Psycho's Movie Reviews #301: Spider (2002)

Spider is a 2002 psychological thriller film produced and directed by David Cronenberg and based on the 1990 novel of the same name by Patrick McGrath, who also wrote the screenplay.

The film premiered at the 2002 Cannes Film Festival and enjoyed some media buzz; however, it was released in only a few cinemas at the year's end by distributor Sony Pictures Classics. Nonetheless, the film enjoyed much acclaim by critics and especially by Cronenberg enthusiasts. The film garnered a Best Director Award at the Canadian Genie Awards. The stars of the film, Ralph Fiennes and particularly Miranda Richardson, received several awards for their work in the film.

Plot

Spider is the story of Dennis Cleg, a schizophrenic man who has just been released from a mental institution. He is given a room in a halfway house catering to mentally disturbed people, ran by an unrelenting landlady, Mrs. Wilkinson. While in his new abode, he starts piecing together in his memory an apparently fateful childhood event.

Dennis roams the nearby derelict urban area and the local canal, and starts to relive a period of his childhood in 1950s London with his mother, Mrs. Cleg, and father, Bill Cleg. Here, he witnesses his father murder his mother by hitting her on the head with a spade with the passive support of a prostitute Yvonne he is involved with, who then moves into the house and is presented as his mother.

Now grown up, Dennis begins seeing Mrs. Wilkinson turn into the mistress from his childhood. He responds by using strands of yarn to form a web-like concoction in his room, and steals Wilkinson's keys to gain access to different rooms. Meanwhile, he begins to relive a memory from childhood where kills the mistress by using a similar web-like pulley mechanism to turn on the gas in the kitchen. However, the final shot appears to show his mother lying dead instead, implying it really was his mother all along, and the prostitute-mistress was a delusion. Dennis comes to this realization when he sneaks late one night into Mrs. Wilkinson's room, still seeing her alternatively as the mistress, and appears ready to kill her, but backs away after she turns back to normal and says, "What have you done?" He is then taken back to the asylum.

Production

During a Q&A session at the Kodak Lecture Series in May 2005, Cronenberg revealed that neither he, nor Fiennes, nor Richardson, nor the producers received any sort of salary during the shooting of the film. All chose to waive their salaries, so the money could be used to bankroll the under-funded production.

Release/Reception/Box Office

Review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a score of 85% based on reviews from 130 critics. The site's critical consensus reads, "Ralph Fiennes is brilliant in this accomplished and haunting David Cronenberg film." On Metacritic, the film had an average score of 83 out of 100, based on 35 reviews.

Roger Ebert gave the film 3/4 stars, writing, "The details of the film and of the performances are meticulously realized; there is a reward in seeing artists working so well. But the story has no entry or exit, and is cold, sad and hopeless. Afterward, I feel more admiration than gratitude." Nev Pierce from the BBC awarded the film 3/5 stars, calling it "dour, thoughtful, and oppressive". Stephen Holden from New York Times praised the film, calling it "as harrowing a portrait of one man's tormented isolation as the commercial cinema has produced." Peter Travers of The Rolling Stone awarded the film 3.5 out of 4 stars, writing, "What catches us in Spider‘s web — besides the indelible performances of Fiennes and Richardson — is the director’s sympathy with this freak man-child who struggles to order his confused memories into a kind of truth. That’s what makes Cronenberg a world-class provocateur: His movie gets under your skin." Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian rated the film 4/5 stars, calling it " an intensely controlled, beautifully designed and fascinatingly acted account of Patrick McGrath's original novel". Mike Clark from USA Today awarded the film 3/4 stars, commending the film's direction, cinematography, and performances, while also stating that it was not particularly "sizzling" as in his previous films The Fly and eXistenZ.

Budget $10 million

Box office $5.8 million

My Review

David Cronenberg was my main reason for seeing 'Spider'. While not one of my all time favourite directors, he is a very unique and truly admirable one and find a good deal to like about all his films. Even the ones that don't do a lot for me overall ('Stereo', 'Crimes of the Future', 'Cosmopolis'). Another main reason is the cast, with Ralph Fiennes and Miranda Richardson being fine actors, particularly Fiennes.

'Spider' also had a fascinating and ambitious concept (one of the most ambitious for a Cronenberg film), which is something that has always drawn me to Cronenberg. His tackling of difficult, challenging subjects and themes and mostly executing them in a way that unsettles. This is especially apparent in his 70s and 80s work. Some of his lesser work tends to be the ones that under-explore their subjects and come over as bland, though with two of his worst it was when he had not yet found his style. Anyway, the cast, Cronenberg and the concept are enough to draw anybody in. Was not sure whether it would be a good film or not, with the reviews here being so polarising although it was critically acclaimed and most Cronenberg enthusiasts at least appreciated it. To me, 'Spider' was a good film, no, a great film.

Can totally see why others won't like it as there are a couple of elements that will turn, and have turned, viewers off and test their patience. In my mind though, 'Spider' is one of Cronenberg's more underrated films and also among his better films (later efforts and overall), if not quite among his very best like 'The Fly', 'Dead Ringers' and 'Eastern Promises'. Perhaps his best since 'Dead Ringers', being the first film of his since that to be above the "respect rather than love" quality of the films between 'Naked Lunch' and up to this in a period where Cronenberg was moving away from the body horror that he pioneered.

It is a deliberate slow burner, and that is something that will, and has, put a fair share of people off. Although the opening sequence was captivating, with such a perfect marriage of beautifully and cleverly designed visuals and music, did think that the pace was too deliberate at first and momentum was really lacking with too much of it almost drawn out. Stuck with 'Spider' though because there was so much talent on board, with some Cronenberg regular collaborators among them, and so much going for it and thought that not giving it a chance by not finishing it was unfair.

That proved to be the right decision, as things did become significantly more interesting and investable. Being a film intended to unsettle and challenge the mind, 'Spider' certainly did both those things.

Visually, as almost always with Cronenberg (with a couple of exceptions, 'Shivers' and 'Rabid'), 'Spider' looks great. Full of audacious atmosphere and the cinematography and especially the editing are so clever, particularly in how they mirror Spider's thought process. Consider the collaboration of Cronenberg and Howard Shore to be one of the best and most consistent regular director-composer collaborations in film, don't think any differently here in 'Spider' judging from his truly haunting work. Cronenberg's direction is very accomplished and he really lets the film get under the skin, which it does do in a very disturbing way, while allowing one to sympathise with Spider.

A good script helps, and moving past the mumbling (an essential part of Spider's personality) having the author himself write the script proved a good move in by far one of the better source material to film Cronenberg films and there is a lesser feeling of over-ambitiousness here. An ambitious concept, executed uniquely and courageously and in a way that unsettled, challenged and moved as the harrowing unravelling and melancholic compulsion increased. What was original was the inner monologue device depicting Spider and past events, the story structure interwoven naturally and cohesively.

Fiennes is nothing short of amazing, chilling and moving so much with such telling body language and expressions that tell a huge amount. Richardson is in a tricky dual role, which she plays with adept ease and differentiates the two characters without overdoing or underplaying. Gabriel Byrne gives one of his better performances in a while up to this point, while Lynn Redgrave and John Neville do a lot with their roles.

Summarising, truly great but won't in any way hold anything against anybody who can't connect with it. 7/10