Michael_Elliott
Crimes of the Future (1970) ** (out of 4) Normally I'd use this portion of my review to describe the "plot" of the film but I must admit that I have no idea what the plot of this film is. Basically it takes place at a disease clinic where several people are staying and we're introduced to a doctor and a mysterious disease that has killed off sexually active women.CRIMES OF THE FUTURE was the second feature film from director David Cronenberg and it's a lot like his first STEREO. Both films are very experimental and I'm going to guess that you could show both of them to a hundred different people and you'd probably get a hundred different explanations of the plot. Heck, you'd also probably get quite a few walk-outs because neither film is what you'd call normal or for the mainstream.I honestly felt the same for both pictures. I honestly respect both of them a lot more than I was actually entertained by them. I thought Cronenberg did a good job with the direction and there's no doubt that you're watching a film from someone with a vision. I also thought the performances were nice. There was a bizarre atmosphere to the film as well, which is something else I liked. With that said, did I enjoy watching the film? No, I didn't. Would I ever watch it again? No, I wouldn't.
kakoilija
OK this flick is all artsyfartsy... but it does have some goodness in it. the characters are interesting, and acting is not at all bad. the script is something totally different...cinematography is not that bad, although some little mistakes are to be found in smoothness.i think that for example eraser head is much more interesting as this one lags quite abit thus becoming somewhat boring.but it does have the same sense as does spider later... (although cronenburgeonerd has sort of made 2 really piece of sh*t movies now... history of violence, and eastern promises, compared to the older stuff) this is a good movie for those who want to start making movies, and critics, and hardcore crounenburgrelers movies =D... but for others not really of any value.
tedg
Spoilers herein.You might find this interesting if you are in search of something deeper in Cronenberg's mind than what is apparent in his later projects. I think that rather than they being watered down, they are a blooming of early intuitions.Or, you might find this engaging on its own, as an economical dive into obsession. I myself am in this camp, and though all but the last 5 minutes is tedious, it has one of the best conceived endings I've seen recently.Its a cheap shot in a way, using a child. But so effective that at the time we should have known that we had a man who is both original and has the competence to express his vision. This indeed presages crimes of his future.But if you want a more competent and bizarre treatment of the same, check out 'Institute Benjementa.'Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.
fred-83
This is an unusual filmic experience, hypnotic, trance-like, not totally rewarding but still fascinating. On the soundtrack you can only hear the narrator, strange noises (sounds of sea-creatures) and for some stretches, total silence. Signs of Cronenbergs weird imagination is present throughout the narrative. I especially liked the quite extraordinary concept of "creative cancer".The sterile, modernistic architecture lends the movie a strangely desolate, surreal tone and sets, at least my, imagination in motion. It´s like stepping into another reality, something Cronenberg has continued to achieve in the best of his subsequent movies. It´s an experimental film, but it succeeds in drawing the viewer into the picture, not solely with its narrative, but with its images and composition. In fact, it´s not unlike what Kubrick did, in much larger scope of course, with 2001. Recommended for Cronenberg fans, and those of you who aren´t afraid of something different.
AD
