It is a masterpiece. You don't feel anything because "they" don't feel anything. It takes a visioner to translate the movie to the spectator. The act is superb, the characters are not here, in our time, they exist in a future far removed, so, they act and talk strangely. The movie is a window into a possible future, and it is scary and beautiful.
Cronenberg has done this sort of thing so much better in the past - Crash, ExistenZ, Videodrome, Naked Lunch, The Brood, etc. This one was lifeless and the acting quite subpar when compared to the tremendous acting typically found in Cronenberg's films. Sorry to say this because I have loved his work for years. Cronenberg is one of the greats.
I was scared. No video for over two weeks. "Surely Ms. Queen isn't taking a sabbatical," I thought. Then...boom...new video! Happy day. Personally, I'm always down to Cronenberg. Like pizza, even when Cronenberg is bad, he is disturbingly good...like Sbarro's. Good vid!
My thoughts on "Crimes" is more of a deep-dive into the metaphorical meanings within Cronenberg's on-the-nose, satirical (albeit horrific) and sometimes humorous view of modern-day technology (ex: eating chair, sleeping bed, autopsy bed), exhibitionism and voyeurism (ex: Saul, Caprice, Timlin, two women with drills), pop culture (ex: Klinik/Ear Man, others), celebrity status (Saul and Caprice), and ultimately the "plastic" society that we have become (ex: plastic eaters, non-plastic eaters, and those "evolving" into eating plastic). There are also the "policing agencies" (Cope, Wippet, Timlin) that try to regulate and/or terminate humanities permanent decline into a meaningless existence of seeking out ever-greater, "shocking" sensualities (ex: government's attempts to regulate social media and the moral decline of society). The story clearly identifies "plastic" as the synthetic, cheap, easily consumed and digested content in social media (I think of "Barbie Girl" by Aqua, Madonna's "Material Girl"). Each of the main characters is participating in the so-called "art" in some way with a brief glimpse of a "normal person" who dies from eating "plastic". The boy Brecken, from the outset, has already "evolved" into a full plastic eater. The mother, representing parents of young "social media artists" today, smothers him. This represents the consequences of parents allowing their children to consume and produce cheap, easy to consume exhibitionism eventually leading them to be killed by it (ex: kids being killed by their stalkers, older men being fans of young girls) as if the parent was the actual murderer. Through the entire story, the main character Saul resists "evolving" into a plastic eater (ex: "tumor-like organs" that grow inside him = the cancers of society) using alien-looking tech just to eat and sleep (Ex: cpap, hospital surgical devices, feeding tubes, mechanised beds etc). Finally, after just giving in to "evolving" into a plastic eater does he find complete contentment and peace. However, never does he realize that his "painless" exhibitionism is the very cause of his morphing into a plastic eater; he's now desensitised to it all. Along the way, we also meet two woman voyeurists who drill holes into people's heads representing the mindless, intellegence draining people of RUclips Channels and pornography; they create content that displays to everyone their so-called "inner beauty" but is secretely "horrific" for us to watch, and we can't turn our eyes away (ex: Adrienne, Ear Man, zipper device, etc.). In addition, Ear Man (Klinik) demonstrates how even the hippocritical Producer of his "Art" (ex: the music and entertainment industry) can be the very one who exploits the financial successes but joins the "popular" view of hating it (ex: anonymous likes, dislikes, etc.). There are many more metaphorical references throughout the story and Cronenberg uses the genre as a warning of the future "horrors" of becoming "Plastic Eaters". Cronenberg asks us If we are disgusted by what we are watching and thus why are we not disgusted by what we "consume" in today's media? He suggests that if we are not disgusted by what we're watching, we're already a plastic eater. Indeed, ultimately society will become senseless, meaningless, painless, completely devoid of the characteristics that make us human if we don't stop eating plastic both metaphorically (ex: social media, empty entertainment, exhibitionism, voyeurism, pop culture, celebrity status, etc.) and physically (ex: oceans being full of plastic: fish eat it, we eat the fish). Neither has any nutritional value and can kill us metaphorically, physically, spiritually, and socially.
David cronenberg has some disturbing movies. Like dead ringers. ( Jeremy irons) surgical horror. Insane gynaecologists. ( identical twins, and they enjoy pretending to be eachother and having sex with the same woman without her knowledge, that before the crazy part )
I didn't think it was horrible, but it did leave me cold. I agree that he didn't go far enough, since it seemed more like a greatest hits of his past movies. I did find the satire of the art world funny, though.
I understand your point. In fact Crash is my favourite Cronenberg film too. But this premise is fantastic and is boring but fascinating at the same time
@@Alachia you should watch this movie his son made called Possessor. It is a movie where the villian's character arc is too become even more cold blooded
@@Alachia indeed, anatomy both interal and external feels wonderful and just imagined in that movie how that sense we have is vital for what it means to be human.
A bit of a shame to hear it's not doing so well. I'm a huge Cronenberg fan, Videodrome, and to a lesser extent, eXistenZ sits pretty high on my favourite movies of all time, so I was very hype when the trailer for this dropped. Still going to check it out, but yeah, this isn't the first time I've heard this movie is disappointing, even from other fans of the director.
I haven't seen the film, I want to see the film, I believe what you're saying about the film is %100 true, but what if some of the purpose of the film was to show that without pain suffering means very little? Maybe his thesis is what creates art is in fact pain.
I always thought "Naked Lunch" was underrated. I thought people took it too serious and they didn't get some of it was following Burroughs' "comedy routines". But everyone who I have ever talked to hates the film.
@@Rubin4749 That was my first Cronenberg, I was a teenager. I really didn’t like it, but would definitely try again. Now Cronenberg’s ‘Crimes of the Future’ that he made in the 60’s is REALLY an uncomfortable sit.
I was examining The Brood which is an all-time classic. Just the narrative alone brings it into classic territory. I'm skeptical of your review because of how great The brood is and how many of his films are misunderstood. The Brood is a masterclass in understanding how one deals with childhood trauma. It was also panned at the time by people like Ebert who just didn't get it. Here's a little Easter egg that nobody has noticed maybe not even cronenberg himself. When the main character goes to his ex-wife's old apartment there's a Saint Catherine of Siena image on the window. I've seen no discussion of this anywhere because it's a hard detail to notice especially with cameras at the time. She practiced what could be called a holy anorexia and died at 33 from strokes because of her anorexia. St Catherine of Siena was like an aesthetic saint. Usually people who are seeking vain self images are the ones who lose that dramatic amount of weight. The Brood is now widely considered cronenberg's greatest film. The body horror stuff that he has done has been prescient in terms of where society is going with surgery and the limits of a corporeal existence. Christ said to live in the spirit not the flesh. But throughout all time humanity has sought dwelling places in the flesh. Cronenberg has always pulled no punches and has actually represented an almost Pilgrimesque regard for sexual fetishism. I'm looking forward to checking this picture out but I'm not convinced that Lea Seydoux or Kristen Stewart have the toolbox that could animate a cronenberg picture.
I'd give it a C. Interesting concepts but it was emotionally uninvolving. Perhaps deliberately given its context, but that made it ultimately a bit dull. I didn't really care what happened at the end because I wasn't invested in any of the characters.
i feel like a lot of movies nowadays are great concept and goes nowhere. or they start well and go way left field. i personally thought that about the lighthouse most recently.
David Cronenberg is one of my top 3 directors, but this one kind of missed for me. It needed a rewrite. Edit: I rewatched it this morning and I think I like it more on the second watching. I don't think the kink thing is as important as the plastic digestion theme. I think this movie is supposed to be funny more than people think. It's definitely got a sarcastic/black comedy edge to it.
I honestly though it was extremely good. A lot of food for the mind... and yes I wanted more which just left me with loads of questions that I'm glad I made... I honestly never though of a world where two species of humans lived... or are they humans? Its not an easy one, the themes proposed aren't layered so easily in front of the viewer. Then again I dont think it's a movie for everyone and definitely you have to be open minded and mainly observe and listen.
Big Cronenberg fan here, but every trailer and image I've seen makes the film look weirdly claustrophobic...like every location was filmed in the same poorly-lit room with different set decorations based on each scene. It just looks so unpleasant and drab...like the work of a mediocre first-time filmmaker attempting to emulate Cronenberg. I suspect there may have been budget issues though. Anyway, great review! I have a feeling you could come up with a pretty wild body-horror script.
I'm a huge Cronenberg fan - I have most of his films in my collection (I even enjoyed his novel Consumed). Viggo is absolutely one of my favorite film actors. Sadly, I found Crimes to be dull and derivative - not of another's work but of Cronenberg himself - Cronenberg imitating Cronenberg. It felt like he copied and pasted a bunch of different elements from earlier movies that were way more fascinating in their original form. It took an act of will for me to finish it - I found it lifeless and dull. It seemed to me that Cronenberg played to his brand and gave people the body horror Cronenberg that they've been craving, but it really felt like he didn't have his heart in it. I'm sure it was much easier to market it as a straight-up body horror project, plus get the funding in the first place. He's done this type of thing so much better in the past - this felt forced and self-conscious. As far as the acting, typically one of Cronenberg's strong points, I found it unfocused and at times dreadful (Kristen Stewart). I felt sorry for Viggo being in this movie. This is a flaccid Cronenberg rather than Cronenberg fully erect.
"Lifeless" and "dull" are risky words to use when criticizing this film. Because of the subject matter, someone could say, "that's just the point". You don't have to buy that, but one could make that argument. Understanding that this was a script that Cronenberg wrote in the 90s, I loved it. I saw it as a free-floating sketch where he was riffing on pre-established ideas and motifs.
@@Alachia The trailer literally showed the best visuals of the film.... Which lasted, what, 30 seconds at most? I completely zoned out during any irrelevant conversation, which was 90% of them.
How disappointing... I was looking forward to David Cronenberg's return to 'body horror.' Cronenberg has always had that cold, detached and clinical style, which was made his early body horror stuff so interesting. You had these off-the-wall, schlocky ideas (a girl whose armpit will suck your blood!!) but presented in such a deadly serious manner. He had a really great run of very distinctive sci-fi/horror films, but once he left the body horror behind, what you're mostly just left with is cold, detached and uninvolving drama.
Well that's the whole point about the film, we feel nothing just like everyone in the film does not, exactly the reasons you dislike the film are exactly the reasons I liked it. Nice review.
I think my gut inclinations might be right. I really admire the effort that Kristen Stewart put into this film. However Lea was not effective and Stewart is too attractive to pull this kind of role off. It should have found a more pedestrian looking actress. The only one with the acting chops to pull this movie off was Viggo. It would have been an all-time classic with better actresses. I'm not saying they're bad actresses they are tremendously good actresses but cronenberg's thrive off of the unknown actors and the actors that deliver performances of their lives and they're virtually unknown outside of a tiny body horror cronenberg piece. '70s body horror special effects will always be peak cronenberg but it is a little fascinating to see cronenberg work with modern CGI. I hope this opens the door for many more cronenberg films before he dies. His dogmatic obsession with the theory of evolution is radically annoying, but his prescient signaling about how as his film says quote body is reality endquote is classic cronenberg Between this film and my deep dive into the Westworld television series, my head is supremely screwed up. It does seem liberating to pretend that we are a video game character making free actions in an open world. Being your own Creator in this world seems better than living in fear and being unable to go outside.
I was looking forward to it, but every minor plot thread leads nowhere. Also, why does every actor have a different accent? You'd think the future would be more homogenized. It sucks.
I'm gonna give a hot take, David Cronenberg got famous for The Fly due to creature effects and has been riding that for his entire career. Man is a Boomer Edgelord not really a very good film maker guy has more flops than good films
He got famous for making weird films. In the sense of him, David Lynch, and Stanley Kubrick. With this film he was wanting to make it like what the Naked Lunch was. That had a complex storyline that you really had to think about with similar visuals. This movie had the same visuals, but was just straight forward with not much of a story. He said he wrote the story over 20 years ago so maybe that is part of the problem? Gunther Von Hagens has been around for ever, and is even old news now.
One reviewer (a positive review) described it as a "transgender allegory". THAT and Alachia's review here, is enough to make me skip this film. I will confess the sexuality part makes me almost wanna try it. But I doubt if it's going to "get me up" in any way. Thanks for saving two hours of my life, because I might have tried this one. Still enjoyed your review.
No, nothing transgender going on, in all honesty is all evolutive. The questions in the movie are more layered out in the dialogue rather than in the action of what is happening maybe thats why a lot of people though of it as boring, better see it with a Coffee on hand. For me it was on the nature of what is human, what we call human? Go see it with this question in mind and everything will make sense. I promise.
I mean it's good that ppl can experience and see different meanings in a film. However, the Wachowski sisters have been very vocal about the matrix films being a trans allegory.
@@Alachia yes matrix is but I'm talking about Crimes of the Future specifically... which isn't, people may have allegories but we can find allegory of too many things everywhere in the film... what about bdsm or medical fetishism? Do people who are transgender find meaning in it as talking of their dismorphia? Yes, maybe but, does it mean is transgender? No.
@@jennifercruz2482 lol. Omg. I'm so sorry.. the RUclips creator app doesn't tell me that comment the video is for and I made a wrong assumption!!! My apologies!
Come on, boring is just a synonym for art film. Boring films are awesome. It takes so much courage to be boring. Being boring in film is peak. I bought this movie on RUclips for $25 and was watching it on my cracked phone screen and I can already tell that it's a classic. Viggo by himself is classic. Your review is so off base I don't know why. You've been so right on the pulse many other times it's hard to believe that you dismissed a cronenberg film. His obsession with darwinian evolution and the idea that humans will continue to evolve is very cringe. This idea that society will ban human evolution is very off. Cronenberg is extremely liberal and extremely atheistic so it's no surprise that theory of evolution is kind of his God at this point in his old age. I doubt that crimes of the future is a classic but it seemed very very good the few pieces that I listen to. I listen to films my first viewing without watching them. Then I will watch the film. If your film writing can't stand up without visuals then it's a waste of time. But this film definitely stood up. I guess I did notice some virtue signaling and trans politics in the film. Kristen Stewart sidekick in the film is so oddly similar to Jordan B Peterson it's freaking me out. In fact when he first spoke in the film I thought that cronenberg had put in a Jordan B Peterson parody character. Wow wow wow. I'm sorry you hated this boring movie but it's not boring and like I said boring movies are the goat. Andrei tarkovsky would get labeled as boring today. It's our attention spans that are limited these days it's not the fact that the films are really boring. high art is boring and quiet. Terrance Mallicks a hidden life is one of the greatest films of all time. It is also one of the most boring films of all time. Boring is a really piss poor way to criticize a film.
just watched it and can confirm, it's shit actually your description in this review still made it sound more interesting as it actually was in the movie. Only "redeeming" quality... 3 naked woman, but you can find those everywhere
@@Alachia She's actually not a bad actress. But most or her parts are *INCREDIBLY* pretentious. And did you see her play Diane??? I don't EVEN LIKE Diane, and I thought OMG!!! Who can watch this and believe she is *that much* of a cuhnt?!?!?! I basically hate her and even I don't think she could be *that* annoying.
It is a masterpiece. You don't feel anything because "they" don't feel anything. It takes a visioner to translate the movie to the spectator. The act is superb, the characters are not here, in our time, they exist in a future far removed, so, they act and talk strangely. The movie is a window into a possible future, and it is scary and beautiful.
It damn is!!!!
nah you trippin it's just boring
Cronenberg has done this sort of thing so much better in the past - Crash, ExistenZ, Videodrome, Naked Lunch, The Brood, etc. This one was lifeless and the acting quite subpar when compared to the tremendous acting typically found in Cronenberg's films. Sorry to say this because I have loved his work for years. Cronenberg is one of the greats.
I was scared. No video for over two weeks. "Surely Ms. Queen isn't taking a sabbatical," I thought. Then...boom...new video! Happy day. Personally, I'm always down to Cronenberg. Like pizza, even when Cronenberg is bad, he is disturbingly good...like Sbarro's. Good vid!
My thoughts on "Crimes" is more of a deep-dive into the metaphorical meanings within Cronenberg's on-the-nose, satirical (albeit horrific) and sometimes humorous view of modern-day technology (ex: eating chair, sleeping bed, autopsy bed), exhibitionism and voyeurism (ex: Saul, Caprice, Timlin, two women with drills), pop culture (ex: Klinik/Ear Man, others), celebrity status (Saul and Caprice), and ultimately the "plastic" society that we have become (ex: plastic eaters, non-plastic eaters, and those "evolving" into eating plastic). There are also the "policing agencies" (Cope, Wippet, Timlin) that try to regulate and/or terminate humanities permanent decline into a meaningless existence of seeking out ever-greater, "shocking" sensualities (ex: government's attempts to regulate social media and the moral decline of society).
The story clearly identifies "plastic" as the synthetic, cheap, easily consumed and digested content in social media (I think of "Barbie Girl" by Aqua, Madonna's "Material Girl"). Each of the main characters is participating in the so-called "art" in some way with a brief glimpse of a "normal person" who dies from eating "plastic".
The boy Brecken, from the outset, has already "evolved" into a full plastic eater. The mother, representing parents of young "social media artists" today, smothers him. This represents the consequences of parents allowing their children to consume and produce cheap, easy to consume exhibitionism eventually leading them to be killed by it (ex: kids being killed by their stalkers, older men being fans of young girls) as if the parent was the actual murderer.
Through the entire story, the main character Saul resists "evolving" into a plastic eater (ex: "tumor-like organs" that grow inside him = the cancers of society) using alien-looking tech just to eat and sleep (Ex: cpap, hospital surgical devices, feeding tubes, mechanised beds etc). Finally, after just giving in to "evolving" into a plastic eater does he find complete contentment and peace. However, never does he realize that his "painless" exhibitionism is the very cause of his morphing into a plastic eater; he's now desensitised to it all.
Along the way, we also meet two woman voyeurists who drill holes into people's heads representing the mindless, intellegence draining people of RUclips Channels and pornography; they create content that displays to everyone their so-called "inner beauty" but is secretely "horrific" for us to watch, and we can't turn our eyes away (ex: Adrienne, Ear Man, zipper device, etc.). In addition, Ear Man (Klinik) demonstrates how even the hippocritical Producer of his "Art" (ex: the music and entertainment industry) can be the very one who exploits the financial successes but joins the "popular" view of hating it (ex: anonymous likes, dislikes, etc.).
There are many more metaphorical references throughout the story and Cronenberg uses the genre as a warning of the future "horrors" of becoming "Plastic Eaters". Cronenberg asks us If we are disgusted by what we are watching and thus why are we not disgusted by what we "consume" in today's media? He suggests that if we are not disgusted by what we're watching, we're already a plastic eater. Indeed, ultimately society will become senseless, meaningless, painless, completely devoid of the characteristics that make us human if we don't stop eating plastic both metaphorically (ex: social media, empty entertainment, exhibitionism, voyeurism, pop culture, celebrity status, etc.) and physically (ex: oceans being full of plastic: fish eat it, we eat the fish). Neither has any nutritional value and can kill us metaphorically, physically, spiritually, and socially.
David cronenberg has some disturbing movies. Like dead ringers. ( Jeremy irons) surgical horror. Insane gynaecologists. ( identical twins, and they enjoy pretending to be eachother and having sex with the same woman without her knowledge, that before the crazy part )
She's back!
4:40 "It was a crime" ... well the movie is called Crimes of the Future... :D (I'll see myself out)
Happy Wednesday 😁💛 Great video
I felt more emotionally impacted by Titane honestly even though it was a lot more vague than COTF
This movie is so deep in a Lot of ways. I think it's a total masterpiece and spoke a Lot of how people see us evolving as humans
I didn't think it was horrible, but it did leave me cold. I agree that he didn't go far enough, since it seemed more like a greatest hits of his past movies. I did find the satire of the art world funny, though.
I understand your point. In fact Crash is my favourite Cronenberg film too. But this premise is fantastic and is boring but fascinating at the same time
🎶 I want to feel you from the inside 🎶
David Cronenberg truly loves disturbing the people that watch his movies
It actually was not disturbing to me at all
@@Alachia you should watch this movie his son made called Possessor.
It is a movie where the villian's character arc is too become even more cold blooded
@@daustin8888 amazing film
@@oreallly967 Extremely unsettling
Bahaha, fav line: "Maybe in the future all our human organs are just layed out perfectly"
You had me at let me pull that liver out.🤣
Livers actually feel very nice. I remember this from dissecting a shark once
@@Alachia indeed, anatomy both interal and external feels wonderful and just imagined in that movie how that sense we have is vital for what it means to be human.
It's been a long time, so good to see you again😊
What was the point of the breakfast chair?
It was odd wasn't it. I didn't get it either
@@Alachia I did like the opening shot of the boy and the abandoned ship. Gave me some hope for what lay ahead but alas..
Tenser was in discomfort because of his "evolutionary" syndrome while eating... the chair helps him digest "normal food".
A bit of a shame to hear it's not doing so well. I'm a huge Cronenberg fan, Videodrome, and to a lesser extent, eXistenZ sits pretty high on my favourite movies of all time, so I was very hype when the trailer for this dropped.
Still going to check it out, but yeah, this isn't the first time I've heard this movie is disappointing, even from other fans of the director.
Wow I really enjoyed this film. My favorite of the year so far.
I haven't seen the film, I want to see the film, I believe what you're saying about the film is %100 true, but what if some of the purpose of the film was to show that without pain suffering means very little?
Maybe his thesis is what creates art is in fact pain.
I love Alachia's operation description. :)
Ooof makes me think of Cronenberg’s M. Butterfly.
I always thought "Naked Lunch" was underrated. I thought people took it too serious and they didn't get some of it was following Burroughs' "comedy routines". But everyone who I have ever talked to hates the film.
@@Rubin4749 That was my first Cronenberg, I was a teenager. I really didn’t like it, but would definitely try again. Now Cronenberg’s ‘Crimes of the Future’ that he made in the 60’s is REALLY an uncomfortable sit.
As much as I like Chronenberg, this movie was a chore to get through.
I think he has a visual idea he wanted to express but just didn't have an actual story
I found the movie to be boring and way too heavy on the world building without any form of plot. I was even bored with the body horror.
I was examining The Brood which is an all-time classic. Just the narrative alone brings it into classic territory. I'm skeptical of your review because of how great The brood is and how many of his films are misunderstood.
The Brood is a masterclass in understanding how one deals with childhood trauma. It was also panned at the time by people like Ebert who just didn't get it.
Here's a little Easter egg that nobody has noticed maybe not even cronenberg himself. When the main character goes to his ex-wife's old apartment there's a Saint Catherine of Siena image on the window. I've seen no discussion of this anywhere because it's a hard detail to notice especially with cameras at the time. She practiced what could be called a holy anorexia and died at 33 from strokes because of her anorexia. St Catherine of Siena was like an aesthetic saint. Usually people who are seeking vain self images are the ones who lose that dramatic amount of weight.
The Brood is now widely considered cronenberg's greatest film. The body horror stuff that he has done has been prescient in terms of where society is going with surgery and the limits of a corporeal existence. Christ said to live in the spirit not the flesh. But throughout all time humanity has sought dwelling places in the flesh. Cronenberg has always pulled no punches and has actually represented an almost Pilgrimesque regard for sexual fetishism. I'm looking forward to checking this picture out but I'm not convinced that Lea Seydoux or Kristen Stewart have the toolbox that could animate a cronenberg picture.
We had to turn this movie off after 30 mins.
This movie has got you thinking Alachia
I'd give it a C. Interesting concepts but it was emotionally uninvolving. Perhaps deliberately given its context, but that made it ultimately a bit dull. I didn't really care what happened at the end because I wasn't invested in any of the characters.
We need another Alachia marathon live stream, nothing big, how about 2 or 3 hours :)
i feel like a lot of movies nowadays are great concept and goes nowhere. or they start well and go way left field. i personally thought that about the lighthouse most recently.
David Cronenberg is one of my top 3 directors, but this one kind of missed for me. It needed a rewrite. Edit: I rewatched it this morning and I think I like it more on the second watching. I don't think the kink thing is as important as the plastic digestion theme. I think this movie is supposed to be funny more than people think. It's definitely got a sarcastic/black comedy edge to it.
Well you summed up my impression of the film in the first 6 seconds of your video. Bravo
Thanks alachia. Oh lea sadow has been cast in dune part two . ( lady Margo fenring )
I honestly though it was extremely good. A lot of food for the mind... and yes I wanted more which just left me with loads of questions that I'm glad I made... I honestly never though of a world where two species of humans lived... or are they humans? Its not an easy one, the themes proposed aren't layered so easily in front of the viewer. Then again I dont think it's a movie for everyone and definitely you have to be open minded and mainly observe and listen.
Big Cronenberg fan here, but every trailer and image I've seen makes the film look weirdly claustrophobic...like every location was filmed in the same poorly-lit room with different set decorations based on each scene. It just looks so unpleasant and drab...like the work of a mediocre first-time filmmaker attempting to emulate Cronenberg. I suspect there may have been budget issues though. Anyway, great review! I have a feeling you could come up with a pretty wild body-horror script.
I'm a huge Cronenberg fan - I have most of his films in my collection (I even enjoyed his novel Consumed). Viggo is absolutely one of my favorite film actors. Sadly, I found Crimes to be dull and derivative - not of another's work but of Cronenberg himself - Cronenberg imitating Cronenberg. It felt like he copied and pasted a bunch of different elements from earlier movies that were way more fascinating in their original form. It took an act of will for me to finish it - I found it lifeless and dull. It seemed to me that Cronenberg played to his brand and gave people the body horror Cronenberg that they've been craving, but it really felt like he didn't have his heart in it. I'm sure it was much easier to market it as a straight-up body horror project, plus get the funding in the first place. He's done this type of thing so much better in the past - this felt forced and self-conscious. As far as the acting, typically one of Cronenberg's strong points, I found it unfocused and at times dreadful (Kristen Stewart). I felt sorry for Viggo being in this movie. This is a flaccid Cronenberg rather than Cronenberg fully erect.
"Lifeless" and "dull" are risky words to use when criticizing this film. Because of the subject matter, someone could say, "that's just the point". You don't have to buy that, but one could make that argument. Understanding that this was a script that Cronenberg wrote in the 90s, I loved it. I saw it as a free-floating sketch where he was riffing on pre-established ideas and motifs.
Suggestion: Watch "Mad God". Way more interesting and goes pretty damn far.
I completely agree with you on this one. I kept nodding off... ZZZZzzzzzzz
I almost fell asleep twice during the film
@@Alachia The trailer literally showed the best visuals of the film.... Which lasted, what, 30 seconds at most? I completely zoned out during any irrelevant conversation, which was 90% of them.
@@Alachia Serious though, "Mad God"... A sight to see
How disappointing... I was looking forward to David Cronenberg's return to 'body horror.'
Cronenberg has always had that cold, detached and clinical style, which was made his early body horror stuff so interesting. You had these off-the-wall, schlocky ideas (a girl whose armpit will suck your blood!!) but presented in such a deadly serious manner.
He had a really great run of very distinctive sci-fi/horror films, but once he left the body horror behind, what you're mostly just left with is cold, detached and uninvolving drama.
The movie felt unfinished
Well that's the whole point about the film, we feel nothing just like everyone in the film does not, exactly the reasons you dislike the film are exactly the reasons I liked it. Nice review.
And I love your tea shirt
I like Crash. (the good one)
So thanks for the review..
I think my gut inclinations might be right. I really admire the effort that Kristen Stewart put into this film. However Lea was not effective and Stewart is too attractive to pull this kind of role off. It should have found a more pedestrian looking actress. The only one with the acting chops to pull this movie off was Viggo. It would have been an all-time classic with better actresses. I'm not saying they're bad actresses they are tremendously good actresses but cronenberg's thrive off of the unknown actors and the actors that deliver performances of their lives and they're virtually unknown outside of a tiny body horror cronenberg piece. '70s body horror special effects will always be peak cronenberg but it is a little fascinating to see cronenberg work with modern CGI. I hope this opens the door for many more cronenberg films before he dies. His dogmatic obsession with the theory of evolution is radically annoying, but his prescient signaling about how as his film says quote body is reality endquote is classic cronenberg
Between this film and my deep dive into the Westworld television series, my head is supremely screwed up. It does seem liberating to pretend that we are a video game character making free actions in an open world. Being your own Creator in this world seems better than living in fear and being unable to go outside.
That is so Deep And I appreciate your cometary for this Movie 🎥
Wow. Wouldn't want to watch this film on a full stomach. Sounds like Cronenberg was trying to live out some sick fantasy.
You see worse surgery scenes at TV than this movie in all honesty.
Yeah.. all the grey's anatomy seasons have much more horrific bits when it comes to surgery scenes
I was looking forward to it, but every minor plot thread leads nowhere. Also, why does every actor have a different accent? You'd think the future would be more homogenized. It sucks.
I'm gonna give a hot take, David Cronenberg got famous for The Fly due to creature effects and has been riding that for his entire career. Man is a Boomer Edgelord not really a very good film maker guy has more flops than good films
Whew!! And I thought it was harsh!! Lol
He got famous for making weird films. In the sense of him, David Lynch, and Stanley Kubrick. With this film he was wanting to make it like what the Naked Lunch was. That had a complex storyline that you really had to think about with similar visuals. This movie had the same visuals, but was just straight forward with not much of a story.
He said he wrote the story over 20 years ago so maybe that is part of the problem? Gunther Von Hagens has been around for ever, and is even old news now.
One reviewer (a positive review) described it as a "transgender allegory". THAT and Alachia's review here, is enough to make me skip this film. I will confess the sexuality part makes me almost wanna try it. But I doubt if it's going to "get me up" in any way. Thanks for saving two hours of my life, because I might have tried this one. Still enjoyed your review.
No, nothing transgender going on, in all honesty is all evolutive. The questions in the movie are more layered out in the dialogue rather than in the action of what is happening maybe thats why a lot of people though of it as boring, better see it with a Coffee on hand. For me it was on the nature of what is human, what we call human? Go see it with this question in mind and everything will make sense. I promise.
I mean it's good that ppl can experience and see different meanings in a film. However, the Wachowski sisters have been very vocal about the matrix films being a trans allegory.
@@Alachia yes matrix is but I'm talking about Crimes of the Future specifically... which isn't, people may have allegories but we can find allegory of too many things everywhere in the film... what about bdsm or medical fetishism? Do people who are transgender find meaning in it as talking of their dismorphia? Yes, maybe but, does it mean is transgender? No.
@@jennifercruz2482 lol. Omg. I'm so sorry.. the RUclips creator app doesn't tell me that comment the video is for and I made a wrong assumption!!! My apologies!
@@Alachia jajaja no no worries lol jajaja damn phones!
Come on, boring is just a synonym for art film. Boring films are awesome. It takes so much courage to be boring. Being boring in film is peak. I bought this movie on RUclips for $25 and was watching it on my cracked phone screen and I can already tell that it's a classic. Viggo by himself is classic. Your review is so off base I don't know why. You've been so right on the pulse many other times it's hard to believe that you dismissed a cronenberg film. His obsession with darwinian evolution and the idea that humans will continue to evolve is very cringe. This idea that society will ban human evolution is very off. Cronenberg is extremely liberal and extremely atheistic so it's no surprise that theory of evolution is kind of his God at this point in his old age. I doubt that crimes of the future is a classic but it seemed very very good the few pieces that I listen to. I listen to films my first viewing without watching them. Then I will watch the film. If your film writing can't stand up without visuals then it's a waste of time. But this film definitely stood up. I guess I did notice some virtue signaling and trans politics in the film. Kristen Stewart sidekick in the film is so oddly similar to Jordan B Peterson it's freaking me out. In fact when he first spoke in the film I thought that cronenberg had put in a Jordan B Peterson parody character. Wow wow wow. I'm sorry you hated this boring movie but it's not boring and like I said boring movies are the goat. Andrei tarkovsky would get labeled as boring today. It's our attention spans that are limited these days it's not the fact that the films are really boring. high art is boring and quiet. Terrance Mallicks a hidden life is one of the greatest films of all time. It is also one of the most boring films of all time. Boring is a really piss poor way to criticize a film.
just watched it and can confirm, it's shit
actually your description in this review still made it sound more interesting as it actually was in the movie.
Only "redeeming" quality... 3 naked woman, but you can find those everywhere
Yeah . It was like that was put in there to save the abismal script but it didn't help at all
Alarm bells should rang for you when you saw Kristen Stewart in it or Any film lol ….
Mmmhmmm
@@Alachia lol for me am gone go watch New Minions film on Friday and switch off …Silliness now and then is a Good thing 🤣🤪😁
@@Alachia She's actually not a bad actress. But most or her parts are *INCREDIBLY* pretentious. And did you see her play Diane??? I don't EVEN LIKE Diane, and I thought OMG!!! Who can watch this and believe she is *that much* of a cuhnt?!?!?! I basically hate her and even I don't think she could be *that* annoying.
It was wasteful potential like I could not sit through the whole thing at all 🥲