The Cronenberg Thread

there was some good stuff in BD but I spent more time laughing at it than genuinely enjoying it

(xp) Yes. I was underwhelmed with Dahlia.

I might have said something about it being the not-worst movie I saw last year, which may have understandably led to confusions.

(btw Redacted isn't out til December)

Ebert gives Eastern Promises four of four stars

What was pretentious about A History of Violence? I'm not arguing that it wasn't, just asking.

It didn't even start with the mesopotamians. Some history.

j, we had a whole thread on it! My problem: B movie as a Grand Statement.

At least this figures to be less pretentious than History of Violence. I hope.

It's less pretentious, but the stakes are also much lower. It's the slightest (formally, narratively and idea-wise) Cronenberg I've seen.

Haha have you seen Fast Company?

I couldn't finish the Hoberman review, it seems like the more he praises Cronenberg (he again calls him the best North American filmmaker of his generation), the fewer ideas he has about him.

Haha, no. Nothing older than The Brood, so I guess that could explain my response.

x-post

Yeah, it was more interesting back in the day, the reviews, when his movies were cold and schlubby and no one liked them.

I want to get the Criterion Videodrome, are the extras good?

"him the best North American filmmaker of his generation"

thats easy: no competition,except david lynch

See, no one said that after SCANNERS, at which point I think he'd made a half-dozen movies.

Lol @ Lynch and Cronenberg as only major North American directors of the 80s and 90s.

I guess it's to read the Death of Cinema thread.

^time

My problem: B movie as a Grand Statement.

otm... he tried to squeeze way too much out of a pretty thin premise.

I still haven't seen that one.

not the only one, but waaaay above all others

"... he tried to squeeze way too much out of a pretty thin premise"

depends how you look at it.
you can also enjoy it flat, as lots of people did

I thought the movie totally worked on the level of Viggo KICKING ASS.

He showed up on Colbert last night, fwiw. Not as a guest, just as an odd cameo, in a LOTR costume. He gave Colbert a very big sword. I don't even remember the premise.

AWESOME

I thought the movie totally worked on the level of Viggo KICKING ASS.

This is true. The steam room scene is great.

slight? it can't be boringer than spider, can it?

I want to get the Criterion Videodrome, are the extras good?

-- Abbott, Friday, September 14, 2007 7:25 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

YES

good commentary and packaging too.

so what kind of "big statement" was Cronenberg trying to make with AHOV?

the film touches on some themes beyond the gangster stuff, maybe. but i don't see that making the film pretentious.

what's wrong with a b-movie as a grand statement anyway. ffs.

I liked Eastern Promises (although a little less that AHOV--which it is much cleaner than thematically--and a lot less than Dirty Pretty Things--which it's just not as good as.) Watt, Mueller-Stahl, Cassell are all good (if at times not entirely believable in their respective Roles), but it's really all Mortensen's movie. The bathhouse fight scene is great.

i thought this thread will be more popular,now when the movie is out...does it mean i can wait for the dvd?

not the only one, but waaaay above all others

^Spielberg, trendies

I saw it last night. Fabulous. See it now on the big screen—you'll be able to see the FOOD better.

this was an awesome movie.
Hitch would have been proud of it.
cronenberg is proving he is currently the best director on playing with genres,injecting deep subtext about modern society and psychology.
and it's very enjoyeble as well.

Saw Eastern Promises a few hours ago: much thinner than AHOV (this one more obviously betrays B-movie origins), and not as satisfying, although Mortensen is quite excellent in a performance that shows with what grace and power he can move.

I found it totally satisfying and actually preferred it a tiny bit to AHOV. I liked AHOV a lot, I just wasn't all that interested in the guy's marriage/ family, blah blah.

an american friend who normally watches things like norbert just saw this and says it is freakin terrific

viggo, naomi and vincent cassell - cronenberg is such a perv

loved it. beth's right - this is like ahov with the fat removed.

i've read several capsule reviews that mention cassel being miscast and thus the weak link, but i didn't see it.

I just saw Eastern Promises - I thought it was fantastic.

Very much one of those films where you can spend the train ride home thinking of another and another detail whose significance didn't immediately occur to you. The bathhouse fight was incredibly gripping - although I could have done without the "Oh shit, fat dude is still alive!" moment.

I just got my copy of Russian Criminal Tattoo Encyclopaedia Vol 2, the first volume of which, when delivered into Cronenberg's hands, provoked a rewrite of the original script of Eastern Promises. It's quite beautiful; I mailed Fuel today asking whether vol 1 would come back into print. (Volume 1 goes for several hundred $, as best I can tell.)

although I could have done without the "Oh shit, fat dude is still alive!" moment

fat dudes die hard

i liked this, but then i ran into a girl from kiev who hated it, and now i'm not so sure. it was cool and entertaining. and the bathhouse scene was pretty amazing and it brought back old(er) cronenberg for me (not just because of the blood, but because of the staging.) but it was a little too contrived at the same time, a couple of lines peeked through that built-up noir world.

I think the Hitch comparison was a good one - it was more of a tightly written thriller than a realistic crime story.

Just saw a History of Violence. Holy shit it's intense and suspenseful and man, that guy's head sure gets shot open. Want to know what happens to his son.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/15520/naked-lunch

two-disc edition of The Fly now at HMV for $4 (in toronto, at least). The second disc has a 2 1/2 documentary + the usual extras.

man ahov was great, finally saw it for the first time -- generic 'is dr. morbius wrong about everything' comment here -- i dont get why ppl think its 'pretentious' or whatever. it avoided camp i guess, in a way that made it seem really severe/stark. i also dont think it was at all about 'violence behind the scenes in small towns!', more about how the cost of peace is violence, and how violence exists in a lot of diff forms & whathaveyou throughout history ... nothing particularly pretentious about it tho, other than the discourse around it being 'ppl took this film seriously'

http://jaded4good.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/jameswoods.jpg http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080408/Viggo-Mortenson_l.jpg http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/pv/Peter%20Weller-3.jpg