Tag: science fiction

Possessor (2020)

Posted on by fenrisfil

Last October I was introduced to Brandon Cronenberg, son of David Cronenberg through his movie “Infinity Pool” (2022). While it wasn’t one of my top films of the year, I was impressed by Brandon’s style and interested by both the similarities and differences with his father. So for this years Halloween Challenge I had a look for anything else directed by Brandon and found “Possessor”. It actually scores higher than Infinity Pool on IMDB (and more than Brandon’s only other feature film “Antiviral” (2012). So it seemed worth a shot. Possibly several shots and a few stabbings. Let’s find out!

Familiar Territory.

Written and Directed by Brandon Cronenberg, possessor stars Andrea Riseborough (as “Tasya Vos”) and Christopher Abbott (As “Colin Tate” and “Tasya Vos” in Tate’s body). It also has a support role for Jennifer Jason Leigh (Who also starred in David Cronenberg’s “Existenz” (1999)) and Sean Bean who you naturally assume is not going to survive the movie, but I’m not giving spoilers. The set up is very much something from a Science Fiction Action movie and had it been in that genre I’d probably comment on it not being especially interesting. However, this is Brandon Cronenberg, so I’m not expecting explosions and car chases.

Much like with Infinity Pool, the plot here is based on a fairly out there science fiction concept, in this case taking control of another persons body and using it to perform assassinations. Both movies are also sort of casual about it, the movie doesn’t appear to be set notably in the future and there is no real explanation about the technology. It ultimately is not about the tech and instead more about human psychology and the film uses the technology to examine that.

What It Is About And What It Really Is About.

True to form, the story seems barely interested in the actual assassination job for which Vos was hired, instead it is really about her mental state and that of her victims. This is a film about identity and the dark desires that hide in the back of peoples’ minds and provides a conclusion that is… well, very Cronenberg. Like with Infinity Pool, the classic Body Horror stuff you tend to expect from the family is present but used sparingly (Except on the marketing material, where it’s overused to the point that it could be called misleading).

What grounds the film more in Horror than Sci-Fi is we are looking at the main characters journey into her own darkness. Shedding her humanity (Much of which seemed to be faked, reacting as people would expect instead of how she feels). While this is laid out for the viewer fairly early on, the journey still offers some surprises and there are perhaps some double meanings behind a few of the scenes. Pacing wise it is a little slow with probably too much focus on people having sex (Another Cronenberg trait) but neither of these are particularly problematic. The film has a feel of a dream and the Jim Williams soundtrack is clearly designed to emphasize this.

Dark Desires

Abbott and Riseborough put in solid performances. Both play Vos, but in Abbots case only while she is in Tate’s body. This means Abbott has to convince the viewer he is two different people in one body, in some cases including Vos pretending to be Tate and others in a way that is meant to feel like it could be either. He does this pretty well. Risenborough meanwhile gets to play Vos as herself, which is largely unemotional and cold, but underneath that a character disturbed and frustrated by her own emotions. She does it well.

Overall I feel about this movie a lot like I did with Infinity Pool. It is interesting and well executed. However, it is a pretty linear feeling journey where we always feel like we are just slowly plodding from A to B. There is a little bit of depth but not enough to really drive discussion. The technology involved is one that obviously opens a lot of philosophical debate (Like in Infinity Pool) and yet Brandon (Again) ignores most of that to hyper focus on a fairly simple character journey.

Once again this feels like taking a David Cronenberg film and watering it down a bit to make it more accessible to the audience. The end result is a movie I definitely enjoyed, but will probably not watch a second time. I can’t help but feel Brandon has an all time great Horror in him, but this isn’t it. It is instead a narrow 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Paul (2011)

Posted on by fenrisfil

When following the films of Nick Frost and Simon Pegg it’s hard not to be underwhelmed when you get to this little number. It seems clear that while Frost may be a walking encyclopaedia of pop culture references, the creativity and flair of his more famous movies likely came from Edgar Wright, because this completely lacks either, but it does have a LOT of references in it. So if you are the kind of person that enjoys movies just because they reference other, better movies, TV shows and comics then this will be for you. If not… Maybe give it a skip.

Paul is written by Pegg and Frost and helmed by “Superbad” and “Adventureland” director Greg Mottola. It stars Pegg, Frost as a couple of Brits visiting America to attend comiccon and the talentless Seth Rogen (Sorry, but I don’t get why he keeps getting so much work) as the titular alien that stumbles into their path late one night after attending the con. The pair decide to help Paul return home, but are pursued by the FBI and various groups of rednecks… because rednecks, I guess.

By The Numbers.

The story itself is a pretty generic by the numbers, protect the friendly alien story. It could be “E. T.” , “*Batteries not Included”, even “Short Circuit” (If you ignore he’s not an Alien). Though those movies have a lot more heart to them. It could also be “Bumblebee” or “Monster Truck” or any number of similar stories of more recent years. The only thing different here is the Alien looks like a generic grey type alien…. So basically it’s a double cliché.

That’s really the game this film is playing. It substitutes any originality or heart for tired tropes and just out of the blue references that could have been stuck at any time in the film since they are only there to be references. This is exactly the kind of film I’d expect a pop culture junky to make and perhaps in the late 90’s to early 2000’s when those kinds of films/shows were relatively fresh and popular (I was a fan of Pegg’s own “Spaced”) they could have gotten away with it, but by 2011 that was all feeling pretty stale. Roll on to 2023 when I’m making this review and it’s still being over done but notably a lot less popular. Everyone is tiring of it now.

Clichés and Stereotypes.

Of course those pop culture referencing films of that period were also funny, which helped them a lot. Some even had artistic merit (The first Clerks film for instance). This doesn’t have either of those. It’s just references, tropes and cameos (Well, one cameo, but that’s also a reference).The closest it.

When the film isn’t doing pop culture references, it is basically just stereotyping people instead, because making a character that isn’t a hundred percent generic would apparently be beyond Pegg and Frost’s writing partnership in 2011. Honestly, it’s shocking to see the gulf between this movie and Shaun of the Dead/Hot Fuzz. Both of those also featured a tonne of references, but actually had a good plot, some really funny moments and… well… style!

Conclusion.

Ultimately this film exposes the limitations of the Pegg/Frost partnership without Edgar Wright’s involvement. Pegg especially is a one trick pony, only able to throw in pop culture references (It’s even how he wrote his Star Trek script, that’s why you had a major scene involving playing The Beastie Boys). Wright brought the quality and style to that partnership and is sorely missed here. This is a 4/10.

Rating: 4 out of 10.