« Slow Week | Main | SOMA, in Flannel »

January 29, 2007


A second viewing was necessary for me to go from liking "A History of Violence" to falling head-over-heels in love with it, although most of the points you mention eluded me even then. You're right: Holmes is the only member of the cast who I wouldn't commend, but his mawkishness was close enough to true youthful angst that it didn't bother me. I'll pay closer attention to the comic book compositions next time; from what I recall, most thrilling to watch were the compositions and encounters that seemed to simulate a rendition of the American dream that was about to collapse like a deck of cards, unbeknownst to all who were relishing in it.

BTW: I'd been planning my own "Take Two" review of "The Departed" (liked it more, still not Best Picture or Director worthy). Now it's gonna look like I'm copying! :)

I recently revisited this film again as well Nick. The first time I saw it, over a year ago in theatre, I liked it but failed to connect with it on an emotional level. I think it was because I thought the entry point into the film was Tom himself. All of the other characters centred around him to me. Upon the second viewing, I saw everything from Edie's point of view and my opinion changed drastically. Her protectiveness over the children, her frantic and confused loading of the family shotgun, the dawning on her that her husband is not who he seems, followed by the trip to the hospital room bathroom, these scenes hit home with me the most with take two.

On a sidenote, have you visited Girish's blog recently? He has a great entry about re-viewing films. Very good stuff!

Funny that both of you (Robs) mentioned liking AHoV more the second time around, since that's sorta what motivated me to write the piece (although my first thoughts about starting a "second viewing" column began after re-watching The Fountain).

As my original review makes clear, I liked the film the first time around - hell, it was the unofficial #11 entry on my 2005 Top Ten list. But somehow, it just seemed to work much more naturally and forcefully this time, which was something of a surprise given that I was only semi-interested in revisiting it in the first place.

Thanks for the heads-up about Girish's blog - I hadn't yet seen his new post about re-viewings. Strange (but nice) coincidence.

And Rob H., feel free to copy away. Especially about The Departed, which is certainly a film I'll be seeing again once it hits DVD.

How was the second viewing of the Fountain Nick? I'm almost afraid to watch it again. The first time I saw it, the film was like a delicate flower that could wilt at any time if given too much water, sunlight, or shade. I feel Aronofsky pulled it off in the end, and left the theatre very satisfied, but on the second viewing it might wither and die before my eyes or become deeper and richer.

I cherish my first viewing experience of it, and don't want to jeopardize it. Any thoughts Nick? Was it better second time around?

The Fountain held up remarkably well. In fact, the second viewing is what convinced me to put it on my Top Ten list.

More detailed impressions about Aronofsky's latest will likely arrive once the film hits DVD and I watch it again (which, I guess, would be Notes from a Third Viewing, but whatever).

Re: The Fountain x2. Same here. The first time left me impressed but not in love with it. The second time I became more aware of its "flaws" but even more appreciative of its feeling and scope: it felt like an opera conducted in a completely different kind of chamber, where the sound was admittedly different but no less remarkable.

The comments to this entry are closed.

New Releases

© 2004-2011 LoD