It's rather fascinating to go back and watch David Cronenberg's earliest films. One readily recognizes what would come to be hallmarks of his works, including especially artful shot composition and content revolving around an intersection of body, mind, sex, and alteration. 'Stereo' (and 1970's 'Crimes of the future') is also, however, unmistakably a reflection of a filmmaker just cutting his teeth. The rudimentary, almost spartan presentation says "student film" as much as it does "art film," and the production was pointedly low budget. Quietly bewitching as the university filming location is, there are no further adornments of set design or decoration; in addition to the enticing atmospheric music, the soundtrack is comprised entirely of narration added in post-production, with no innate audio. And the fundamental conveyance of plot, such as it is, is so loose and almost free-form that it's particularly helpful to have the context of an outside synopsis on hand to understand the course of events.
While modern cinema as a medium is audiovisual in nature, that essence is made most apparent where the components are divorced. One can experience any conventional film from either audio or visuals alone and nonetheless obtain a significant if incomplete understanding of the narrative content. In a feature like this, the sequencing of the visuals relate certain events, but each successive image by itself communicates little if anything; the narration provides context and a measure of substance, but is also characterized by such a verbosely blustery quasi-scientific lexicon that the narration is equal parts meaningful and nonsensical. Noting the distinct lack of resources Cronenberg had to work with, 'Stereo' is suitably well made, with actors who adequately play their parts and writing that is serviceable in relating an intriguing concept.
What is abundantly clear to me, though, is that whatever else is true of this picture, it's one for a limited audience. Movie-goers with a wide appreciate of everything the world of cinema has to offer may find this worth a look, and die-hard fans of Cronenberg. In the very least, it's interesting as a look into the early development of an acclaimed filmmaker. For my part, I did enjoy 'Stereo,' though it is less a title to entertain, as a viewing experience, than it is a curio to admire for its place in film history. So long as you keep that perspective in mind, this is a fine way to spend 60 minutes on a lazy day.
While modern cinema as a medium is audiovisual in nature, that essence is made most apparent where the components are divorced. One can experience any conventional film from either audio or visuals alone and nonetheless obtain a significant if incomplete understanding of the narrative content. In a feature like this, the sequencing of the visuals relate certain events, but each successive image by itself communicates little if anything; the narration provides context and a measure of substance, but is also characterized by such a verbosely blustery quasi-scientific lexicon that the narration is equal parts meaningful and nonsensical. Noting the distinct lack of resources Cronenberg had to work with, 'Stereo' is suitably well made, with actors who adequately play their parts and writing that is serviceable in relating an intriguing concept.
What is abundantly clear to me, though, is that whatever else is true of this picture, it's one for a limited audience. Movie-goers with a wide appreciate of everything the world of cinema has to offer may find this worth a look, and die-hard fans of Cronenberg. In the very least, it's interesting as a look into the early development of an acclaimed filmmaker. For my part, I did enjoy 'Stereo,' though it is less a title to entertain, as a viewing experience, than it is a curio to admire for its place in film history. So long as you keep that perspective in mind, this is a fine way to spend 60 minutes on a lazy day.