Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz in The Fountain
© Warner Bros.

Mania Grade: B-
Maniac Grade: A+
Reviewed Format: Theatrical Release
Rated: PG-13
Stars: Hugh Jackman, Rachel Weisz, Ellen Burstyn, Stephen McHattie
Writers: Darren Aronofsky, story by Darren Aronofsky & Ari Handel
Director: Darren Aronofsky
Distributor: Warner Bros.

Related Links

3

"The Fountain"

There’s no denying that The Fountain is a ravishing-looking movie. Director/writer Darren Aronofsky, working from a story he crafted with Ari Handel, bathes the screen in the glowing gold of a far-off collapsing galaxy and in the shining white of dazzling candle flames. However, it’s in the service of a premise that isn’t so much confusing as it is wearying. Most viewers will be able to work out how most of the elements are connected, but won’t necessarily be intrigued and/or moved enough to care about puzzling all of it out. 

Aronofsky seems to be aiming for something like the mystery and awe (“awe” is a word used a lot within the film) of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. The Fountain moves between three time frames: the Spanish Inquisition, when the conquistador Tomas (Hugh Jackman) bravely travels to the New World on a quest for his beloved, imperiled queen (Rachel Weisz); the present, when medical researcher Tommy (Jackman again) desperately searches for a cure for the illness of his adored wife, writer Izzi (Weisz again); the future, with Jackman as a priestly astronaut exploring a huge tree inside a glass-like sphere, who reacts with anguish to his visions of a woman (also Weisz). 

Once we get the set-up, it’s easy enough to follow the connection between past and present, even if it never resonates emotionally the way that seems intended. Jackman and Weisz play Tommy and Izzi with emotional rawness, but they’re written and shown without the kind of specificity required for us to warm to their uniqueness (also, Tommy’s enthusiastic participation in invasive primate research may keep some viewers at bay). We’re not pulling hugely for Tommy to solve the mystery, nor especially curious (since we correctly sense we’re not going to get any sort of conventional answer) about how Izzi intuits certain things, and therefore we’re not especially moved by the metaphysical conundrum laid out for us in the narrative. As for the sequences set in the future, they don’t provide perspective on the other two timeframes – they seem to exist primarily to allow Aronofsky to pull off some spectacular visuals, particularly in the finale.