Well - sometime back in the early '90s I saw that a minor local theater was showing something called "Tetsuo - The Bodyhammer". It claimed to be comic book-like, and being a comic collector, I went to see it. It was really weird, with not much of a clear narrative. It was about a guy who could shoot rusty iron from his hands. Or something. It's a long time since I saw it. Anyway, it turns out it was the sequel to the earlier "Tetsuo - The Iron Man", which is apparently a huge cult classic and a milestone in surrealist cinema.
Last night, I watched The Iron Man with some friends. I'm generally not into horror, nor horrific surrealism, and sure enough, I did not enjoy watching this movie. I was grateful that it was only an hour long. However, I do pride myself on being an appreciator of art movies, and although I thought this movie was mostly just a piece of artsy self-indulgence, I have to say it is interesting and difficult to come up with a good interpretation.
Several possible interpretations struck me as I watched it, and the other user comments here also mention some of them. Was it a movie about trans-humanism; about how our carnal vessels are nothing but trouble and we should replace them with superior, adaptable, changing metal bodies? Or, was it about fear of invasive technology which alienates and dehumanizes us, leaving us without compassion and conscience? A modern Kafkaesque Metamorphosis? Or, was it a tale of a traumatic homosexual awakening, which in fact many elements of the movie suggest? And, what about the ending? Were the characters good or evil by the end? Was the movie hostile to technology or positive towards it? Opinions are divided, possibilities are endless. The only thing definite that I and my friends could come up with was that the movie chronicles some kind of transition. A deeply stressful, traumatic and accidentally triggered transition which includes all sorts of aspects of human life. But a transition which concludes in a new state of happiness. Perhaps the movie is simply a general description of the human condition, and our passage from one set of circumstances to another - perhaps the change from natural man to technological man.
It is to the movie's credit that there are so many possible interpretations, but I do wonder how much of it is true art, and how much of it is simply the director's fascination with weird effects. Still, it is certainly an art movie, and cannot be dismissed as trivial. It wasn't very enjoyable to me - noisy, ugly, repulsive, confusing. I understand that these are the tools with which the movie makes its point, but this is just not my idea of effective entertainment, artistic or otherwise.
7 out of 10.
Last night, I watched The Iron Man with some friends. I'm generally not into horror, nor horrific surrealism, and sure enough, I did not enjoy watching this movie. I was grateful that it was only an hour long. However, I do pride myself on being an appreciator of art movies, and although I thought this movie was mostly just a piece of artsy self-indulgence, I have to say it is interesting and difficult to come up with a good interpretation.
Several possible interpretations struck me as I watched it, and the other user comments here also mention some of them. Was it a movie about trans-humanism; about how our carnal vessels are nothing but trouble and we should replace them with superior, adaptable, changing metal bodies? Or, was it about fear of invasive technology which alienates and dehumanizes us, leaving us without compassion and conscience? A modern Kafkaesque Metamorphosis? Or, was it a tale of a traumatic homosexual awakening, which in fact many elements of the movie suggest? And, what about the ending? Were the characters good or evil by the end? Was the movie hostile to technology or positive towards it? Opinions are divided, possibilities are endless. The only thing definite that I and my friends could come up with was that the movie chronicles some kind of transition. A deeply stressful, traumatic and accidentally triggered transition which includes all sorts of aspects of human life. But a transition which concludes in a new state of happiness. Perhaps the movie is simply a general description of the human condition, and our passage from one set of circumstances to another - perhaps the change from natural man to technological man.
It is to the movie's credit that there are so many possible interpretations, but I do wonder how much of it is true art, and how much of it is simply the director's fascination with weird effects. Still, it is certainly an art movie, and cannot be dismissed as trivial. It wasn't very enjoyable to me - noisy, ugly, repulsive, confusing. I understand that these are the tools with which the movie makes its point, but this is just not my idea of effective entertainment, artistic or otherwise.
7 out of 10.