[go: up one dir, main page]

    Kalender veröffentlichenDie Top 250 FilmeDie beliebtesten FilmeFilme nach Genre durchsuchenBeste KinokasseSpielzeiten und TicketsNachrichten aus dem FilmFilm im Rampenlicht Indiens
    Was läuft im Fernsehen und was kann ich streamen?Die Top 250 TV-SerienBeliebteste TV-SerienSerien nach Genre durchsuchenNachrichten im Fernsehen
    Was gibt es zu sehenAktuelle TrailerIMDb OriginalsIMDb-AuswahlIMDb SpotlightLeitfaden für FamilienunterhaltungIMDb-Podcasts
    OscarsEmmysSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideToronto Int'l Film FestivalIMDb Stars to WatchSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAlle Ereignisse
    Heute geborenDie beliebtesten PromisPromi-News
    HilfecenterBereich für BeitragendeUmfragen
Für Branchenprofis
  • Sprache
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Anmelden
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
App verwenden
  • Besetzung und Crew-Mitglieder
  • Benutzerrezensionen
  • Wissenswertes
  • FAQ
IMDbPro

Crimes of the Future

  • 1970
  • Not Rated
  • 1 Std. 3 Min.
IMDb-BEWERTUNG
4,7/10
3434
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Crimes of the Future (1970)
SatireKomödieScience-Fiction

Crimes of the Future schildert die Irrfahrten von Tripod, dem zeitweiligen Leiter einer dermatologischen Klinik namens Haus der Haut, der auf der Suche nach seinem Mentor, dem verrückten Der... Alles lesenCrimes of the Future schildert die Irrfahrten von Tripod, dem zeitweiligen Leiter einer dermatologischen Klinik namens Haus der Haut, der auf der Suche nach seinem Mentor, dem verrückten Dermatologen Antoine Rouge, ist.Crimes of the Future schildert die Irrfahrten von Tripod, dem zeitweiligen Leiter einer dermatologischen Klinik namens Haus der Haut, der auf der Suche nach seinem Mentor, dem verrückten Dermatologen Antoine Rouge, ist.

  • Regie
    • David Cronenberg
  • Drehbuch
    • David Cronenberg
  • Hauptbesetzung
    • Ronald Mlodzik
    • Jon Lidolt
    • Tania Zolty
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • IMDb-BEWERTUNG
    4,7/10
    3434
    IHRE BEWERTUNG
    • Regie
      • David Cronenberg
    • Drehbuch
      • David Cronenberg
    • Hauptbesetzung
      • Ronald Mlodzik
      • Jon Lidolt
      • Tania Zolty
    • 25Benutzerrezensionen
    • 38Kritische Rezensionen
    • 58Metascore
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • Fotos44

    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    + 38
    Poster ansehen

    Topbesetzung23

    Ändern
    Ronald Mlodzik
    Ronald Mlodzik
    • Adrian Tripod
    Jon Lidolt
    Tania Zolty
    Paul Mulholland
    Jack Messinger
    Iain Ewing
    William Haslam
    Raymond Woodley
      Stefan Czernecki
      Rafe Macpherson
      Willem Poolman
      Don Owen
      Udo Kasemets
      Bruce Martin
      Brian Linehan
      Leland Richard
      Stephen Zeifman
      Norman Snider
      • Regie
        • David Cronenberg
      • Drehbuch
        • David Cronenberg
      • Komplette Besetzung und alle Crew-Mitglieder
      • Produktion, Einspielergebnisse & mehr bei IMDbPro

      Benutzerrezensionen25

      4,73.4K
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10

      Empfohlene Bewertungen

      4TheLittleSongbird

      Dermatological strangeness

      Have become a great admirer of David Cronenberg and find his films and style interesting. His films are unsettling and the subjects that he chooses to explore are very difficult ones, but that is what makes him and his films interesting. Most are good to brilliant and none of them for me are terrible or irredeemable (though a few disappointed). A few too belong in the appreciate rather than love category.

      There were directors that started off shakily, Stanley Kubrick for example started with his worst film 'Fear and Desire'. Cronenberg was one of those directors, with this and 'Stereo', before improving significantly with 'Shivers'. Which wasn't perfect, but explored the major theme of sexual exploration and consciousness of mind that was introduced in 'Stereo' much better and the other five or so after doing the theme even better than that. Found his first great film to be 'The Brood' and his best films 'The Fly' and 'Dead Ringers'. After seeing 'Stereo' and 'Crimes of the Future' not far apart only recently, it is hard to decide which was worse between those two. None of them are unwatchable, but for Cronenberg they were both underwhelming and the flaws in both films are exactly the same.

      Beginning with the good things, 'Crimes of the Future' doesn't look too bad at all for early Cronenberg and for a film made on a low budget. Actually thought it was one of the better-looking early Cronenberg films and feel the same with 'Stereo', both look better than 'Shivers' and 'Rabid' despite both of those films being better overall. The photography shows inexperience at times but mostly is quite skillful and atmospheric. The location does have a good deal of unsettlement, if not as eerie as 'Stereo' and the lighting adds a lot to the atmosphere.

      Some interesting diverse themes here in 'Crimes of the Future' (but they were explored in much more detail and more compellingly in other films). Intriguing concept, Ronald Mlodzik is surprisingly hauntingly nuanced and the ending is memorable.

      On the other hand, the flaws that were in 'Stereo' are not improved upon, other than the acting being marginally better (not saying much for most, got the sense their hearts weren't in it properly) and that it was a little less confused. That's pretty much it for the improvements. Found it to be very dull, going at too slow a pace for a story that was pretty slight, making a very short length feel longer. Too many overlong and drawn out scenes are the problem in this regard. Also felt that it was too clinical and emotionally distant, usually do feel something watching Cronenberg whether it's being disturbed, being amused at some dark wit or being moved. This is a not so common case of feeling nothing in a Cronenberg film.

      Cronenberg's direction is similarly clinical and it comes over as bland apart from being relatively technically sound. Despite saying that the slight story was less confused, again that was actually not saying much either because it is still muddled and one may have to ask anybody who's watching it with them what's going on and they are likely to not know. The dialogue is self-indulgent and eccentric and the over-use and over-complicated (the writing here not the delivery, the delivery is infinitely better here) feel present in the narration of 'Stereo' is here too at times if not as much. One never cares for the characters, who come and go a lot which confuses the narrative. Then there is the soundtrack/sound effects, which sometimes was not necessary and often went overboard on the weirdness.

      In conclusion, an interesting failure that is still worth a one time watch. 4/10
      5lost-in-limbo

      The ticking mind of Cronenberg.

      Aaron Tripod is studying a patient at a clinic that can emit a chocolate like substance from his body, which people become compelled to eat. This occurred after nearly all the woman on earth died from a poisonous cosmetic. After the patient disappears Aaron moves onto another clinic where there are more people of that type being used by doctor for his own purposes and there's a secret lurking in the facility that can change the fate of this outcome.

      Just like the film before this: "Stereo", Cronenberg comes up with another experimental, art-film that combines his interest in literature and science. Especially that of the human body and sexual chemistry, where science tries to manipulate the genetic makeup somehow. On this particular film the style and story's context are very similar to "Stereo" with most of the cast and crew returning for this project. I actually found this one to be slightly better and one incredibly bizarre trip compared to his previous film. But for this experience you have to be in the right frame of mind that's for sure, as this one too goes for an hour, but there are many padded scenes with many slow stretches. But for me it didn't seem to drag that much. Again there's no dialogues, but there are some odd sound effects worked into the picture that sound like something out of nature (bird cries, ocean waves and even a sound like someone is blowing bubbles). This gave the film such a real anxiety, but at times it did get a bit overbearing. Also you got a fitting narration that's gives out an mildly stimulating outlook and provides at times a coherent plot device. This could be because a plethora of characters spring out and then suddenly disappear which makes the story rather uneven, as it changes course quite a bit. The static voice over is not as frequent here, but it's the actions and faces that mostly tell the story. Now the look of the film is where Cronenberg was at his best here and the budget was a tad higher for this outing, since now this one was shot in colour and production was of high quality with what he had to work with. Great use of composition and lighting, while the strong shapes in the background features added a huge imprint. Plus there was always little things going in the foreground that you catch a glimpse of. The film sustains a bare atmosphere, which has a emotionless, post-apocalyptic feel where everything is beyond redemption. The offbeat environment is filled with many surprises and the hypnotic images just flood the screen. The haunting conclusion stages one that's hard to forget. The camera-work here gives the film a third perspective and builds on the groundwork very well. Ronald Mlodzik's performance as Aaron Tripod is rather good and his expresses his actions in a clear and concise way. Cronenberg has come up with an far more accomplished effort on this occasion.

      This excursion I found strangely fascinating as you can easily see this as a stepping stool for Cronenberg to iron out those creases for future projects. He's obsession on the evolutionary process where sex and disease is controlled by science makes his work so unique. Again just like what I said on "Stereo", if you're looking for some entertainment, look elsewhere. But if you want to see the where the clinical influence and cold style for his most assessable work came from, there's no better place to start than here.
      7fred-83

      hypnotic

      This is an unusual filmic experience, hypnotic, trance-like, not totally rewarding but still fascinating. On the soundtrack you can only hear the narrator, strange noises (sounds of sea-creatures) and for some stretches, total silence. Signs of Cronenbergs weird imagination is present throughout the narrative. I especially liked the quite extraordinary concept of "creative cancer".The sterile, modernistic architecture lends the movie a strangely desolate, surreal tone and sets, at least my, imagination in motion. It´s like stepping into another reality, something Cronenberg has continued to achieve in the best of his subsequent movies. It´s an experimental film, but it succeeds in drawing the viewer into the picture, not solely with its narrative, but with its images and composition. In fact, it´s not unlike what Kubrick did, in much larger scope of course, with 2001. Recommended for Cronenberg fans, and those of you who aren´t afraid of something different.
      4ikonoklastik

      I love Cronenberg, but...

      This film, I believe, is only about 70 minutes long and succeeded in being one of the longest movies I have ever seen. I actually fell asleep for about 10 minutes toward the end. I appreciate this movie to an extent since the concept itself is interesting and the narration, when it happens, can be quite funny. But it gets old quickly. I think it is more interesting to remember than it is to watch. I view this movie and "Stereo" the same way. The narration is funny at times and has a very satirical and original style but it is not enough to keep one awake, let alone keep ones interest. I think the lack of sound is due to Cronenberg's laziness and lack of desire to do any recording and mixing. Maybe I should give him more credit than that. Maybe it was lack of funds and knowlege. After all he was paying for those out of his own pocket and was, to paraphrase his own words, still teaching himself how to make movies.
      8Captain_Couth

      Another early film from David Cronenberg.

      Crimes of the Future (1970) was made a year after Stereo and with a larger budget, Cronenberg came out with an even more bizarre film based around sex and human nature. In this film he takes his cold, clinical and dark view of the world a step further. A world filled with emotionless people who are devoid of individual thought and repressed beyond imagination. A doctor uses this to his advantage whilst sexually experimenting amongst patients within a mental hospital.

      This film is kind of hard to describe without giving away to much. But I found it to be comparable (somewhat) to THX 1138. In many ways you can compare the two. Cronenberg shot this faux documentary style accompanied by narration. The film reminded me of those videos that psychiatrists use when documenting extraordinary cases of psychosis and what not. Maybe that's what he trying to accomplish (if he was he succeeded). However some of the scenes in this movie are not for all viewers (those easily offended will be turned off by the subject matter).

      All in all it's a more polished film than Stereo and his film-making had matured. Cronenberg also experiments more with sound and editing. The technique he uses gives the viewers the impression that they're under a state of semi-hypnosis (I don't know if they'll appreciate that or not). A interesting experimental film.

      For fans only. Recommended.

      Mehr wie diese

      Stereo (Tile 3B of a CAEE Educational Mosaic)
      5,1
      Stereo (Tile 3B of a CAEE Educational Mosaic)
      10.000 PS - Vollgasrausch im Grenzbereich
      5,4
      10.000 PS - Vollgasrausch im Grenzbereich
      Parasiten-Mörder
      6,3
      Parasiten-Mörder
      Rabid - Der brüllende Tod
      6,3
      Rabid - Der brüllende Tod
      Die Brut
      6,8
      Die Brut
      M. Butterfly
      6,7
      M. Butterfly
      Crimes of the Future
      5,8
      Crimes of the Future
      Transfer
      4,4
      Transfer
      Naked Lunch
      6,9
      Naked Lunch
      Scanners - Ihre Gedanken können töten
      6,7
      Scanners - Ihre Gedanken können töten
      Spider
      6,7
      Spider
      The Death of David Cronenberg
      6,1
      The Death of David Cronenberg

      Verwandte Interessen

      Peter Sellers in Dr. Seltsam oder: Wie ich lernte, die Bombe zu lieben (1964)
      Satire
      Will Ferrell in Anchorman - Die Legende von Ron Burgundy (2004)
      Komödie
      James Earl Jones and David Prowse in Star Wars: Episode V - Das Imperium schlägt zurück (1980)
      Science-Fiction

      Handlung

      Ändern

      Wusstest du schon

      Ändern
      • Wissenswertes
        The film was shot without any sound recording because the 35mm camera made too much noise. The first-person voice-over and a few strange sound effects were added later.
      • Zitate

        Adrian Tripod: When Antoine Rouge disappeared, soon after he had himself contracted the disease which bears his name, we believe that he had preferred to die alone, in an exile only partially self-willed. Still, he on one occasion remarked that Rouge's malady could not possibly be fatal to Rouge, though it had already killed hundreds of thousands of women. And it is true that his death was confirmed only by certain authorities who had long wished for his death. Yet the Rouge, as my mentor and I were preternaturally close, and I feel sure that he no longer exists...

      • Verbindungen
        Featured in On Screen!: Shivers (2008)

      Top-Auswahl

      Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
      Anmelden

      FAQ14

      • How long is Crimes of the Future?Powered by Alexa

      Details

      Ändern
      • Erscheinungsdatum
        • 10. August 1984 (Vereinigte Staaten)
      • Herkunftsland
        • Kanada
      • Sprache
        • Englisch
      • Auch bekannt als
        • Преступления будущего
      • Drehorte
        • Massey College, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Kanada(interiors and exteriors at the beginning)
      • Produktionsfirma
        • Emergent Films Ltd.
      • Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen

      Box Office

      Ändern
      • Budget
        • 20.000 $ (geschätzt)
      Weitere Informationen zur Box Office finden Sie auf IMDbPro.

      Technische Daten

      Ändern
      • Laufzeit
        • 1 Std. 3 Min.(63 min)
      • Sound-Mix
        • Mono
      • Seitenverhältnis
        • 1.66 : 1

      Zu dieser Seite beitragen

      Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
      • Erfahre mehr über das Beitragen
      Seite bearbeiten

      Mehr entdecken

      Zuletzt angesehen

      Bitte aktiviere Browser-Cookies, um diese Funktion nutzen zu können. Weitere Informationen
      Hol dir die IMDb-App
      Melde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr InhalteMelde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr Inhalte
      Folge IMDb in den sozialen Netzwerken
      Hol dir die IMDb-App
      Für Android und iOS
      Hol dir die IMDb-App
      • Hilfe
      • Inhaltsverzeichnis
      • IMDbPro
      • Box Office Mojo
      • IMDb-Daten lizenzieren
      • Pressezimmer
      • Werbung
      • Jobs
      • Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen
      • Datenschutzrichtlinie
      • Your Ads Privacy Choices
      IMDb, ein Amazon-Unternehmen

      © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.