Cosmopolis (2012) - Crime, Drama, Fantasy

Hohum Score

100

Hohummer

Riding across Manhattan in a stretch limo in order to get a haircut, a 28-year-old billionaire asset manager's day devolves into an odyssey with a cast of characters that start to tear his world apart.

IMDB: 5
Director: David Cronenberg
Stars: Robert Pattinson, Juliette Binoche
Length: 109 Minutes
PG Rating: R
Reviews: 107 out of 212 found boring (50.47%)

One-line Reviews (264)

In all the engaging, and sometimes mind numbing, dialogues we hear many incoherent one-liners that may definitely cause some disputes over their actual significance.

I can think of better ways to waste 109 minutes of my life than this.

It's a very challenging, difficult film to enjoy, but I did, mostly because the director has luckily found a clever and apt metaphor for the slow inevitable descent of society into chaos, mayhem, and oblivion which we're all currently experiencing, whether or not you realize it.

There's no merit in showing off you master the technique of filming almost a whole movie inside a car (much less given the fact it is a limousine), in a sink, wherever, if you have no story at all to tell.

This "movie" is nothing but a never-ending, pointless verbal diarrhea.

The movie is boring, the only good scene is the one with Juliette Binoche, was awesome to see her in that role and she did it wonderful.

No acting, no story, no characters, not a single line worth quoting.

the story has no plot so you don't know the purpose of the movie or what message they want to deliver.

There is clearly a lot of thought put into this story and was meant to be smart and intriguing, but instead just comes off slow and confusing.

It is without doubt the worst haircut in the history of film, and like that possibly pointless detail there are a few strangenesses and questionable things in this film that you could analyze till Kingdom come.

Finally Cronenberg is back to complex exciting ideas, visual splendor and his body/flesh emphasized films.

So will we be excited, perplexed, angered or bored?

This is deliberate on director David Cronenberg's part, as he tries to find an appropriate style to portray a world dedicated to repetitive ritual in which such things as emotion, spontaneity and chance had been squeezed out.

To call him "bored", would be like calling the sun "warm".

It is full of engaging repartee, to the point where I had to pause and think about what I was hearing.

I also think this movie may have come out about a year to late as well, because a lot of the movie seems to be a nod to the "Occupy" movement who at this time has been dying a slow death.

He's bored, troubled, horny and well aware that beyond his limo-shaped prison is an angry, aggressive world that wants him dead.

Very slow and very depressing with no resolution, or with a resolution that is like the movie is...

The over-riding focus here is on Robert Pattinson's character: a man who, like everyone else in the entire film, talks in pointless and annoying circles of pointless baggy gibberish that goes nowhere.

The rest of the film could be a good therapy for insomnia.

But is just a boring and confusing piece of garbage.

This is like a really bad version of the most pretentious David Lynch film ever made.

Also another complaint about Pattinson's performance is how boring it comes off because he added no depth or interest to a character that when done by an actor with much more talent could come off as a great performance.

Thought provoking and intense drama .

Packer is a vastly empty man.

A little sex here and there, a little bombing and explosion etc. The dialogue is so weird, unnatural and pointless!

Its a shame then that their first collaboration is this piece of pretentious tosh.

Empty plot, pretentious directing and Robert Pattinson make this incredibly bad .

Unpredictable absurd comedy, perfect midnight movie .

The film is heavily pretentious and it was just a torturous experience for me, which is too bad because I really enjoyed some of his previous work (especially his films with Viggo Mortensen).

Yes the dialogue is contrived and strange, until you realise why.

All the scenes i watched i was getting a headache of trying to keep up with the talk and then the sex scenes where just strange, and his wife or what ever she is meant to be in it her slow talk made the movie so slow.

Hard to follow.

I didn't like this one, it bored me and I just wanted it to get over with so I could go to bed.

He seems comfortable with the bizarre style of dialogue, but the character and the story are so empty that the film can hardly be considered a fair judgment of his would-be dramatic prowess.

It's philosophically bankrupt at its very best and its painfully dull at its very worst.

From beginning to end you listen to benign whining and useless, boring dialogue about this poor little rich boy who befriends the most unlikely of characters in his journey across town to get a haircut.

What a waste of time Too much dialogue.

This movie is a waste of time .

If you can get past some of the hard to follow dialogue and fairly stale acting, you'll find that the dialogue, even when it is somewhat hard to follow, is actually very rich in dark and somewhat sophisticated (borderline pompous)humor.

Though some of the supppper early ones are a bit gore-bore, I have to rank him as one of my favorite directors of all time.

Only in the bizarro world don't waste your time .

Drivel, pretentious gasbag drivel .

Terrible boring waste of time .

Could tell here that Robert Pattinson had come on as an actor, but still found him bland and in parts expressionless.

Because the "action" scenes are super boring!

This is a film I will not be revisiting ever, although I know that in order to understand it completely several viewings need to take place because it is based on a philosophical novel written by Don DeLillo that is hard to follow.

This movie has surprised me by how boring it was.

These shallow, empty and completely out of touch "People" are chilling to behold.

I tried to bring it back, tried to focus but nope, I'm bored.

Funny how capitalism lifted millions out of poverty, yet is being criticized in boring films like this one.

Sidenote: it was almost uncomfortable watching some of the sexual scenes in this, but I think it made it all the more intriguing.

Pattinson is part of that contemporary scenery, but simply inadequate in a role that calls for commanding empty space instead of acting to fill it.

This mess of a dialogue-only movie was so all over the place, so tedious, so dull, it should actually be studied for what NOT to do during a film class in college.

This epic journey for an every day task becomes extremely complicated and at some points is very hard to follow.

Deep ramblings and sharp set designs make this critique of our modern Monsters, the self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe, a fascinating Film that is not very accessible for a wide audience.

A late evening KVIFF viewing, a complete full-house, but the film doesn't live up to David Cronenberg's esteem, which comes across as a big blow since I have watched all his films since NAKED LUNCH (1991), with the exception of A DANGEROUS METHOD (2011), and this latest nihilistic post-modern parable has been his worst so far, a self-indulgent endeavor with deadly hollow format.

Boring, filled with dialog that can most aptly described as "pseudo-intellectual psycho-babble" (with apologies to Jack Nicholson), with gratuitous meaningless violence interspersed, presumably, to keep the viewer from walking out (or falling asleep).

But how to understand how he can generally be bored with such and such opportunities?

All in all, a movie well worth watching more than once, thanks for reading!

I was incredibly bored and the highlights did not excite me at all.

A surprisingly proper and convincing performance by Robert Pattison makes him look like an adequate choice for future roles in more ambitious production than Twilight or, lately, the overly dull Bel Ami.

If we put our brains into overdrive and try and work out what this film is all about we can vaguely ascertain that we are confronted with a young and bored billionaire.

A loner billionaire goes across the town in his limo for a haircut in the mist of chaos on the streets as he intentionally sabotage his billion dollar empire maybe seemed like interesting in Don Delillo's book but on screen it's the most tedious & time wasting experience.

Now I understand why all the dialogs sound pretentious and over intellectualized , the script and the lack of climax is the problem of this movie.

You may enjoy this one, but for me I can give it 3 stars for being decently crafted but really it bored me on a lot of levels.

It is the worst movie I ever saw (I did not not watch it fully) - please stay away and do not waste your time!

I am a fan of noir, but I was bored after 5 minutes (less confused than completely disinterested), a little angry after hoping for the next 20 that it might turn into something and at 45 minutes I was getting a migraine and had to leave or be sick.

I think that the lack of plot, the unrelatedness of the actors and the entire movie was terrible.

It is such a marvellous look inside the mind and world of an individual so tormented yet so disillusioned by his own emotional state and simple boredom that it will stay with you for days.

Of course, it is clear that he is devilishly bored, being unable to at least rejoice or grieve.

It bored me stiff.

Worst Movie ever .

Also they spent $20 million on this pile of crap and yet it was one of the worst movies in existence.

Most of the film takes place in his limo as various 'guest stars' - Juliette Binoche, Paul Giamatti, Mathieu Amalric - pop up in order to have a boring, pseud-ish conversation and then disappear.

It's uninteresting, tedious, dull, dreary, mind-numbing, tiresome, lackluster, unexciting, monotonous, repetitive, wearisome, humdrum, uninspiring, bland, insipid, weak, tasteless,lat, flavorless, wishy-featureless, ordinary, dull, lackluster, boring, flat, nondescript, unappealing, vapid, banal.

A dull and pretentious Cronenberg film .

kept me on the edge of my seat really.

Dialogue-driven and emotionally empty, "Cosmpolis" requires an intense desire for philosophical discourse .

This film reminded me of a good Shakespearean play; I only understood about half of it but enjoyed it a lot.

"Cosmopolis" is in fact quite dull.

I give it a 6/10 for its positives being the fresh storytelling not seen in most other movies, and the interesting dialogue that I actually found to be quite humorous and intellectual at times, but also the negatives for its stale acting (from nearly the entire cast), dialogue that, at times, is just too pretentious that it loses all philosophical value, and the small fact that this movie cater's to such a small audience.

(I kept pace with all the dialogue, but found it too lengthy and was often bored during this movie.

This is a weird movie about a 28yr old billionaire named Eric Packer(Robert Pattinson) who has a major ego and is self-obsessed and yet bored with everything going on a ride on his limousine which is most of the setting for this movie takes place in.

Unfortunately the billionaire wishes the audience to share his boredom.

Stylistically the film is quite repetitive; most of the action takes place in claustrophobic interiors, and the basic shot/reverse shot structure is employed during most of the conversational exchanges.

I was bored.

Next day I enjoyed it more and was able to use the IP TV functions to go back to the most compacted wording scenes and was able to better follow the plot.

Long, dull, nothing that interesting happens and should be avoided at all costs.

Dark, brooding and suspenseful, it follows a day in the life of a self-made mega-tycoon and you are dropped into his world really not knowing what is going on.

This films (if you can call it that) reminds me to Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and I really like this cartoon, but , Cosmopolis has a nonsense, boring lonlasting scene of a young millionaire that spent his life in a limousine and that the only things he needs is a haircut "At this point save me to ask why".

You're likely to fall asleep that way.

True, it started off with me instantly being bored by it.

I laughed hard at this pretentious, action packed (not) movie for all the wrong reasons.

An inevitable showdown with an acting veteran, a 20 minute scene, driven by some stunning dialogue.

If this film bored you to death, I sympathize.

Easily one of the worst movies of all-time.

I can appreciate that a lot of people don't "get" this movie, or find it pretentious or pedantic or just strange.

"Cosmopolis" wants to drive one point home: successful business people are emotional corrupt, bored with life, and evil.

Weird and lack explanations but still somewhat intriguing and enthralling .

As the limo very slowly rolls and stops on it's interrupted journey through the mean, nasty city which is bursting into revolutionary madness the protagonist, a surprisingly compelling Robert Pattinson, manages to keep my gaze averted from all the increasingly ugly things occurring outside the tinted power windows and focused upon his sincerely fascinating face.

Turns out Robert Pattinson is still as clueless as ever, but his lack of acting talent is more than aided and abetted here by a dull, empty, directionless plot and very pretentious direction from David Cronenberg.

Slower than a turtle moving in the desert.

The dialog is boring.

The film is a long, uninteresting, verbal masturbation session.

It got to a point,though, where it just became unbearable.

Pointless and rambling movie about a conceited billionaire.

I wonder if many of the folks giving this a poor review, saying it's boring or confusing, are simply unprepared for what they're renting, and they blame the movie for not meeting expectations.

All in all, the movie is a story of a world ruled by empty shells, where even the people conscious enough to be protesting against the humongous financial gap are too busy with themselves to make a difference.

It really is an extremely original and very entertaining movie with several original characters.

Despite these flashes this wont be a film for everyone and a man next to me in an early afternoon screening fell asleep while a couple on the row in front left about half way in.

But what good does insightful dialog make if you're about to fall asleep constantly.

In his previous attempts, he tried to present the story in such tedious way that just like his characters you're also lost in translation.

The dialogues are really profound and pretentious as everything they are talking about serves as a sort of metaphor or symbolism on capitalism.

It will make more sense and be more entertaining.

The dude's bored with the world, disillusioned, and is a thrill seeker just so he can feel real while he spends most of his time in a purgatory-like limo.

I am an avid film watcher & lover of widely varying genres, but this was unwatchable.

And it's not that Cosmopolis doesn't have some good things to say, but you have to sift through a lot of crap to find the good lines, this after all is 1:45 hours of talk of which 1:40 hours or more are dumb and pointless.

Some long pieces of monologue may bore most people not used to Cronenberg's indulgent style.

There's a little violence and some sexuality but it's all pointless.

Well i consider myself pretty damn open minded but this was really unwatchable.

This movie's plot is pointless.

It's easy to notice that, in the finance-related sphere, this insightful neo-noir movie is also like a more ideological and, thus more enjoyable, version of Margin Call.

The guy next to me fell asleep.

I hope Cronenberg returns to his A History of Violence days instead of making these pretentious philosophical movies that seem not to answer any questions in particular.

This film is a complete waste of your time and film maker resources.

The life of this successful participant in the finance market seems quite boring and joyless.

David Cronenberg attempts to visualize the fiction of novelist Don DeLillo, whose impenetrable novels are difficult and tedious (I couldn't even finish one of his novellas) and the result is pretty much what you'd expect: slow, dense and written in a vacuum.

Somewhere underneath this beautifully disjointed slow moving film is a masterpiece, but the slow pacing and confusing nature takes it out of contention.

The movie had no plot.

Boring and Uninteresting .

The movie itself to me was just boring.

but I alternated wake and naps (I struggled to stay awake) and when I asked my mates I found out that I didn't miss any of the meaningful parts of the movie.

Any die-hard Cronenberg fans out there I'm sorry to report that this is near unwatchable pretentious garbage of the highest order.

Even with the presence of some highly-reliable actors like Juliette Binoche, Samantha Morton and Paul Giamatti, their performances are as uninteresting as they goes.

That could have been interesting, except it's all said in the most monotone voices possible, without any emotion.

The film starts a bit slow, the actors seems uneasy in the plot and it feels very unnatural.

Just like when I lost my job as a senior finance manager and had to stay 11 month at home - the change in pace is breathtaking and mind blowing.

Poor thing, Cosmopolis is a very bad movie with conversations, conversation & some more boring, meaningless conversations.

And you will enjoy it much more than this film, which was like watching paint dry.

a new bottom for boring .

The closest comparison piece I can think of to this garbage is Freidkin's Bug - another pretentious art house turd with "something to say".

Tedious and Pretentious .

I usually begin my reviews in IMDb with a plot summary, but what can I say about this pretentious story?

One is with Binoche's character, Didi Fancher, Packer's personal art consultant; although she makes it clear that the paintings on display in a church are not for sale, Packer is so eager to waste his money that he persists in making offers.

Okay, I see a lot of movies, and I know the difference between a weird masterpiece like El Topo and boring, pretentious crap like Cosmopolis.

"Cosmopolis" has no story; its characters are talking heads and its scenes just a collection of political gospel and esoteric ideologies.

After 30 minutes I was asking myself if there is no story is there any hidden meaning in the dialog.

Even though it also dragged on, it once again showed why this guy stays on the radar all the time.

The story plods badly (with the first 10 minutes alone wanting one to bail), only coming properly to life in the last twenty minutes, and feels emotionally empty and at times coherence is an issue.

This kind of movie happens, if too many wanna-be intellectuals with pretentious ambitions come together.

Such an atmosphere could not have been created without the terrific job of Robert Pattinson : miles away from his former teen vampire performance, he was perfectly fit for this role : a young, handsome and bored golden boy, about to let go of the artificial world surrounding him.

During viewing I pinned down the overwhelming feeling to two words: aseptically pointless.

The entire drama plays out as a sort of metaphor on economics and capitalism, but the dialogues are really hard to follow as there are so many symbolisms and metaphors which I found very heavy handed and philosophical.

Love in an atmosphere of boredom and cold does not live ...

All characters babble on for far too long.

A pretentious confuse movie that seems to be 8 hours long .

You get him and someone else talking parallel in non-sequiturs and asking rhetorical and pointless questions.

Sorry to all the die hard Cronberg fans or Robert Pattinson fans if I insulted one of your idols, but this movie was a waste of my time.

It was neither compelling, smart, sympathetic or vaguely interesting.

The pace is way too slow.

I fell asleep in the first 25 minutes then woke up when he was having a anal check "what on earth"...

Nothing happens, all the dialogues are philosophical, and talk about metaphors to something, but geeez, it's such a pretentious movie, it thinks it's the smartest and important piece of art that was ever made by human kind.

Don't expect anything but weird, and somewhat pointless action scenes though.

A Cronenberg movie is always worth watching at least once, maybe twice to see if you caught all the subtexts.

Yawn...

Empty talk .

Plain horrible and a waste of time.

Absolutely a waste of talent and my time.

Philosophically bankrupt at best and dull at worst .

Nothing happens.

The film has no plot.

On the other hand, you have a master of his craft making cinema from an un-cinematic source that is essentially metaphor piled upon metaphor, drawing a compelling performance from a lead who I never thought I'd like, and creating something which, despite all that has been said about its impenetrability, actually managed to pull me in to a point where I wanted to know where it was all leading.

Pure, self indulgent crap!

Though there might be some truth buried, dialogs are pretentious gibberish which are supposed to show us how bad the world is.

A Bore .

Confusing and crap.

The clothes, the car, the excessive and repetitive dialogue sequences, and so on and so on.

Boring is polite.

Back to Cosmopolis, it starts rather slow and confusing, but particularly from the Barber's Shop scene on, it becomes more intriguing and the mounting tension reaches top level during the conversation between Paul Giamatti & Robert Pattinson.

This film is just confusing, more than Inception is apparently confusing (I personally didn't find Inception confusing but many did).

It's a test of will to sit through Cosmopolis - a stillborn bore that's damn near unwatchable.

I would have walked out of the cinema after 30 minutes if I hadn't been with a friend's family.

no story, no concept, no future.

So neither image (it's boring like hell), nor dialog (it's pretentious crap), nor characters (none of them seems real) seem real.

There is NO story!

I felt it was a but boring at times.

This is by far the worst movie ever.

After reading countless reviews and comments about how boring this film is and how Cronenberg missed the mark I just want to chime in with my own opinion.

All in all, even though the movie might seem too complex or a bit boring, it still is definitely worth a watch, as it is both a great adaptation of the novel, and an interesting character study of not only the protagonist (antagonist?

Loved Scanners, but Croneberg is getting boring.

I am so relieved I did not pay to watch this in a cinema, I would most definitely have walked out after the first 30 minutes...

I will admit there is a possibility I missed the point of the movie during one of several occasions when I nodded off from pure boredom.

If I had to compare this movie with any other it would be like a 21st century version of 1993's "Falling Down" with Michael Douglas, another flick which captured the zeitgeist of the nineties, the fragmentation of the world, the slow descent into the unknown and the degradation of humanity at the expense of the individual...

Since David Cronenberg teamed up with Robert Pattinson, a new word has been invented to describe long, tedious, depressing car journeys.

I cannot recall a film where so many people got up and walked out.

Besides that, I have never even heard of such a misguided, self serving, pretentious, piece of pseudo intellectual clap trap.....

personally I think it was too cliché, we all have an image of the evil, socially psycho stockbroker, ever since wall street.

It has worsted even the worst movies that I have seen and I have seen a lot of movies.

Long and wordy, complex and confusing - it will haunt you long after as more and more of it makes sense.

Once I started to see the film as an inverse of a movie - every detail played out with the intention to project an idea, feeling or thought, implicit - This movie however makes the intent explicit and takes away the usual and cliché implicities.

There's no story...

A Slow Unstoppable Cruise Into Oblivion.

Worth watching--twice.

A deep, intellectual, intense story with heart.

I have to say upfront that this is one of the most boring movies I have ever seeing.

This is among the most pretentious movies I remember seeing.

Based on the novel of the same name I could blame the book for some of pacing problems but Cronenberg's adaptation stays very slow and the build up it try's to have is just not a good pay off or not at all interesting in my mind.

These few instances ignited some of the more drawn out and dare I say duller scenes to keep the audience on tenterhooks.

Eric Packer himself is determined to bring on his own destruction; he is bored by having achieved everything he could possibly want at his young age.

easily the worst movie of the year, how this isn't rated 1/10 is beyond me.

The dialog was boring, the characters were boring, the scenes, the acting, were all boring.

It's a strange movie where most of the movie takes place in a limo that is intriguing and yet can be confusing and weird to the point nothing is natural and probably needed more explanation.

I watched the whole movie extremely bored with all those monologues (nobody was holding a conversation, most of the time each character was talking non stop, disregarding completely what the other was saying, and quite contented to do so) and our hero twaddles along so he won't look out of place within this context.

The worst movie ever .

I suppose some people will watch this boring self-serving waste of philosophical hogwash, then relentlessly replay the poignant observations of these ridiculously banal characters with idiotic lines like "death is a scandal".

It's understandable if some audiences are bored with this movie though.

easily the worst movie of the year, how this isn't rated 1/10 is beyond me.

The dialogue can be pretentious at times, and the movie doesn't really put you in the protagonist's shoes, with the camera acting in a more voyeuristic mode.

First 30 minutes are the beginning of the "waste of time" .

Even if everyone was nude, COSMOPOLIS would still be boring.

The pace is so awfully slow to a standstill, that its 109-minute running time seems like forever.

And it's just confusing.

Pattinson is perfect for this, suited, and well cast for his monotone delivery (which some would see as a woodenness, I in this interpret as the dream-state narration of the piece), and the descent into mental anarchy mirrored through the windows of his blacked out limo is shown starkly.

The entire film consists of a bored super-rich businessman, played by Robert Pattinson, who rides around a city in his limousine and comes into contact with a number of diverse people, most of whom are played by cameoing guest stars.

boring.

I found this movie incredibly boring, like a shot of tranquilizer in a hot summer day.

It becomes such a tedious film that by the end of it, you are exhausted, angry and a little hurt.

Just look at the movie poster - the movie is as boring and dark as the image of Pattison in the limo suggests.

Riding across Manhattan in a stretch limo in order to get a haircut, Eric Packer (Robert Pattinson, in a monotone, phoned in 'performance'), a 28-year-old billionaire asset manager's day devolves into an odyssey with a cast of characters that start to tear his world apart.

is this the point of the movie, how we waste our money on boring, pretentious films, then point well taken.

The dialogues are extreme, where every single detail matters, making the conservation an unbearable boredom.

Tedious babble from someone who should know better all set in a car with a third act straight out of an actors line remembering workshop...

Too bad and such a waste of my time.

So if you want to see a film with themes that are a little too pompous at times, and delve deeply into philosophical territory that seems pretentious, then this is something for you.

An artsy film about an exec riding across town in a limo bumping into various characters who all deliver unbelievably pretentious dialog like authors breaking the fourth wall.

Pretentious and self indulgent .

I'm guessing about the only entertaining thing about Cosmopolis would be to invite loads of die hard Twilight fans to watch their immortal, love-sick idol in his latest role, only to laugh at them for being totally disappointed and shocked at how he never looks longingly at any sour-faced pale teenage waif; neither does he wrestle werewolves or run up trees.

Worst movie ever seen .

It's a movie about the nihilism, despair and boredom of those who're without a meaningful goal or purpose on their lives.

There are sexual encounters of the boring kind thrown in that don't really add to the story.

This movie was boring as hell.

The film is very slow paced as you follow the main character for almost the entire film inside his limo talking to several different characters that jump in and out of his vehicle.

It's still artsy, but in an entertaining manner.

All of the characters are pretentious, speaking what they see as multi-layered metaphors just for the sake of appearing deep and intelligent, whereas if you listen to their conversations they sound like a modern interpretation of the Babel tower.

This time, he hits an all-time low in COSMOPOLIS -- a lifeless and painfully boring motion picture that even a die-hard art-house fans might find this a monumental waste of time.

Everything is, of course, supposed to be loaded with symbolism and meaning but comes across instead as pretentious and silly.

Towards the ending, the story gets increasingly incomprehensible and inexplicable, which further frustrates me in addition to boring me.

Most pretentious movie of the millennium .

And it was suspenseful, in the sense that you really will be kept wondering what will happen next to the main character.

Those that are saying it is genius are either misguided or pretentious, or more likely both.

The worst movie of 2012 do far .

Help put a pack of metaphorical matches in between the toes of these eyes-open-but-asleep bores and light it so that they may "bicycle" to the sky of a novel thought and an experienced emotion.

It's final earnings at the box office of not even 1 Million, show just how much of a waste of money this movie truly was.

Eastern Promises, A Dangerous Method & now Cosmopolis are victim of his tedious presentation.

This movie is pretentious and dumb.

We as a spectator can feel on the edge, as ambivalent as Eric Packer, both reflective and impulsive.

One of the most fascinating films of Director, David Cronenberg's career...

The plot is boring.

Thus, I was skeptical about Cosmopolis at first, and the beginning of the movie did nothing to reassure me : "in medias res" long, intense, fast, and complex dialogs , characters appearing one after the other according to no apparent logic , etc ...

The conversations are different, his consternation increases and his voice remains the monotone stream of a lexicographer burdened with intellect and a lack of inspiration.

You are glad when this tediously pretentious film ends.

Because of the atrocious traffic conditions (due to the President's outing and street riots, apparently unrelated), the journey took a whole day, during which an assortment of people (said assembly of choice actors) came into the limo to do various things with him – discussions, consultations, medical check-ups, sex, sex, sex… In two interludes, he also ate with his beautiful, recently married wife (Gordon) in banal restaurants.

Boring waste of time.