frank1979

To say that Twin Peaks is the least interesting thing by Lynch seems quite bold to me, given that it is thanks to this project that the era of serials exists and started... Twin Peaks is and will remain a milestone. In Twin Peaks, there are the germs of what will later become various X-Files, C.S.I., etc. etc. It's an immense melting pot with facets that touch on all genres... Horror, Drama, Comedy, Comical... there's everything in Twin Peaks.

Nice review, I liked it. I've only seen the film once, as mentioned in another review... I thought I noticed a connection between the protagonist (the one who gets the role) and the protagonist she portrayed, I realized it from the ways in which they both disappear, which are almost similar. Anyway, I will have to rewatch it even though it's too long.

I saw the film recently, and I don't have everything clear in my mind because the plot is to be read between the lines, given that the various visual and contextual situations that seem to change rapidly take over in this film (at least for its entire duration). I feel I caught a connection between the protagonist (the actress hired for the film) and the character she was meant to portray, since they are the only two people who disappear (albeit in different circumstances) in the same manner; perhaps one’s sacrifice freed the other… but I still need to watch it again to get a clearer picture.

Are you done being a pain in the ass, Bartleboom? Because you rely on what others say. Those who really review do so primarily by sharing what they’ve experienced themselves regarding the film in question. You're such a sycophant, Bartleboom. At least the reviews I post are solely mine, and I don’t base them on others' opinions.

BARTLEBOOM Well... you certainly have a unique way of judging films and their reviews. You say Scanners "shows the signs of age and the passing of time," while you praise Videodrome to the nth degree... I would sadly point out that Videodrome also feels the effects of time. (VHS tapes aren't made anymore, and cathode screens have disappeared)... just to name a couple.
Then in the meeting, the Scanners were talking among themselves and it wasn't a séance.
Regarding the connection between the booth (telephone line) and the computer... that's a topic worth discussing. But know that until the '90s... in the early '90s, chatting was only possible with Telecom's terminals (back then called SIP). The telephone lines are also connected to PC terminals; in fact, you pay for internet access through your phone.

I hate reviews that recount the plot and ending in detail. The movie is historical anyway..

Everything is perfect, both the review and the movie.

The film seems to have been judged too presumptuously; even though some Spielbergian elements and/or effects can be noted, this film is and will remain a Cult classic. Many scenes have made history and have been referenced in other films (the corridor that stretches, Diane being moved all around the room on all the walls, even on the ceiling... a scene later echoed in the first Nightmare, the scene of the voice coming from the television, the scene of the chairs moving on top of the table). This film actually has many moments that can be genuinely scary. I don’t mind; I was torn between 3 and 4 stars, but I eventually decided on 4 because this is one of those films that, like it or not, has marked the history of horror cinema. The sequels are lacking. As for the review, I find it utterly useless; here we’re playing around with trendy details and losing sight of the real reason we’re all here, which is to read reviews that talk about films, not to read the nonsensical, airy flights of fancy that each of us comes up with. I even struggled to give this review 1 star. It’s unacceptable that for three and a half quarters, we talk about nothing, and for the remaining part, we make reference to the film. Pathetic.

The film doesn't bother me; I find it decent, but I don't see any "Cronenbergian Metamorphosis" in it. There are many other films with more or less the same plot (acquisition of powers due to trauma), the storyline isn’t Cronenbergian but purely in the style of Stephen King. There is indeed a touch of Cronenberg in tackling true horror, but it’s the film’s plot and setting that make it Soft Horror; after all, as a tribute to King, Cronenberg is absolutely not a horror director. He chose this story, which actually fits his style better. The film is well made, essentially.
Your arrogant review could have been fine, and I was about to give it a decent 3, but I am forced to give it a 1 due to a basic mistake that has led you to ramble throughout. The Dead Zone is not "... that part of our brain often unused that has the ability to capture scenes or situations from other places..." as you mistakenly say in your review. But if you pay close attention to the film, you'll see that the doctor explains that it's that part of vision in which nothing is decided, because that part is where he can change the future and/or the course of events. Indeed, Walken says, "in my visions there is a dark part that does not make them complete...I don't understand what they are..." and it’s here that the doctor says they are the "dead zones," meaning the events that do not manifest clearly at certain points because it is the protagonist with this gift who can change them. Watch the film again and try to stop being so full of yourself.

However, I cannot understand how the so-called "fans" of Cronenberg above consider the films where Cronenberg stepped outside his style (except for Crash and Naked Lunch) to be better. I mean, Cronenberg became famous and it's fully understandable in his style, which is that of Body Horror... the transformation. I still believe that Scanners is the best, but not just for this simple fact; it's also because Scanners is his beginning, the start of Cronenberg, as mentioned in the review of this film. Scanners is the pure matrix of what he will do, it contains everything including the hint at the use of technology (when the protagonist psychically connects to the network via telephone). Everything starts from this film. Many reviewers here are trying to act intellectuals and get sidetracked... that's the problem.