.

 

[MichaelW]

Godard...now you're talking. To mention him in an Aronofsky thread is an insult to Mr. G. 😀 But truly, Godard really hits his creative stride with his color work. I saw a newly restored 'Made in U.S.A.' a couple of years ago and a newly restored 'Sauve Qui Peut (La Vie)' a couple of months ago—both on the big screen. Gorgeous. See the former for some wonderful use of primary colors, text, and graphics.

Pierrot Le Fou has gorgeous colour & is enjoyable to watch.

 

[NickTrop]

I'll check that one out... Thanks for the recommendation. I'm glad I've only seen a handful of Goddard. Lots to look forward to. Do check out Alphaville - a scifi film that blew me away...

 

[MC JC86]

He did something similar in parts of Black Swan which I thought was an awful movie. I like arthouse type films but Black Swan blew chunks.

Thank you!


Slightly o/t, but why did a movie "about ballet" have more blood than Saving Private Ryan?😉

 

[GSNfan]

I watched the first 30 mins of PI and then got bored. I don't like movies that insist upon themselves 'look at me, i'm a serious movie about mathematics and shot in high contrast b&w...'

I have seen The Wrestler and Black Swan, both were decent.

 

[RayPA]

Pierrot Le Fou has gorgeous colour & is enjoyable to watch.

I agree. That's my GF's favorite.

Watchability is a key issue for most with Godard films. His films can be challenging, which is about all he has in common with Aronofsky (but on a different level).




/

 

[filmfan]

I like arthouse type films but Black Swan blew chunks.

Sarcasm I hope...