ROTTEN TOMATOES: Darren Aronofsky Unhappy About "Fountain" DVD

Darren Aronofsky Unhappy About "Fountain" DVD

by Scott Weinberg | June 01, 2007

If you bought the "Fountain" DVD and you were disappointed at the lack of a commentary track, be patient: Darren Aronofsky is cooking something up.

Aronofsky blogs his displeasure with the DVD process on "The Fountain" by saying "Everything at the studio was a struggle. For instance, they didn’t want to do a commentary track cause they felt it wouldn’t help sales. I didn’t have it in me to fight anymore. Whatever."

But he promises to record a downloadable track that you can play as a traditional commentary track. And he also plans to knock on a few doors at Criterion: "I got a lot of extras in my bag so who know maybe if you all write to criterion they’ll get interested (suggest the fountain as a title: mulvaney@criterion.com). They’ve been into pi and requiem but because the first run of dvd’s had so many extras they didn’t know what else they could add. but the fountain…"

So there you go, Fountain fans. A piece of good news and a (polite) email to write.

Source: Slashfilm

Related Items

Celeb:	Darren Aronofsky
Movie:	The Fountain

(1-20 of 48 posts) | Reply

Cicatriz writes:
on Jun 01 2007 02:13 AM

this movie was amazing. anyone who says otherwise is butt hurt.

(Reply to this)

LordRobbo writes:
on Jun 01 2007 03:53 AM

MY BUTT'S JUST FINE

(Reply to this)

The_Reckoning writes:
on Jun 01 2007 04:46 AM

My butt is also fine. I turned The Fountain off after an hour, though. I thought it was pretty hokey.

(Reply to this)

frogleg writes:
on Jun 01 2007 05:46 AM

hehe... "butt hurt".

(Reply to this)

ChinaRises writes:
on Jun 01 2007 06:04 AM

[b]Love Aronofsky, Hated "The Fountain"[/b]
This movie was an incomplete mess that could of been 20 min or 90 min either way as the story went NOWHERE. I heard he cut a lot out after the Cannes release so maybe that's at fault-- or maybe Aronofsky just got brainwashed by too many New Age Hippie books that pretend to understand Eastern and Mayan Religion.

(Reply to this)

FILMCZY writes:
on Jun 01 2007 07:35 AM

Since when the hell did a commentary track "hurt sells" Warner Brothers?

90% of dvd watchers don't listen to the damn things anyway!!!

Warner Brothers probably didn't want to risk Aronofsky saying anything "negative" about his working experience with the studio over this movie. Touche'

(Reply to this)

miroshima writes:
on Jun 01 2007 07:41 AM

In reply to this comment (#867545)
It says nothing about commentary hurting sales. It simply says that they didn't feel it would boost sales. And believe it or not, these things do cost money...

(Reply to this)

tycox writes:
on Jun 01 2007 07:46 AM

I THOUGHT THE FOUNTAIN WAS AMAZING!!! A GREAT PIECE OF FILM MAKING!!! IF YOU DIDN'T LIKE IT THAT PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT!

(Reply to this)

Rash Hunt writes:
on Jun 01 2007 08:13 AM

Whew, that was a close one. I almost rented a faulty DVD without commentary - the nerve.

(Reply to this)

CannibalPenguins writes:
on Jun 01 2007 09:24 AM

Who even listens to those?

(Reply to this)

ZEZEtheX writes:
on Jun 01 2007 09:42 AM

WHAT'S A COMMENTARY

(Reply to this)

deneco4 writes:
on Jun 01 2007 09:46 AM

[b]fountain rules[/b]
This pains me. I thought this movie was one of the most beautiful movies ive seen. Just because people didnt get it...

I bought the one and only copy at blockbuster the day the DVD came out and ive watched it religeously since then. I was dissapointed there wasn't a commentary or deleted scenes.
I did think that what they had was good, the inside look at the fountain

(Reply to this)

dracus writes:
on Jun 01 2007 09:49 AM

Unless it's a movie along the caliber of LOTR's, Star Wars, Godfather or Citizen Kane, I don't even notice if a DVD has commentary. The Peter Jackson-Fran Walsh-Phillippa Boyens commentary on the extended versions of the three LOTR's movies is very entertaining and informative though.

(Reply to this)

dracus writes:
on Jun 01 2007 09:56 AM

In reply to this comment (#867550)
Ever go to a movie and there's this one guy who won't shut up until it's over? Well, that pretty well sums up what a commentary is.

(Reply to this)

zachbraff fan writes:
on Jun 01 2007 10:21 AM

The best movie of last year, period. A criterion would be fantastic, as the current transfer is a bit weird. It's very grainy, and the dark scenes are practically impossible to see.

(Reply to this)

elziard writes:
on Jun 01 2007 10:27 AM

i thought the shut down in Australia woulda been the kiss of death on this one. obviously a lot of people didn't 'get' it and there will be some grumbles over it. but i thought as a (striking) visual allegory for death and how we embrace or fight it, this film was original, the concept sound, and the execution incredible. it had it's hokey moments and sure we can pick it apart under a microscope (fitting, as most of the 'space' environments were done on this level) but it should be given a chance.
and for chrissake! if ridley scott can constantly 'ultimate edition' his films, this certainly deserves a go around.

(Reply to this)

stevegilpin writes:
on Jun 01 2007 10:41 AM

I also thought this movie was beautiful and poignant. It's definitely not a movie everyone will love, partly because the issue of mortality is so uncomfortable for people, and this film holds nothing back and is incredibly emotional. But there is so much eye candy and great performances to boot. I hope someday it will get the credit it deserves. I think Aronofsky is a real visionary.

(Reply to this)

liono86 writes:
on Jun 01 2007 12:23 PM

PEOPLE! QUIT USING THE EXCUSE FOR US WHO DIDN'T LIKE IT AS "YOU PROBABLY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT!" It took me a sec, but, I finally did, and, it still was a very bad movie. Just b/c something can be beautfiul to look at, it doesn't make it any good at all.

(Reply to this)

Averystorm writes:
on Jun 01 2007 12:44 PM

In reply to this comment (#867557)
Well, with a defence like that, who's to argue....

Seriously though, if you didn't "get it" don't feel too stupid. It's not the type of flick your supposed to fully understand. You could show it to a hundred different people, and could get a hundred different perspectives. It's a total "art" flick, that's meant to challenge the viewer, and invoke discussion.

There are aspects of the film that can be disected, and concluded upon. For the most part though, it's meant to be a personal experience, that is open to many different perspectives.

(Reply to this)

Bane Of Anubis writes:
on Jun 01 2007 02:33 PM

I DIDN'T WATCH THIS MOVIE BUT I LIKE WRITING IN CAPITAL LETTERS, TOO!

(Reply to this)