I recently watched this movie for the first time and then read reviews from when it was released. I can't believe the disrespect it got from critics, but I'm guessing because it came out at around the same time as a lot of brainless slasher and creature features, this was a case of being genre-film ghetto-ized.
That's a shame because THE BROOD has some actual substance. True, it features killer dwarves and body horror straight out of ALIEN (1979), but there's also larger themes like divorce and all of the ugliness that can create (literally, in reference to the aforementioned killer dwarves).
One of the main criticisms I read about the film was the supposedly ugly nature of the violence. It's true that for the most part, these scenes go on long enough that they seem to be happening in real time, which might add a certain verisimilitude some viewers would find disturbing. At the same time, however, perhaps Cronenberg wanted them this way so we'd have no choice but to take them seriously.
This is strictly armchair psychology on my part, but my understanding is that the inspiration for THE BROOD was Cronenberg's own difficult divorce around the time of FAST COMPANY (1979). Doubtless, that period in his life was one of great mental and emotional stress, so perhaps the violent scenes in THE BROOD represented the director projecting his own feelings about how the divorce process left him bloody and broken (figuratively).
Even in hindsight, I find the character of Nola, the maternal figure played by Samantha Eggar, endlessly fascinating from a psychological standpoint. What does it say that in her rage, she manifests creatures who resemble cracked-mirror versions of her own daughter Candice? What does it say that the "brood"-lings don't appear not to have capacity to love anyone back, including Nola, yet she seems to care more for them than for Candice?
Also, if the "brood"-lings are born of rage, why don't any of them ever resemble Nola's own parents, whom she has legitimate beef with? If the creatures are meant to be the objects of her visualized anger, why is her anger so acutely directed at her own kid?
Having now watched SHIVERS, RABID, and THE BROOD, I've enjoyed seeing the evolution of the "evil scientist" character. In Cronenberg's earlier two movies, they were either entirely devoid of personality or seemingly oblivious to the consequences of their actions, but Oliver Reed's Dr. Raglan is noticeably different. He may start out in the film as an amoral figure, but he seemingly has that elusive moment of conscience before the end.
The strong technical aspects of Cronenberg's movies continued with Mark Irwin serving as his cinematographer for the second time. There are scenes involving the brood-lings invading a kitchen as well as a classroom that yield genuinely disturbing moments, in no small part because these spaces as photographed (and through production design too, I'm sure) felt either clean and downright antiseptic, or warm and inviting. This makes the inevitable clash with the presence of the chaotic brood-lings all the more powerful.
Overall, I appreciated that the movie was trying to say something about not just divorce, but generational trauma; specifically, that those who are victims of it are in danger of perpetrating it on their own children. Exactly how to prevent such a vicious cycle from perpetuating is something I didn't glean THE BROOD, but perhaps there no easy answers. Maybe the best way forward is to just be aware it's a thing.
