← Back to Reviews
in
Since I'm on an Aronofsky kick, I decided to check out what seems to be his best-reviewed movie overall: The Wrestler (after getting to Pi, which I may or may not review later). Aronofsky has a long history with polarized reviews, and he's probably the single most polarizing director I can think of. But most places seem to adore The Wrestler, so I was really, REALLY hoping for one of Aronofsky's best here, and I do not feel like that's what I got.
Mickey Rourke plays Robin Ramzinski, known as "The Ram," an old wrestler who's health is starting to get to him. Even though his doctors tell him that he should stop wrestling, that's all he wants to do. But attempting to reconnect with his daughter and find other ways of living finally convince him to retire.
Other than using the surroundings to try and read Randy's mind, showing us what he's thinking and feeling, this really isn't that unique of a sports drama. A guy's health is deteriorating and he's trying to reconnect with his estranged daughter. Now this movie's been done many times before, and I'm certain that scenes about a man's persona changing between the hallways and the stage have been done before with better cinematography. Is there really any point to having some dude hold the camera the whole time instead of making something a little cinematic about it? Sure, we're following him all the time, but once you have that point down, it's no longer original.
Sure, there were a few good scenes. The hardcore wrestling matches were too damn tense. Aronofsky knew what he was doing with those close-ups and angles that time. It's been a while since I watched wrestling, so I was pretty damn glad to have that back for a little while, especially with how disturbing the hardcore matches got. But after that, the best thing about the movie seemed to be the glam metal, and I'm not really into "Bang Your Head" and I believe "Round and Round" to be the worst song on Ratt's Out of the Cellar.
One thing that seemed totally empty was the characterization. I mean, Cassidy's character never evolved beyond "mother / stripper." Randy's daughter has practically no development at all, most of the wrestlers and coworkers are just there, and no one stood out other than Randy in either the story or acting departments. In The Whale, everybody was a perfect choice for their roles. In The Wrestler, the only one who's performance goes above a 7/10 is Rourke.
I feel the same way about The Wrestler that I do about the Johnny Cash biopic Walk the Line: standard for its genre. The whole story seems like something Nicholas Sparks could put together, and I was never that impressed with him after reading several of his books to give him a fair chance. People really need to switch around the consensus between The Wrestler and any one of Aronofsky's more experimental outings. This movie only ended up convincing me that Aronofsky is at his best when he's symbolizing his themes in a more blatant light, or focusing on what the "arthouse" fans want. I'm not into this in anyway, shape, or form, and has only cemented my further disappointment in the state of sports cinema. At least it's slightly better than Noah.
= 62
Darren Aronofsky's Directorial Score (6 Good vs. 0 Bad)
Requiem for a Dream: 100
The Whale: 100
Black Swan: 97
Pi: 88
The Wrestler: 62
Score: 89.4 / 5
With the inclusion of Pi and The Wrestler, Aronofsky's position on my Best Director's List raises from #97 to #85 between Kenji Mizumi and Richard Linklater.
The Wrestler
(2008) - Directed by Darren Aronofsky
--------------------------------------------
Drama / Wrestling
-------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
Drama / Wrestling
-------------------------------------------------
"A lot of people told me that I'd never wrestle again and that's all I do."
Since I'm on an Aronofsky kick, I decided to check out what seems to be his best-reviewed movie overall: The Wrestler (after getting to Pi, which I may or may not review later). Aronofsky has a long history with polarized reviews, and he's probably the single most polarizing director I can think of. But most places seem to adore The Wrestler, so I was really, REALLY hoping for one of Aronofsky's best here, and I do not feel like that's what I got.
Mickey Rourke plays Robin Ramzinski, known as "The Ram," an old wrestler who's health is starting to get to him. Even though his doctors tell him that he should stop wrestling, that's all he wants to do. But attempting to reconnect with his daughter and find other ways of living finally convince him to retire.
Other than using the surroundings to try and read Randy's mind, showing us what he's thinking and feeling, this really isn't that unique of a sports drama. A guy's health is deteriorating and he's trying to reconnect with his estranged daughter. Now this movie's been done many times before, and I'm certain that scenes about a man's persona changing between the hallways and the stage have been done before with better cinematography. Is there really any point to having some dude hold the camera the whole time instead of making something a little cinematic about it? Sure, we're following him all the time, but once you have that point down, it's no longer original.
Sure, there were a few good scenes. The hardcore wrestling matches were too damn tense. Aronofsky knew what he was doing with those close-ups and angles that time. It's been a while since I watched wrestling, so I was pretty damn glad to have that back for a little while, especially with how disturbing the hardcore matches got. But after that, the best thing about the movie seemed to be the glam metal, and I'm not really into "Bang Your Head" and I believe "Round and Round" to be the worst song on Ratt's Out of the Cellar.
One thing that seemed totally empty was the characterization. I mean, Cassidy's character never evolved beyond "mother / stripper." Randy's daughter has practically no development at all, most of the wrestlers and coworkers are just there, and no one stood out other than Randy in either the story or acting departments. In The Whale, everybody was a perfect choice for their roles. In The Wrestler, the only one who's performance goes above a 7/10 is Rourke.
I feel the same way about The Wrestler that I do about the Johnny Cash biopic Walk the Line: standard for its genre. The whole story seems like something Nicholas Sparks could put together, and I was never that impressed with him after reading several of his books to give him a fair chance. People really need to switch around the consensus between The Wrestler and any one of Aronofsky's more experimental outings. This movie only ended up convincing me that Aronofsky is at his best when he's symbolizing his themes in a more blatant light, or focusing on what the "arthouse" fans want. I'm not into this in anyway, shape, or form, and has only cemented my further disappointment in the state of sports cinema. At least it's slightly better than Noah.
= 62
Darren Aronofsky's Directorial Score (6 Good vs. 0 Bad)
Requiem for a Dream: 100
The Whale: 100
Black Swan: 97
Pi: 88
The Wrestler: 62
Score: 89.4 / 5
With the inclusion of Pi and The Wrestler, Aronofsky's position on my Best Director's List raises from #97 to #85 between Kenji Mizumi and Richard Linklater.