It is surprising The Fly was such a success, but I think it's a more logical result than for any of his other films. It's a powerful, tragic love story. Guessing some were attracted for the special effects, some for the scares,and some by word of mouth heard how emotional it was and were drawn to it.

It is something of a mystery as to why, from all of Cronenberg's filmography, it was namely The Fly that enjoyed such a disproportionate success (actually, Scanners is his second most successful movie, but it's still far off). Certainly it can't be the star power since Goldblum and Davis, although pretty high profile, are hardly the kinds of megastars towards whom masses would automatically gravitate. Also, it's probably not the legacy, either, because the "original" 1958 The Fly was still a rather modest kind of a classic that couldn't have been too prominent in the public consciousness almost 30 years later. Add to this the little fact that it happens to be one of Cronenberg's grossest, most repulsive films (and, considering Dave Deprave's track record, that's saying something) and there is indeed something of a puzzle. As a matter of fact, the only sensible explanation that I can come up with, is that the marketing campaign must have been unusually forceful and effectively handled. Otherwise well, perhaps someone out there knows better.
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

Yea but we can't ignore the success of The Fly. That film alone puts him with the best. He has a solid fan base, somewhat reminiscent of David Lynch. One could argue Lynch is more successful. I think it's more they're sick and tired of proving to people they can make a good film
. They're probably just sick of Hollywood, and i can't blame them

Generally speaking, I don't think Scorsese has ever had much problem getting his projects financed, especially when Di Caprio is on board (Silence or something like The Last Temptation Of Christ apparently being exceptions because of their supposedly unattractive subject matter).
Cronenberg though has never really been a Hollywood director to begin with nor has he ever enjoyed any spectacular box office success (with the exception of The Fly and, to a lesser degree, The Dead Zone), so I'm not sure how much these recent flops have changed. I'm sure he could get backing provided he scales things down a little bit cost wise.
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

I got news for em. Theres gonna be hell to pay. Cause I aint Daddys little boy no more

I really don't get how directors like Cronenberg and Scorcese struggle to make films happen. You'd think they could rake in millions just from appreciative peers in the movie b1c84usiness. I mean, people know he's a legend.
I guess it's because of his last few films (haven't seen anything since A Dangerous Method), but I've heard Cosmopolis and Maps to the Stars were disappointing. Obviously the studios weren't too happy either. Yet- I'll still give em a shot - at some point.
So I don't know, maybe find a new studio to work for? Oh They have contracts don't they.. Well. Make an indie film. Or is that too far of a step backwards..? You don't really need a ton of money to make a great film. It sure helps- but with Cronenberg, I refuse to believe he's out of creativity. Atleast I hope he isn't.
P.S. I mentioned Scorcese because supposedly he has been trying forever to film Silence- like 20 years - and he finally made it happen- barely. Same with wolf of Wall Street. Who are these white collar dweebs denying Scorcese and Cronenberg films?

Around the time Maps to the Stars came out he said it might be his final film.
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/10/29/david-cronenberg-contemplates-retirement-with-maps-to-the-stars
People often say "never again" when they've just finished making a film.
But at Cannes this year Viggo Mortensen said Cronenberg is still (nearly two years after Maps) considering retiring, that he's getting more pleasure from writing novels.
http://variety.com/2016/film/news/cannes-viggo-mortensen-talks-trump-david-cronenberg-collaboration-1201771333/
It's a pity - obviously his career has to end at some point, but I expected a few more films from him.

I still find it odd that Maps didn't get more promotion. Surely it would have done much better at the box office than Cosmopolis. I'd love to see at least one more film, and if not at least another book or publication of unreleased screenplays.

There was a recent article, which included an interview, where he states he's not getting much work now. It's very discouraging to see that he's giving up because he's branched out, quite successfully in my opinion, from just doing horror. I've enjoyed his last few films immensely and he still remains one of my all time favorite directors. He hasn't done anything I've disliked. I either love or like his films. Sadly, Dangerous Method, Cosmopolis, and Maps To the Stars got very little release and studio backing, resulting in not making much money. Studios don't feel comfortable giving him work. He has to work independently at this point, if he decides. I'd love to see him do one or two more films before he hangs it up for good.