I had no idea Cronenberg was making a new movie. This looks pretty cool. Has anybody seen it or heard something about it?
Quote from: bonanzatazI had no idea Cronenberg was making a new movie. This looks pretty cool. Has anybody seen it or heard something about it?
well it went to cannes and all that. supposed to be pretty good. im seeing it this friday and i cant wait, being ahuge cronenebrg fan.
PS. just a warning, taz, but be prepared to be redirected by someone soon.
But before you're redirected, I'll mention as I did in the post you'll be redirected to that it's a really good movie. The more I think about it, the more I think it might be my favorite Cronenberg film.
well i just came back from seeing the film. its remarkable. anyone else see it yet?
I agree that it's great. I saw it this last December and haven't quit thinking about it since. I wanna go see it again this week. It seems to me that it's a more subtle/ dare i say mature Cronenberg, (Don't worry I know how stupid that probably sounds, maybe not, who gives a fuck.) His last three movies have sort of seemed to culminate into this one story wise I guess. A new Language, a new flesh. Good old fucking cronenberg.
you people suck. why isnt anyone seeing this film?
Quote from: cecil b. dementedyou people suck. why isnt anyone seeing this film?
Whats it about?
its cronenbergs new film. that should be enough :yabbse-wink:
I'm planning on taking a trip to the city and seeing either this or all the real girls. Which is more worth it?
Quote from: bonanzatazI'm planning on taking a trip to the city and seeing either this or all the real girls. Which is more worth it?
join the new flesh, taz. see cronenberg
word up, cecil. word up.
I've seen this film and totally support Cecil: this is a prerequisite to any interaction with real girls.
The only movie I've ever seen that makes familiar English places unfamiliar and strange to me. Cronenberg does for here what Lynch does for small town America. All the performances are exceptional, specially luscious Miranda Richardson, the pace is immaculate and the story continually catches you out. Just as you think you've got it sorted pyschologically, it shifts away. It also does the brilliant trick of sympathetically conveying the male fear of women without blaming the women. It's scary but also so known. It breaks my heart that it'll probably miss out on awards because of its release date, but also that it didn't get any recognition here. :cry:
Quote from: cecil b. dementedjoin the new flesh, taz. see cronenberg
for the record, i changed my sig
before i read this post.
now i don't know what to believe.
I love Miranda Richardson. I can't say why. She just has a very interesting quality about her.
Quote from: P
for the record, i changed my sig before i read this post.
now i don't know what to believe.
oh, its cause im also a scanner
Cronenberg Talks Spider
The story follows a man (Fiennes) from London's East End who is trying to put his life back together after an early release from a metal institution. Journaling his days, the man attempts to find out the truth about his mysterious past and his mother's death. Spider was her nickname for him. Gabriel Byrne, Lynn Redgrave and Miranda Richardson also star.
Cronenberg recently dropped a line to FiLM magazine and Landmark Theater's movie enthusiast group. He says, "Little did I know how many times, and in what a concrete way, I would be playing the role of Spider myself when I undertook my 9-cities-in-9-days tour of America for Sony Pictures Classics. Many people have told me how much they love the first, flowing shot of Spider, which ends with Spider himself, played by Ralph Fiennes, descending gingerly from a train in London onto the empty platform. You know right away that the man is out of place, confused, and troubled."
"And now I, I get off the plane, and like Spider I am carrying only the clothes on my back and one small, chaotically crammed suitcase which contains all my worldly possessions. I am confused, mumbling to myself, distracted by the jumble of people around me, not sure where to go, not sure which city I'm in, not convinced I really speak the language, hopeful that I'll actually hook up with the one person who can guide me. It is the ultimate Spider experience, the closest I've ever come to him, and I have Spider himself to thank for it."
just saw it. still not really sure how i feel about it... didn't hate it, like my friend who i saw it with did, but i didn't exactly like it either... i guess i'll sleep on it...
Cronenberg is an intriguing guy. I'm glad he didn't end up doing Basic Instinct 2, I think it would have been a shocker.
I only just saw eXistenZ on the weekend, it just blew my mind, but I felt it could have explored the world it had created deeper ..... visually ..... gone a bit crazy like The Cell or Being John Malkovich. Maybe it didn't have the budget for that? Jennifer Jason Leigh was ....... I'm not sure how to finish that, HOT is the obvious word that comes to mind.
I saw 'Crash' well before I considered myself a movie fan, and I dubbed it the worst movie I'd ever seen. It's been long enough and I guess I need to give it another chance, anyone here a fan?
Anyway all I know about Spider is from this interview.
http://www.abc.net.au/arts/film/stories/s660704.htm
And here's just a great quote:
" ...there's Spiderman and then there's Spider. I don't want to trash anyone. I watched A Beautiful Mind which on a very mechanical level - being a Hollywood movie done by professionals - it works. But I loath and despise the film. Is that clear?"
Quote from: MarkyboyI saw 'Crash' well before I considered myself a movie fan, and I dubbed it the worst movie I'd ever seen. It's been long enough and I guess I need to give it another chance, anyone here a fan?
I loved Crash, but my friend has tried watching it over and still can't get into it. I don't know why, I find it really moving and very erotic. It really made me want to go out and drive again. Why didn't you like it?
I can't believe that people here are not seeing Spider. What is wrong with you? :cry:
i wish i could but it won't come here. you would think being in liverpool you would get really cool movies instead of Two Weeks Notice. Im going to have to watch a shit ton of movies once I get back in May to catch up.
Quote from: budgieI loved Crash, but my friend has tried watching it over and still can't get into it. I don't know why, I find it really moving and very erotic. It really made me want to go out and drive again.
You're into leather, aren't you.
Quote from: Markyboy
I saw 'Crash' well before I considered myself a movie fan, and I dubbed it the worst movie I'd ever seen. It's been long enough and I guess I need to give it another chance, anyone here a fan?
crash is amazing. and yes, very erotic.
Quote from: NewtronYou're into leather, aren't you.
No. I do have a thing about vinyl car seats on a baking hot day though. That acrid smell and the way it melts against your skin and scorches at the same time. It probably has something to do with the neighbour's red Capri when I was a kid.
Quote from: budgieI loved Crash, but my friend has tried watching it over and still can't get into it. I don't know why, I find it really moving and very erotic. It really made me want to go out and drive again. Why didn't you like it?
I vagely remember the experience - just didn't enjoy it at all. At the time I probably watched it purely for the "most controversial movie you will ever see" banner on the cover. I couldn't believe the bodily injuries/auto-erotisism connection. It pretty much sickened me. :yabbse-tongue: Maybe I missed the point. Ok. I'm gonna give it another watch.
I was visiting new york recently, and I saw Spider. I though it was hell of a movie, and probaly the best work Ralph Fiennes has ever done. If course, it was defiently kind of a step in a different direction for Cronenberg, in that he made a character study with no "humans having sex with machines" subtext. Good for him. As much as I love his apocalyptic organic/mechanical themes, it was nice to see him try something different.
I also saw Irreversible. Not so sure what to think about that one. It was an experience though, I'll give it that.
That movie was just crazy insane! Did Ralph Fiennes say one understandable word of english that another character didn't say or was about to say throughout the whole movie? AND it was consistently entertaining. I don't understand how it works...
I was expecting a little more Cronenbergness, but this was very good. Miranda Richardson proves herself again with a faaaaaaaaantastic performance. I'll have to see it again to fully understand it. I was a little out of it tonight.
I'm not condoning drug use or anything, but...if for some reason you ever happen to drop acid, you should try reading J.G. Ballard's novel upon which 'Crash' was based. Reeaaal interesting.
Quote from: GhostboyI'm not condoning drug use or anything, but...if for some reason you ever happen to drop acid, you should try reading J.G. Ballard's novel upon which 'Crash' was based. Reeaaal interesting.
Yeah, that's it... drop some acid, then sit down and try to read a book.
drop some acid and drive a car while getting road head.
drop some acid and drive a car while getting road head.
Just getting head is ambitious enough for me.
:shock:
Well I NEVER!
Maybe this thread is well and truly dead, but I just got back from seeing this wonderful film - finally - and wanted to just say that I thought it was exceptional. It gave me a really strange emotion whilst watching it that I don't think I've got from any other film. Reminded me a great deal of the plays of Beckett, which aslo give me this strange indefinable emotion. I've been put in a weird emotional state by this movie which I don't think will leave me for a while - and that is surely a sign that it has succeeded...
Raph Fiennes: never been better.
Cronnenberg: my favourite film of his now without a doubt. He really has shown another side of himself to me with this one: I always saw him as a visionary, interesting, fun - but VERY unsubtle - auteur. With Spider he has shown a restraint which I hope will become a trademark of his work to come... My problem with previous films was that the dark mood he was creating would often spoiled by something I would just think was... well: kinda silly. Nothing like that here. Total fucking unrelenting pessimism in content and ambience, uninterrupted by outbursts of over-the-top effects or some such thing.
This is a great movie.
I FINALLY just saw this film.... my god, it took me a while... it had come here for about a week or two a few months back and when I didn't get a chance to see it, I figured I'd have to wait until the dvd.
I liked it... it was good... I guess I'm just not as enthusiastic as you all about it though.
Dunno... maybe I'm missing something here. It seemed like it was trying to slowly reveal what was kind of obvious the whole time... maybe it's just me...
though now that I've sat here thinking about it, I just realized something about it that I hadn't while watching the film... interesting.
I should definately see it again.
Quote from: RegularKaratethough now that I've sat here thinking about it, I just realized something about it that I hadn't while watching the film... interesting.
and whats that?
dvd will be released july 29th, with audio commentary by cronenberg, and three featurettes: Caught in Spider's Web: The Cast, In The Beginning: How Spider Came To Be, and Weaving The Web: The Making of Spider.
Quote from: cecil b. dementeddvd will be released july 29th, with audio commentary by cronenberg, and three featurettes: Caught in Spider's Web: The Cast, In The Beginning: How Spider Came To Be, and Weaving The Web: The Making of Spider.
Thank goodness. I completely missed this upon its release, and I
really wanted to see it. I like Cronenberg off and on. Loved
Dead Ringers, didn't think
ExiZtenz was so great, and still have to see
Crash. He's interesting.
I wonder what SoNowThen thinks of him... I thoughtlessly left Cronenberg out of our Canadian-cinema conversation in the Atom Egoyan topic.
not that its relevant at this point, but i was really excited about this movie from the previews and was severely disappointed. it was bad, i mean BAD. i went opening night and almost fell asleep. ralph fiennes was terrible. he had like 3 lines in the whole movie. the concept was okay, ,but completely predictable from like 10 minutes intot he movie. it was boring as shit and had little point.
No offense, but it sounds like the whole thing went right over your head.
none taken. was there something i missed?
I may have worded my reply a little harshly. I'm sure you got the point of the movie, which was that the movie was simply a deconstruction of one man's illusions -- it didn't have any grand scheme, other than to offer a dense look into an insane mind, so if you were expecting something more substantial than that, something more like a standard mystery thriller, I can see how you might have been disappointed. But that's exactly why I think it's brilliant -- it's so layered and deep, and yet so minute at the same time. Just a little story. And Ralph Fiennes's performance was amazing, precisely BECAUSE he only had three lines -- he did so much with his face and with those incomprehensible mumbles.
exactly. this is a bold film, one that takes alot of bravery to tackle.
Many :kiss: es to budgie.
I blind bought this today because of her recommendation, and I can say I was not disappointed. Thank you, dear, this will really help with my current project.
Spider's introduction was one of the best character intros I have seen. You got this man right from the get-go. Ralph Fiennes and Miranda Richardson were brilliant. The only problem I had was with the little boy's limited acting range. But other than that, it was a fascinating character study.
Quote from: budgieCronenberg does for here what Lynch does for small town America.
It's funny you mention Lynch because I kept feeling a little bit of "Eraserhead" as I was watching this.
I'm so happy to find more takers for this. I was given the DVD as a gift (though dismayed to see the region one has all the extras while ours has soundbites) and loved it just as much the second time. Knowing the ending made it even more moving, since instead of just a puzzle, the adult Spider becomes constantly tragic. The scene where he writhes on the bare earth muttering 'my mum, my mum' just had me. And the final shot of Miranda Richardson... God, what a perfect film.
As for the little boy's acting... he's all dumb repression, sealed up like the rest of the movie. Like Fiennes, he doesn't have to do anything.
It's just so English. I love that a Canadian made it.
Quote from: MacGuffin
It's funny you mention Lynch because I kept feeling a little bit of "Eraserhead" as I was watching this.
You're disgusting.
Quote from: budgieQuote from: MacGuffin
It's funny you mention Lynch because I kept feeling a little bit of "Eraserhead" as I was watching this.
You're disgusting.
Hah! :-D
Quote from: budgieQuote from: MacGuffin
It's funny you mention Lynch because I kept feeling a little bit of "Eraserhead" as I was watching this.
You're disgusting.
And you know that's what you love about me. :kiss:
But seriously, didn't you feel Spider was a little like Henry? I'm talking comparisons in the openings of both films. They are quite similar, in that the characters are small next to the walls of the buildings they pass on their respective treks home, passing industrial areas. Even Spider's childhood house looked like Mr. and Mrs. X's home.
Very soon I will see Cronenberg's Spider...
I only saw four of his works (Dead Ringers (very long ago), eXistenZ, Crahs and Naked Lunch).
Haven't seen his best/ most famous works, Videodrome and The Fly.
His world gets more interesting with every film I see (or re-see)...
I hope Spider will have the same dark intensity as Dead Ringers, for instance.
A lot of people (on a Dutch moviesite I frequently visit) see this film as somewhat different than Cronenberg's others, although I don't really know why...it's supposed to be more internal, or atmospheric- or whatever.
Maybe this film is somewhat different because the screenplay is written by the auteur of the same book (Spider), Patrick McGrath. His book Spider is REALLY SUPERB and is a MUST READ for all you Dostojewski-, Kafka- or Beckett-fans out there!!
A very intense description of one's inner world...magnificent.
Anyway, because of that VERY INTENSE reading experience I had, I'm very looking forward to see this movie...
Anybody knows this book?
..spider is intense and kick assssssss.....
but i liked dead ringers bette though..but they are both brilliant pieces of work IMO.
and speaking of naked lunch anyone picked up the criterion ???..it came out today....
This was the first Cronenberg I'd seen and I can't say I was blown away by it. It seemed a pretty straightforward movie; well-executed of course. It didn't make me feel sad, or enlightened, or anything, really. Perhaps it will grow on me.
Anyone who especially likes the portrayal of madness/neurosis here should also watch "Love Is A Treasure" (I think it is Slovenian). Now that film (actually it was initially meant to be an art projection, not a film film) really crawls inside the mind of a mad person. Five mad persons, in fact.
foray
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsuicidegirls.com%2Fmedia%2Fauthors%2F587%2Farticle.jpg&hash=ae93d7876cd8e71135c658685c67cdcc42efe3cc)
Interesting, strange, witty and always with a small smile Cronenberg reels you in with his charm then keeps you at a distance just like his movies.
The film Spider will hopefully change people’s perception of what is a David Cronenberg film. This is first film of Cronenberg’s to utilize no major special effects since the drag racing film he did called Fast Company back in 1979.
Cronenberg calls his star Ralph Fiennes the only special effect he needs. Spider is the story of a very disturbed person who lives at a halfway house in London in the 1950’s. The character is called Spider because of the webs he weaves out of string. He very inconspicuously slips into hallucinations which put his mother at the forefront of his every thought. It is an amazing film.
Daniel Robert Epstein: Your movies that start with other people’s novels are very different from the films you write alone. Even eXistenZ was a throwback to your earlier pre-Dead Zone films. What is it about other people’s work that sends you off into a whole other direction?
David Cronenberg: Other people. That’s exactly why you do that. When I started making films I was very intolerant of directors who didn’t write their own scripts. I was even going further with the auterist theory than the French critics. They were not insisting that the directors wrote their own scripts. They were just finding connections amongst all their films. I thought one should really write their own stuff. I realized at the same time that there were some directors who could not write. Kubrick was one. You couldn’t put him down in front of a typewriter in those days. He couldn’t do it. You could still be a wonderful director and not write. The two things only come together by accident that you can write and direct. They’re not necessarily connected. When I did the Dead Zone I was really very happy with the film and the experience of mixing my blood with somebody else’s in that case Stephen King. That’s exactly what happens whenever you use someone else’s work as a basis. It’s something you would never do on your own but something you feel an incredible empathy for and a connection with. The two of you mix together and make something that didn’t exist before. I just realized, it’s like sex.
So I didn’t have the experience that [William] Burroughs had or that David Hwang had when he wrote M. Butterfly. In fact even though Dead Ringers is a script I co-wrote was based on a newspaper article that was about real twins. Even then I realized that it doesn’t matter where it comes from. That kind of purity really doesn’t matter. I’ve been lucky all the movies that I have done that are adaptations have resulted in movies that live on their own. It’s inevitable because you can’t really do a translation of a book. There’s no dictionary for that kind of translation. You really have to reinvent it totally.
I read the script for Spider first. I only read the novel later and once. So for me in a weird way I wasn’t doing an adaptation. I was doing a script that was written by somebody else. You’re doing all these different mixtures and the excitement is that you are in fact fusing yourself with somebody else.
DRE: How big of a rewrite did you do on Patrick McGrath’s script?
DC: Patrick said he did the changes I asked for in one and there were other changes done but they were the kind of changes you make as a director even if you wrote the script yourself.
It has to do with the mystery of a movie taking on its own life which happens when you work your collaborators. It’s all very physical and tactile. I don’t do storyboards. They’re so abstract to me that I don’t understand them. I need to be with my actors and figure out how to shoot them. That happens when you make a movie and if the movie is alive you want that to happen. You want the movie to kind of push you around. Some things that Patrick had like he had a potato that gets cut and bleeds. Of course it’s his mother’s blood because he thinks she’s buried under this potato patch. It’s a hallucination that has meaning. I had the special effects guys makes this potato which they were very proud of. They were disappointed when I didn’t shoot it. The reason was that by the time we got to that the movie was somewhere else. I knew that the potato scene was from some other movie. That’s all intuitive. It’s my feeling and I don’t regret it.
There were a lot of changes in fact and in another way there were no changes. Patrick had a lot of hallucinations and a lot of special effects stuff. People would normally think I would like that but if it doesn’t work then I don’t. I don’t have to do special effects, it’s just another tool.
But as for the changes in the novel Spider, the main character has written the book you are reading. It’s his journal and it’s very literary. But Patrick’s first draft had Spider writing in his journal and then had voiceover where Spider would read. I could see immediately that these were two different characters. Patrick had already created a new Spider for the screen that was inarticulate, could not have possibly had those thoughts. To me it was obvious but not to Patrick and that’s why you need another perspective. I took away the perspective but I still wanted Spider writing. I needed Spider to have something physical to do that would show he was obsessive and paying attention to detail. Spider thinks he’s taking evidence of a crime that was committed. He’s gathering this evidence from his memory. So I asked Ralph to invent his own hieroglyphics which he could write fluently. There are other crucial but small things.
DRE: What is it like using no special effects for a film?
DC: Ralph is my special effect. He’s very physical. He’s concerned with gas emanating from his body. I don’t need to show it the way I often do like with eXistenZ. Although the themes are the same but the creation of reality and memory by human will with the understanding that those things are creative acts. Memory is one of the subjects of this movie and so is identity and reality which connects with my other films. It’s like the same crystal seen from different facets. That’s the way I think o fit if I think of it at all.
Frankly I must say I don’t think of it at all. I don’t want to be dishonest. I do think of it sometimes. But it has nothing to do with how I make another movie. I don’t think of how it will fit in with my other movies or what people’s expectations are. Because it’s so difficult to find a project that you can live with for two to three years and still find exciting and fascinating that you’d be a fool to say something like the people who loved Scanners and The Brood won’t like this so I won’t do it after all. You can’t do it that way.
DRE: You’re making films which is your art which you need to do but is it also fun to tweak the audience. To make them feel like they are Spider.
DC: I’m not a Hitchcock type director. He liked to be the puppeteer. The audiences were his marionettes. He would pull their strings and they would laugh or cry. My relationship with the audience is much more collaborative. I don’t feel like I am doing anything to them. I feel like I am doing things to myself and then talking to the audience about it or inviting them to have the same experience. If I was to do any tweaking then I would be doing it to me.
DRE: Ralph was perfect for the part. What made you think he could do it?
DC: I had seen many of the movies he’s done. He hadn’t done anything quite like this. Casting is a black art. You see actors that you like and think are good but you don’t really have any particular desire to work with them. Then others that you see and you say “That’s my kind of actor.” It’s very hard to articulate why. It’s a very strange and intimate relationship that you have together. If it’s working then it should be intimate, strange and beyond articulation. There’s a lot of trust involved. When I read the script after two pages I saw Ralph in the script.
On set we discuss everything and are very close. I’m very open with my actors. I didn’t hide anything. I don’t yell, scream, it’s all very congenial and it’s very warm. What I need to do on the set is create a protected environment where people can and want to do their best work. That they will be listened to. It’s all very Canadian. It’s not hostile and confrontational. There are some directors who like the mystique of being sadistic or torturing their actors. When you’re working with professional actors they know how to torture themselves. I don’t have to do it.
I’m not a Kubrickian kind of director. I’ve never done 80 takes of anything in my life; I think that’s just jerking off.
DRE: John Neville appearing in Spider makes me think of The Adventures of Baron Munchausen which reminds me that you and Terry Gilliam share similar themes in your work.
DC: Well I love Terry and his filmmaking. It’s the kind of filmmaking I can’t do. He started as a graphic artist and I was more of a writer. We have different backgrounds but I do like his films.
DRE: Could a film like Lost in La Mancha be applied to any of your films?
DC: I haven’t seen that yet but I heard for a filmmaker that’s its just heartbreaking. Spider almost lost financing a few times. I had to fly back from London and wait to see if we could put it back together again. For Ralph and me the fact that Spider wasn’t going to come to life was the real sadness.
DRE: Why is it so hard for you to get your films off the ground?
DC: Well movies were going down all around us. It was like charging the machine guns. The only time I’ve had a film fall apart like that was Basic Instinct 2 and that was a whole other story which I don’t think would have been as amusing as Lost in La Mancha.
DRE: Is Spider also a moral story of people who are abandoned by social and protective forces?
DC: Some people could see that young Spider’s webs that he was making were more like a safety net for him rather than a trap. The idea that it’s the decay of social health services in England and in America. America never had much of them anyway. In countries where they start to fall apart the consequences are dire. There are those elements suggested in the movie. There were those people who would just turn their house into a halfway house for people who are released from asylums. They could make money by not treating them well.
DRE: What’s next?
DC: I’ve written a script called Painkillers. [centered on French artist Orlan]