There’s often a rush to judgment when audiences see some films that require them to think or even pay attention. Some films in particular require that you pay close attention to get the most out of the experience. In fact, there’s a short list of films out there that are best viewed at least twice to notice the subtle details woven into the often layered, but not particularly complex, story. That is, if you bother to pay attention.

Joel and Clementine's troubled relationship gets better and worse, then better from Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

The Sixth Sense is probably one of the first films to come to mind when mentioning movies that must be seen twice to be appreciated. Everyone knows that Bruce Willis’ character is a ghost. He’s dead. And he’s the one that Haley Joel Osment’s character is referencing when he utters the all-too-often quoted, “I see dead people.” A second viewing will reveal that during every scene with Bruce Willis, no one is actually talking to him or even acknowledging his presence. A montage of scenes at the end reveals this, but a second viewing will point out that fact more bluntly and you’ll notice the great amount of care that went into making sure the logic of The Sixth Sense holds up to the repeated viewings.

One of my personal favorites in this category is Richard Linklater’s Slacker. The indie classic already has a radical, yet beautifully dream-like story structure focusing on random characters drifting in and out of the camera’s view. Upon further viewings, you’ll notice just how much detail was put into the crafting of each scene. The appearance of minor characters is not as random as it seems as some can be found in the backgrounds of scenes or are referenced in dialog.

Tyler Durden is a subversive terrorist in Fight Club.

Note: Spoilers for several films are contained below. If you have not seen these films at least once, you may want to read this story another time. You have been warned.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
The first time: Joel goes to a doctor to erase the memory of his beloved Clementine, who also had him erased from her memory, in an effort to purge the painful relationship behind forever.
Upon second viewing: Eternal Sunshine is really three stories happening simultaneously: the present day conscious tale of the doctors taking part in Joel’s memory-erasing process, Joel’s actual memories of the relationship as they play themselves out backwards from their present awful state to their first cute meeting on the beach, and the final story of Joel’s attempt to block the doctors memory purge by hiding Clementine in the nether regions of his brain. Most of this becomes clear about 2/3 of the way into the film, but it’s not so obvious the first time, and repeated viewings show just how perfectly each story is woven.

Edward Norton's character from Fight Club is credited as "the narrator." Huh.

Fight Club
The first time: This dude played by Edward Norton becomes pals with a bad influence in the form of Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) who makes him do very, very bad things.
Upon second viewing: The narrator (Edward Norton) is Tyler Durden, a figment of his imagination and the brains behind all the darkly hilarious and heinous acts performed in the film. Go fight yourself.

It can be easy to forget where Memento is going. And that's the point.

Memento
The first time: Leonard (Guy Pearce) suffers from short-term memory loss causing him to go to great lengths to retain information while simultaneously attempting to solve his wife’s murder.
Upon second viewing: When the film reaches its finale, it begins to feel like a puzzle and it’s up to the viewer to assemble the pieces and draw their own conclusions. It seems clear that Leonard killed his wife… or did he? The film has caused much debate and there is enough evidence to draw multiple conclusions, each with enough supporting evidence to be the absolute one and only correct answer.

The Illusionist tries to trick the audience into believing one thing is true, but closer inspection proves the opposite.

The Illusionist
The first time: Eisenstein is a talented illusionist with a seemingly magical gift who reconnects with his childhood sweetheart Sophie as an adult. Upon realizing he cannot be with her due to things like those pesky European class values and the fact that she is engaged, he has an affair anyway, and her fiancé murders her. Or she simply disappears.
Upon second viewing: Eisenstein and Sophie planned the whole thing and this is revealed upon second viewing with loads of visual cues. Recommended viewing: The Prestige which deals with a similar subject in a story that includes a sick, Twilight Zone-like twist at the end.

This painting from the comic book of the script for Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain illustrates how difficult it was to translate grand concepts of life and death to the screen...

The Fountain
The first time: Bouncing between a trio of characters all played by Hugh Jackman spread across three time periods, each deals with attempting to cheat death in the search for eternal life.
Upon second viewing: The film has a very simple journey played out across each of the three stories resulting in the trio of characters striving for the same goal, but reaching very different conclusions – the acceptance of their own death. It is only the future version of Hugh Jackman who finally gives into the universe and becomes one with the stars reaching a kind of Zen peace. It’s a simple story told in a complex way to force one to think about the larger issues and avoid discussing the issue of experimentation on monkeys.

...but it's much easier to comprehend The Fountain's layered story with a second viewing.

Gore gone... again.

Chris_Gore has had multiple experiences with each of the films mentioned in this story.

Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain is a film that has been long in the making. Bringing this existential epic from script to screen took more than six years and was a personal obsession for the director who launched his career with Pi at the Sundance Film Festival in 1998. Brad Pitt was so moved by the screenplay, he broke down and cried after getting to page 40 when he called Aronofsky to say that he was definitely “in.”

After scheduling conflicts and delays, Pitt was out and the movie in limbo. With the fate of the film unknown, Warner Bros. enticed the director with other projects to helm including Batman, but Aronofsky remained steadfast in his intention to make The Fountain. Once imagined as a nearly $100 million dollar epic spanning thousands of years, Aronofsky downsized the project to a modest $35 million dollar studio film to get it to the screen—Hugh Jackman came aboard to star alongside Aronofsky’s love in real-life Rachel Weisz and the film was a “go.” The kind of struggle to get a film as unclassifiable as this one to the screen always says something about the creative minds who will not give up on bringing their ideas into reality. And the reactions, as one might expect, have been mixed. (Read on, but be warned—SPOILER: You will die.)


...what is most interesting is not the “story” but the subtext...

Perhaps you’ve read reviews that have attempted to explain the movie’s plot describing it as “...three parallel stories about love, death, spirituality, and the fragility of existence as told through the odyssey taken on by one man in his thousand-year struggle to save the woman he loves.” Sure, it’s about that and much more. But taking a step back from the surface level story synopsis put forth by the studio marketing department, what is most interesting is not the “story” but the subtext and, more importantly, the reactions to the journey by viewers. Some say the film is difficult to understand as Aronofsky tells his non-linear story, sometimes bouncing between the three time periods within the same scene, but for me, it worked. It’s also the kind of movie that requires a second viewing to get the most out of it. The last movie that I felt required this attention was Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind—a movie whose story unfolds backwards.


Aronofsky tells his non-linear story, sometimes bouncing between the three time periods within the same scene...

For myself, I was moved. Put simply, the film is about the acceptance of death and reaching a place where one can think of death as an act of creation, not destruction. Tomas/Tommy/Bald-Future-Yoga-Man (Hugh Jackman) will not accept death and works tirelessly in all three parallel stories to conquer it. Isabel/Izzi/Tree-Woman (Rachel Weisz) has come to terms with death as she accepts her own. We experience the film through the eyes of Tom as he finally learns to accept his own death, becoming one with the universe. It’s somber, odd, engaging, beautiful, and it’s the one film I’ve seen this year that moved me to tears. Call me a sap, but it wasn’t just the experience, but that so rarely does a film as unique as this one come along. But how could anyone be surprised coming from the director behind Pi and Requiem for a Dream?

And my interpretation of the film is the right one…for me. While we all have different reactions to movies based on our experiences, The Fountain is one of those rare movies that acts as a cinematic Rorschach test saying volumes about the individual based on their response. And the experience and each individuals’ reactions to it, no matter how vastly different, are all completely valid.


It's not about medical experiments, conquistadors, life-giving trees or monkeys.

When I discuss movies with friends and colleagues, there’s a consensus measurable on a scale of brilliant to crap, and there is generally agreement about where most films fall on this scale. But The Fountain transcends this as the reactions are so across the board, more than any other film in recent memory. Some say they “love it” while others say they “hate it.” I’m most interested in the opinions of those who disliked it. A good friend well-versed in film was captivated by the imagery but was confused by the subplot involving the use of experimental compounds on monkeys. That plot thread completely threw him off the underlying themes. He was as confounded as the character of Tommy in the film—so driven in his work-life that he fails to notice the importance of life’s moments in the present. And that reaction is completely valid. Having seen The Fountain more than four times now (yes, I get that way when I see a film I truly love) I imagine that my own feelings about it will alter as I see it differently based on where I’m at in my own spiritual growth.


Put simply, the film is about the acceptance of death...

So, I hope that others will be open to experiencing The Fountain multiple times as they struggle to unravel the message(s) they discover for themselves. The benefit is that, along the way, you may find yourself gaining more than just an understanding of a movie, but of yourself.

Gore gone.

Chris_Gore is an author, a filmmaker, the creator of Film Threat, and plans to see The Fountain again.