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

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994) (SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction ’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump . And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

Poetry in translation is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

Paterson (2016) (SPOILERS) Spoiling a movie where nothing much happens is difficult, but I tend to put the tag on in a cautionary sense much of the time. Paterson is Jim Jarmusch at his most inert and ambient but also his most rewardingly meditative. Paterson (Adam Driver), a bus driver and modest poet living in Paterson, New Jersey, is a stoic in a fundamental sense, and if he has a character arc of any description, which he doesn’t really, it’s the realisation that is what he is. Jarmusch’s picture is absent major conflict or drama; the most significant episodes feature Paterson’s bus breaking down, the English bull terrier Marvin – whom Paterson doesn’t care for but girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani) dotes on – destroying his book of poetry, and an altercation at the local bar involving a gun that turns out to be a water pistol. And Paterson takes it all in his stride, genial to the last, even the ruination of his most earnest, devoted work (the only disappoint

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.