Passages

"Tomas" (Franz Rogowski) and husband "Martin" (Ben Whishaw) find their marriage severley tested when the former man starts to fall for "Agathe" (Adèle Exarchopoulos) and that passion drives "Martin" into the arms of "Amad" (Erwan Kepoa Falé). What now ensues is, frankly, a rather dull introspective of characters that didn't really leap off the screen at me. Rogowski can be a charismatic actor, but here he offers us a rather unremarkable characterisation of a horny man who wants to have his cake and eat it. Whishaw is, routinely these days on screen, just a bit weedy and presents another weakly constructed individual who seems content not to fight for the man he's supposed to love. It all just rolls along without really catching fire, it's over-scripted and though it may well have a visual authenticity to it, it's all just a bit so what? The production and pacing all contribute to the general ennui of the film and to be honest, I was just a bit disappointed with this whole thing. I saw it at the cinema this week, but I suspect even the most ardent fans of these three can wait for a television screening.

Not all films need to be message driven, but I think any director or writer makes a film because they have something to say. In that sense, I'm not sure what 'Passages' wanted to say.

There was an ample potential to make an interesting social cut in the age of more fluid sexuality. "don't pigeon-hall yourself", "follow your heart"", you could be anything and love anybody"... and so on all sound great, but how it actually works in reality, and how it could clash with the traditional idea of a committed relationship, gender roles, and responsibility of a parenthood. There still are remnants of such questions and reflections in 'Passages'. Problem is Tomas is too big a rotten character and consumes all the drama. He's self absorbed (resulting in being selfish even without a malicious intend), cowardly, dishonest with himself and others, emotionally needy yet wants to dominate the situation, and above all manipulative (oh, and his fashion sense is pretty atrocious, but that's just based on my taste). It makes in contrast his male and female partners innocent victims, leaving very little room for a balanced reflection on sexuality/relationship/gender role issues.

Maybe a social commentary was not the director's intention. Maybe a character study was the goal? But surprisingly we don't really get to see the depth of Tomas and even less of Martin and Agathe. Why is Tomas the way he is? What was Tomas's relationship with Martin like before the storm? What did Tomas really see in Agathe and the future with her?

All the sex scenes were fun to watch, but if a character study was the goal maybe the film could have used those minutes more towards... well, to show the character. 'A rotten character ruins the lives of others' is too obvious a conclusion for a character study or even just any old relationship drama.

Passages is an OK drama. Technically sufficient and actings are decent (though I think it failed to utilize all the potential of such interesting actors as Whishaw and Rogowski). But it left me wondering what it really was all for... or is it just me out of my depth?

Who knows what routes were taken to be you, the entrances and doorways you've passed through, the aisles and the channels, the thoroughfares you've unravelled, the barriers you've broken and forced through. As you begin a fresh departure from your husband, deploying all your tools, with a brand new hand, falling for French girl Agathe, trying on restyled hat, nipping back to make sure flames are truly fanned. As the music stops you look for a new chair, continuing with conflict and despair, like a ball (a pair even) you bounce around, a kind of yo-yo is unwound, until you're snookered and then left, to go nowhere.

"Passages" is a master class in building a film around an unlikable character.

Franz Rogowski gives a commanding performance full of charisma and sex appeal as a sexually fluid narcissist who can't stand to let anyone around him be happy without him (or even really with him, for that matter). Viewed with a live audience, the movie becomes almost something of a comedy, and it was a hoot hearing the people in the theater with me reacting with more and more vocal disbelief at just what a jerk this main character could be. It's a morbidly fascinating character study -- it's almost like watching a day in the life of a sociopath.

I should have been exasperated with this character and movie and probably would have been if it had been handled differently. But as is, with Ira Sachs's excellent direction and the film's terrific acting, it's instead one of the best movies I've seen so far this year.

Grade: A.

This is a very grounded film that challenges the viewers morality and values. The "Peter Pan" protagonist is a hedonistic director fumbling through love and life and refusing to "grow up". He thinks everyone will accept his choices because he assumes the world is on the same page: reality hits very differently. I like the exploration of queerness in this film and the torments of fluidity.

The performances are quite spectacular, especially by Adèle Exarchopoulous. Time and again she proves to be sexy, vulnerable, exquisite in every frame.

Franz Rogowski has a very Phoenix brothers quality to him and portrays the complex and haunted character very effectively, navigating from sexy, commanding, vulnerable to selfish and self-centered.

A very simple film about very complex humans. I think the cinematography, the casting, the writing, the direction all point to a masterful filmmaking that delves deeply into the contemporary human condition where we all still have a very long way to go before accepting each other for who we are.