Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #30029 in DVD
• Released on: 2004-07-26
• Rating: Suitable for 18 years and over
• Number of discs: 1
• Format: PAL
• Original language: English
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 110 minutes

Amazon.co.uk Review
You are now entering Interzone, William S Burroughs' phantasmagorical land of junk, paranoia and crawly things. Best travel advice: "Exterminate all rational thought". In David Cronenberg's superbly shot, unnerving warp on the Burroughs novel, Naked Lunch, the novelist himself becomes a main character (played in an implacable monotone by Peter Weller), with elements from Burroughs' life--including the shooting of his wife during a "William Tell" game, and bohemian friends Kerouac and Ginsberg--added to frame the book's wild visions. This is, ironically, a somewhat rational approach to an unfilmable book (and it makes a hair-curling double bill with Barton Fink, another look at writerly madness, with both films sharing Judy Davis). Cronenberg is a natural for oozing mugwumps and typewriters that turn into giant bugs, of course. But in the end, this is really his own vision of the artistic process, rather than Burroughs' hallucinatory descent into hell. --Robert Horton, Amazon.com

Synopsis
The dry wit of William S. Burroughs transfers surprisingly well to the screen, where a pest-control man seeking escape from his troubled existence flees to Interzone, a hallucinatory version of Tangiers, where reality and fantasy have merged. Peter Weller does a dead-on Burroughs impression, and the film follows a bizarre logic and has a dark, rich look that help make it one of Cronenberg's more satisfying works. It's not exactly Burroughs, but it is a strange, surreal landscape inhabited by half-alien, half-insect creatures and bizarre humans. And, like all other Cronenberg films it's a bit squishy; it is full of the biological dread that pervades all his films. Make no mistake, this film is not exactly faithful to the novel, and Cronenberg provides it with a neat framework, beginning and ending with Benway accidentally(

Customer Reviews

Out to Lunch
Less a literal translation of the novel (an almost impossible feat) more of a mood and feeling evoked by much of Burrough's work, Naked Lunch manages to be both perverse and witty in it's exploration of the dark arts at the heart of the twin worlds of writing and hard drugs. Taking extracts from many of Burroughs' books and staging the more surreal elements of the life of the man himself (the bizarre William Tell style shooting of his wife Joan, which happens to be true) Cronenberg's film covers all bases in it's attempt to portray accurately the genius of both the novel and the author. Even Kerouac and Ginsberg turn up in the guise of Willam Lee's fellow writers Hank and Marvin. The scene where the two try to piece together the fragments that would later become the novel in a Tangiers hotel room, while a seemingly disinterested and drunken Burroughs looks on, is particularly wonderful. The more visceral elements of the book are also displayed as the grotesque lizard-like creatures known as mugwumps that permeated Naked Lunch, come to life in true Cronenberg fashion. Many of Burrough's exquisitely written passages from a variety of sources are also developed upon, the unforgettable tale involving the Duc De Ventre's carriage (providing an example of his truly original black humour) as well as the moving piece on the author's discovery of his latent homosexuality are just two of many highlights. The acting is also notable, Roy Scheider as the ubiquitous Dr. Benway is a standout and Ian Holm's performance as the Paul Bowles-like character Tom Frost in particular. But it is Peter Weller who nails William Lee with a deadpan and dry-witted turn on whom so much of the film rests, and the actor manages to pull it off brilliantly (helped no doubt by the fact that he looks a lot like Burroughs). Highly recommended for fans of William Burroughs, Naked Lunch also happens to be director David Cronenberg's finest, achieving a rare psychological depth and insight that many of his more horror based films fail to. The DVD also features a superb LWT documentary on the making of ... as well as an interesting and informative interview with producer Jeremy Thomas.

Highly original
Like many previous Cronenberg outings 'Naked Lunch' deals with ideas on how by affecting the body, you alter your reality. In fact there probably wasn't a better director around who could so accurately evoke Burroughs visions.

Although 'Interzone' is set in Tangiers, the film crew had to shoot all the interiors in Toronto as North Africa was off limits during the first Gulf War. Films about writers usually involve a static quality where the writer spends a lot of their time in front of the typewriter. Cronenberg has made his writer live the hallucinatory situations that made him put pen to paper. 'Interzone' becomes William Lee's hallucinatory state of mind, where his writings are not just musings on past events, but 'reports' on everything he sees and experiences around him at that moment. Like Max Renn in 'Videodrome', Cronenberg sees Lee's imagination as a disease, as a mind constantly 'on', unable to turn off the constant stream of images that prevades his reality.

Cronenberg totally reshaped the original book for the screen, most noticably in playing down the homosexual aspects of the original novel. The 'bug powder' and the black stuff given to Lee by Dr. Benway were used as a euphamism for drugs. Obvious references to coke, heroin and crack weren't used so that there wouldn't be a 'Just Say No' campaign against the film. Although even if named drugs were overtly mentioned, it's difficult to see a mainstream audience coming to a movie like this. 'Naked Lunch' is unlike any movie you've seen before or anyone you're likely to see hence and for that reason alone, it's worth the admission price.

Close, but no cigar
First off, i haven't read the novel - which means i didnt go into this with ANY expectations or prior knowledge as to the content, ideas or visuals of the story. You could say i watched it ''cold''. Please don't get elitist on me! I do consider myself however, to be a David Cronenberg fan, so in that respect, i was anticipating something bizarre and frankly disgusting. I definately got my fair share of both.

I want to give a plot outline to start off, but in all honesty, I'm at a loss. Not necessarily a bad thing by the way. So all I can do is give it my best shot, and outline the narrative as i saw it, as simply as possible. Movies are supposed to be subjective right?

Ok, strap yourself in - a bug extermintor starts getting high on the insecticide he uses and gets arrested. In the police station, he hallucinates a giant bug informing him that his wife is an agent in Interzone Inc., and is ordered to kill her. He goes home, and kills his unfaithful wife, although I'm not sure if its an accident or not. He then flees to Interzone and starts writing up a report on his ''mission'' whilst his typewriters morph into more giant bugs, giving him another task to accomplish. That's pretty much it really, and in my opinion, the plot was incredibly thin and uninteresting, despite a pretty surprising conclusion. Sorry...

Having said that, I actually liked the film overall, but it wasn't as engaging or clever as it thought it was. The real plus point of the movie is its truly stunning visuals, blatant homosexual/phallic/orificial imagery, and overall allegory for drug addiction. I'm sure the fantastically warped set pieces and effects will stay tattoed in my brain for a long time, so in that respect, it was a great experience. I'm not spoiling anything - just check them out for yourself.

It just seemed very slow paced and pretty boring in places. The plot i mean. The mise en scene was NEVER lacking and was great to look at, so for that reason, I will say truthfully that this was a worthy cinematic feast you should see.

Absolutely weird though. It would make a surreally crazy triple bill with Videodrome and Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas.