Not sure I've ever read the words 'Requiem for a Dream' and 'light hearted' in the same sentence before....anyway, I've had shame on my watch list for a while and as Requiem is one of my favourite films, if you're saying this is bleaker, i'll have to give it a watch
The thing is when you watch Requiem For A Dream so much of it is taken up in the style - the fast editing. It is unsettling because it is unsettled, so to speak. It is about a loss of control in the face of addiction, and so the editing presents things as frantic and chaotic. Now that's great, but it means that there is an element of style over substance. I still think the substance of Requiem is sound, and it is horrible and bleak and all the rest of it, but nevertheless a large chunk of the effect comes from the style. Personally I think it's a bit hard to watch it without being caught up in looking at it from a production point of view, particularly when that is a chief selling point of the film and what everyone tells you about, so then you're watching "the film" rather than watching the film, if you get what I mean.
Shame is calmer, and takes its time over things, and is unsettling in a different way. Maybe it's because it lingers too long on things, where Requiem is always chopping on to the next thing. Michael Fassbender looking miserable during a lengthy threesome scene is heavy going, and it goes on and on. It's inescapable, because he can't escape his addiction.
By the way, the film features many shots of Michael's fassbender, so brace yourself. On the other hand, it also features a naked Carey Mulligan and many other naked women, so it sort of evens out.
Quite a British cast, though Matt Smith annoyed the hell out of me, couldn't stand his character
