Cosmopolis Movie Reviews



Release Date: Aug 17, 2012

Genre: Drama

Rating: (R)

Watch Trailer Movie Reviews

User reviews on Cosmopolis

  • 2
    This was one bad film and I almost could not believe how bad it was. I would not even call it a film, it’s just bunch of scenes of a guy talking complete nonsense and then there is a scenes where a doctor gives a prostate exam in the car, it is just so random and weird. Pattinson is not horrible but he is way out of his depth and it shows, he just looks very confused and ot of his place in this film and it is uncomfortable to watch. It was a very frustrating experience for me and I really wanted my money back because I felt that it was a complete waste of my time. I hope you will not see this film and save your money and time.
  • 1
    Cosmopolis is a film starring Robert Pattenson set in the not-too-distant-future. It is a very weird and difficult movie to follow. I didn’t exactly not like the film but rather it was just a very weird movie to watch. I wasn’t a big fan of Robert Pattenson in Twilight but I did very much like him in Cosmopolis. His acting was very good and I truly believed his character. He played a Wall Street powerhouse who during a cab ride across town beings to lose his entire fortune. All of these weird things start happening and he eventually finds clues that tell his coming assassination. Overall this movie won’t be for everyone but it was still enjoyable.
  • 3
    David Cronenberg has made some interesting movies over the years, though you have to really be into his brand of storytelling to enjoy them, I think. He doesn't like to tell happy stories, that's for sure: he likes to tell the audience how their submission to the ways of the world is what is undoing them, how his heroes are often just cyphers or tools in the cog of the grand scheme that is the Big Lie. The same holds true in "Cosmopolis" which is a good movie is at times and a maddening one. Sometimes it does play like some bizarre and esoteric "stream of consciousness" story that is only half conscious, but the message about money and greed seems very pertinent, especially in today's world of haves and have nots. It's a cautionary tale of what happens when we let money corrupt us to the core, though whether there is any escape from that corruption remains to be seen. Most will not escape: just as k Mitt Romney.
  • 2
    Sometimes you see a movie that you know thinks it has something important to say and you just kind of go along, knowing that the payoff will come eventually (hopefully before the closing credits roll and not on your ride home from the AMC). But this movie seemed to think that just because it was shot in a stylized sort of way that it was a very important work of art. Eh, not so fast. I think it has some valid things to say about the ultra rich and how capitalism may be a failing economic model, but ultimately this movie is really quite shallow. Robert Pattinson seems to only have one expression in the entire film. I find it hard to believe that the director watched him and thought "yeah, just keep doing that snarky thing you do!" but I guess he did because this one helluva one note performance. I wish there was more of Juliette Bionche in the movie, she is divine and was the only character I wished I saw more of.
  • 3
    It's kind of embarrassing to admit but I do have a soft spot for Robert Pattinson. I am totally one of those middle aged gals who love the "Twilight" movies and who went to see all of them with my teenage girls who insisted on introducing me to the dreamiest catch ever, Edward the Vampire! In "Cosmopolis" he plays a similarly remote kind of guy who isn't burdened with supernatural powers but billions of dollars. He loves money but it is the one thing in his life that makes him dead. He has so much of it that it reduces him to a joyless machine whose only function is to make as much money as possible without thinking why or how it's important. Pattinson does a good job in the role, but the movie feels very, very pretentious and I was honestly kind of bored. The "Twilight" movies may not be great art, but they don't pretend to be either. This movie pretends to be something much more grand and meaningful than it really is. If it weren't for Pattinson, I would skip it.
  • 5
    Wow, is there ANYTHING that Robert Pattinson cannot do?? He can do fantasy (Harry Potter), Romance (Twilight, Water for Elephants), Historicals (Bel Ami) and now a really out there kind of art cinema that lets him really show off his acting chops. His character isn't so much a man as he is an idea: he explores what it means to be defined by money and nothing else. His whole day is just about satisfying his own meaningless needs like getting a haircut. He also runs into certain people that are "real" and which get him to start thinking that maybe there is another way of living. Maybe money isn't everything. The movie isn't so much about the economy (though that's definitely relevant, especially these days) as it is about what kind of values we choose to live with. Lots of millionaires and billionaires live small scale lives, while middle class people try to appear richer than they are. The question is why and how.
  • 5
    I was TOTALLY blown away by this movie. I'm not sure that I really understood all of it as was intended, but I thought Robert Pattinson gave a truly stupendous performance. Granted, he isn't known for his acting skills, and apart from "Water for Elephants" I can't think of another movie of his where anyone thought he was a good actor, but in this one he really delivers. He plays a young billionaire whose life is so meaningless that the biggest concern he has is getting to the right barber for the right haircut. He also has no regard for any person who doesn't have as much many as he does, and when he meets these 'po' folks, he treats them as oddities. The more I think about the movie, the more fascinating it seems to me. I think it's the kind of movie you have to see a few times before you really can get what they're trying to say. The performances are spot on and I hope Pattinson earns a few awards out of it.
  • 2
    Some storytellers know firsthand that the best way to communicate their ideas and social commentaries via their narratives and characters is by allowing them to say nothing. Let the experiences speak for themselves, and the audience shall understand what I’m trying to say, they think. “Speaking between the lines”, perhaps, is the professed goal.
    Unfortunately, David Cronenberg’s Cosmopolis says almost nothing because it exists in a vacuum of such utter vacuousness that it would not surprise me to know that many viewers who emerge from the movie will feel somehow like they have left part of their soul behind: this is a movie that robs its audience of its agency, forcing them to become complicit in its damnation of Big Money and Big Business that sees the world population not as citizens, but as moneymaking propositions. In this age of The Great Recession where the global economy is hobbling along as the whips of Wall Street grow ever louder and harsher on its already slashed back, it would seem that this would be an easy story to tell. Because it’s set in 2000 instead of 2008 and centers on the bursting of the tech bubble, it feels dated, historic, and even slightly irrelevant. We’ve come so far beyond the horrors of the One Percent that this feels like an old, forgotten conversation that just doesn’t matter anymore. Our realities are much scarier than what Packer is forced to endure.
    The story is about a young billionaire named Eric Packer whose life is so cushioned by the security of vaults and vaults of money that his greatest worry in life is getting the right haircut. As played by Robert Pattinson, he is effectively portrayed as cold and removed from the normal constraints of the human experience, but Cronenberg never really attempts to show either a) if there’s an actual person under all those dollar signs or b)if there isn’t, what actually is there. It’s like trying to decipher an ancient hieroglyphic by studying modern Spanish slang. The two simply cannot work together.
    If Cronenberg was trying to prove that money corrupts to the point of inhumanity, then he accomplishes that in the first five minutes and there’s no point to the rest of the film. If he was trying to say that money necessarily forces up existential barriers that divorce the rich from reality and then leaves them to wander the rest of their lives in a soulless state, well, he never really bothers to show us how or why. It’s just an endless series of random encounters that Eric has throughout his day that I suppose is to make us think and feel, but which ends up doing neither because it never tries. You can only speak between the lines if you actually have lines and not just Robert Pattinson’s cold stares to rely upon. An overwrought and self-satisfied piece of pretentious moviemaking as I’ve ever seen.

Write a review for Cosmopolis

Login to write review:

Roll Over stars and click to rate movie theater

Although updated daily, all theaters, movie show times, and movie listings should be independently verified with the movie theatre.
Contact for information or comments. Please read the Privacy Policy and terms of use. Enjoy the movie!
Copyright © 2016 Movie Times, Inc. Site Map | Google+