Pi (1998)

Pi was the debut feature of the now acclaimed director Darren Aronofsky. It revolves around the obsession of a charismatic, but troubled man named Max Cohen (Sean Gullette), who is determined to find a pattern that will decipher the stock market. His former professor (Mark Margolis), who had been chasing a similar obsession for years, tries to convince him against it. Max is obsessed beyond return though and soon he finds himself going after a 216-digit number that could explain universe and help him discover God.The film has some very interesting themes. It deals with the same idea that Black Swan did (the only other Arronofsky's film I watched), that while the relentless pursuing of an obsession can lead to success, it can also lead to self-destruction. Then there is the search of God as we have seen in many other movies before, most notably in Ingmar Bergman's filmography. Max is so infatuated with the idea of the secret key number, that before he knows it he loses control. He becomes a slave of his obsession as so many other people in our days.Arronofsky did a great job in Pi. I don't know for certain, but it seems like a low budget film with its relatively unknown cast and its black and white filming. The surrealistic, thought-provoking way the plot is unveiled though, is more than enough to redeem the viewer. The acting is not what we would call top-notch, but they're all doing a respectable job. Mark Margolis in particular gives a very good performance.I'll end this review with the optimistic message that I believe the ending scene attempts to deliver: there is beauty in simplicity. We don't need to understand everything, it won't make us happier. It would only serve to bury us even deeper in the universe's chaotic nature. Let your goals and ideas serve your life rather than making your life a servant of them.More reviews at: https://reflectingoncinemablog.wordpress.com/

Be warned never watched this stones especially if you trade the stop market mind blowing! It truly breaks open the mind and explains what we see any question you've ever wanted to know about the stock markets mental makeup then this is the film to watch. Some films really push the boundary in explaining the deeper meanings of life. If your into bow bow bang bang half naked women then this isn't for you but if you want to open your mind and dive into the souk existence you name it. If you felt the Matrix was an eye opener not just action but the basic facts of what the films says then wow are you in for a treat. Almost spiritual how this made into such a crazy perfect diagram of almost everything almost like its own math equation.

I just watched this for the first time, it is a really intense movie, the story is not complicated and the whole movie was easy to understand. The main character played his role brilliantly; you can see the amount of pain he goes through as his health deteriorates. As a huge fan of 'Requiem for a dream', I had high hopes for 'Pi', since they were both directed by the same guy, and I can say that it was a really good movie. On the other hand, It is a little bit messed up to be fair; I felt that some scenes deserved further explanation, especially his delusions. All in all, good movie, great acting and direction. 8/10

Maximillian Cohen is sickly and math obsessed. He is building his Euclid computer in his small New York apartment as a way to understand and predict the world. Sol Robeson is his mentor. Religious Jew Lenny Meyer introduces him to the mathematical nature of Hebrew and the Torah. He finds that the computer predicted the correct stock price. He is also hounded by Marcy Dawson from a powerful financial consortium. They offer him a supercomputer chip. The computer outputs a number and everybody wants it.This is a debut from Darren Aronofsky with great originality. It has great paranoid thriller vibe. The music, the style, and Max all build a great obsessive mood. There are some things to nit-pick. The camera work is strictly indie. The action scenes are a little dizzying and not in a good way. It's unlikely that Aronofsky had the equipment to do better although some low-budget indies do better somehow. The acting from some of the secondary characters could also be better. They are all understandable indie deficiencies.