Repulsa ao Sexo

"Repulsion" is a great example of how to make a truly scary movie: The trick is not to fill the screen with monsters or indestructible serial killers, it is to portray fear in a way that will be familiar to the audience. It is clear from early on in the film that the lead character, Carol, played brilliantly by an extremely young-looking Catherine Deneuve, is not exactly normal. When her sister leaves her alone in their shared London apartment for a few days, however, the things that scare Carol are the sorts of things that have scared a lot of people spending the night alone, such as hearing (imagined) footsteps in the hallway and the like. Of course, while normal people get a brief fright from such a thing, Carol descends into a madness of hallucinations. The movie is seen almost entirely from her point of view, using techniques borrowed by later directors such as Darren Aronofsky for his movie, "Pi", which gives the entire movie a claustrophobic feeling that enhances the impact of Carol's hallucinations.

There are no doubt people who would like to explicate this film as an exploration of sexual repression or the like, and perhaps they are indeed hitting the mark in doing so, but this film works brilliantly as pure cinema, with no metaphoric subtext needed.

Overall Rating: 4 stars (out of 4), or 9 (out of 10)

In "Repulsion" the gorgeous Catherine Deneuve suffers from an industrial-strength case of sexual repression, coupled with a hefty dose of sibling rivalry which foists upon her a succession of rape fantasies and delusional hallucinations. Polanski's direction is unparalleled as he elicits a creepy terror through the use of some fairly unconventional special-effects. The subjective world created for the heroine is a series of dreams and visions of a decaying apartment and psycho-sexual fantasy and this is what the film seems to be about. The cracking walls are perhaps one of the most ingeniously horrifying special-effects in cinematic history. The lack of dialogue that runs throughout complements the restrained narrative design as the neurotic obsessions remain largely unexplained. But for better or for worse, I think better, Polanski's final frame settles on an image which cryptically resolves the entire enigma with a kind of devastating efficiency. All in all, one of the great films of the 1960s.

"Repulsion" is one of those films you like to use for an Oscar retrospective, to illustrate both the farce of the award nomination process and the attitude change that comes with a little historical perspective. While perhaps not Best Picture material for a mass audience, Polanski's direction and Deneuve's performance dwarf those actually nominated; when is the last time anyone even gave a thought to "Darling" or "Ship of Fools". And though worthy of its nominations, "The Collector" (in the same Psycho-Drama genre as "Repulsion") loses any contest between directors and actresses. Only Elizabeth Hartman in "Patch of Blue" turned in a better (arguably of course) 1965 performance than Deneuve's "Carol".

Films are a storytelling device with a common visual language and with certain conventions. "Repulsion" is an example of elliptical storytelling as Carol's decent into madness is revealed in a maddeningly slow process as thin layers of her coping skills are peeled away one-by-one.

For most first time viewers the pacing will be agonizingly slow. In part because it is hard to identify with Deneuve's' character and the secondary characters are too irrelevant for any special concern. Once you understand that this is a film you are meant to read, you see that the slow pacing is both intentional and necessary. It gives an attentive viewer enough time to explore the depth of each scene. Then you will see an entirely different film than the one a causal viewer is watching because "Repulsion" has this third dimension. Watch it a second time because you have to know the shape of this movie (and its surprises), before you can become totally involved in its process. This is a film that withholds its best from a first viewing.

Reading a film is something we all should be able to do, not just the pompous people who prattle on about the language of film. The fact is that all movies have codes and most of the codes are part of our general culture-we just have to train ourselves to find them and make them a part of our conscious viewing and not just something that acts on our subconscious.

"Repulsion" is the best primer I can think of for picking up this viewing technique because it is full of shared cultural codes and it does not race along so fast that you miss the images. Polanski positioned it midway between European new wave and conventional Hollywood, you get a concrete and relatively easy-to-follow story with tons of subtle visual and audio clues working on the attentive viewers subconscious.

Some are obvious, like the bathtub. Carol uses the bathtub as a means of purgation and regeneration after her unsatisfactory interactions with the world outside. This is an appropriate use in our culture, so when she allows the tub to overflow it signals that her life is coming apart. When she turns off the water but does not get into or even drain the tub Polanski is signaling that Carol is doomed; because as time passes the now cold water in the tub (soon joined by a dead body) prevents her from performing the purgation and regeneration ritual she needs.

Throughout the film the scenes are filled with dysfunctional and disorienting images and sounds. When Carol goes outside the street is torn up for pipeline work, there is a car accident, street musicians walk backwards (banjo and spoon players are weird even when walking conventionally). The bells of the convent next door chime discordantly during moments of torment. The sounds of children playing inside the walled convent courtyard taunt Carol with a world of peace and protection that she can never hope to share.

Progressively, Polanski goes deeper and deeper into Carol's psyche, as her apartment is rendered both her prison and the dark fantasy world of her mind. The film is basically a chronicle of her slow descent into complete madness. Deneuve is utterly convincing in her role. Largely mute, she must convey almost everything through gesture and expression. Which gives the film a "Wait Until Dark" quality as Polanski plays with one of our most primal fears: that someone will come into a place where we believe we are safe and hurt us. It is even worse in Carol's case because that someone is her abusive father, whose dark figure she conjures up whenever she is alone. Her persistent waking nightmare (or hallucination) is of being ravished by her father while alone in the apartment. Each time she is brought back to reality by the shrill ring of the telephone until finally she cuts the phone cord with a straight razor, thus ending her last link to reality.

There is the slowly rotting food on the counter, including a scary looking skinned rabbit. It looked like a very large fetal pig at first but then I remembered a similar image in "Roger and Me".

Polanski draws an amazing performance from the then 21 year old Deneuve. In ''Polanski: The Filmmaker as Voyeur,'' he related being unhappy with the candlestick scene and provoking Deneuve until she gave him what he wanted. ''She tried to control her rage, but Polanski continued to bait her,'' Barbara Leaming wrote. ''Then she exploded. He gave her the candlestick and she swung at him. The camera had been rolling, and now Polanski had the performance he wanted. . . . The Deneuve the spectator sees on screen is not acting -- the violence is real, directed at Polanski.'' Watch the scene several times just to check out Deneuve's expression.

Ultimately Polanski exonerates Carol. Watching the film again, with the knowledge of the reasons for Carol's disintegration (which is revealed in Polanski's final "Rosebud" shot) , we only want to protect her. Based on that shot I'm sure Polanski wanted us to view/experience the film several times.

Disturbing, harrowing tale of one girls' (Catherine Deneuve) descent into madness.

Catherine Deneuve's performance is fantastic--she plays it just right. Quite an accomplishment considering she was only 22 at the time! Roman Polanski's direction, beautiful black and white photography and effective use of sound really helps the film. Ahead of it's time.

Some people have complained about being bored by this film...I'm assuming they're watching in on TV. It's true--the film doesn't play as well on TV. I was lucky enough to see it for the first time in a theatre and it scared me silly. On a big screen you're pulled into the girls' madness--I was jumpy for days afterwards.

On TV it just doesn't work. It's still good, but nowhere near as unsettling. So, if you're going to see it, try to see it on a big-screen TV. This film almost never plays at revival cinemas--a real shame. Probably Polanski's best film next to "Chinatown".

This young woman's descent into insanity is so well documented that you truly thank God that it is not you that is going through this. Leave it to Roman Polanski to scare the hell out of you! I was grieving the death of someone who was very close to me when I saw this movie, and this movie snapped me out of that grief; the awareness that it could always be worse helped. Highly recommended.