Cosmopolis

Sem Tempo para os intelectuais. Uma crítica difícil de digerir do capitalismo, cheia de diálogo incompreensível, a maior parte do qual nem sequer nos pretende dizer nada de significativo, e destina-se apenas a transportar-nos para um mundo cinematográfico que nunca vimos antes. Depois de Crash, David tenta defender a sua posição como realizador que filma o não filmável. Uma viagem visualmente estética, perturbadoramente atmosférica, pulsante, brincando com as expectativas do público de que nem sequer se sabe qual será a próxima palavra que vai sair de um personagem, quanto mais o que vai ser na cena seguinte (o episódio da arma no campo de basquetebol é ótimo). Pattinson, sobre cujo papel no elenco eu inicialmente abanei a cabeça em descrença, é o principal trunfo do filme e ele interpreta-o perfeitamente. Binoche, Amalric e Giamatti desfrutam dos papéis menores e são um bom impulso para o filme. É uma pena que, para uma representação da alienação da sociedade cosmopolita, o próprio filme permaneça alienado a todos os níveis, exceto a relação de Pattinson com a sua mulher. A dupla tem as melhores cenas do filme juntamente com os únicos diálogos palpáveis. Cosmopolis é uma brincadeira que me entretém com o quão diferente é. E também imaginando o olhar nos rostos das multidões de fãs adolescentes de Pattinson a observá-lo :-D (10/07/2012)

What feels like roughly four hours of toilet philosophising, which Cronenberg disparages in places, but through most of the film he just lets it monotonously flow forth, which is so mind-numbing that you will probably lose any desire to hear the film’s message, whatever that may be (for example, the message that we haven’t been told anything). I will have to watch it again to confirm or refute the impression that this is Cronenberg’s shallowest and least atmospheric film, but I’m going to need to psych myself up for that over the next several weeks. 50% (04/08/2012)

It is not enough to describe book dialogues and film them with the stereotypical method of “shot x counter-shot". There are a few eccentric moments and they feel more self-parodying, while the ending is explicitly verbal diarrhea. Although I basically like what the film says, it does not defend Cronenberg's form. Not even the desperately un-charismatic Pattinson, whose decadent boredom one can't even take seriously. (08/07/2012)

It’s not exactly an enjoyable watch, but Cosmopolis is definitely worth seeing. For its differentness at least. Also to see Pattinson (just how many horrified fans left the theater in disgust? :D) who gives the best performance of his career so far. I must admit that I found myself nodding off a bit during the first half, some of the theorizing dialogs were tiresome, but that soon stopped. Basically non-existent relationships (except for the wide and that grampa) rule out any sympathy for the characters. The music, combining Shore’s abilities with the electronic project Metric, is almost hypnotizing in places. This isn’t a satisfying picture and that’s on purpose. Maybe that’s why I rather liked it. I’ll certainly play it again, the more I think about it, the more interesting that proposed journey to the barber’s seems. (01/10/2012)

I don't count myself among the die-hard fans of David Cronenberg, and although I’ve been keeping an eye on hims since the days of Crash, but I've never been particularly fond of him. So what is Cosmopolis like? Ordinary. In the context of Cronenberg's work, not particularly alarming, not particularly revelatory. But his collaboration with Robert Pattinson apparently appealed to him, and so we got even more of it with Maps to the Stars... (29/10/2016)