Genres

Visitors Review

fred-83 2013-05-21 22:26:35

One of Cronenbergs finest moments

I have very fond memories of this film, I first saw it as a kid and was veryimpressed by the gory effects. Rewatching it numerous times since then it´sstill a special kind of movie experience, the hypnotic atmosphere enhancedby Shore´s brilliant score, the dreamlike quality of the plot, StephenLack´s static acting which I think work in the movies favour, and MichaelIronside in one of his best roles. I´m totally absorbed into this movieevery time I see it, and I think it´s one of Cronenbergs triumphs,establishing him as a director with a unique, original vision. With thefilmmarket now flooded with bland, predictable Hollywood nonsense, I´llrather watch SCANNERS again.

bob the moo 2013-05-21 18:06:43

Could have been stronger in several key areas but is still worth seeing

Within "normal" society exists a new breed of person who possesstelepathic powers. They are small in number but their powers makes themvery dangerous – but also very powerful in the hands of the rightpeople. Dr Paul Ruth runs a secretive programme trying to develop thepower into a weapon but he only has one recruit – Cameron Vale. WhenRuth's programme is violently attacked by scanner Darryl Revok, theyrealise that the battle is being lost and they prepare Vale to goundercover, in filtrate Revok's group and lead them to him.As everyone and their dog knows, this film is always talked about forthe infamous scene near the start where we are first shown the power ofthe scanners, however there are many scenes across the whole film thatare just as strong as that one. The opening scene is powerful as itshows the ability Vale has and the lack of control he has over it whilethe scene where Revok escapes capture is even more sinister andgripping. This pretty much carries across the whole film although thereare some slows spots and parts of the story that don't hang together aswell as they should. Cronenberg is famous for his body horror but hedoes do tension well and here he is solid when called upon. The lowbudget does show through at times but mostly it is good.The acting is a little bit ropey though, which is maybe where thelimitations do show through. Lack is OK but he isn't anything special –he can say his lines well enough and not fall over while walking but hecan't bring out much more below the surface than that. He reminded meof the old b-movie matinée stars who have good jaws but not much else.McGoohan is better and his presence is welcome in his scenes. Ironsideis hammy but enjoyable perhaps not having as much screen time as Iwould have liked but effective when he is. The support is mostly prettyaverage, O'Neill is OK but the rest are so-so and are sometime amusingas they get scanned.Overall though this is a classic cult film. The plot moves forward wellenough although I would have liked more real life commentary fromCronenberg above the general "mental illness" metaphor that it acts asbut his direction otherwise is good. The cast are mostly only OK butthey do enough to keep the story moving while moments of horror andtension are well served up. Could have been better in several key areasbut is still worth seeing.

Miyagis_Sweaty_wifebeater 2013-05-20 19:55:34

David Cronenberg's Scanners!

Scanners (1981) was another one of David Cronenberg's "body in revolt"films. This one deals with people that have telepathic and telekineticabilities. Not your average horror film because it's quite heady.That's what I like about Cronenberg, not only does he make greatpsychological horror/thrillers but he makes you think. Nothing is spoonfeed to you. The splatter effects have given this movie it's muchdeserved place in one of the best horror set pieces ever made. Twoscenes stand out the most. After watching this film you'll understandwhy gore hounds love this movie.The only part of this movie that I would have changed would have beenthe lead. Mr. Lack was okay but I felt that Cronenberg could have foundan actor with more experience. Michael Ironside was chilling, ice ranthrough his veins. This movie made his career as a movie heavy.Jennifer O'Neill was nice to look at and fit in well. A strongstoryline and good directing made this one a must see.I was very impressed with this movie. The soundtrack was apt for themovie.I haven't watch this film in awhile. But after seeing it on D.V.D.recently, I'm still a big fan of Scanners. Sadly I'm not too fond ofthe sequels. A+If you love heady horror films this is a must see.

no-skyline 2013-05-20 01:18:29

You ever see the bit in scanners where that dudes head explodes?

If you read the plot to this film - telepathic humans in societyrunning amok you'd be forgiven for thinking it'd be another piece oflow budget, late night sci-fi trash. Look above the titles however andyou'll see the name David Cronenberg and now we know we're going to begetting something better than that.Cronenberg has always been obsessed with 'body horror' and in Scannershe expands on the theme as scanners enter each others mind and body.It's fairly low budget but Cronenberg uses what he has well and MichaelIronside and Patrick McGoohan put in very good performances. StephenLack had a difficult role that of someone with no personality and doesOK but not great.Its the harsh, unsettling and oppressive atmosphere that Cronenbergmanages to sustain that really makes this movie standout.Interesting and entertaining 7/10

the narrator 2013-05-18 00:11:25

Good, but not enough head explosions!

This movie was good, but I would have enjoyed it more if it was more of agorefest. This has the classic scene where the guys head blows up in slowmotion at the meeting. That scene is worth the rental price alone, justdon't watch it after (or before dinner). 7.5/10.

tliebe 2013-05-17 15:33:42

Cronenberg's Schlockiest--and Most Accessible--Film

It may be cheesy of me to prefer David Cronenberg's earlier horror films tohis later "art" cinema. However, I feel the genre's constraints focused himin a way that his later adaptations of Burroughs' THE NAKED LUNCH orBallard's CRASH never could. By including thought-provoking themesinvolvingrampant technology, bodily corruption, sexual mores/roles and alienationinto "schlock" movies about killer mutant babies, face-sucking leeches or(literally) mind-blowing telepaths, Cronenberg succeeded in making thepoints he wished to much more clearly (and entertainingly) than he has inthe past decade.SCANNERS is the closest Cronenberg has come to making a plain old-fashionedcommercial drive-in movie. It's not as poignant as either THE DEAD ZONE orTHE FLY (his two best films), nor as clearly the work of a brilliantfilmmaker as VIDEODROME, DEAD RINGERS or CRASH are (but as I said in myCRASH review, it's a cold brilliance which gives audiences little to hangonto except for some inspired, disturbing images). It's also not lame,unlike FAST COMPANY which could have been directed by an ex-television hacklike Jack Smight or Jeannot Szwarc.SCANNERS fulfills the aphorism of "imagination" as "intelligence havingfun". It's smart schlock with its fantasification of the FiftiesThalidomidebaby scandal and Cain & Abel climax, along with enough subthemes strewnabout willy-nilly (the Scanner collective/halfway house, a Scanner'sabilityto hack computer networks with just his mind and a phone line, theinabilityof Scanners to integrate into normal society without either medication orintense training) to create a whole raft of (usually lame) sequels. But atcore, it's unashamed schlock moviemaking about a bunch of people with theability to read your mind--and blow it up real good if they're in the moodto!--chasing, shooting and mentally tossing each otheraround.Okay, so male lead Steven Lack is about as bad an actor as you'll find thisside of XXX porn, female lead Jennifer O'Neill isn't much better, andRobertSilverman's crazy Scanner artist is either the worst (or most inspired!)performance you've seen in a while. Also, cramming so much into a hair over100 minutes makes most of the dialogue sounds like translated comic-bookspeech balloons (Security Head pointing gun at Computer Programmer: "Here'syour authorization!").However, both Patrick McGoohan and Michael Ironside give excellentperformances (even if Ironside gets a little *too* over-the-top in theclimax), the production credits are impressively first-rate for amodestly-budgeted feature, there are a couple justly-famous (or notorious,depending on how you feel about gore) scenes, and a lot to chew onafterwards. What more could you want?I've seen this film several times, enjoyed it immensely and found moredepthto it each time. I wish that Cronenberg would come back and make a sequelofhis own following the themes he touched on here.

John Lindsey 2013-05-14 00:25:09

Excellent 1981 Science-Fiction movie.

This masterpiece from David Cronenberg is a Horror/Thriller andaSci-fi Suspense all combined. It's about Telepathic Beingscalled" Scanners" who have a unique power that can let them communicateeach other in the brain and to sometimes give those who abusethema Deadly Seizure resulting in Exploding Heads. A youngScannernamed " Vale" ( Stephen Lack) who is sent by a Scientistnamed" Ruth" ( played by Braveheart's Patrick McGoohan) to destroyadeadly criminal Scanner named " Revok" ( Michael Ironside)whoplans on Mutating the entire world with his Chemicals.It'sgot enough Suspense and gore to keep you awake.Recommendations: Akira, Carrie, Firestarter, Roland Emmerich'sMaking Contact, Re-Animator, C.H.U.D., X-Men, The Matrix,DarkCity, Day of the Dead, Dawn of the Dead, and The Stuff.

2013-05-13 09:37:34

The Classics Return

This review is from: Scanners (DVD) How well I remember seeing this movie at the movie theater when I was a kid. It was exciting and thrilling at the same time. It was GREAT reliving those feelings and this story.

Walter Chaw 2013-05-05 02:11:12

The film is awkward and, at its worst, listless and meandering.

2013-05-04 12:09:31

classic

classic movie most have seen, one of my favorites if you never have seen this check it out,has one of the best head explosion scenes.

seric26 2013-05-02 20:22:29

A genre classic

One of Cronenberg's greatest strengths is how fully he commits to hisvision: there are portions of this film that don't seem to track, or thatjump around rather obviously as they try to generate mystery and suspense.And it doesn't matter, because if you accept Cronenberg's own skewed logicabout his major themes (identity/erasure, biology/technology,isolation/socialization) it all makes some kind of sense.He's hampered here by a very uneven cast. Jennifer O'Neill is beautiful,butnot a major actress. Others are hammy in their eccentric character roles.Patrick McGoohan and Micheal Ironsides steal the show as dotty inventorandmad villain, respectively. At the center of it all, Stephen Lack is acomplete blank slate with terrible line delivery and timing. Cronenbergalmost gets away with it, though, because he's playing a character who, asO'Neill's Kim says, is "barely human" anyway, a derelict under theprotection of a biotech company.The psychic stuff is played super-straight, with Lack's Cameronoverwhelmedby his ability to "connect his own nervous system to another's", Kim waryinher use of her Scanner abilities, and Ironsides' Revok an abuser whorelishes the damage he can cause.You may find it incredulous when he connects himself to a hopelesslyold-fashioned computer system at one point (because, as McGoohan's Dr.Ruthexplains, "computers also have nervous systems"), but you can't deny thepower with which Cronenberg films even this shaky sequence. Because hebelieves so fully in his story, so will you.Plus, for horror fans, effects and plot-points from this movie inspiredcountless scenes in later films (and not just in the sequels to this one).Aclassic.

2013-05-02 10:11:10

Disgusting, distasteful movie:(

This movie is too gross to be taken seriously. I thought it was meaningless ( what entertainment does it provide us ). Was it made to make us lose our lunches? It was disgusting. The so-called "scary music" was phony and lame. The acting is HORRIBLE, and the special effects are cheesy and awkward. This movie isn't worth the dirt of my shoes. It's totally gross.

2013-04-28 02:13:28

Mind-Blowing

Wow!"Scanners" is a classic of horror.It has all the goods.The pacing is perfect.The score and sound effects are perfect.The acting and cinematography are excellent.Great plot.If you like gore, it's in there.Some might call this "dated",but trust me, it stands the test of time.Who needs fancy-schmancy high tech effects?Who needs gratuitous skin,sex and toilet humor?Not David Cronenberg.I have not seen "The Brood" or "Rabid" yet,but I certainly intend to.I love horror cinema and have seen manyfilms from all periods and from all overthe world and this is a keeper in my opinion.There are some people, scanners,who have a form of ESP that allows them to read peoples minds and to projectdestructive power and mind-control on others.The ability is a burden and can be controlledonly when under the influence of a particular drug.Who are they? How did they become that way?Will this power be used for good or ill?All these questions and more will be answered when you view the movie.

lostgallifreyan 2013-04-27 18:01:16

Hmmm.. :) Very hmmmm...

Magnificently bad! And you won't have to see it all to get the best outof it, I reckon the first 6 minutes or so will do. I guess if you enjoygurning competitions you might want to see more.The exploding head scene is fun, it starts out with the guy lookinglike John Cleese about to throw a fit, then he pops like a nice bigliver-filled red balloon, loudly. Three rewinds to view theastoundingly unbespattered white desk and headless corpse mysteriouslyAWOL, and I'd laughed enough to know to quit while I was ahead. :) Theacting at the start is odd, anyone who's seen any of the representedfeelings and states of living will know these for the awful clichésthat they are. To be fair, there's a scientist who should have beenenlisted to play the Master in Doctor Who, but the rest look likerelics from movies and attitudes 10 years earlier than when the moviewas made, or more likely a slightly dim-witted idea of those times.I can't comment on the rest of the thing, as I didn't want to see anymore.

sippasi 2013-04-27 11:14:49

Scanners...ahead of time!!!

Scanners is a story about little group of people, which have a specialtalent to Scan people. Thats the plot in shortly (Of course there is also abad Scanners and good Scanners).First i have to say that this movie really is a horrorclassic,and Scanners was ahead of time just like Lang'S Metropolis.This movie was a Cronenberg's major break out but it wasn't the best. Imyself like better Cronenberg's Rabid and Brood, also Naked Lunch is verygood. But i was writing about Scanners so...Scanners idea is great and the scenes where a two scanners fightin the end is marvelous, and also the classic cult scene where the headexplodes (Bad headache) is great. Special effects are really incredible andalso ahead of time (Scanners was made at 1981, if you didnt know). But whereis the bizarre Cronenberg (I dont mean that Scanners isnt bizarre at allbut).If the Scanners would had a little more better plot and more bizarrebio-scifi influence id would be so much better.But its stil great!!!

Jake Euker 2013-04-26 20:42:49

Cronenberg's obsession with making the human insides visible begins here.

2013-04-20 09:45:43

Mind Reading Can Be Murder

Michael Ironside is head of an underground group of Scanners - mutants whose thoughts can literally kill. He's got a major grudge match going on with the government goons who made him, and the two groups have been engaged in a private little war that slipperily elusive Patrick McGoohan wants to end. McGoohan brings in unaware Scanner Stephen Lack and clues him in as to what he is, and why he keeps hearing other people's voices in his head. Lack becomes McGoohan's secret agent, sent out to be recruited by Ironside's group and get the goods on them from the inside.The film is uneven and a bit slow, but heavy on suspense and pretty good special effects - which are extraordinarily shocking and violent. Lack is a little wooden as the hero of the piece, but is credible and sympathetic. McGoohan plays the role he always plays - the less-than-forthcoming, smoothly sly double-dealer - and he does it well. The ever-lovely Jennifer O'Neill is Lack's fearful and reluctant helper and love interest. Ironside, who frequently plays underspoken heavies, is at his quietly unsettling best as Lack and McGoohan's psychotic quarry.This is a very well done Canadian low-budgeter, as effective today as when it was made almost a quarter of a century ago. It was the first of the government-created-human-psychic-weapons pieces to follow The Fury, the one that started it all, and is generally better than that film though not as slick.

atinder 2013-04-19 11:53:25

Why have you not see this movie ?

Cameron Vale is at a mall. Vale is eating leftover rood from other.Vale psychically overhears two women talking about him, when suddenlyone of them start to convulse. Without knowing he is responsible forthis, Vale attracts the attention of two guys.One of men were Dr. Paul Ruth tells Cameron Vale that is he Scanner,which means he has powerfully intense telepathic and telekineticabilities and also tells others like Him, Cameron also tells him he canhe voice in head which can stop with a Drug called Ephemerol.Then Dr. Paul tells Cameron to go and find Darryl Revok who is alsoScanner that is killed number of people.This movie something brand new for 80's which I don't think anyone haddone before, This movie was really entertaining, the movie had reallyfast pace, it didn't get boring at all. it had some really great goryscenes which I really enjoyed watching.The deaths scenes in this movie were outstanding with the makeupeffects and special effects were great and the acting from the wholecast was really good.This as got to be one of the best horror/goriest movie ever, I goinggive this movie a 9 out of 10

jzappa 2013-04-17 06:14:49

Great Gory Schlocky Fun of Various Possible Interpretations

Scanners does not have the gloomy intimacy of Cronenberg's hauntingwork since, like eXistenZ, A History of Violence or Eastern Promises,even those which shortly followed like The Dead Zone, The Fly, NakedLunch. But it does have an intellectual drive that makes itscheesiness, often characterized as even laughable, almost disappear.Scanners succeeds The Brood, another early Canadian production by the"body horror" maestro where Cronenberg, as he is here as well to somedegree, is still finding that very abstract and even ineffable pitchthat would build through his latter succession of films. These two longfor the magnified emotional impact of his physiologically andsymbolically mutant subjects, but in Scanners, he is realizing thepower of Howard Shore's haunting orchestral strains.Scanners created a cult following I think because the story, about acorporation that attempts to use people with telepathic and telekineticabilities for its own megalomaniacal agenda, allows for more of anaction movie than a psychodrama. Michael Ironside gives one of the mosteery and expressive performances as a telekinetic fugitive who does notspeak that much, probably because he has a much morebottom-line-oriented manner of getting his point across. There is alsoa very dubious performance by Patrick McGoohan, who has much stoiccharacter in his face. Many characters are on the run, and rather thanshootouts and full-contact physical struggles, they fend off theirpursuers and the advocates of them with mental power to explode theirheads among other things. It has that graphically violent,blood-and-guts sci-fi action charm that guys who flock to such fareyearn for, but are instead only vaguely fulfilled by myriad extravagantspecial effects cash-ins.For all its goofy outdated sound effects and the overall look of theschlock of its era, Scanners does have a high mind. The dialogue is allintelligent and realistic. The pace is actually quite deliberate. Thesequalities instantly set it apart from De Palma's schlocky rendition ofCarrie, Stephen King's popular telekinetic revenge tale.However---though I've always thought that Cronenberg and De Palma, intheir respective idiosyncrasies and obsessions, are diametricallyopposed in style and approach to such elements of either---De Palma'saudience seems to often be discriminate against Cronenberg's films, anda good way of intermingling audiences to diversify the viewerexperience could be to pair The Fury, another De Palma film of the late1970s involving telekinesis and a power-hungry exploitation of it, withthis film. They both have a great sense of suspense, spectacle andsurprise. But one is purely surface grace and the other has a well ofpossible interpretations. Fans of both directors should get togetherand delineate which one is which.

General_Cromwell 2013-04-16 21:54:59

more mainstream but still very much a Cronenberg film

Cronengergs first film that was accessible to a mass audience,and morescience fiction than horror.Not to take anything away from Scanners,this isan excellent film,and still very much a Cronenberg one.Featuring anotherfailed medical marvel,this time Ephemerol,a drug for pregnant women that hasa side-effect that causes their babies to be born as scanners.The film alsofeatures other Cronenberg traits,like shady organizations,weird reclusivecharacters,and some startlingly nasty make up effects,the best being theinfamous exploding head sequence,that has never been equalled.The film iswell paced and moves fast,with a clever intelligent script.The only let downis the lead performance from Stephen Lack.Aptly named since he lacks anyacting ability whatsoever!Thankfully the other performances are topnotch.Patrick Macgoohan is reliably good,as is Michael Ironside who gives ariveting and intense performance,as Revok.Howard Shore provides a superbelectronic score to a film that added to Cronenbergs already impressiveoutput.