← Back to Reviews
in
eXistenZ (David Cronenberg, 1999)
Spoilers Everywhere (although, as in most of my mini-reviews, I try not to divulge major plot twists, but in this case... However, the spoilers have more to do with ME than the film
)
OK. I'll admit that I'm late to the eXistenZ party. I've seen basically all of Cronenberg's films, but somewhere along the time I stopped going to many theatrical releases and I had an impressionable daughter, I started missing certain things in cinema. Just to be official, I watched this film with my 16-year-old daughter tonight. She's an aspiring screenwriter/director, but she has only been exposed to A History of Violence and Eastern Promises. In other words, she doesn't really understand the Cronenberg who is obsessed with gooey human-machines or the psychosexual nature which is at the heart and soul of Cronenberg's style and themes.
Another thing I've missed is modern gaming. Oh sure, I played ancient Pong, Pac-Man, DonkeyKong, etc, but I've never played a "game system" of any kind, and I have no desire. Movies are my game system, and that's why I think I can understand this flick as well as any gaming aficionado. Just like Fincher's The Game, which came out a year earlier, this film leaves all kinds of clues scattered about for those who have a mind to interpret.
One other thing I have to mention about Cronenberg's style. No matter how crazy his subject matter (and this is mild compared to Naked Lunch), he always has a way of presenting his stories in a dull manner. Now, please don't misunderstand me here. Cronenberg's films tend to be non-ostentatious and on the low-budget scale. Therefore, most of his films come across in just that manner; sorta low-budget, everyday tales which suddenly transform into horror/sci-fi of the most primordially-disturbing kind. I realize I seem to be avoiding this specific film, but since I believe that Pyro is interested, I'm trying to leave clues for him, sorta like Cronenberg does in this entire movie.
One thing to consider about eXistenZ, and yes, I'm trying to focus now because if I want to get more into Cronenberg specifically, I believe I have to post at another thread, is that Cronenberg is unafraid of rubbing your noses in clues. Although Jude Law's character comes across as extremely interested in all the goings-on at the beginning, he also seems to be a bit dense in the fact that he misses that almost all the major locations in the "film" are named generically: "Southern Gas Station", "Ski Lodge", "Chinese Restaurant". Additionally, some of the actors really look like video game characters; Willem Dafoe obviously looks like a maniacal character from a game/movie (two for one!) and several other characters just look too perfectly coiffed to be real. The outrageous accents of some characters also reminds me of earlier "artificial", yet humorous, films as Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
One other thing to mention is that I find the film funny. Some of the dialogue and delivery of a few characters are meant to be just as scary/unsettling as they are funny, but I tend to tilt toward the funny side when watching it. Perhaps that's why I may not be giving the film as much love or respect as it may deserve. I do believe that people should watch it, but as with most Cronenberg films, it probably needs added viewings and it depends on the perspective you bring to it.
The actual plot of the film, concerning "rebels", spies, contacts, double agents, mutant reptiles and amphibians, and all having something to do with a world where gaming is far more significant than real life, is probably a satirical comment on our current society. I find it interesting, but it's basically one long chase, and no matter what level you proceed to in the game, it does seem to keep on going. Now, the question is, when all is said and done, is the film nothing but a game where all the clues are placed just to trick you, or does it all actually fit together and make sense when it makes its final "twist"? After watching it twice, I'm not really sure that I care, and that might be partly why I feel ambivalently about the film.
I could spend another page on the film's final 10 minutes, but in general, I believe the film is the film, just like the game is the game. If you aren't sure how to respond to the character at the end, about whether or not he has to die, then watch the movie again, at least if you really care.
Spoilers Everywhere (although, as in most of my mini-reviews, I try not to divulge major plot twists, but in this case... However, the spoilers have more to do with ME than the film
)OK. I'll admit that I'm late to the eXistenZ party. I've seen basically all of Cronenberg's films, but somewhere along the time I stopped going to many theatrical releases and I had an impressionable daughter, I started missing certain things in cinema. Just to be official, I watched this film with my 16-year-old daughter tonight. She's an aspiring screenwriter/director, but she has only been exposed to A History of Violence and Eastern Promises. In other words, she doesn't really understand the Cronenberg who is obsessed with gooey human-machines or the psychosexual nature which is at the heart and soul of Cronenberg's style and themes.
Another thing I've missed is modern gaming. Oh sure, I played ancient Pong, Pac-Man, DonkeyKong, etc, but I've never played a "game system" of any kind, and I have no desire. Movies are my game system, and that's why I think I can understand this flick as well as any gaming aficionado. Just like Fincher's The Game, which came out a year earlier, this film leaves all kinds of clues scattered about for those who have a mind to interpret.
One other thing I have to mention about Cronenberg's style. No matter how crazy his subject matter (and this is mild compared to Naked Lunch), he always has a way of presenting his stories in a dull manner. Now, please don't misunderstand me here. Cronenberg's films tend to be non-ostentatious and on the low-budget scale. Therefore, most of his films come across in just that manner; sorta low-budget, everyday tales which suddenly transform into horror/sci-fi of the most primordially-disturbing kind. I realize I seem to be avoiding this specific film, but since I believe that Pyro is interested, I'm trying to leave clues for him, sorta like Cronenberg does in this entire movie.
One thing to consider about eXistenZ, and yes, I'm trying to focus now because if I want to get more into Cronenberg specifically, I believe I have to post at another thread, is that Cronenberg is unafraid of rubbing your noses in clues. Although Jude Law's character comes across as extremely interested in all the goings-on at the beginning, he also seems to be a bit dense in the fact that he misses that almost all the major locations in the "film" are named generically: "Southern Gas Station", "Ski Lodge", "Chinese Restaurant". Additionally, some of the actors really look like video game characters; Willem Dafoe obviously looks like a maniacal character from a game/movie (two for one!) and several other characters just look too perfectly coiffed to be real. The outrageous accents of some characters also reminds me of earlier "artificial", yet humorous, films as Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
One other thing to mention is that I find the film funny. Some of the dialogue and delivery of a few characters are meant to be just as scary/unsettling as they are funny, but I tend to tilt toward the funny side when watching it. Perhaps that's why I may not be giving the film as much love or respect as it may deserve. I do believe that people should watch it, but as with most Cronenberg films, it probably needs added viewings and it depends on the perspective you bring to it.
The actual plot of the film, concerning "rebels", spies, contacts, double agents, mutant reptiles and amphibians, and all having something to do with a world where gaming is far more significant than real life, is probably a satirical comment on our current society. I find it interesting, but it's basically one long chase, and no matter what level you proceed to in the game, it does seem to keep on going. Now, the question is, when all is said and done, is the film nothing but a game where all the clues are placed just to trick you, or does it all actually fit together and make sense when it makes its final "twist"? After watching it twice, I'm not really sure that I care, and that might be partly why I feel ambivalently about the film.
I could spend another page on the film's final 10 minutes, but in general, I believe the film is the film, just like the game is the game. If you aren't sure how to respond to the character at the end, about whether or not he has to die, then watch the movie again, at least if you really care.