Cosmopolis (2012) Poster


User Reviews

Add a Review
204 Reviews
Sort by:
Both absurd and hyper-real, shocking and droll
Mike Beranek24 July 2017
Once I got over the lack of straight narrative, and felt the hypnotic power of the dialogue, then witnessed some brilliant set pieces from a star studded list of supporting actors I was hooked. You don't have to 'get' everything. It's as clever and significant as Crash but more complex and subtle in places. It felt multi-layered and worth revisiting. I feel to class this as dull is to look for the wrong thing in a director who is anything but conventional. I thought of the apocalyptic dream imagery of JG Ballard and his mercurial solipsistic protagonists. It is not without its heart-stopping moments too with sharp darts of piercing sex and violence. This film has a prophetic feel and can only mature and reveal its truths with the passage of time. In other words looking back, this will be appreciated as a great work.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
What the blimmin' flip
Chris Burns11 July 2017
Oh dear god, turned off after 15 minutes.

I'm willing to concede that I might have missed the point of this film, but my life minutes/hours, I felt after 15 minutes, were better spent concentrating on the clothes ironing that I was doing rather than on this self indulgence.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Atmosphere over story, which in this case doesn't work
Anssi Vartiainen13 February 2017
A stupidly rich young man sits in a limo and rides towards his barber meeting. Around him the city gets crazier and crazier as the society crumbles in the throes of an economical crisis. Or at least that's what I think happens... The movie isn't big on explaining stuff.

As the stupidly rich young man rides across the city, things happen. He has his daily doctor appointment right there in his limo, he argues with his wife about sex, has sex with just about every other woman he meets, talks with his business associates, hires bodyguards (one of them being a woman he eventually bangs), and so worth. None of this really moves the plot forwards, none of this really connects with anything else. The movie tries to rely on mood and an interesting situation to hook you in, but it lacks the core structure. Plus it tries to make economics into a philosophy, which only reminds me how much I hate the whole subject. At least a film like The Big Short, which is also about economics, makes the whole subject interesting by talking about the people behind it. This tries to elevate economics into an art form, if not a religion in its own right, but it just doesn't have the depth to pull it off.

The film has a couple of merits to its name. The story is artsy garbage, but at least the film looks really good and director David Cronenberg's touch is clearly visible across the board. Plus the final scene, where two mentally ill people sit in a trashy low-end apartment and try to make their personal neuroses resonate with one another, is pretty cool. It's still artsy, but in an entertaining manner.

All in all I'm sure the film has its fans because it throws enough stuff at the screen that some of it has to stick with certain people. Personally I didn't get enough out of it to be satisfied, but perhaps the fault lies with me.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Violence needs a burden. Needs a purpose.
adonis98-743-18650327 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Riding across Manhattan in a stretch limo in order to get a haircut, a 28-year-old billionaire asset manager's day devolves into an odyssey with a cast of characters that start to tear his world apart. Cosmopolis in my opinion is one of the most underrated weird movies i've ever seen it's basically about a rich guy living in a world where the rich rule the world and the poor live on the streets and they have some kind of king "The Rat" and this guy called Eric is an insane guy with a lot of money who cheated his wife like 3 or 4 times, shot his bodyguard and was hit by a pie on the face and in the process he tracks down the guy who wants to kill him. First of all Robert Pattinson gives a great performance in this movie alongside Paul Giamatti, Sarah Gadon and the rest of the cast and crew. I watched this on theaters a couple of years ago and my experience was pretty bad people walked out of the theater screaming and calling names the actor and the movie and demanding their money back but honestly what did you except it's a film that went to Cannes and got directed by Cronenberg about the economic crisis and a guy who is insane and even shoots his own hand because he thinks he is the king of the world. Cosmopolis is by no means a classic but it's by no means a bad film and it deserves better respect for what it tried to do and if you watch it for the first time just do your research and learn what you're getting yourself into but also if you hated it the first time try to give it a 2nd chance and try to study the film closely because it's nowhere near as bad as Maps to the Stars was not even close.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Be prepared for a film about ideas that doesn't seem to understand any of them
lemon_magic26 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
If this film bored you to death, I sympathize. I found it intensely irritating at times, at least until I got into the rhythms and mindset of the screenplay, and even then there were times I wanted to yell at the screen, "GET ON WITH IT!!!"

If I had to sum "Cosmopolis" in a few words, I'd say (perhaps unfairly) that it was a Harold Pinter play filtered through a Walter Gibson scenario (the closest parallel being "New Rose Hotel") and through Cronenberg's own desire to challenge our ideas about what is "real". All of these influences aregood things, but I can't say that they go well together in a film format.

On the positive side: the film looks great, in spite of the seemingly claustrophobic setting, where 80% of the film takes place inside a stretch limo. I really enjoyed being in that limo. And the actors look great. And the screenplay tries to discuss some big, challenging ideas.

On the negative: the film comes to an ambiguous, unsatisfying end. And the characters don't seem to have any real meat to them - every last one of them (except the bodyguard and the driver and maybe the barber) are so vacant, so bloodless, so postmodern and anemic, that you want to throw them outside, make them go for a walk, maybe get into a fistfight or something. I know these are deliberate choices,probably stemming from the Delillo novel this is based on - but it still makes it hard for me to care about what happens to these twits. And I hate Delillo's pseudo-profundity anyway, which poses intellectual and philosophical dilemmas that really don't matter to anyone but maybe a devotee of Derrida.

In the end, a Cronenberg movie is always worth watching at least once, maybe twice to see if you caught all the subtexts. Go into this with an open mind and maybe a beer or bottle of wine to relax, and you'll probably be fine.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Alpha Finds His Prey
gpknopp15 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Yes, it's a crass film, pretty much about being stuck in a limo in Manhattan during political unrest - the Rat whatevers. It's a crass film because such a concept is simply voyeuristic. And it sounds smart but ridiculous, on my second watch it fell into place and not I am a bit more impressed with the fine script that made this possible. And, it's pretty zen, with his underlings coming to him to consult, and there's babble about unchartables, it's not chartable this, it's not chartable that. Which I took to mean, on the second watch, that it's about being part of the thing, rooting out the cause somewhat instinctively, like any artist/scientist. He identified the root cause, went there, lost track of the complex, which he had to do, and how dangerous really were those security people? He seemed to infiltrate them, plying people off with goodies. Only his wife gets him. And hates him, because she's old money and he is just a genius, son of a driver, probably. And, in the end, he finds his man, the master manipulator, and he is recognized. And they take pot shots of one another, and it's funny, but he has to keep them reacting! One final question - what would have happened if he would have stayed in the office? Don't play into those short squeezes, brothers!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A masterpiece but not for everyone
metzzz14 September 2016
''People eat and sleep in the shadow of what we do''

Cosmopolis is not an easy ride and certainly not for everyone, resembling a dream-like feeling this is a visually beautiful film, the performances are great and the dialogue is weird and complex which is obvious it didn't please a lot of people. (5.0 rating is laughable, what the hell is going on?).

It's one of those films that may require more than one viewing to fully understand the meaning of each conversation but it's totally worth it since you're always gonna discover something new and interesting that will make you think for days (you can find quotable lines everywhere in this movie).

The final confrontation might have hypnotized me in some kind of way, Paul Giamatti and Robert Pattinson deliver one of the best climactic dialogues i've ever seen.

Cronenberg gives us the vision of the 1% of our society and he creates a masterpiece that can be thought-provoking and funny at the same time, i feel sorry for those who didn't get it.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A film packed with existential quotes ... a truly European film
Elena Kuyumdjian26 July 2016
Warning: Spoilers
One evening I tried to watch it (up to somewhere 20 -30 min) and I found it too complex to follow. I gave up and decided to watch it again when I am not tired and can follow the plot. I haven't read the book so I can not comment and can not make comparisons with it.

Next day I enjoyed it more and was able to use the IP TV functions to go back to the most compacted wording scenes and was able to better follow the plot. I was fascinated by the surrealistic and exaggerated character of Eric Packer. Compare it to "The Wolf of Wall street" - Cosmopolis is the dark and ugly side of it.

The pacing in the first part and after meeting (the character) Benno Levinis, cutting the world of Eric in two. Just like when I lost my job as a senior finance manager and had to stay 11 month at home - the change in pace is breathtaking and mind blowing. You have to experience to believe it possible!

A film packed with existential quotes ... a truly European film.

July 2016
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Lynchian Dr Faustus - possibly Cronenberg's masterpiece
wlee0811 January 2016
I can appreciate that a lot of people don't "get" this movie, or find it pretentious or pedantic or just strange. But I'll have a go at what I liked about it. I liked that it walked a very fine balance between reality and dream, incorporating poetry and symbolism. I liked the complexity of the dialog - so complex at times that it seems the intention is not so much to be understood as to give an impression. It felt in places like Ingmar Bergman's The Seventh Seal; it stares at the issue of mortality head-on. It also felt a bit like Fellini's Roma (the long highway scene) I thought the deadpan acting was perfect. And it was suspenseful, in the sense that you really will be kept wondering what will happen next to the main character.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Cronenberg at his Best!!!
vanludyck2 January 2016
Warning: Spoilers
This is Shivers, Videodrome and eXistenZ continued....

Do not let Yourselves get fouled by opinions of those who do Not Know, do Not Follow and therefore do Not Understand...

After accidentally watching one of the Twilight Saga flicks with my younger sister I did not expect much of Robert Pattison, imho he really is Not a bad actor at All, Juliette Binoche pretending to be 41 is an oll'Pro, all others keep it real cool paranoid, the security guy always listening in is probably the best gem, really creepy ex-post modern fun that delivers spine-shivers for those of U out there who regularly watch somewhat-conspiracy-oriented Utube channels etc. Ol'Cro knows very well what's today's Buzz about...

So far the Best Cronenberg's Piece of Art up 2 date.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
tristanh-2490026 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I thought this movie was incredible. The way we are immediately pulled into the dark and almost surreal atmosphere inside Eric Packer's world speaks volumes about director David Cronenberg's prowess. The story is one not many people can relate to, especially when one comes off as cold as Packer. But truth is, deep down inside, Packer's character is incredibly tormented, and simply cannot face it. He is a walking sociopath, and talks the part too. His interactions with other characters serve brilliantly as indicators of his personality and experiences: what shaped him, what is he after, and most of all: why does he seem so dissatisfied? All compelling questions that are answered more and more as the film looms to a climax, culminating in an ultimate "suicide" attempt on behalf of Packer, but not in the way you would think. It is such a marvellous look inside the mind and world of an individual so tormented yet so disillusioned by his own emotional state and simple boredom that it will stay with you for days. Cosmopolis: the size of Packer's genuine lack of care. An incredible rendition of an even more haunting novel by one of Canada's best film directors, and actors that complete Pattinson so well that you wonder if this is real. Best of all: Robert Pattinson is truly superb as Packer; so much so that I forgot all about Twilight until getting here. Truth is Pattinson is not at all Twilight anymore; and Cosmopolis serves as a perfect example of his versatility and ability to portray fraying human emotion. The film's nomination for the Palme d'Or at Cannes was truly deserved. An incredible work of art, worth a revisit but not too many: slipping into Packer's calculated world of self- destruction can be dangerous, and, ultimately, suicidal. Goodnight to all, and I really hope you both understand (as I read from other reviews..) and enjoy this movie.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The World Awaits Us
inioi27 October 2015
Warning: Spoilers
What en excellent and personal movie. I can not expect less from David Cronenberg.

The movie is simple and complex at the same time.

The film focuses on the personal (and private) life of the main character. Through his life we can see the uncontrolled capitalism which brings a tremendous lack of values of our era, and how is unstoppably growing.

Eric Parker is a Wall Street billionaire who does not care anything but money. But the movie, in a smart and not evident way, shows that ultimately Our indifference to our neighbor's sorrow brings suffering to our door . And the result is: emptiness and loneliness and absurd.

IMPORTANT: The structure, pace and concept of the movie are not the usual. The plot is not obvious, but the feeling it leaves is subtle yet clear.

Just for independent movie goers

The world depicted in the movie is not dystopian: we are already living in it.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Bad reviews due to wrong target audience, marketing.
nm636964126 October 2015
Cronenberg's Cosmopolis is an adaptation of Don DeLillo's novel. The Novel is accepted as unfilmable an as one of the few novels which composes a precise image of our zeitgeist. The movie is not just based on Cronenberg's clever written script that could be a marvellous play for theatres but also a well directed movie with a talented cast and gets the audience into the atmosphere of a Japanese surreal anime. Nonetheless the movie is a marketing mistake of its kind. The negative reviews that emphasis the main actor Robert Pattinson's ex-sanguine performance are not to understand, since he is exactly as vampire as his character Eric Packer, a 28 years old egoist with a lot of money. However the reason of the box-office flop can be understood. First reason is the difference of target groups: It is possible that neither real Cronenberg fans (because of the poster of Pattinson on the foreground) nor Pattinson fans (since it's not a teenage movie) had the intention to see the movie. Second reason is he wrong advertisement: The audience watches an action trailer but finds out it is a Japanese surreal anime. This masterpiece of art proves us that even sci-fi legend David Cronenberg can flop on box-office.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Sell Those Rats Short! or Here's How it Is....
LemonLadyR30 September 2015
Boy, this is a real love/hate film and mostly hate, but people want to be entertained and this film is not gonna do that very much during our look into one man's day of decision/change. But it will move you in odd ways, make you think, and do what art is supposed to do: react strongly. So, even knowing all this, it is still a difficult movie to get one's head around, but after some digging, I finally did, although I did realize fairly soon that it was something completely different, even for an Indie film. But I think what people are not getting is that it is not a typical 'romantic' film, with all its production values geared towards the slick (although it IS highly stylized), beautiful lighting, emotions, and a film with warm characterizations and bonds between viewer and character (although I did relate to Packer, but it's a specific, not universal thing).

I think it hearkens back to the New Wave in cinema of the late 50s/60s (and more than just French, for it is very Fellini-esque). I love Robert Pattinson as Eric Packer. Cronenberg tried this style of abstraction in Crash, but how can you view James Spader or Holly Hunter without emotion? They are too well known for it, it didn't fit, and in the end, could not pull it off due to their strong personalities (esp Holly Hunter). Here, Cronenberg finishes what he started there with this disembodied style. Thus Pattinson is the exact right casting, even in appearance. As Cronenberg himself says, which encapsulates most of the zeitgeist of the movie, which is that high intensity computer trading is abstracted from production, products, commerce, from anything. Thus Packer is reflecting that as a completely abstract person who has no idea of the world and how to be human, so he sounds and appears as an alien dropped into real life on Earth (on the day he finally realizes all this).

Character IS valued in films, and I value it, and judge them on it, but here the lack of it works since it goes along with the whole abstraction concept. The complete silence in the limo, when the windows are up, creates a dreamlike tone that pervades the movie, even though it is not realistic, it is not meant to be. Limo as uterus, coffin, tomb, video game, spaceship, sex toy, and on and on. The movie really is not about a financial crisis, but of Packer's stubbornness and attempt to destroy himself by going against his advisers and becoming his own worst enemy. His problems are limited to *his* life; the world has not been affected by his issues, although of course he thinks it has, as a 1%er.

The protesters represent the Occupy Wall Street movement, according to Cronenberg, and I thought the "rats" as commodities thing hilarious, but the more serious metaphor is that you can abstract anything and trade it and Pattinson drinks far too much from that cup, even as his primary relationship reflects it. So I think Pattinson is abstracting life and trading it and his relationships as commodities.

If you don't care for really arty, stylized films or massively metaphoric films, you will not like this one, but I think if it is thought of as Pattinson's journey from isolation to gritty attempts to join real life then it will go down better. It is as if he is living in the digital world along with his commodities, then has an epiphany during which he realizes there is more outside his tiny world (represented by the limo), both physically and emotionally. So he stumbles his way out of it, creating havoc for himself in an unconsciously suicidal way as he tries to get back to his roots, although it doesn't seem like he quite knows what they are. The guy is so abstract and above it all, from his billionaire throne, that he commits immoral acts without a thought, so desperate is he to get 'home'. He truly needs a pair of ruby slippers to click to go home, and when he finds the next closest thing (people from his past or a chance to right himself) he blows it.

Of course there are all the obvious things we hate about the rich, the extreme self-centerdness, the narcissism, the arrogance, and the social commentary (although Cronenberg seems to be less about that here; it is obvious anyway to anyone who is not living under a rock today).

The other actors must, for the film to work, at least Packer's advisors, wear the same mask of abstraction and speak in the same disembodied way. I love Samantha Morton, who can do anything, chewing up the scenery. She is right in there with him, as are the other actors for whom it is appropriate. His wife is just a reflection of his narcissism, since narcissists find relationships that mirror themselves. Her skin doesn't even look real, more like an avatar's in a virtual world. She is farther gone than he is, but is more resigned to it and aware of it.

All in all, I grew to really like the film and appreciate its perfections. Again, this is Crash done right, in many ways. This film is much less about entertainment than anything else; so fair warning. However I was entertained in a strange way and enthralled by most of the aspects of it. It has wonderful production values that add to the theme perfectly and the other things that make a film deserve a rating of 8/10. I recommend watching at least twice and finding some Cronenberg interviews/commentary. Yes, there is some work to this film, but that is another thing that makes it great art and a viewer that is not spoon fed will be a more well rounded fan of cinema.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A film that does not make you care about the characters
Gordon-1114 September 2015
This film tells the story of a young billionaire who travels across the city in his limousine to get a haircut. However, his journey is punctuated by traffic jams, violent protests and many meetings with his associates.

"Cosmopolis" is a strange film, though not as strange as the other David Cronenberg films. In one of the early scenes where Juliette Binochet has a rendezvous with Robert Pattison, it reminds me of Holly Hunter in "Crash". The scenes when Robert Pattison meets his wife are interesting because the wife is always very distant. In fact, all Homan relationships in "Cosmopolis" is unusual because they interact in a matter of fact manner that is devoid of emotion. They use words and sentence structures that is far from everyday usage that makes me unable to connect with any of the characters. Towards the ending, the story gets increasingly incomprehensible and inexplicable, which further frustrates me in addition to boring me. I didn't enjoy watching "Cosmopolis".
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Slow Unstoppable Cruise Into Oblivion.
Edward Rosenthal12 September 2015
It's a very challenging, difficult film to enjoy, but I did, mostly because the director has luckily found a clever and apt metaphor for the slow inevitable descent of society into chaos, mayhem, and oblivion which we're all currently experiencing, whether or not you realize it. Our world is on track to implode into some real horrible sh*t very soon, but everyone's coasting along like skaters on some very thin ice, seemingly unaware that their terrible fate lies inches away just below their shuffling feet.

As the limo very slowly rolls and stops on it's interrupted journey through the mean, nasty city which is bursting into revolutionary madness the protagonist, a surprisingly compelling Robert Pattinson, manages to keep my gaze averted from all the increasingly ugly things occurring outside the tinted power windows and focused upon his sincerely fascinating face. I felt as though I was being invited. emphatically, to pay attention to the man behind the curtain, except in the case of this profoundly disturbing film the Wizard is not a loud mouthed little phony. No, this Master of this Universe is a genuinely powerful and twisted fellow.

If you hate to have to think or ponder or even consider for a moment what anything means in a film--or in life--you're sure to really, really hate this deliberately annoying and confrontational film. But if you're anything like me and you don't mind being asked to contemplate the bizarre nature of our ever more devolving, collapsing society then you, too, should find this deeply unusual cinematic stunt to be quite worthwhile. It's not always fun or pleasant to watch, but it's extremely original and undeniably haunting. And it has some neat surprises from some very good supporting players, especially a superb Paul Giamatti as an especially ominous and unpleasant sort of Angel of Death.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Empty plot, pretentious directing and Robert Pattinson make this incredibly bad
grantss7 September 2015
I was initially conflicted in watching this. Directed by David Conenberg and starring Samantha Morton, Juliet Binoche and Paul Giamatti, but also stars Robert Pattinson. Will the quality of Conenberg, Morton, Binoche and Giamatti more than make up for the talentless, vacant Pattinson?

Turns out Robert Pattinson is still as clueless as ever, but his lack of acting talent is more than aided and abetted here by a dull, empty, directionless plot and very pretentious direction from David Cronenberg. This movie would have been crap even without Robert Pattinson in it (though probably not as crap...)
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
a new bottom for boring
empbb25 August 2015
This movie has surprised me by how boring it was. I have not seen anything this boring for some years. It has worsted even the worst movies that I have seen and I have seen a lot of movies.

There is a never ending dialogue about all kinds of things. That could have been interesting, except it's all said in the most monotone voices possible, without any emotion.

There are "action" scenes if you can call them that. Because the "action" scenes are super boring! Believe it or not the "action" in this movies is more boring than the endless monotone dialogue.

There are sexual encounters of the boring kind thrown in that don't really add to the story.

Well, I've warned you. If you still feel like watching, drink lots of coffee.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A 'Cosmo' polis
Guy9 March 2015
Warning: Spoilers
COSMOPOLIS is based on a Don DeLillo novel, and boy is that obvious. The plot, such as it is, concerns a twenty-something billionaire who decides to cross town in get a haircut. Most of the film takes place in his limo as various 'guest stars' - Juliette Binoche, Paul Giamatti, Mathieu Amalric - pop up in order to have a boring, pseud-ish conversation and then disappear. There's a little violence and some sexuality but it's all pointless. Everything is, of course, supposed to be loaded with symbolism and meaning but comes across instead as pretentious and silly. Nobody could believe these are real people or genuine conversations and any 'insights' don't add up to much. Casting Robert Pattison as the lead was also a disastrous decision as he displays all the charisma of a fridge magnet. By the end, I wanted the anarchist protesters to kill him and torch the car.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Thought provoking story that mirrors contemporary life
Samrat Mitra8 March 2015
I had avoided watching Cosmopolis because of the unsympathetic reviews it received from critics. Surprisingly, this is a very thought provoking film that delves into the disastrous consequence our society is headed for. First of all, Critics (the so called paid ones): Were you actually listening to the dialogues or were you just not paying attention to what was going on? Did any of the dialogues strike even a remote chord of reflection on , for example, the fact that the firms or companies most people work for actually treat them as worker bees? That actually while we talk and stress on our individuality and unique perspectives are actually forced to follow and sacrifice ourselves to a vision of the more powerful and influential members of the society? Robert Pattinson is a revelation, he has been working very hard in all the movies recently such as The Rover, Maps to the Stars among others. We are sure to see more of this talented actor as he seems to choose his roles in movies more carefully than his equally if not more talented peer Danielle Radcliffe. The open ended conclusion in the story is bound to leave a few viewers a bit miffed but the whole point of the story is not the conclusion but about smart billionaire's approach to life especially when he feels little empathy or achievement because everything in life was given to him. This is today's generation who live their lives as if death would never conclude life. If you see closely, you will notice that today's work pressures are created artificially by people like the ones portrayed by RPatz: They are joyless mostly unhappy workaholics who would keep pushing people without having any empathy about what they are going through! All in all, a movie well worth watching more than once, thanks for reading!
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
encorespod-730-8513316 March 2015
I recently saw this movie and loved it, I came onto to IMDb and was surprised to see it had some very unflattering reviews, I think that's because some people just didn't get it.

Yes the dialogue is contrived and strange, until you realise why.

The whole movie sounds like a poem because it is, the characters are inside out, instead of hearing their boasts we hear their thoughts and if you don't get that point, I can see how you would think this is a bad movie.

However when when you see the genius behind this creative device it all starts to make sense, thats why I'm giving this a decent score.

All in all the movie itself could be any other like it, the underlying theme rather wreaks of 'Collateral' but the turning of the whole movie into a poem and the way the characters introversions are extroverted, genius.

I liked it for that alone, it was a refreshing break from the staleness of forumlaic sensory diversion.

I didn't know it was a Cronenberg until I saw the credits at the end but when I saw that name, it made sense, he always had a thing for the weird and twisting the boundaries of perception.

In this he truly succeeded, even if the storyline itself doesn't stand up to scrutiny, the creativity of the concept has to be admired.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I hope I eat my words one day, I really do, but this stinks bad
Adam Peters5 March 2015
(16%) I wanted to like this I really did: a David Cronenberg crafted poke in the eye at big business capitalism with surreal twists and turns, satire, black humour, bite; but heavens above, this is an almost impossible film to enjoy, take anything from, or in most cases even make it until the end credits. I can't remember the last time a film that I wanted to see left me as cold as this one did. The over-riding focus here is on Robert Pattinson's character: a man who, like everyone else in the entire film, talks in pointless and annoying circles of pointless baggy gibberish that goes nowhere. Some, if not many of the lines are so terrible that it actually hurts, and I could dig deep into the depths of the hidden meanings and ideas, but quite honestly I'd rather remove my own finer nails with a pair of pilers because the film just isn't good enough for me to care. After not very long at all into this you can tell this is based off a novel deemed by most as totally unfilmable, as there's no real narrative anywhere, all the characters behave in a manner that make mental patients appear sane, while not one of them are interesting enough to make me care about what happens; of course, not that anything of any real note does actually happen. Any die-hard Cronenberg fans out there I'm sorry to report that this is near unwatchable pretentious garbage of the highest order.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Pseudo-intellectual tripe
Leofwine_draca4 March 2015
Wow, Cronenberg really dropped the ball on this one. I guess the source novel appealed to his intellectuality, given that he adapted it for this film's screenplay as well as directing, but this is the kind of stuff that leaves me absolutely cold. I'll make no bones about it: I hated COSMOPOLIS through and through.

The entire film consists of a bored super-rich businessman, played by Robert Pattinson, who rides around a city in his limousine and comes into contact with a number of diverse people, most of whom are played by cameoing guest stars. So Juliette Binoche turns up as a hooker, Paul Giamatti as a psycho, Mathieu Amalrice as a reporter, and so on. Unfortunately, the characters then spend the entire running time spouting pseudo-intellectual nonsense, and everyone who's not of the same mindset will quickly tune out.

Cronenberg does his best to appeal to his dedicated fan base by throwing in some random scenes of explicit violence and sexuality, but the dialogue is so arty-farty, so untrue to life, that the film just sinks because of it. Pattinson was also an extremely poor, charisma-free choice for lead actor; you feel like you're looking into the dead eyes of a male model here, instead of a proper 'actor'. COSMOPOLIS? Count me out - this is Cronenberg's worst as far as I'm concerned.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Could have been a master piece
paul_3-960-89677426 February 2015
I had always been intrigued by this film, now that I've seen it, I'm still intrigued. Maybe the movie's way to smart for me, too metaphorical for my taste, or I shouldn't have watched it while pulling an all nighter. Cosmopolis has a lot of interesting themes in it but the way they are presented did not do it for me.

The performances seem on point, I say seem because I'm not sure what the direction was. Cosmopolis feels like a dream, but the weird kind, I thought I was tripping. I don't take drugs or often drink to excess but it felt like I took something bad, some kind of drug that had turned bad that I shouldn't taken. I want to say Cosmopolis and lack of sleep do not mix but really I don't think it was a good movie. Despite the really cool underlying themes the film was not very good. I may have understand where Cronenberg was going with it and what it was about but I struggled to watch this movie to the end. It's a rich people problem movie that will resonate with very few of us. The megalomania of the rich, the economic crisis, creed I did get all that but the film was still poorly handled. In 10 or 15 years when everything will have gone to sh** maybe it would look like a master piece but for now it's not.

Sometimes, when watching a film I want to read the book for broader experience of the story, well with Cosmopolis that is not the case.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Favourite since "Spider"
darameja16 December 2014
I have only read two books about directors so far and one of them is David Cronenberg. I have been dedicated fan of his since the time I saw "eXistenZ" after a random recommendation and was left with a feeling "What did I just see?" and a craving to see more. Cronenberg is certainly one of the most unusual people who managed to put their grotesque, weird and uncomfortable imagination onto celluloid (other I can think of is David Lynch, though personally I always had preference for Cronenberg). I have to say, you will most probably not like "Cosmopolis", just like most viewers and critics. You might not even want to attempt to watch it. But if you do like it, chances are: a) you already are a Cronenberg fan b) You need to go and watch the rest of his films. To me, "Cosmopolis" is the best Cronenberg film since "Spider". Not to say that "Eastern Promises" or "History of Violence" were bad films - not at all. But they that's what they were - good films. This one is a CRONENBER film, with Cronenbergeque elements and this magic awkwardness that just draws me into his films. It is one of those daring films of his where director takes up to a novel that nobody else would/could do (others being "Naked Lunch" and "Crash"). It is a near future dystopian film, centering around a very young billionaire who made his money by finding special patterns for trading currencies. We ride with him in a luxurious, tech-enhanced limo through turbulent events in New York. And don't be discouraged that Mr. Twilight Robert Pattison is in the lead role. He does really well showing this detached from reality, too-early- to-be-rich math genius, his social awkwardness, dealing with people more like with math problems than with real humans.

Eric Packer: The logical extension of business is murder.

The whole film is something difficult to put into words, as usual from Cronenberg,. It's an experience, an uncomfortable, awkward and mesmerizing experience.

Vija Kinsky: The more visionary the idea, the more people it leaves behind.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews