User Score
5.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 54 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 25 out of 54
  2. Negative: 20 out of 54

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Jul 15, 2013
    7
    Cronenberg’s unsettling denuding of an identical twins’ inseparability wreaks controversy in its in-depth protrusion of psychiatric delusion and drug abuse, Jeremy Irons, plays the Mantle twins, both gynecologists and live together, even perversely share the same woman. Albeit their mirror-image resemblance, Beverly is the shy boffin while Elliot is the gregarious mouthpiece who is astuteCronenberg’s unsettling denuding of an identical twins’ inseparability wreaks controversy in its in-depth protrusion of psychiatric delusion and drug abuse, Jeremy Irons, plays the Mantle twins, both gynecologists and live together, even perversely share the same woman. Albeit their mirror-image resemblance, Beverly is the shy boffin while Elliot is the gregarious mouthpiece who is astute and dedicative in taking care of his younger brother’s every need, after meeting a sterile actress (Claire) who has a mutant vagina, Beverly irrationally falls for her and slowly he becomes drug-addictive and paranoid (cause and effect), and even Elliot couldn’t rescue him, a finally unhinged Beverly slips into the abyss and tragedy is irrevocable.

    Irons offers a tour-de-force engagement by splitting himself into two disparate roles, initially one wonders how could we tell them separately, and 5 minutes later, one will realize how distinguishable they are, Beverly is a meek soul, his life orbit is dominated and regulated by Elliot, who is sensible enough to admit they are an entity since neither of them could live without each other, nonetheless, the equilibrium has fatefully been violated by the interloper Claire, Bujold is feisty and emanates a of independence and vulnerability which fatally enchants Beverly and triggers his downhill of the separation procedure. The midstream of the film deals with the decomposition of Beverly’s mental stability has damped down by a slightly tedious script, which is wanting some explicable introductions to the mayhem it has caused, but the coda does save the pathos and it is mesmerizing and gives a sucker punch to the gut.

    Cronenberg’s films often leave me some bitter aftertaste, last year’s COSMOPOLIS (2012, 4/10) is beyond my interpretation, but DEAD RINGERS has its integral breakdown of a psychosexual drama, and fanboys will be exulted to indulge in Cronenberg’s signature chimerical shots (sundering the umbilical cord, the surgery ceremony in vermillion with a set of eerie apparatus) and there are magical contrivances to put two Jeremy Irons present in the same frames (deeming its pre-computer era), accolades should be also awarded to the film’s steadfast emotion liberation, which encroaches inches by inches into the subliminal conscious of its protagonists, a compelling piece of work rests higher on the shelf than Cronenberg’s other lesser creations.
    Expand
  2. Nov 1, 2012
    4
    I'm probably in the minority here, but I felt the bleak, intense, and all too gory "Dead Ringers" is too twisted for its own good. Cronenberg directs with style and it exemplifies his skill as a director, and Irons gives two, distinct and excellent characterizations, but all the gloominess makes it no fun.
  3. YuriH.A.
    Jan 27, 2004
    10
    Again : one of the all-time cinema classics. Irons perfect acting + good music + sometimes perfect photography and heart depressive plot ... it's more than twins taking drugs, this movie makes you feel just as the twins are supposed to feel through their downward spiral...and their end.
  4. BillyO.
    Jan 3, 2004
    6
    It was very strange and interesting but there wasn't much plot. Nothing happened. The brothers had sex with the same girl and they then both became drug addicts. That is about the entire movie.
  5. BillyO.
    Jan 3, 2004
    6
    It was very strange and interesting but there wasn't much plot. Nothing happened. The brothers had sex with the same girl and they then both became drug addicts. That is about the entire movie.
  6. D&KH.
    Jul 8, 2006
    3
    Nothing was great about this movie. It did not "pull me in".
  7. [Anonymous]
    Jun 23, 2003
    10
    One of the all-time cinema classics.
  8. PatC.
    Jan 13, 2004
    8
    Such impromptu examinations of the unexpected are one of a shrinking list of reasons to not outlaw the film industry.
  9. AustinC.
    Dec 10, 2005
    10
    Captiating from the opening score, the movie is a masterpiece.
  10. PatricioM.
    Apr 26, 2003
    10
    The movie was a complete delight, especially the muscial background. The acting was good also, and the subject matter blew me away. It was a very uplifting movie and I was entrawled by it. I found it thrilling, epecially the surgical procedure.
  11. YoonC.
    Sep 15, 2003
    8
    Strange and impenetrable but fascinating as filmic exercise nevertheless. Genuinely unnerving and perhaps Cronenberg's most formidable achievement at least in mood.
  12. MrJ
    Oct 25, 2006
    9
    Captivating and depressing in the best way. So sad, you can feel the heartbreak of the brothers, and the sadness is that the heartbreak is for each other, and not the girl. Astonishing, beautiful, sad, brilliant.
  13. Jul 12, 2016
    9
    Sheer brilliance. Deep down, EVERYONE has a love/hate thing about identical twins. On the one side, they wish they had that kind of communion with someone, that sort of magical intimacy they share, having someone basically the exact same as themselves...yet that same one-of-a-kind companionship is scary as hell.

    I haven't seen, from my fellow Canadian, either 'Scanners' (1981) or 'Naked
    Sheer brilliance. Deep down, EVERYONE has a love/hate thing about identical twins. On the one side, they wish they had that kind of communion with someone, that sort of magical intimacy they share, having someone basically the exact same as themselves...yet that same one-of-a-kind companionship is scary as hell.

    I haven't seen, from my fellow Canadian, either 'Scanners' (1981) or 'Naked Lunch' (1991), so I can't honestly say whether or not my assertion can be thus extended, but I dare ANYONE to find in horror a finer run than Cronenberg had, in 'Videodrome', 'The Dead Zone', 'The Fly'...and this, 'Dead Ringers'.
    Expand
Metascore
86

Universal acclaim - based on 15 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 15
  2. Negative: 0 out of 15
  1. 70
    The movie is really almost tasteful considering [Cronenberg’s] stomach-churning capacities. He always does it for a higher purpose, though, which is why his films sometimes win wider audiences. This one probably won't cross over, because it's too queasy. [23 Sept 1988]
  2. Chicago Tribune
    Reviewed by: Dave Kehr
    88
    It's almost too rich in ideas for its own good: The sense of concentration and proportion isn't there. But it remains an astonishing, magnetic, devastating piece of work. [23 Sept 1988]
  3. USA Today
    Reviewed by: Mike Clark
    100
    An instant classic, an Oscar-worthy showcase for Jeremy Irons, and a tightrope ballet over dicey screen material… A subtle movie - and thus a disturbing one. Like “Vertigo,” “The Night of the Hunter,” “Repulsion” and a few others, it finds beauty in morbidity - then nags you to come back for a second dose. [23 Sept 1988]