Good movie but grossly overrated

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

First of all, in order to fully appreciate Spider it requires more than a single viewing - at least 2 are necessary. Secondly,if you grew up in England, especially London, that would have helped, as many of the idioms spoken in this film, eg 'wicking' (as used by Yvonne Wilkinson - meaning 'annoying') were very much around in 1950s London. There are some other parochial phrases used which would be lost on most Americans. Curiously, looking at the subtitles for Spider a lot of the phrases have been wrongly interpreted, (probably compiled by Americans).Anyway, the first time I saw this, I didn't really get it either. At the same time I felt I hadn't given this film a proper chance, and when I did decide to revisit it I realized what a subtle, if strange and depressing movie it was. I've watched this several times since and on each occasion it became more fascinating, gradually dawning on me how much I'd missed in some of the more suggestive and important scenes. Eg, how many viewing this for the first time recognized that the actress playing Yvonne Wilkinson flashing her breast at young Spider, was not Miranda Richardson, who played Yvonne in all the subsequent scenes. There was a good reason for that of course. Also I realized why the imposing gasometer structure seen by Spider from his bedroom window seemed to terrify him. There are plenty of other examples. Once you notice what you missed first time around and more, you can appreciate this film so much better.But most viewers do not have the time or patience these days to allow a 'slow' film like Spider to develop, so naturally Spider will never see the light of day again for those with a short attention span. That's their loss though. You can make films about mental illness in a more entertaining way - eg. A Beautiful Mind. But in the end Spider digs that much deeper. Full credit to David Cronenberg for having the balls to make such an unconventional film, yet brilliant study of the schizophrenic mind. And needless to say Ralph Fiennes performance as the confused, mumbling Spider is extraordinary.

I'm normally a fan of David Cronenberg, from his early body horror stuff to his more recent thrillers like A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, but SPIDER takes the biscuit. It's a plot less psychological drama featuring a gurning Ralph Fiennes doing his usual round of overacting in the role of a mentally handicapped guy haunted by events from his past. It's also one of the dullest movies I've watched.I don't mind a lack of incident in a narrative, but I ask for it to be replaced by other stuff: drama, mood, atmosphere, tension. None of that is present here. Instead this is one big slow-paced character/mystery/drama along the lines of THE MECHANIC, but nowhere near as good. The entire movie gradually unravels the mystery which is finally revealed at the climax, and it's so defunct and underwhelming that you end up feeling angry at having wasted your time sitting through it.It's a pity, because we all know what a great director Cronenberg is given the right material, and there are some decent actors in support here including Miranda Richardson, John Neville and Gabriel Byrne, so it's a shame they have so little to work with. SPIDER is a boring little movie that smacks of pretension.

* A stunning psychological thriller, with very unexpected turns, like in true thriller. However, the film avoids the horror trap, where the shocking scenes are the film's objective in itself. There are no such scenes in this film. * Though a thriller, yet not intended to be only that. Instead, it is an almost clinical, cold description of a schizophrenic. One almost feels what it is like to be a schizophrenic. This was so expressive that I had dreams the night after I saw the film, which I seldom have. * The film shows a deep human tragedy of the main character. However, it does not fall into the trap: "that poor mentally-disturbed human and that inhuman society which treats him as ... mentally-disturbed". * Summing up: - A brilliant thriller with a psychological depth, or rather a drama in a thriller setting. - But neither masterpiece of thriller nor masterpiece of drama. - With superb acting (R. Fiennes - main character) and direction (D. Cronenberg). - Leaves a deep, long-lasting impression and many questions to think about. - I could watch this film once more after some time.

A number of reviewers rate this movie as "the best ever" and "masterpiece" etc etc. The point is that this movie is listed as a thriller, so you expect a thriller but it is not. It's more like a very slow, did I say slow? I mean a very very very slow movie about a man that lost his mind as a child. Although the acting is quite good and the setting of the movie very authentic, the slow pace is just annoying. And yes, even if you are a real fan of cult,drama and historic films. Do not believe people so easily that announce "the plot and climax of the film are fantastic". Half way the movie you already know what happened and why, if you are a fan of mysteries and thriller books and movies. If you liked "The Machinist" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361862/) for example, don't expect to like this one or think that this is in the same genre.