Skip to main content

I must remind you that the scanning experience is usually a painful one.


(SPOILERS) David Cronenberg has made a career – albeit, he may have “matured” a little over the past few decades, so it is now somewhat less foregrounded – from sticking up for the less edifying notions of evolution and modern scientific thought. The idea that regress is, in fact, a form of progress, and unpropitious developments are less dead ends than a means to a state or states as yet unappreciated. He began this path with some squeam-worthy body horrors, before genre hopping to more explicit science fiction with Scanners, and with it, greater critical acclaim and a wider audience. And it remains a good movie, even as it suffers from an unprepossessing lead and rather fumbles the last furlong, cutting to the chase when a more measured, considered approach would have paid dividends.

Rather than diseases that “destroy a well-functioning machine” (an atheist-materialist perspective at its core level) they may change that system into something else; rather than a defective machine, it becomes one that “just has a different purpose”. Cronenberg seems genuinely convinced of this, and is fond of extolling the “empathic” position: “I can imagine what it feels like to be a virus” (I guess Cronenberg as a virus is preferable to Prince Philip, at least). Of course, to validate this concept, he must embrace the fallacy that it is “a living creature”: “See the movies from the point of view of the disease. You can see why they would resist attempts to destroy them”. You can observe this (if you must) as a through line from Shivers to The Fly, in particular. But in tandem, gaining in strength, is Cronenberg’s interest in not just the disease, but also the technology behind it. By the time The Fly comes along, the physical mutation of his ’70s movies is specifically attenuated to scientific progress, however in error.

In Scanners, the disease is a man made, and its end is at least in part a transhumanist one, whereby “a new world will emerge” from the conflict of sides, as Kim Newman notes in Nightmare Movies. In its tritest sense, we find this in Michael Ironside’s Revok and his desire to take over, to become the new dominant species (through the mass distribution of ephemerol). His only difference from Dr Ruth (Patrick McGoohan) is that of method; Ruth was, after all, willing to experiment on his pregnant wife, who gave birth to Revok and Stephen Lack’s Cameron Vale. Even come Blade Runner 2049, such ideas of uprising and revolution seem rather clumsy as plot devices, such that the stealth encroachment of the new flesh (Videodrome) carries more weight and resonance.

But if Revok’s plan – and the spying of Lawrence Dane’s Consec Head of Security Keller – is a little on the rote side, and Cronenberg, for all his lo-fi science-fiction sheen, aided by then regular cinematographer Mark Irwin, delivers chamber-piece visions of epochal events, many of the ideas are acute. We’ve seen De Palma explore the surveillance services putting the psychically gifted to use in The Fury by this point, and the talk of corporate interests supplying espionage and private armies conjures visions of much-vaunted super soldiers, be they psychic (Montauk) or augmented (black goo).

Rather than a host of gruey deformities – give or take the odd exploding head and popping veins – Cronenberg has a more contained evolution in mind in Scanners, such that the end note is, as Newman notes, his version of a happy ending. Even one that involves inhabiting a villain’s body (it might have been more effective had Ironside given a genuinely changed performance, utilising his own voice, rather than hearing Lack through him).

Can it be a coincidence that Cronenberg, an atheist (“I think atheism is an acceptance of what is real”) should call his psychic-producing drug ephemerol (ephemeral)? The only means of immortality, in Scanners, is continuance through appropriation of another physical vessel (very pointedly, Cameron makes short work of a yoga master, a much-vaunted symbol of spiritual advancement). These new humans embody scientism, despite the emphasis on power of the mind. Symptoms of being scanned – nosebleeds, earaches, stomach cramps, nausea, etc – might also characterise an EM assault. And very pre-Neo, Cameron’s embodiment of the next step in evolution can infiltrate and control computer systems, even if he is not yet one himself (“You have a nervous system and so does a computer”). The title itself, and therefore the skillset of these new humans, invokes technological application.

Cronenberg commented "I'm interested in saying, 'Let us discuss the existential question. We are all going to die, that is the end of all consciousness. There is no afterlife. There is no God. Now what do we do.' That's the point where it starts getting interesting to me". But it is, also, a very limiting sandpit. Like many with a singular vision, Cronenberg has some very fixed ideas governing his world. He would, for example, be in a pretty pickle if the façade of his philosophy, rooted as it is in Pasteurian virus theory, were suddenly ripped away. It is, after all, the kernel of most of his early work. The idea that it is not only real, but also, look at it from the disease’s point of view: it just wants to survive.

Doubtless he would dispute such reductive characterisation, and it’s undoubtedly a generalisation, but the frostiness of his vision very much keys into finite, materialist perspectives, whereby we may be consumed, leaving nothing of ourselves behind, or what is left is curiously removed from any emotionally invested component (and a spiritual one is right out).

It’s probably partly because my appreciation of his work as a director has always been somewhat qualified, then, but I found this revisit of Scanners more rewarding than I expected. The movie definitely has its issues. Lack lacks the weight Ironside, all twisted, gurning, savaging of the screen, brings to bear. He’s okay, but more striking for his wide-eyed appearance than his performance.

There’s a sense too that the picture’s progression should take more time (Newman believes it goes so fast, you only look at flaws in retrospect). Cameron becomes actualised very speedily, and Revok turns on him even more so; in the space of a single exchange, he decides that’s quite enough of his plan for them to unite (one might argue he was itching for a fight anyway, but it’s still a disappointment). Likewise, McGoohan, who gives a marvellously authoritative performance as Ruth; it’s the kind of element that’s beyond a price tag in what it adds to the movie. Which makes it a shame his character rather perfunctorily exits after muttering to himself about past deeds, receiving a bullet in the head offscreen. Cronenberg also dumps reams of exposition, from Ruth and then from Revok, in a most ungainly manner, clearly having concluded it’s time to wrap things up.

But the bits that work are transfixing, and the tone and atmosphere are aided throughout by Howard Shore’s hypnotic synths. The opening Consec marketing event (“I must remind you that the scanning experience is usually a painful one”) remains a masterful set piece, not merely for its explosive climax. Cameron discovering his powers (“You were, right, Doctor Ruth. It was easy”) and his visit to sculptor Benjamin Pierce (Robert Silverman), who leads a discourse inside a giant head, are compelling. And there’s the scanner group Cameron attends, in which the mantra of losing oneself to the group will has a troubling subtext all its own.

Cronenberg opined that he and McGoohan didn’t hit it off (“His self-hatred came out as anger against everybody and everything”; reference to his drinking may explain why he and Mad Mel got on – well, that and Catholicism), yet at the same time noting “But he was sensing the disorganization; the script wasn't there, so he was right to worry about it”. Lack liked Pat (“a man of vast intellectual capacities and great heart”) but was less effusive about Ironside (“Ironside wants to prove that he’s as good as whoever he’s trying to be as good as. And that’s exciting for Michael and the audience. He does a good villain, though I don’t feel that a good villain necessarily has to scowl”).

I probably first became aware of Scanners through the Starburst cover (I didn’t pick up a copy until much later, but that poster art is an all-timer). And yet, it wasn’t a movie that really stayed with me. It was only watching it this time that I realised a trio of lines on Future Sound of London’s Among Myselves – “I can hear myself”; “I think I’m a little afraid”; “They were drowning me” – are from the picture.

I wonder how Cronenberg sees things just now, whether he’s had his shots and is looking forward to his eventual fate, desperately hoping it’s the transhumanist one, rather than the alternative. His next, Crimes of the Future – the same title as his second film – is apparently an explicit exploration of transhumanism by way of opposing factions, but he may be judged to have been more influential a force when he was ahead of the curve.

Popular posts from this blog

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

If this were a hoax, would we have six dead men up on that mountain?

The X-Files 4.24: Gethsemane   Season Four is undoubtedly the point at which the duff arc episodes begin to amass, encroaching upon the decent ones for dominance. Fortunately, however, the season finale is a considerable improvement’s on Three’s, even if it’s a long way from the cliffhanger high of 2.25: Anasazi .

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

You have a very angry family, sir.

Eternals (2021) (SPOILERS) It would be overstating the case to suggest Eternals is a pleasant surprise, but given the adverse harbingers surrounding it, it’s a much more serviceable – if bloated – and thematically intriguing picture than I’d expected. The signature motifs of director and honestly-not-billionaire’s-progeny Chloé Zhao are present, mostly amounting to attempts at Malick-lite gauzy natural light and naturalism at odds with the rigidly unnatural material. There’s woke to spare too, since this is something of a Kevin Feige Phase Four flagship, one that rather floundered, showcasing his designs for a nu-MCU. Nevertheless, Eternals manages to maintain interest despite some very variable performances, effects, and the usual retreat into standard tropes, come the final big showdown.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

I think it’s wonderful the way things are changing.

Driving Miss Daisy (1989) (SPOILERS) The meticulous slightness of Driving Miss Daisy is precisely the reason it proved so lauded, and also why it presented a prime Best Picture pick: a feel-good, social-conscience-led flick for audiences who might not normally spare your standard Hollywood dross a glance. One for those who appreciate the typical Judi Dench feature, basically. While I’m hesitant to get behind anything Spike Lee, as Hollywood’s self-appointed race-relations arbiter, spouts, this was a year when he actually did deliver the goods, a genuinely decent movie – definitely a rarity for Lee – addressing the issues head-on that Driving Miss Daisy approaches in softly-softly fashion, reversing gingerly towards with the brake lights on. That doesn’t necessarily mean Do the Right Thing ought to have won Best Picture (or even that it should have been nominated for the same), but it does go to emphasise the Oscars’ tendency towards the self-congratulatory rather than the provocat

You’re the pattern and the prototype for a whole new age of biological exploration.

The Fly II (1989) (SPOILERS) David Cronenberg was not, it seems, a fan of the sequel to his hit 1986 remake, and while it’s quite possible he was just being snobby about a movie that put genre staples above theme or innovation, he wasn’t alone. Fox had realised, post- Aliens , that SF properties were ripe for hasty follow ups, and indiscriminately mined a number of popular pictures to immediately diminishing returns during the period ( Cocoon , Predator ). Neither critics nor audiences were impressed. In the case of The Fly II , though, it would be unfair to label the movie as outright bad. It simply lacks that *idea* that would justify the cash-in.