Videodrome

Videodrome is truly a surreal experience. I do not want to include too much information as that would spoil the film for "virgin" viewers. If you are familiar with Cronenberg's work, you may have an inkling of what you're in for. Videodrome can drive one to the brink of madness, and then tell you you've been there for an hour and a half. From scene to scene you can't tell what's real and what is in James Wood's imagination. It's utter insanity, but it's great at the same time. This film is a good companion piece with Cronenberg's Existenze. When you can wrap the audience up in your movie, you have accomplished something few have. And David Cronenberg seems to do that time and again. Cronenberg is not for the faint of heart, definitely.

Videodrome ticks many of the Cronenberg boxes that fans of his films will have come to expect and love. Themes including technology's role in shaping humanity, government conspiracy against its own people, and the cultural value of sex and violence are each delivered up in the film's gray-and-beige, metropolitan '80s setting. Casting was excellent and the plot is moved forward by a spritely James Woods and the provocative Debbie Harry (Blondie), set to a sparing but precise score by Howard Shore. But the most intriguing question posed by the film is the extent to which reality is shaped by personal perception alone. This concept, explored through dream sequences, body horror, and philosophical dialogue between characters, is central to the plot about a television broadcaster bent on finding the most "real" adult content for his niche viewers. Cronenberg appears to ask not only whether our insatiable media consumption has gone too far, but whether humanity ever had a choice in the first place.

Videodrome is a prescient moment in cinema history as our desensitized society moves ever deeper into a world of screens and virtual personalities. It's not a film for everyone, but it's a film anyone could get something out of. I highly recommend it for those approaching it with academic interest and for fans of the genre.

Max Renn's found a brand new channel to explore, where it comes from, whose transmission, he's not too sure, broadcasts torture, hurt and pain, you might be curious but refrain, it's got him hooked and things are getting quite obscure. His hallucinations feel very real, a gaping mouth inside his belly's a big deal, consumes a gun and video, controls his actions, where he goes, there must be awful indigestion that he feels.

It wouldn't be so bad in the digital age fortunately, I'm sure a small USB slot opening up in your midriff wouldn't be anything like as bad as one the size of a VHS cassette - more like keyhole video.

Wow! My favorite actor and my favorite singer in the same movie! Deborah Harry (of Blondie fame) gives a great non-blonde performance as an "emotionally energized" radio show host, and James Woods is a scummy business-minded owner of a seedy TV station.

Like "Brazil" or "Twelve Monkeys" this movie will make you think, and even though there isn't really much violence or horror, your mind will fill in the parts that aren't there. The ability of a movie to do this makes it a must-see alone. You constantly ask yourself "is this real?" just as the main character is asking the same thing.

One thing about this movie is that they never really answer a lot of things. As we watch the main character go in and out of reality, the audience is never quite sure what is really happening either. They never tell us. They never truly explain who is behind Videodrome, or even what happens to James Woods. If you didn't like the ending of Network or Twelve Monkeys, then you won't like the lack of explanation here either.

Lots of underlying messages here too, involving television, pornography, and technology - all of which are more significant today than in 1983. Note common themes such as the head in a box. Excellently made film, the only thing that would have made it better is more story.

I had the "bad luck" to watch eXistenZ well before i set my eyes upon this work of director David Cronenberg. Bad luck, as eXistenZ basically consists of the same ingredients as Videodrome, and kind of spoils the subliminal story line of Videodrome. I guess it's impossible to see Videodrome and eXistenZ as separate movies, as they both handle a subject that obviously intrigues David Cronenburg. Where eXistenZ had so much more to it, for Videodrome, the subject is really the only good thing about it.

To me it seems Videodrome suffers from a lack of enthusiasm from both director and actors. The flat acting of pretty much everybody, but especially James Woods, turn the characters from potentially mysterious into plain geeks. There's Deborah Harry, who moans herself halfway through this movie (be it in bed or in the torture room), as a kinky radio-presenter and there's a strange TV-program saleswoman dressed like a Bulgarian fortune teller. Also, a number of outbursts of violence in this movie are either witnessed by zombie-like bystanders or are just ways to force the movie through some big holes in the script. With these facts, the unexpected plot twists become highly incredible.

Maybe Videodrome made some impact in the time it was released, but nowadays the idea that a video-tape embodies evil is somewhat outdated. Cronenberg was a bit smarter when adapting the story for eXistenZ (can't help but mentioning it), as it tells of an electronic device which may just as well never be invented, and therefore will give the movie more longevity than Videodrome.

Videodrome would be a must-see for Cronenberg die-hards, as it shows him making an early attempt at making a movie that shows a world, switching between reality and hallucination, on the brink of revolution. He finally succeeded in this with eXistenZ, which is a much better attempt in telling the Videodrome story.