Gary Floyd Posted March 16, 2006 Report Posted March 16, 2006 I loved the movie. One of Cronenbergs best, and a big step up from the tedious "Spider". It's a shame he wasn't nominated for best director at the Oscars, but I'm not suprised.
Special K Posted March 16, 2006 Report Posted March 16, 2006 I just hope Cronenberg makes the occasional fucked-up movie every now and again. Videodrome, the Fly, Shivers and Naked Lunch were all great.
NoCalMike Posted March 17, 2006 Report Posted March 17, 2006 I just hope Cronenberg makes the occasional fucked-up movie every now and again. Videodrome, the Fly, Shivers and Naked Lunch were all great. Not to mention The Brood, Scanners & Dead Ringers.
Special K Posted March 17, 2006 Report Posted March 17, 2006 Hmmm, haven't seen The Brood. Good? I think Shivers is one of the most underrated 'zombie' movies out there. truly fucked up stuff. I think Videodrome is pretty brilliant too. Scanners is good, but not great, IMO. That head exploding scene, though. WOW. I didn't know he did Dead Ringers. That's a really good thriller. And, hey, he did the Dead Zone? I always just associated him with his fucked up movies. He's been doing good thrillers for a while. I didn't like his Crash, though.
dubq Posted March 17, 2006 Report Posted March 17, 2006 I didn't know he did Dead Ringers. That's a really good thriller. And, hey, he did the Dead Zone? I always just associated him with his fucked up movies. He's been doing good thrillers for a while. I didn't like his Crash, though. Yeah, he directed Dead Zone (novel by Stephen King). His Crash was god awful. I definitely didn't need to see a Elias Koteas and James Spader make-out scene.
bobobrazil1984 Posted March 20, 2006 Report Posted March 20, 2006 Well I thought it sucked.. Yeah, and we all know how valuable your opinion is around these parts when it comes to movies. I can only imagine what it must be like for you to read a book. "This book is awful! It makes no sense and I've read five pages into the first chapter and I can't tell what's going to happen at the end! It's horrible!" Wasn't he the guy who got dizzy and nauseous cause of the camera-work in Serenity and left and trashed the movie because of it? Anyways, I saw this tonight, and enjoyed it. I also thought that the movie lost some steam though when we found out his true identity. Still it was good, I didn't think the ending was that open, i mean they set the plate, he sat down, i took it to mean they accepted him back.
Special K Posted March 20, 2006 Report Posted March 20, 2006 He complained because he didn't know the plot after 20 minutes, left because he got dizzy, and said Mal looks like Charlie Sheen and River looks like Jessica Alba. What the fuck.
NoCalMike Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 I really liked the movie but the one thing I really couldn't stand was The son's reaction to finding out his father used to be a gangster-type. I mean to me the Wife had a legitimate gripe because he did hide it from her when he met her and all, but it's not like his son was even alive at the time, and hey, like a guy isn't allowed to change? The fact that the son was mouthing off to his dad "so if I don't do this, are you gonna have me whacked" etc etc.....
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 Thats why I thought Tom had the right to slap the taste out of his mouth, even though it "meant" that Joey was the one to do it. So... the ending... what am I supposed to infer from this? That Joey is finally 100% dead and he can resume his life as Tom?
Lord of The Curry Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 Pretty much, yeah. I took Viggo talking to William Hurt about his family and how much he realizes now what they mean to him as Tom's decison to destroy Joey.
Edwin MacPhisto Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 So... the ending... what am I supposed to infer from this? That Joey is finally 100% dead and he can resume his life as Tom? I think it's terrifyingly ambiguous, as are the feelings of all the film's surviving characters. We don't know what to think because they certainly don't. Love this movie.
2GOLD Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 I really liked the movie but the one thing I really couldn't stand was The son's reaction to finding out his father used to be a gangster-type. I mean to me the Wife had a legitimate gripe because he did hide it from her when he met her and all, but it's not like his son was even alive at the time, and hey, like a guy isn't allowed to change? The fact that the son was mouthing off to his dad "so if I don't do this, are you gonna have me whacked" etc etc..... Told his son violence wasn't the way to solve problems and then he sorta finds out his dad used to kill people for money and lied to his family about who he was. Yeah, the son had legit reasons to be pissed. If your father told you never to solve your problems with violence and then you find out he was a serial killer who changed his name and lied to you and your mother for all of these years, what would your reaction be?
Special K Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 I think it's terrifyingly ambiguous, as are the feelings of all the film's surviving characters. We don't know what to think because they certainly don't. Love this movie. QFT. Here's my take: Will Tom/Joey ever kill again? Doubtful. Living as Tom has changed his life irrevocably. With Ritchy dead, he doesn't have a reason to kill anymore. He used to ENJOY killing, he doesn't anymore. However, the veneer's been stripped off. His family might break up, or not. Mario Bello's character is so defined by Tom that she probably won't leave him, and they'll probably raise the daughter in a haunted, sterile, house. Once the son gains independence, he'll probably never talk to Tom again. What happens to HIM later in life is anyone's guess. I wager he can lead a decent life, but I'm an optimist. The thing to remember is that Tom/Joey isn't some corny, overused multiple personality disorder. Tom is fully cognitive of his life as Joey. He's just Joey grown up and changed, though impermanently. The only thing keeping him as 'Tom' was that veneer of civility. He'll act like 'Tom' in his public life, but the rest of his life is going to be COMPLETELY without passion or meaning.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 It's not multiple personality disorder I thought. It was just a killer changing his identity to wash his hands of his past.
2GOLD Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 I like to think the ending is Tom says, "Fuck this" and proceeds to kill them and burn his house down while smoking a cig on the outside. Then going back to Philly and taking over the business now that he wiped out his brother. Course at the time, I was missing the Sopranos.
Special K Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 It's not multiple personality disorder I thought. It was just a killer changing his identity to wash his hands of his past. Which is exactly what I said. Should be obvious, really, but some people take Joey/Tom as completely different entities. EDIT: Which pretty much is the point of the movie. It's in the fucking title. I dunno how people were waiting on the edge of their seats, wondering if Tom did, indeed, was Joey. It was plain to me. EDIT II: The Revenge: The 69 scene was fucking hawt. Cronenberg knows his sex.
2GOLD Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 Which scene was better? The 69 with Bello in the Cheerleading outfit or the rough sex on the stairs? Both made me feel uncomfortable and strangely intrigued. Didn't expect her to have so much bush though. That shot caught me off guard.
Special K Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 The 69 was intimate and, I thought, pretty sexy. It showed a married couple still in love with one another, trying to make things exciting. That makes for a realistic and sexy scene. The rough sex on the stairs was uncomfortable and completely unsexy. It was pretty much rape, for Christ's sake. Which I think was what Cronenberg was going for. And Bello's hot, and a decent actress. Beautiful face. Have you seen The Cooler? Best sex scene ever, and it had William H. Macy! Who am I kidding? My love for WHM knows no bounds. I'd fuck him in a heartbeat.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 And I dug Maria since the movie Payback. I was pleasantly surprised that I got to see her naked, albeit being disappointed in the actual body.
theintensifier Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Posted March 21, 2006 The 69 was intimate and, I thought, pretty sexy. It showed a married couple still in love with one another, trying to make things exciting. That makes for a realistic and sexy scene. The rough sex on the stairs was uncomfortable and completely unsexy. It was pretty much rape, for Christ's sake. Which I think was what Cronenberg was going for. And Bello's hot, and a decent actress. Beautiful face. Have you seen The Cooler? Best sex scene ever, and it had William H. Macy! Who am I kidding? My love for WHM knows no bounds. I'd fuck him in a heartbeat. The fuck scene on the stairs also made me pretty uncomfortable as well, it looked like the gruesome and hate filled sex everyone wants to have at a certain point in there life, but never get it. I don't consider it rape, since she wasn't trying to get away when he finally got on top of her, and she didn't resist his cock either. EDIT: Fixed error.
Special K Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 I don't consider it sex You mean you don't consider it rape, right? I'm pretty sure it was sex, unless he roughly dry-humped her. Either way, that's the emotion it was supposed to invoke. As an aside, I don't think that that scene was exploitative. Fucked up? Yes. However, I think it was pretty necessary to the plot. Bello's character getting into it? Maybe not. It may have been there to soften the scene. No one likes to watch rape.
theintensifier Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Posted March 21, 2006 I'm sure there are people that like watching rape, like the people who rape other people, lol. Who knows for sure. I generally get angry about the discussion of rape, considering one of my ex-girlfriends was brutally raped and beaten, and nearly killed. But, that's another story. The stair scene was to show that she was just as fucked up as he, but had a little more control over herself than he, as shown when she just got up and walked away. It probably made her mad that she gave in to him when she was angry, but the nympho side of her came out, and it's exciting to her that her beloved husband she thought she knew soooo much about has a sudden mysterious past. Turn on.
theintensifier Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Posted March 21, 2006 That's my theory, I'm just throwing it out there, you can go ahead and toss it back if you like.
Special K Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 Ok, you thought the stair scene was a turn on, whatever you sick fuck. the loving, consensual 69 scene made you uncomfortable?
theintensifier Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Posted March 21, 2006 It's weird dude. The stair scene was uncomfortable to say the least, but I was turned on a little bit by it, not like the 69 though, that was amazing.
dubq Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 The rough sex on the stairs was uncomfortable and completely unsexy. It was pretty much rape, for Christ's sake. Hardly.
Special K Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 You must be from Japan. Where rape is like a handshake.
theintensifier Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Posted March 21, 2006 You must be from Japan. Where rape is like a handshake. Who is this in response to ?
Special K Posted March 22, 2006 Report Posted March 22, 2006 To the sex on the stairs is hardly rape. To vivisecti.
theintensifier Posted March 22, 2006 Author Report Posted March 22, 2006 He could have meant that it was sexy to him. In a way, it was indeed rape, but then again, it wasn't.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now