Much ado about “Mother!”

Enshrouded in secrecy, director Darren Aronofsky’s “Mother!” had heads being scratched right up until a few weeks ago, and until it premiered at the Toronto Film Festival.

Aronofsky is certainly known for testing the cinematic boundaries, ever since his 1997 debut, “Pi,” with films such as “Requiem for a Dream” and “Black Swan.” Even his big-budget misfire, “Noah,” was a spectacle to witness, despite its bizarre dip into sci-fi mysticism.

The trailer for “Mother!” (the exclamation mark is a part of the title) led audiences to believe that it could perhaps be a supernatural, suspenseful meditation on maternity, a la “Rosemary’s Baby.” And with Jennifer Lawrence and Javier Bardem as leads, supported by a mysterious Michelle Pfeiffer and Ed Harris, it looked to be a tantalizing kickoff to awards-season prestige pictures.

Now that it has been released, “Mother!” has drawn a line in the sand with viewers. Some are praising its deep, allegorical underpinnings, while others are ready to throw in the towel before the chaotic third act even revs up. It currently hovers around a just-over-fresh rating of 63 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and earned a rare “F” score with CinemaScore, a Las Vegas-based polling organization that also gave said grade to the “Solaris” remake with George Clooney and “The Wicker Man” remake with Nic Cage.

Lawrence and Bardem star as a newly married couple who move into his remote Victorian home that was previously gutted in a fire that took the life of his former wife. They are not identified by name, and all we really know is that he is a poet suffering from writer’s block and he cherishes a crystal that survived the fire.

As they begin their restoration, they are visited by a mysterious stranger (played by Harris) whom Bardem instantly befriends. His peculiar demeanor is unsettling to Lawrence, and that discomfort in only compounded when Harris’ wife (played by Pfeiffer) arrives at the door and begins a passive-aggressive dance with with Lawrence.

I hesitate to mention much more, as that may be the only joy some of the audience gets from witnessing “Mother!” Others may have made their way to the exit door without even caring what happens next.

I will state for the record that I love a film that holds up and rewards viewers over repeated viewings. One of my favorite films of this year is “Get Out,” which I can enjoy on multiple levels even after having sat through it a few times. And while I can certainly appreciate the sheer chutzpah on display as Aronofsky swings for the fences with every late-game pitch in the film, there is little to it that holds up no matter if you try to view it as a rumination on the environment, religion, motherhood, misogyny, writer’s block or any strange mash-up in between. None of the characters rings a note of authenticity from the start, so it’s hard to engage with the narrative plotline constructed by Aronofsky (who also serves as writer). And that is a necessity for the audience once the Grand Guignol of a third act kicks in, which unleashes imagery and exposition at a machine-gun pace.

I suppose that barrage is part of the film’s point, but when there is no emotional core in which to root it all, the rest is just noise. And for those who are looking to view it through an environmental or biblical lens? Good luck. Even shifting into those gears left me holding many stray pieces to those puzzles as well, and no motivation to make them fit.

I admire the fact that “Mother!” wants to take on so much and still market itself to mainstream moviegoers. I would rather have a film overstuffed with ideas than one created purely to tick off boxes designed to appeal to mass markets. That said, if those ideas are not tied to a strong emotional core, it’s hard to not feel crushed under their weight.