Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis to Play Scissor Sisters in Black Swan?

First thought in my head was Brunette Sandwich.

I thought Natilie said she wasn't doing any more nude scenes?

Why must you crush our dreams?

The Wrestler and Requiem for a Dream are boring and pretentious? You've lost credibility today Rob

I had credibility?

Touche

Pretentious: behaving or speaking in such a manner as to create a false appearance of great importance or worth

Yeah, all of Aronofsky's movies are pretentious.

Yea thanks except I knew the definition before you copied and pasted that...as a quasi-journalist, you should be embarrassed that you didn't know that.

Please sir, ELABORATE (explain and give reasons, examples...I'm safely assuming you don't know the definition of that word either) when you say The Wrestler and RfaD are pretentious.

Considering you don't think Aronosky's movies are pretentious, and that the very idea seems to offend you, I had assumed that you didn't know the meaning of the word. The definition was for your benefit. I thought perhaps after I jogged your memory, you'd see the light. Unfortunately, I was wrong.

In enumerating (that is, individually identifying) the reasons why I believe Aronofsky and his films to be pretentious is inherently difficult, considering the word itself. If I assign his films no great worth, the film is pretentious to me. However, if you assign them great wealth, then the film is not pretentious to you. So therein lies the difficulty of even arguing the point (still with me?) in so much as as long as you enjoy the film and ascribe it worth and importance, you will never come to my side.

However, I will spout (it means say, in this context) a few reasons why I believe his movies are pretentious. First of all, one most examine (you know, think about, critically) the films at their basest level. "The Wrestler" is a simple story, a point which should be inarguable. Yes, it is a sad story about a man during a sad period, yet one who tries to do right by himself and his girl and commits himself wholly to what he loves. We've seen this a million times, yet Aronofsky deems it necessary to barrage us at every moment with depressing music cues, long wistful looks into the horizon, and silent close-ups on Rourke. Through his style of directing it's as if he believes he has discovered this story. He found it first, look at it! He is making you feel for this character! No shit. The guy's life sucks then he dies and everyone gets sad. FEEL SAD FOR HIM. It was a misunderstanding with his girlfriend and daughter! They love him! He shouldn't have chosen wrestling! Again - no shit. Yet, Aronofsky, in speaking about The Wrestler, would seem to think he invented tragedy. (I could go on and on, and this is for a movie I kind of liked)

Much of the same can go for Requiem - it is admittedly very stylishly shot and I enjoyed it, but it's not groundbreaking. It was based on a book. A book that had themes from every other movie. But yet, as an audience, we are,I suppose, so stupid that it most be repeatedly pounded into us that this is what drugs do to you - and he's the first to tell us. Like The Wrestler (and most of his films) at the end of the movie most people are either dead or in a shitty situation, as if to say "Hey, there is no hope if you go down this path so learn from me as I teach you. Remember, no redemption!" Hm. Yeah.

I won't even touch "The Fountain" or "Pi."

This is fun. Your turn. Convince me otherwise, though again the difficult surrounds the very idea of pretentiousness.

Very original Robert, the whole defining words shtick. Oh wait, I did that first. If you're going to take shots at me at least try harder than mockery. Be a little more creative. Anyway I can see you wrote this retort like it was a college thesis, making sure to sound as intelligent as possible. I think I should point out that I was never offended, I'm not some Aronofsky fanboy. I wouldn't even place him among my 10 favorite directors. I'm just amused that you think someone of critical acclaim like Aronofsky (The Fountain notwithstanding) is a terrible director.

Those were some vague examples. Silent closeups? Looking into the horizon? Depressing musical cues? I see those same things in lots of dramas. Crash and Leaving Las Vegas jump to mind (great films too). What's the difference in Aronofsky's films?
In the end we can agree that the definition of pretentious is very subjective, but something I don't think you can argue is that you're among the minority who find his films pretentious. The 79% and 98%(!!!) positive reviews on RT( as well as 8.4 and 8.3 ratings on IMDB) for Requiem and The Wrestler can attest to that.

Technically and factually I defined a word first. You just continued the game. Crash is another film fairly widely regarded as being pretentious. As for The Wrestler and Requiem, like I said - I liked them. They're well made. Still pretentious, in my opinion.

But yes, I'm in the minority opinion (I'm used to it) when it comes to Aronofsky. Though I never said he was a terrible director - just a pretentious one. His films are technically very good. The Fountain is amazing to look at and is beautifully shot. It's still not a good movie.

In the end - agreed, pretentious is subjective. Thanks for reading.

=)