Benutzerrezensionen

Like most films either adapted from Hanif Kureishi's fiction or having screenplays written by him (`My Beautiful Laundrette', `Sammy And Rosie Get Laid' as well as this film, which lists Kureishi as a co-writer along with Anne-Louise Trividic and director Patrice Chereau), `Intimacy' circles its subject in an indirect manner, never declaring what it's truly about but leaving a distinct impression. This can make for difficult viewing, requiring an inordinate amount of concentration to keep up (and which wears you down after a while) and it only sinks in long after it's over. But that's the film's strong point: the writers prefer to have you draw your own conclusions, with dialogue that forces you to read between the lines of an affair in which both participants seem to be using it to address their individual demons. Chereau and Kureishi are more interested in their characters' circumstances than their actions but it's precisely their circumstances that make their actions compelling. Mark Rylance and Kerry Fox are the lovers (and they're excellent, even though the fact their trysts are presented in explicit detail may overshadow their performances), with Rylance as a bitter bartender who has spontaneously abandoned his family and Fox as a drama teacher stifled in her marriage to a cabbie (Mike Leigh favorite Timothy Spall, also very fine) whom Rylance befriends in an attempt to understand her; it's the tensions that build around the trio that drives the narrative. It's an unhappy yet sensitive film that may distance some audiences and push others into uncomfortable areas they may not want to visit, yet there's no denying its inquisitive, intelligent presence.

"Intimacy" tells of a divorced man and a married woman who have weekly loveless sex while each knows little of the other. The film explores the "why" of their peculiar relationship and follows the pair of protags to their inevitable conclusion. Whatever you know, think, or read about this film, it does break new ground as it pushes legitimate cinema one small measure toward its destiny by illuminating that dark corner of human behavior currently occupied only by pornography. Be prepared for graphic sex/nudity and some intensely personal scenes in a stark, austere, somewhat depressing but very courageous drama. Not for prudes, "Intimacy" will be most enjoyed by mature drama enthusiasts. (B)

This film was controversial when it first appeared because of the fairly frank sexual scenes, although thy are mostly not real (apart from what seems to be actual oral sex at one point). But there is absolutely nothing erotic or unusual about them; they chiefly resemble farm animals mating in a mucky stable. Their coldness is deliberate, and an intrinsic part of this story about emotional chasms. Intimacy is what is missing from the character's lives. The overall milieu, which might be characterised as 'tatty-London' helps this a lot; the whole film is quite depressing in that sense. The least successful part of the film is the depiction of the relationship between Claire and her drama class student, which becomes tedious. The film is immeasurably helped by Timothy Spall's lugubrious taxi driver husband, at once knowing but also in denial.

This was not the first nor the last movie that used hardcore sex as a mainstream movie. Could it have worked without us seeing all the nudity and the explicit sex? I think yes, but it does make a point in how disconnected sex and feelings can be. Hence the title we get. This is a drama, so it is not totally there to be a viewing pleasure (no pun intended) or just plain arouse the viewer.

We get relationships and issues within - how sex is a substitute ... but also something we seek! Sometimes knowing it won't actually bring us more than a quick satisfaction - quite literally. How can it be sustained? The acting is really good and you probably will care for them, which of course is a good thing. I never came around watching this until now - I thought the sex was just there to shock us into watching it, but there is more here than that.

Intimacy (2001) was co-written and directed by Patrice Chéreau. The movie stars Mark Rylance as Jay, the head barman at a club. Somehow, he has met Claire, played by Kerry Fox. To Jay's surprise, Claire reappears every Wednesday at his apartment to have sex with him. (That's the only way to phrase it. They don't talk, and there's no foreplay. They just tear their clothes off and go at it.) There's plenty of nude scenes of both Fox and Rylance. However, it's not really erotic, because the apartment is so dirty and unkempt that all I could think of was "it's disgusting."

Matters would have apparently continued along in this way, except that Jay wants to know more about Claire. He manages to track her down to a pub/theater, where she's starring in "The Glass Menagerie." This brings him into contact with Andy, Claire's husband, played brilliantly by Timothy Spall.

The plot really begins at this point, and I will carefully avoid explaining what happens next. I won't avoid saying that the plot appeared contrived and, basically, ridiculous. I wasn't familiar with the work of Kerry Fox, but she's an excellent actor. Rylance and Spall are great actors. It's hard to understand just what went wrong with this film. Some reviewers have suggested that director could have made a better movie in France than in England. Maybe we in the English-speaking world think that this bizarre plots works better if the actors are smoking Gauloises and drinking wine, rather than smoking Mayfairs and drinking ale.

If you really want to see this movie, you'll have to decide whether you want to see all the sex (unrated version) or just the suggestion of sex (R-rated version). The movie has no real outdoor scenes, so it will work as well on DVD (which is how we saw it) as it will on the large screen. This isn't a great movie for anyone. If you want porn, buy porn. If you want narrative drama, buy narrative drama. Intimacy promises both, and gives you neither.

'Intimacy' is a very well acted drama, set in London. Jay has left his wife and son a year ago, and lives a disordered life, working as a barman, and carrying some ambiguous relationships with a couple of friends. He meets weekly a woman, Claire, with which he has a pure sexual affair, without any communication, a la 'Last Tango in Paris'. Things start to go wrong in this affair, when apparently involved he follows and finds out the background of the woman, and befriends her husband and young son.

The film is not easy, and sometimes the border between complexity and confusion is crossed. However, the acting is so good that the characters are just alive. Life is confusing as well many times, after all.

The film has many explicit sex scenes, and they have their place in the story line. This film is to a big extend about communication, and sex is the main way of communication between Jay and Claire for much of the film. Will this be enough to sustain their relationship? Well, go and see the movie and you will find out.

8/10 on my personal scale.

My husband is currently watching this film which we rented, which he seems to be enjoying. Maybe it's just my mood tonight, but I found this film unwatchable. Literally. I had to leave the room -- something I NEVER do when my husband and I are watching a film together. I found it irritating. The characters were so unsympathetic, dysfunctional and frankly boring, I couldn't work up enough interest to care about them, even in a literary sense. As I was watching the sex scenes I thought "I SHOULD be finding this erotic" but I wasn't -- probably because I didn't these like or care about them. (I guess that's the difference between "women's porn" and "men's porn.") I thought the entire mood of the movie was dark, depressing and that the characters had sex just to reassure themselves they were alive. To me, that's sad and pathetic and depressing, not erotic. Hey, call me a romantic.

To each his/her own, I guess.

Watch it for the sex scenes if you like, but for me, there wasn't much else in terms of interesting plot lines or character. I think it's boring and frequently painful to watch.

PS The movie is over. I asked my husband if HE liked it, since he watched it to the end. His answer was NO. He read this review, and he agrees. A waste of time.

Once in a while you run across a movie that breaks boundaries. This film does that in many ways. If you remember seeing an old David Lean movie called "Brief Encounter", "Intimacy" may remind you of it only this film takes you much farther into the actual affair than many films dare to go. Whoever trains British actors gets my undying admiration. Mark Rylance gives an understated performance that simply thrills a person with its reality. Anyone who knows the work of Mike Leigh (Secrets and Lies) will want to see this movie. All of the actors give performances that rate highly with me. Imagine a scene where actors have to pretend that they are in an actors training session and they are supposedly doing improvisation. How would you script this? Could you script this? It's marvelous to watch.

As the plot advances the dialogue is spare. A sign of great film making in my view. The camera work and editing provide the clues as to what is transpiring. At the heart of the movie, the tables turn in an unexpected way that leaves the viewer breathless. You almost have to stop watching to consider all of the implications of what has happened.

Sure there are some strange inexplicable events, but that's life isn't it? So based on boldness, superb acting, amazing realization or direction this film will shock and satisfy, puzzle and pique your interest. One of the greats to emerge from the new realist school of European film making. Along with Romance and Blais Moi. Finally film making that looks at sexuality in an adult way and doesn't get coy when the actual act of sex is depicted. I delight in seeing films that are brave enough to illuminate the act of sex, after all it's what most humans are designed to do.

A man and a woman, they barely know each other, they don't even know their names, and they're connected only for one reason: each Wednesday she visits him and they have an intense session of sex. That's it: 100% animal attraction... but he wants to know something else about her, and things will become complicated. At the same time we'll gradually discover some details about the lives of the main characters: their disappointing in love, their fears, their doubts...

I'm sure that most of the people that watched "Intimacy" pointed out the fact that the scenes with sexual content are quite explicit (pornographic, to put it plainly). Now,I'm not gonna discuss about if that kind of scenes are necessary or not, that's up to the director (and to the actors), but the fact is that in this case they emphasize the powerful sexual attraction between both characters.

This is a good modern drama, with some secondary characters that look rather unnecessary. Two thumbs up for the work of the the two leading actors (you won't see Angelina Jolie or Sandra Bullock doing that kind of jobs)... and we also have the great Timothy Spall (but don't worry, you won't have to see him naked).

*My rate: 7/10

Though it may not achieve all its aims, Patrice Chereau's would-be existentialist drama, adapted from stories by Hanif Kureishi, makes a welcome change from the recent run of London-based thrillers and comedies. Intriguing while it focuses on the obsessive sexual relationship between non-committal Claire (Kerry Fox) and embittered, divorced Jay (Mark Rylance), the film tends to lose its way as more characters and situations are introduced. Shot, with a lot of hand-held camera, in Jay's untidy flat, in crowded bars, and in busy South London streets, about the only visually beautiful frames are those showing Claire's and Jay's intertwined naked bodies, relaxing after their frenzied love-making.

Meeting once a week, and hardly speaking to each other, both Claire and Jay seem to be satisfied with little more than sex; but his curiosity takes over, he begins to follow her, and is resentful and envious when faced with the realisation that she has a life of her own and may simply be using him. The movie explores questions such as - how far can sex alone can take a relationship; and do words add to or detract from love? Another theme is that of role playing, on the stage and in life.

Both Fox and Rylance are superb in their scenes together; and Timothy Spall is excellent as Claire's talkative, down-to-earth husband. But I confess to finding Claire's friend Betty (Marianne Faithfull) a baffling character. Some sequences, particularly those involving Jay's friend Victor (Alastair Galbraith) and gay French barman Ian (Philippe Calvario), seem simply to be padding. Possibly, Chereau felt the need to insert personalities and scenes from Kureishi's books, even though these were not relevant to the central Claire-Jay situation. Finally, yes, the over-hyped explicit sex is necessary for the movie to work.

Over the past few years I've been making an effort to see a number of movies from the 21st century that I'd never previously gotten around to seeing. Among the examples are "August: Osage County", "Stranger than Fiction", and now "Intimacy". A big surprise is that the movie stars Mark Rylance, of whom I'd never heard until his Oscar-winning role as Rudolf Abel in Steven Spielberg's "Bridge of Spies".

Anyway, it's about a man and a woman who meet once a week to have sex (shown graphically), but know nothing about each other outside of that...until he follows her one day.

If you expect a movie to have nonstop action - i.e., superheroes, explosions, quick cuts - then you'll want to avoid this one like the plague. The action deliberately moves slowly to let the characters develop. The serious treatment of sex reminded me of the 2012 movie "The Sessions" (another one that took me a few years to see); they could probably make for a double-bill.

Basically, it's worth seeing, just as long as you understand that you're getting a drama not made for a wide audience. If you're looking for something serious and profound, then you should enjoy it.

Great movie, show the hollow ness in relationship. And when one try to fill it . It again remains empty handed. Love Kerry Fox work.

Can't explain it in words.

Intimacy's title is an ironic joke; this is a movie about the lack of intimacy. Intimacy is supplied entirely through sex by characters who are unable to deal with it in their regular lives. Intelligent and absorbing, Intimacy is also quite depressing. Not sad, not tragic, just dispiriting. Jay is a bitter man who is doing his best to hold the world at arms length, yet his desire for something more than his superficial existence is what propels the actions of the movie. He is unable to connect with other people, but then, that seems to be true of almost everyone in the film, and the movie reeks of desperation.

That doesn't sound like any fun at all, and Intimacy is not a good time movie. And it's not a weepy tragedy either, it's a cold, clinical film about existential loneliness. It is hard going but worth it.

Pathetic losers abound. Even Marianne Faithfull, whom I expected to be classy, gets to play a frumpy character not too different from a bag lady. The males are all notably unattractive, while none of the female characters is developed enough to care about. Kerry Fox is reasonably attractive, though. Lots of sex scenes; totally unerotic, they seem to suggest that people should have sex because they dislike each other or have no use for each other.

I've seen this film in USA and the taste that I felt is quite bitter; not because it was a lousy film, per contra, but because of the way that a man and a woman try desperately to escape from a lonely and abortive life, is so vivid and so authentic. I was tempted to catalogue the sex scenes, too daring but let's face it, this is the reality. Like probably Zola would say "naturalism not hypocrisy". If you want to see this film it's better to leave home all your prejudices about how life should be.

Intellectual drama with terrific acting and consistent mood. I think the explicit sex scenes fit very well into the movie, they support the authenticity and the dirty look of the entire set. The movie has some remarkable scenes, especially those with 2 of the 3 main characters (him, her and her husband).

Unfortunately for me it's a little bit too depressive. I had problems to understand most of the actions and reactions of the characters in the movie so I couldn't identify with anybody or any of their problems. Perhaps I'm not flexible enough ... or I'm just too happy with my life! If somebody has similar problems with the movie I can recommend 'Une liaison pornographique' by Frédéric Fonteyne - it has a related topic and is far more comprehensible.

6/10

So-so. Starts well enough. Had a fair amount of intrigue, but just when you think the movie is going to kick up a notch, it goes in a dull, pointless direction. From then on it drifts and ultimately goes nowhere.

Good performance by Kerry Fox. Mark Rylance is irritating, however.

I just saw this film in Paris, mainly attracted to it by Mark Rylance and Kerry Fox, who are consistently terrific actors.

Looking at the other comments issued so far, I guess that most of the attention given the film will be on the graphic sex scenes, but in general they contributed well to the overall story of lost people looking for some connection in their lives, which in a city like London (as it is filmed) seems impossible. Still, I have no idea how a sexually repressed country like Britain will pass this film without cuts. It will be intriguing to see the infantile controversy that this film will ignite in the media when it plays here.

I wouldn't recommend this film for those who are used to fast-paced stories and quick-fire dialogue. I never found the pacing too slow but you have to watch everything carefully to feel the full impact of the movie.

If you have ever had a passionate but ultimately painful affair, this film will throw up all those feelings that you thought you had forgotten.

Starts slow and boring .... moves to trite .... has a deep ending.

I never bail on a film ... if I chose to watch I watch the entire thing. Character development: excellent. Direction: average. Screen play: hmmm it makes you wait.

Worth watching.

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.