How good is it?

Good if you like history and violence

>Cronenberg
I miss this lil nigga's film making like you wouldn't believe.

Attached: shutterstock_9865576j.jpg (4016x2678, 2.02M)

I don't understand why they felt the need to show Viggo Mortensen as the Terminator in the last 20 minutes. It turns the movie into a big cartoon. All we need to know is that he was a good hitman in the past and that he abandoned "Richie" (aka big money) by starting a new life.

Ignore this pleb

You just have to be quicker than the other guy and joey was already a known legend

Once you get past le ebin edgy characters and violence, which is no longer anywhere near as grotesque, inventive or shocking as he used to be, Cronenberg's 21st century films are severely lacking in any good characters, plots or narratives
ExistenZ was his last inventive movie that also tackled its subject matter in a cool way
Cosmopolis is hypnotic in parts but its such a harangue in terms of its dialogue, without much visual heft
He even had a Q interview several years back where he all but confirmed he no longer believes in the power of images but rather "a face talking" being the true "essence of cinema"

>that rough sex scene on the stairs
UNNNNNNFFFFFF

Eisenbuurhuurduurrg is fucking annoying in this as he is in almost everything but TSN.

>the framing of the story and characters is so silly
It's pulpy. But a lot of what makes the movie stick is how well it threads the needle between pulp and family drama. It gives everything an unusual sense of tension that wouldn't work without that contrast.
>Cronenberg has stumbled severely as an artist in the 21st century.
He hasn't been as productive. But let's not forget that in the 20th he gave us shit like Scanners and Shivers.

this