Requiem for a Dream by Darren Aronofsky (Review)

How do I begin this review, especially since I don’t really know where it’ll end up? I know, that as a reviewer, I should have all of my thoughts and impressions already down in order to give you, the reader, as clear an idea as possible as to the movie’s merits. But truth be told, I’m still in a bit of shock after seeing this movie, and my mind is still trying to process all that I saw. Yes, it was most certainly a mind-blowing movie. But lest you think that is a blanket endorsement, I suggest you read on.

Requiem for a Dream is the latest film from Darren Aronofsky. His debut film, Pi, was a brilliant thriller that combined elements of science fiction, Jewish mysticism, and higher mathematics with brilliant and edgy camerawork and editing. Needless to say, I’d been looking forward to Requiem for a Dream ever since I first read about it nearly a year ago. Although I was somewhat discouraged when I heard it’d be a “drug” movie (fears of a Trainspotting rip-off came to mind), what I read and saw about this movie quickly increased my anticipation.

Requiem for a Dream focuses on the lives of four people. There’s Harry (Jared Leto), a young heroin addict who hopes to make something of himself. Tyrone (Marlon Wayans) is Harry’s best friend, and shares his dream of making it big. Marion (Jennifer Connelly) is Harry’s girlfriend, an aspiring fashion designer who joins Harry in his addictions. Rounding out the cast is Sara (Ellen Burstyn), Harry’s lonely mother who spends her life watching television. When Sara learns that she’s won an appearance on television, she’s elated. She finally has some joy in her life, something to look forward to. Unfortunately, she’s unable to fit into her favorite dress. When diets don’t work, she goes to a physician who gives her diet pills, to which she becomes addicted. Although Harry and Tyrone’s business venture seems to be going well, a gang war quickly dries up their supply of drugs. With their cash dwindling, they’re forced to go to extreme measures to get their supply of drugs. And Marion is forced to subject herself to the worst depravities of all in order to support her habit.

Over the course of two hours, we are subjected to watching these characters’ lives unravel in every possible way. In his review of Dancer in the Dark, Pearson Greer states that if you can name a bad thing, it happens to Björk’s character. That’s doubly so with Requiem for a Dream. Aronofsky utilizes the film like a scalpel, revealing each of the characters’ hopes and dreams with great skill, only to then destroy them utterly. To call it harrowing is an understatement; devastating is a better word. Aronofsky does not shy away from revealing the depths of depravity to which the characters sink for their dreams. This means that the viewer is forced to sit through what must be some of the most disturbing imagery ever committed to film.

The final 20 minutes is nothing but a hellish ride, a collage of misery. The viewer is bombarded with image after image of the characters suffering; electro-shock therapy, prison, orgies, rotting limbs… it’s all there. And when it’s all over, we watch each character strike the bottom of their lives, with no hope of return or redemption. I found it difficult to keep watching; at times, I was forced to turn away as the movie spiraled further and further down. Too Aronofsky’s credit, even when the film is at its most graphic and explicit point (i.e., Marion’s participation in an orgy), he keeps it from being pornographic and titillating. If anything, you feel nothing but pity and deep sadness for a woman who has sunk so low.

Because of its disturbing imagery, Requiem for a Dream was slated for an NC-17 rating. Rather than compromise his vision, Aronofsky released the film unrated. Commercially, it was death for the movie, but one has to applaud Aronosfky’s dedication. The movie was also slammed for glamorizing drug use, which is one of the most asinine things I’ve ever heard. There’s a big difference between depicting drug use and glamorizing it. The film is rife with drug use, but it’s presented as unappealing as possible. Let’s put it this way; anyone who still wants to do drugs after watching Harry shoot up in his rotting arm gets what they deserve.

So what could be this film’s merits? Why would anyone want to see this film? Requiem for a Dream has been called the most honest film about drug use ever, and I’m not going to argue that. But what’s more interesting is that the film is not really about drug addiction. It’s about the most damaging addiction of all: addiction to hope. All four of the characters become dependent on making a better life for themselves, and in the end, it becomes their downfall. The most tragic example is Sara. When she has a chance at happiness, she latches onto it. Soon, appearing on television is all that gives her hope in life, until it ultimately leaves her a shell of a person. It’s this desire to have a better life, to achieve the “American Dream” (to which the title refers) — whether it be through drugs or whatever — that leads to the characters’ downfall.

Unfortunately, the film sometimes has the subtlety of an aluminum bat upside the head. The movie seems so intent on bombarding you with image after image that you want to duck and cover, to say enough is enough. It almost seems as if Aronofsky makes up for any lack in the storyline with some brilliant editing trick or special effect. There are times when he’s so intent on making the viewer perceive the world like his drug-addled characters that nothing else seems to matter. But there are also brilliant segments when we get to peer into the lives of the characters. The most heartrending of these is when Harry buys his mother a new TV and realizes that his mother is an addict just like him. Burstyn imbues Sara with such loneliness and despair that it’s almost as painful as the film’s conclusion, albeit on a completely different level.

So what does all this mean to me? Well, I respect this film. I respect Aronofsky’s vision and conviction. And the entire cast does an excellent job, with no weak performances to be found. In the end, I suspect that Aronofsky accomplished everything he set out to do with Requiem for a Dream. Did I know this film would be intense? Yes. But I had no clue it would be this intense. Walking out of the theatre, I felt shell-shocked and in need of a shower. For me, it raised questions of how much depravity can a movie about depravity show before it becomes depraved. It almost seemed unreal; that such vileness and hopelessness could exist was almost unthinkable, and yet the film is as truthful and honest as can be. And I have to respect that.

But I don’t think I’ll ever want to see it again.