This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

A Major Disappointment

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

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.

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.

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.

(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.