Crimes of the Future (2022): Drama/Horror/Sci-fi

In the not-so-distant future, certain humans evolve in unexpected ways, and while some embrace it and see the artistic side of it, others only want to suppress it.

Intricate, interesting, and largely unspecified. It’s been eight years since we last saw a feature film from David Cronenberg – Maps to the Stars (2014) so, brace yourselves. The first act, and the Orchidbed in particular, inevitably leads back to Cronenberg’s early films that gave him his unique identity – The Brood (1979), Scanners (1981), Videodrome (1983), etc. Such elements can also be found throughout the rest of the film (the Sark autopsy, the Breakfaster Chair…) but it’s not just the prosthetics or the visual effects. The surrealistic acting, the Kafqu-esque atmosphere, the blurry distinction between art and science, and the dark consideration of what both are, constitute a dystopian, decadent future (not far from present-day) whose reality seems to belong to another Earth similar to ours, with humans identical to us, but with (un)natural elements and behaviours that are barely recognised or understood. The Fly (1986), Naked Lunch (1991), and eXistenZ (1999) add to the films mentioned above and, in their own respect, they have shaped equally different realities.

From a filmmaking point of view, admittedly, I didn’t find it challenging. Douglas Koch’s photography serves the narrative well, but that is pretty much is. The narrative in and of itself though is. Cronenberg has a long history of examining society through the lens of sexuality and technology and Crimes of the Future isn’t an exception. The new ways of experiencing pleasure, the alien-like technology that fulfills specific needs, and the evolution of people who consume… “plastic”, are all allegories of the world we live in. Did you get them? If yes, what did you think of them? How effective were they? If you thought they weren’t, why?

I find it hard to imagine how Cronenberg pitched this script, especially when it came to defining the audience. Shot entirely in Greece with actors from all over the world, the film has, on one hand, a universal taste, and, on the other hand, a small crowd to follow. Viggo Mortensen, Léa Seydoux, Kristen Stewart, Scott Speedman, Lihi Kornowski, Don McKellar, Nadia Litz, Tanaya Beatty, Welket Bungué, and Yorgos Pirpassopoulos do a great job in front of the camera, but the narrative is such that can leave you undecided in regard to their chemistry.

To every Cronenberg fan: Watch it! Can’t wait to hear your thoughts on it.

Please, don’t forget to share, and subscribe. If you enjoy my work and dedication to films, please feel free to support me on https://www.patreon.com/kaygazpro. Any contribution is much appreciated and valued.

Solidarity for Ukraine 🇺🇦 🙏

Stay safe!

Underwater (2020): Action / Drama / Horror

Underwater.jpg

Following an inexplicable, devastating earthquake, the crew of an oceanic drilling company must find a way to the surface while their whole facility collapses and creatures they have never seen before are after them.

This is the first time I watch a film, feeling like starting with the second act. I mean, as if the first act has been completely edited out. I would really like to get the shooting script and see if the script faded in this way or this “innovation” took place in the cutting room. Anyway, that’s the first strike right off the bat. The film’s main problem starts before that… in Hollywood. The vast majority of Hollywood producers never truly understood H. P. Lovecraft’s vision. They never grasped what the Cthulhu Mythos is. I might be wrong here but, as kids, they never really turned the lights off and scared themselves sh*tless with his cosmic horror. As adults, they only saw his stories as the cash cow; a means to make money! And that’s why the results are such.

Lovecraft’s stories are meant to inspire fear. His creatures cannot be fought. They hunt you and they haunt you and there is nothing you can do about it other than run and pray. And even then, the denouement will most likely not favour you. My second-best Lovecraftian adaptation is Color out of Space (2019) – https://atomic-temporary-153424946.wpcomstaging.com/2020/02/07/color-out-of-space-2019-horror-sci-fi/ and even though there were unresolved issues, director Richard Stanley managed to conceptualise his vision. But my number one old-time favourite adaptation still remains John Carpenter’s In the Mouth of Madness (1994) – https://atomic-temporary-153424946.wpcomstaging.com/2019/01/04/in-the-mouth-of-madness-1994-drama-horror-mystery/. Only if you watch it (or if you have) you will know what I am talking about. Having said that, the visual and sound effects teams did an amazing job with the creature(s). I must admit that that was really impressive. As Jessica Henwick always is. This isn’t William Eubank’s fault. He is a brilliant director and I look forward to watching his next couple of upcoming projects – I loved The Signal (2014).

In the world of Lovecraft, there is no action. Only struggle to remain sane while desperately trying to find any way out of it.

Stay safe!

Charlie’s Angels (2019): Action / Adventure / Comedy

Charlie's Angels.jpg

When a young whistleblower becomes a target, the new generation of Charlie’s Angels team steps in to save her and solve a corporate conspiracy.

If I’ve said it once I’ve said it a thousand times… I don’t judge films, I judge their intentions. There might have been bad/horrible films which meant well but due to budgetary reasons or other unforeseen circumstances they faced issues. Not this one though! Charlie’s Angels is, unfortunately, undermining human intelligence. Despite Elizabeth Bank’s efforts to convince us that whoever doesn’t watch her film is sexist, the film itself couldn’t be more sexist. She tried to mitigate the successes of previous female-led films by saying that even them they were meant to be profusely for the male audience. Finally, even after her film flopped at the box office, and the critics ‘buried’ it (so no one finds it ever again), she was still proud of it.

I have nothing much to say about the film: Writer/producer/director/actress Banks and the rest of the producers prove that they have no knowledge of what real fighting or Krav Maga is. The same applies to spy games, corporate espionage, and the appreciation of the human (male) life – see how both men’s death is treated (excluding the T-1000 lookalike assassin). The action couldn’t be more laughable and the messages it is trying to come across are horrendous. To cut the long story short, this Charlie’s Angels rightfully earned its flop just like Ocean’s 8 (2018) did the year before. What were they thinking? That by portraying white men as villainous and stupid the film will instantly perform well? It is an embarrassment. And that’s me done about the waste of my almost two hours.

There is something else that the creators of this film have no grasp of: How it is to be stuck into a 9-5 job that you hate or do 24-hour shifts round the clock. One of the things they would have learned – which would be beneficial to the film as well – is that wherever there is no diversity, there is a problem. Have you ever been to a working environment with just women? The amount of bitching is unfathomable! Have you ever been to a working environment with only men? Plainly boring and dull! This world needs diversity and we all need each other equally to move forward. Furthermore, we all need to stop being proud of what we haven’t earned.

Elizabeth Banks is extremely talented both in front of and behind the camera and I will keep being a fan regardless. Watch her Pitch Perfect 2 (2015) and watch her in People Like Us (2012) to get an idea. It is a shame that she tried to please the masses and pretentious social media groups. Because even they didn’t care about her effort.

 

P.S. To the mindless side of Hollywood: Stop treating us like we are dumb. We know life better than you do!