For me they're two different sides of the same coin: essentially the same story told in another way. So in that way (in my mind at least) they're perfect companion pieces. Where Tetsuo has shortcomings, Body Hammer picks up the slack (and vice versa). That being said, the impact that the sequel had on me was nothing compared to the way the original got under my skin (no Fetishist allusion intended).
Tetsuo is amazingly visceral, yet simultaneously intimate. The look and tone of the film is amazing, with the black and white imagery and low budget techniques only serving to enhance the nightmarish quality. Body Hammer, although it still has a wonderful dreamlike feel to it, feels slightly watered down. It's a redefining of the original's vision, and although it improves in places, it ultimately just loses something in the shift. It's Iron Man for me!
reply
share
zbyszanna
16 years ago
I agree with almost everything you said. I also think that these movies should not be compared, because they were meant to be different. BH (in my opinion at least) was not to be as surreal as the IM, so it should not be considered as it's flaw.
As for loosing something in the shift, I don't agree with you at this. It's that director made IM in B&W by accident or from the lack of funds, but rather on purpose. Colors give BH different feel and I think it was conscious decision. I wouldn't count it as a shortcoming.
As for me, they are both great movies in what they are. Personally I prefer the feel of the IM, but I don't think about ony of them as superior or inferior. They are just different kinds of movies.
reply
share