Intimacy (2001)

Very disappointing...

Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

The acting in this movie is really good.

French screenwriter, playwright, actor and director Patrice Chéreau's eight feature film which he wrote with French screenwriter Anne-Louise Trividic after stories written by English-Pakistani author, screenwriter, playwright and director Hanif Kureushi, premiered In competition at the 51st Berlin International Film Festival in 2001, was shot on locations in England and is a France-UK-Spain-Germany co-production which was produced by producer Charles Gassot. It tells the story about a drama teacher named Claire who lives with her family in London, England and a father and bartender named Jay.Distinctly and precisely directed by French filmmaker Patrice Chéreau, this quietly paced fictional tale which is narrated interchangeably from the main characters' viewpoints, draws a humane portrayal of an unacquainted she and he who meet each other on Wednesdays at his place. While notable for its atmospheric milieu depictions and distinct cinematography by cinematographer Eric Gautier, this character-driven and dialog-driven story about non-theoretical … and language where the male lead asks: "Was this agreed?" the female lead asks: "All those things I was hiding. Scary, isn't it?" an English singer utters the words: "When I died, there was no one there …" and "… on the day you die you have total freedom of speech …" which was made more than a century after a French 19th century mystic with a middle name meaning merciful, in her memoirs, wrote: "… If a little bitterness drops onto these pages, no venom will ever fall. The human race as a whole is blameless if individuals waste away like animals in the struggle for existence …" ninety-six years after the first Remembrance Day (1919) was held in the United Kingdom, thirty-two years after an English singer with a first name of English origins meaning counsel of the wolf sang his lyrics: "… The rain cries a little pity for one more forgotten hero and a world that doesn't care …" nine years after an English band started by an Irish lead vocalist called Shakespeare's Sister sang: "… the headlines in the street - - another war … we're bingo numbers and our names are obsolete … a brave new world had dawned upon the human race …" eight years before and English multi-instrumentalist with a birth name meaning innocent in Latin sang: "… Somebody's gonna get hurt … Don't oh please don't oh please don't oh please don't …" and fourteen years before Londoners integrated in the streets of London to protest, depicts several interrelated studies of character and contains a great and timely score by composer Eric Neveaux.This immediate character piece from the early 2000s which is set in England in the early 21st century and where a practicing theatre actress is alive, is impelled and reinforced by its cogent narrative structure, substantial character development, rhythmic continuity, comment by Claire: "You don't even know who I am. You don't even know how to hurt me." and the respectively lingering acting performances by New Zealand actress Kerry Fox, English actors Mark Rylance and Timothy Spall and English actress Marianne Faithful. A graceful narrative feature.

One of the most unpleasant films I've ever seen.The dialogue is howlingly bad. All the characters are reprehensible. The script doesn't make any sense whatsoever.The only thing everyone talks about this film are the sex scenes because the rest is not worth mentioning. The story made so little sense. The relationships between the characters were unbelievable (the gay bartender, the drunk roommate, the main character befriending the overweight husband, etc). Everyone, and I mean everyone, was dour and angry.The bits of dialogue made me laugh out loud. Nothing rang true. Notice the hilarious dialogue during the scene between the two women in the park. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Here's an example:"When I died, there was no one there. I had to go through the whole thing on my own.""What was it, the day you died?"Who talks like that?To make things even worse, the acting is strictly amateurish.The film has a very French feel to it because the director is French but the whole thing didn't jibe at all. It was like watching British characters behave in a French manner, with everything set not in France but set in England.It's almost like the director wanted to make all English folks look bad. Really bad.Avoid at all cost.

"Intimacy" in a porn film? Was this supposed to be a joke title? Is this Europe's "cinema Veriee"? Or perhaps "neo cinema Veriee"? Makes no difference what they call it, but it doesn't come off as particularly realistic. Perhaps it's "neo Euro-trash porn". They tried to put porn into mainstream movies in the early 70s and it failed. And so it will fail this time, too, in spite of such talentless - and hence highly regarded - Eurotrash directors such as von Trier who propagate such junk. I hardly think that showing a man's erection adds to the realism of a movie. What about the dialogue? On quite a few occasions the characters talk and interact in an unrealistic way; real people simply don't behave the way these characters do half of the time. Yet, there is a belief that just because Kerry Fox is actually shown putting her co-star's erection in her mouth that this will somehow add new dimensions to the realism of a movie, realism never seen before. I think not.On the other hand, I always had the wish to see the seemingly impossible: a (semi-)famous actress in a pornographic scene. I can't say I wasn't pleased when Kerry Fox in one scene grabs her co-stars penis, and then even orally pleasures it (briefly, unfortunately) in another scene. And it's rather nice that it was Kerry Fox who has had the dubious privilege of becoming one of extremely few known actresses to become a temporary porn star. Of course, I'd love to see Shirley MacLaine get it from behind, Elizabeth Taylor engage in masturbation, Susan Sarandon do it doggy-style, etc, but Fox is a pretty good choice, too. Though, I must say, Fox looks more than a little embarrassed in the porn scenes. Considering she got some award in some meaningless little European festival, this is surprising. I mean, didn't the jury who awarded her notice her obvious lack of relaxedness during the sex scenes? Lousy Eurotrash jury...The movie isn't too boring. The hand-held camera shtick is quite tiresome at times - another hint that this director belongs to the Lars von Trier trash director's club of European losers. (Losers 95.) The film would have been a shade weaker if it weren't for Fox's charisma. The male lead was ideally cast in "Institute Benjamenta", but rather badly cast this time around. Being a continental European, his accent takes too long to get used to and it's rather silly the way he tries to do a British/London/whatever-accent-he's-supposed-to-be-doing and his swearing (which is regular) comes off as totally unconvincing. There is also a character who plays a gay man - which seems to be a must in today's movies and sit-coms: every film and series has to have a homosexual, and it's almost always a happy-go-lucky smart-ass full of wise advice for the lead characters, who are of course straight. (And every courtroom scene nowadays has to have a black female judge, as if that will contribute to solving the problem of racism, but that's another story.) All in all, much better than anything von Trier has/will ever come up with, but ultimately pointless.How dumb does Kerry Fox have to be to be suckered into doing a porn film? "Don't worry, dear, it's art. People will respect you even more as an artist."

This film received a tremendous amount of attention when it was released in the UK. All this was due to the sex scenes. Four years later and seeing the film for the first time, I do think there is cause for alarm at the film but not for the reasons given by the original moral critics. The film is simply dreadful. For a tale so concerned with the appearances given by people, all three leads (Rylance, Fox and Spall) frequently give appalling performances. Then there is the general unevenness of the film. It sways uncontrollably from the quiet 'intimate' scenes, which are probably the best bits of the two hours, to the moments of dramatic confrontation that lack focus, sense or drama. The director simply cannot handle straightforward dramatic duologues. There is a character called Victor, and every time he turns up there is a huge question-mark hanging over the film saying - where is this going? Avoid this film. Last Tango in Paris was bad enough. This is considerably worse.