Current Cover Page

by Christophe Vander Kaay

here is a large part of the viewing public that would never admit to watching and enjoying horror films. And the excuses vary, but most come back to the same point. Horror movies aren't scary. Therefore, they don't serve their purpose. The question that remains is, why aren't the films effective? Has the world as a whole been desensitized to the idea of violence and gore to the point that it would take a film more extreme than we know how to make in order to bring dread back into the process? I don't think so. The reason that horror films are no longer "scary" is because there is nothing invested in them. Without someone or something to care about as a narrative engine, then the disinterest takes over before anything else can. You can't fear for a person if you don't care for them. 
CLICK HERE for a complete list of David Cronenberg films and books.

Of all film genres, horror films are by far the most universal, and yet the most personal. Anyone can make a horror film, sure. Fear is a universal theme. But the good horror films are the ones made with a large amount of personal investment from the writer and/or director. People like that are few and far between in today's market. In fact, I only know of three. All are very different, but they all bring personal vision to the screen. The one that I'd like to focus on is David Cronenberg.

He was born March 15, 1943, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. By most accounts, his first endeavor into film was in 1966, with a film called Transfer. In the earlier part of his career, with projects such as Shivers, Rabid and the Brood, he was considered to be an exploitation director, employing such cheap horror movie staples as rampant nudity and excessive gore. But one thing that separated even Cronenberg's early films from your average low-budget horror film was its unflinching view of the face of deterioration.

Scanners and Videodrome brought Cronenberg into a new realm of special effects, and he was finally able to utilize them to further the story, not to create shock effect. He worked with a very young Rick Baker on the bizarre and unsettling images that permeate Videdrome. In these newer, slightly higher budget films, Cronenberg was able to work with actors of a higher caliber, actors whose names would become synonymous with obsessive imagery, such as James Woods and Michael Ironside. Finally, Cronenberg was getting what he needed to make real horror films.

His next project was the one film that undoubtedly brought him to the attention of "real" horror filmgoers worldwide. That picture was the Dead Zone. Working from the source novel by Stephen King, Cronenberg created a truly painful film about one man's slow descent into despair and alienation, pushed to the limits because of mental and physical deterioration.

Besides his brilliant translation of Stephen King's admittedly flawed novel, he found the perfect withered soul character in Christophe Walken. As Johnny, Walken completely embodies the constant pain and regret that one would know as a physically disabled man out of his time and place. The exploration of the deterioration of man was quite apparent in this film, with the ravages of the unused body, the alienation of five years of exile, and the curse of foreknowledge eventually leading this man to do things he couldn't dream of.

This film brought him the attention he deserved, and he proved himself worthy of the mantle, "New King of Horror." His next film, while truly disturbing in its message and content, also held a striking message about love and illness. Not only had Cronenberg come into his own as a director, but now he had the ability to put deeper meaning into his "exploitation."

His next film was The Fly. Starring Jeff Goldblum as scientist Seth Brundle and Geena Davis his reporter love interest, Cronenberg managed to fashion a film genre that has been touched on rarely and succeeded in even less often. The horror-romance. As the tragic figure of the physically deteriorating but brilliant Seth, Jeff Goldblum occupies both his last and best true performance before succumbing to his own Hollywood stereotype in such films as Independence Day and Jurassic Park. Geena Davis, an actress known for her other "assets" more than for her acting ability, gives a beautiful, haunting performance as the woman in love with a man who is slowly becoming less and less of a man. The ideas of man deteriorating and someone being in love with something they can't stand to look at bring this story to the classic on the same level as Phantom of the Opera, one of the only other true horror-romances.

Many reviewers for the film argued that, while the story was excellent and the performances right on their mark, that the film itself was dark and often excessively gory. They were finally starting to catch on. Cronenberg, unlike may horror directors, understood the idea of universal fear. He didn't find a single theme of fear and stretch it to an unbelievable point. He touched on several frightening possibilities, if only briefly. And a new vision was to come to screen in his next film.

With all due respect to David Cronenberg, Dead Ringers would never have worked if not for the brilliant, underrated performances of Jeremy Irons. That's right, performances. He plays twin brothers, both of whom happen to be gynecologists. This is another one of many of Cronenberg's films that uses the split focus of numerous universal fears to bring about its eerie feel. Aside from his common theme of the deterioration of man, he uses both the fear of visiting a doctor and the fear of losing a loved one as plot narrative. His visual style is in grand view here, and it is quite apparent to the filmgoer that his attention to detail is great.

As if projects with so many personal investments weren't enough of a challenge to him, Daivd Cronenberg decided to adapt a novel by Charles S. Burroughs. Naked Lunch was the title, a book considered by many to utterly unfilmable. While not adhering strictly to the book, Cronenberg did make a meaningful, deeply disturbing film that I'm sure came as close to a real interpretation as that book will ever receive. Outstanding performances by Judy Davis and especially Peter Weller were realistic in an unrealistic story, but somehow seemed appropriate. 

Never one to be tied down to a specific way of thinking, Croenberg's next project was M. Butterfly, a updating of the classic story. He worked once again with Jeremy Irons, and John Lone played the part of the man disguised as a woman. Most notable in this adaptation was the appearance of John Lone not as an attractive female impersonator, but more as a very effeminate man, leading to undercurrents and even more overt homosexual tones. On the whole, a well-made movie, but perhaps not a film meant for David Cronenberg. But if it is to be considered a failure, it can only be considered a brilliant one.

And this brings us full circle, back to the point that David Cronenberg once again became controversial because of his horrific images and overt sexual nature.

When Crash was released, it received a special award from Cannes for daring and audacity. However, this was one of very few kind reviews of the film. Many saw it as perverted, dark, angry, and completely unrealistic. The sex in the film was not arousing to nearly anyone, and the matter-of-fact documentary style of the violence in the film only put the audience more ill at ease. The idea of being uncomfortable made most of the audience forget that the aim of the film was to do just that. And so, in being such a successful film, it was lost to an audience.

His most recent effort, Existenz, is a science fiction film in the vein of virtual reality and the world of the hacker. A game is designed that attaches itself to you through an embryonic "sac", and you become part of a virtual world. The exploration of the possibility of another reality within our own is genuinely explored, unlike the eye candy trips of the Matrix or Johnny Mnemonic. However, Cronenberg does not forsake the eye-popping imagery, as in a particular sequence when one of the characters orders a meal, and then constructs a weapon from the bones in the soup. Cronenberg wrote this screenplay, his first completely original since Videodrome. It is quite obvious that he has been working on this story in his head for quite a while, and the detail comes through.

While we wait to be disturbed yet again by Cronenberg's unique and often life-changing vision, we can say this. David Cronenberg may not be the new king of the horror film. It is my belief that John Carpenter holds that mantle. But David Cronenberg goes beyond horror. He finds the place in the heart and the mind that live beyond horror, the place in a constant state of dread and morbidity, and taps deeply into that. And for exploring that fearlessly, we all owe him thanks.
CLICK HERE for a complete list of David Cronenberg films and books.