IMDb > Pi (1998) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Pi
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Pi More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 8 of 58: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [Next]
Index 575 reviews in total 

9 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

One of the worst films I have EVER been exposed to!

1/10
Author: steve-balogh (balogh.steve@gmail.com) from Melbourne, Australia
21 February 2002

The credits came as a welcome relief. This is the first film that had a physical effect on me... I felt nauseous from about halfway through and could not bear to watch the awful spinning effects. It was like being on a childrens round-about. Yechhh!

The black and white effects tried to be arty... it was crap! The audio was terrible. The dialog was meaningless. The technical references bordered on rubbish. The so-called "supercomputer" WAS rubbish. The acting was awful. The storyline was just a jumbled mess. Whoever decided this was a Sci-Fi must have been delirious at the time. Can you see a trend?

Basically this was a really bad film.

I gave it a score of 1 but only because ZERO was not an option.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

A movie for people who don't care what's on the screen.

1/10
Author: EasyThere Pilgrim
11 July 2014

This movie will only appeal to people who don't care what is actually on the screen. It's for people who just like to let their mind wander into some sort of a mathematical/noir/drug-induced mind-trip. And there's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean you're not intelligent. But for me, I don't like doing that. For me, this movie was a bunch of nonsense. Total nonsense. I have an electrical engineering degree with a math minor, so I know something about math. This movie just takes some equations, number sequences, etc....throws them up on the screen, and says nature, the stock market, or even God might be based on these numbers. It's a bunch of nonsense.

But like I say, some people like this movie. They want to let their mind wander, pretending that these numbers might mean something. Add in the black & white, the sickness and mind-trip the main character goes through, the shaking camera, the disturbing music....and I guess you have something that some people like. It's just not for me.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Good first half last 45 minutes flatlines to religious yuck

7/10
Author: movie reviews from Peru
8 June 2014

OK, I am certainly not a genius but did graduate from MIT (many years ago) so am literate enough in math to follow the "logic" of this movie-- basically I had to suspend disbelief immediately. But, I found it fun to pretend something might be in the offing by putting intellectual blinders on for about the first half but it starts to flatline about 45 minutes from the end. And the ending is a great big anticlimax---the religious stuff with the ark of the covenant etc....is just a big giant barf.....with Rosemary's Baby looking Rabbis.

I gave it 7 because they build up the suspense nicely and the bit acting was very good--- I am not sure how you could end a movie like this? for one thing keep the religious cliché garbage completely out of it...or fry the Rabbis...somehow show their way leads to a big boring dead end. Maybe that is what the film was trying to do but it failed.

Well it was definitely different.

RECOMMEND ----

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

There is more to the Fibonnaci sequence

Author: BlackBalloon
28 July 2002

The film only hints at the parallels between the Fibonnaci sequence and the Biblical story of Creation. There is much more to be discussed.

At the end of the film, Max was not lobotomizing himself, but performing trepanation.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Smart ... but not all THAT smart.

6/10
Author: Jeff G from Parsippany, NJ
25 August 2000

I do admit it's a more intelligent film than the usual schlock, but from the advertising you're led to believe that this is a brilliant, insightful combination of religion, magic, and mathematics. However, the connection is never really made, only hinted at, and the film is rather like a very yummy appetizer ... without a main course.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Not for everyone, and not for video

7/10
Author: Philby-2 from Adelaide, Australia
28 June 2000

I recently had the opportunity to see this again, and this time at the cinema having previously seen it on video. I have to admit to being disappointed after the video viewing, but given the attention the big screen demands the film makes a vastly different impression. It is most definitely not for everyone, not even all fans of indie films. Brilliant given the tiny budget, but it gives the impression of being a short film padded out to feature length. Some of the cinematography is fantastic, though the grainy images start to wear after a while, and the soundtrack is outstanding. Ignore the holes in the plot, and the occasional implausability, and feel the obsession, the paranoia and fear and you'll probably enjoy it a lot more.

If you have to view it on video do yourself a favour and make sure it is on a big screen, with a decent and loud home theatre set up, with the room dark and the phone off the hook. Get immersed.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Dark, Gripping, but Falls Slightly Short on Believability

7/10
Author: Rob Novak from Catonsville, MD
2 May 2000

Writers Aronofsky and Gullette have crafted a dark, psychological thriller that centers around, of all things, math and numbers. One would think that there was no way that this could hold anyone's interest, but they managed to pull it off. "Pi" reminds us that genius is just this side of madness, and that great intelligence is a burden as well as a gift.

Gullette plays Max Cohen, the brilliant and tortured mathematician, beautifully and without overacting. His mind seethes with the possibilities that lie waiting inside number systems. However, the strain that his talent places on him results in blinding, hallucinogenic migraines. The scenes where Max falls victim to his ailment are tense, well-directed, and have just the right amount of creepiness.

The one beef that I have with this picture pertains to the other characters who are meant to be the film's antagonists. Two parties - a Wall Street firm and a Hasidic Jewish sect are after Max for his abilities. Neither of these relationships are expanded on enough to make the viewer care about them. Of the two, the sect members are the most believable. However, the stockbrokers and Max's encounters with them scream "film school". The loud-mouthed and overbearing businesswoman is more a parody of "the suits", and doesn't fit in with the rest of the film. You are left thinking that the only reason these characters appeared at all was as a plot device to get Max the parts he needed.

A minor, but nagging point - are we really to believe, in this day and age where nearly everyone has seen the inside of a PC, that Max's super-processor is a black cube with four pins? I saw this film with a bunch of other techie-type folk, and our collective reaction was "he's going to run his calculations on a bridge rectifier?"

All in all, this film is entertaining for those who enjoy offbeat cinema. Those looking for "The Matrix" aren't going to be satisfied at all. Math, science, and computer geeks won't wince too much. Hollywood SFX blockbuster this isn't, but that's not a bad thing. Overall, a good film with a few minor drawbacks.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Incredibly good

Author: electrodevil from Texas
29 April 2000

The atmosphere this movie creates is simply incredible, a masterpiece. It's really worth seeing (assuming you're not somebody that likes Jean Claude Van Damme and Sylvester Stallone. I particularly liked the background sound, at first it's a little bit annoying but it really supports the atmosphere.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

oh, man, this was such a cool movie (a horror film about... math? brilliant!)

8/10
Author: solemn avalanche (jse0303@unix.tamu.edu) from College Station
20 April 2000

I saw this a while back so I really can't give a very concrete review, but there are a few things I'd like to mention- first of all, yes, the math involved here is somewhat absurd... oh, but wait a minute, who goes to a feature film to LEARN ABOUT MATH? I think it's pretty sad that there are people who are so obsessive about scientific accuracy that it prevents them from enjoying a brilliant movie not really about math but about PARANOIA. In fact, this would have been a much lesser movie if the math had made any sense; it would have made Max's quest justifiable and could easily have turned this into a sappy Hollywood film (better living through mathematics/paranoid self-obsession: max figures it all out and makes millions, retires and marries the woman next door, haha, wouldn't that be fun?). Instead, it becomes an impressionistic descent into a half-hallucinated hell, and wow, when you realize what's going on, it is gripping. The grainy black and white provides the perfect palette for the film's remarkable, sometimes very frightening images, and the brilliant techno score by Clint Mansell (formerly of Pop Will Eat Itself) backs up what is certainly one of the most compelling films I've ever seen.

Well, ok, so the editing is a little too "MTV," but what did you expect?

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Dark and gritty

7/10
Author: Charles Thomas Tatum, Jr. (movieslave@hotmail.com) from Minot, ND, USA
24 March 2000

It is not that this is a bad film, just a bit misguided. I appreciated the story line and the musical score. The performances were very good, especially considering this was low budget; they were able to afford good actors. My main problem with this film was the direction and grainy black and white look. The direction has been done many times before. I, myself, went for the closeups of hands unlocking doors and doing other things in a music video I directed eight years before I saw this. I know this had no budget, but the grainy photography worked against the film. Math is such a pure science, the score is pure synth, so I wanted to see pure, clean pictures. Instead, the graininess was effective, but would have worked better in a different movie. I appreciated what this tried to say, but it was not the total failure others have been saying it is. I give it a 7.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 8 of 58: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history