Friday, November 25, 2011

Shivers: David Cronenberg


Let me just say this about David Cronenberg's Shivers: I cannot BELIEVE that this film was shot on actual 35mm film stock. Allow me to explain. Shivers looks and feels like a cheap, shot-on-video horror film from the 70s and 80s. Everything...the lighting, the cinematography, the sets, and the acting...all feel like they are from an independently produced direct-to-video sleezefest. And yet, according to IMBD, the film was shot on 35mm. But such is part of the appeal of Shivers: it looks and feels like a low-budget horror film because it WAS a low-budget horror film. Shot on a budget of around C$179,000, David Cronenberg had to cut every corner imaginable in order to complete this film. And yet, the film succeeds to be oppressively atmospheric and genuinely shocking. The film takes place in an ultra-modern, totally self-sufficient apartment building outside Montreal. An insane scientist has accidentally released a deadly parasite that attaches itself to a victim and turns them into mindless sex zombies. The parasite doubles as an aphrodisiac, causing its hosts to go on raping sprees which allow the parasite to spread to other people. It's up to the apartment's resident physician, Roger St. Luc and his assistant nurse to stop the parasitic invasion before it can escape the complex and spread to the rest of the world. I'll be honest, this film is surprisingly well made. It relies much more on suspense and atmosphere than outright gore. The few creature effects are well made and convincing. But Cronenberg's true triumph is how he manages to turn the apartment complex, a building designed to completely protect its inhabitants, into a trap instead of a haven. Shivers is not for the faint of heart. There are several graphic and group rape scenes which, despite being well shot, are nauseating to watch. There are a lot of obvious plot holes, most noticably in how the afflicted seem to transition willy-nilly between being uncontrollable sex-monsters and seeming capable of normal, rational behavior. This was Cronenberg's first feature film, and it shows. The screenplay, also written by Cronenberg, is clunky and cluttered, introducing too many characters simultaneously while doing too little to distinguish them. It's a good first effort. Thankfully, Crononberg would learn from his mistakes and go on to release some of the most revered (and disturbing) horror movies of all time.

6/10

2 comments:

  1. I haven't seen all of Cronenberg's films but of the ones I've seen I'd say this his weakest. I still liked it and as you said it was a solid effort for a first film and he certainly got better. I think this film is a bit ahead of its time as modern audiences could see it as an AIDS metaphor despite being released before that (sure there were other STDs before that but not with the same paranoia and media attention). The parasites themselves reminded me of a cross between the facehuggers and baby aliens from Alien, which again this movie came out a few years before.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Really? I saw the parasites as...well...giant slugs. But I know what you mean.

    ReplyDelete