I forgot. I tried rewatching I didn’t get that far. πŸ˜‚

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I was waiting for Cronenberg’s signature action/suspense/thrills. Nothing happened. Watched a plastic surgeon whine and cry lmao

A lot of that. πŸ˜‚

I think you might be enter his critical acclaim, yet turd stretch

More turds coming up? Oh no

That is why I said I like his early stuff but the taste makers prefer later Cronenberg very New Yorker.

History of Violence and Eastern promises though. Both in his third phase of crime and crame. Excellent stuff. Even Crimes of the future.

Maybe his second wave of existential movies is mostly terrible? πŸ˜‚

*crime and drama

I liked those but history violence is very ghey too πŸ˜†

I forget. I think I saw once πŸ˜‚

It got a lot of praise from the critics

Not the best sign πŸ˜‚

πŸ˜‚

All the gangsters seemed pretty ghey to me. 🀣

Directors who stay consistently good throughout their career are rare πŸ˜‚

He tricked me with all the horror movies at first lol. Wasn’t expecting something that bad

Gotta power through his gay phase πŸ˜‚ (sounds weird)

πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

Wait till you get to spider πŸ˜‚ at least imo

Naked lunch? The next one

😬

Existenz sounds good. Crash could be good. Could be weird. 😬

Crash I liked but most people I know hated it. This is one we might be divided on πŸ€·πŸ»β€β™‚οΈπŸ˜‚

Sounds like it might be highly controversial πŸ˜‚

Just read the one liner for it

People in car crashes getting horny about car crashes. πŸ˜‚

Boring, gay, but some interesting special effects

He went mainstream πŸ˜‚

He did.

Although these middle era movies I would call art house.

Dead ringers was definitely that

It is all art house till history of violence

History is the fourth one on the list πŸ˜‚

🫑