Rabid

Remaking a movie by a guy who was talented enough to create one of the great all-time remakes is ballsy and almost bound to fail. Rabid is close to being a good remake but has too many issues for my liking.

The story: a beautiful fashion designer has a life-changing accident and is doomed to a future of ugliness, unless she undergoes an experimental operation which has unforseen side-effects for her and the city around her ...

It's a cool premise, as was with the original but the pacing is way off. It takes too long to get off the ground and then when it does, lacks focus and seems to be telling two distinct stories rather than one, whereas Cronenberg's movie has a much sharper narrative.

There are a few grisly scenes but not immensly eye-opening for something that really should have people squirming.

The lead actress is good and, on the whole, the acting is solid but let down in a few places by some support roles. The editing could be a lot slicker; some scenes just felt dragged out and irrelevant.

I think it's worth checking out if you like the original but I'd be surprised if many people hail this as a big success.

I'm a big David Cronenberg fan but I've always felt that Rabid was one of his weakest efforts. That the Soska twins chose this one to remake cannot be faulted. Since Cronenberg himself did a remake, let's not be overly judgmental. The twins do an okay job but don't really add anything to the original concept. I liked this Rabid slightly more than the original but neither of them are going to set the world on fire. All these low reviewers are hateful asshats. Watch and judge for yourself.

So what did I actually watch? I really don't know. I was hoping this movie would be at least a decent remake, or a good B movie. However, at the end I was just wondering WTF it was supposed to be. It's quite different from the original, but not as good, or thoughtful or provocative (I mean, the original lead was an adult movie actress, the new one is a beautiful, established soap opera actress pretending to be ugly).

It's shot well, features good SFX and gore, but many scenes look like their from a telenovela or CW YA TV show. The acting was atrocious at times, the story too convoluted. The last 20 minutes are totally bonkers, unexpected and, in my opinion, unnecessary. But I gotta give the Soskas respect for doing their own thing. Unsuccessfully, but still, they tried. I enjoyed their first feature 'Dead Hooker in a Trunk' a lot more.

I thought it was important to watch the original. I couldn't do that beforehand, but only after I watched the Soska sisters remake. But it is different in many aspects so it wasn't too bad doing it this way (I usually like to watch an original first and then the remake if I can). The effects here obviously up the ante, but the original had some great ones too.

One of the main differences here is that we get to learn our main actress first, before the inciting incident. This may feel like time wasted or as a nice little touch. Let's go for the latter. The Soskas do have an affinity for Cronenberg and you can tell. They also assembled a nice cast overall, even though someone like CM Punk (can't recall his real name) is quite a cardboard cutout and very cliche for example. But you can tell he has fun with his litle role as is anyone else involved.

The Soskas did change enough for it to make sense to watch both movies. So if you are into horror movies, and don't mind a bit of social commentary thrown in for good measure, you could do worse

They might be rabid horror fans, but the Soska sisters were a poor choice for directors of the first-ever remake of a David Cronenberg movie. Cronenberg is a true innovator of horror, having directed more than a few genuine classics; the Soska Sisters, (or 'Twisted Twins', as they like to market themselves) have one decent film to their name(s) - American Mary - the bulk of their output ranging from the mediocre (slasher sequel See No Evil 2) to the downright awful (Tarantino inspired exploitation trash Dead Hooker In A Trunk). Rabid is possibly their worst film yet.

Set in the world of high fashion, Rabid 2019's central character is Rose (Laura Vandervoort), an aspiring designer hoping to get her work noticed by her boss, Günter (Mackenzie Gray). One night, while leaving an event, Rose is involved in an accident that leaves her face horribly disfigured; however, after volunteering for revolutionary stem cell treatment, Rose's natural beauty is restored, and better still, Günter chooses her designs for his latest show. Life would be perfect if it wasn't for Rose's strange hallucinations, her newfound hunger for blood, and the vicious tentacle that lives in her armpit.

Clumsy direction, gimmicky editing, an overlong running time, obnoxious characters, a ham-fisted tribute to Cronenberg's Dead Ringers, and weak make-up effects all contribute to a hellish viewing experience, but what made this film really unbearable for me were the fashionistas and the models, all of whom could have come straight out of cult comedy Zoolander (or worse still, Zoolander 2). If I thought for a minute that the Soskas were going for giggles, then I would probably think better of the film, but I don't think this is the case: any laughs seem to be purely unintentional. Günter is an embarrassingly bad caricature -- Will Ferrell's Mugatu is positively normal by comparison -- and the scene where Rose slashes at a dress with scissors to realise her boss's vision would be genius if this were a satire. But it's not.

I honestly think that the Soska's believe their own hype, but as the film descends into asinine zombie territory, it becomes clearer and clearer that the twins have bitten off way more than they can chew. The final scene, in which Rose discovers the true horror of her condition, is let down by more terrible make-up effects and the directors' misguided belief that they have crafted a truly shocking movie. The only thing that is shocking about this film is that it got made in the first place.