Crimes de Amor

Right from the opening credits and the full-blown saxophone score accompanying them, you know what you're in for: a typical erotic thriller of the early 1990's - the most prolific period of the genre. It does stand a little above the crowd because of the ambiguous "villain" - is he indeed a villain or is he really just exposing and satisfying the hidden desires of these (admittedly gullible) women for mutual gain? And the fact that the film was directed by a woman and co-written by another adds an extra layer: are Lizzie Borden and Laurie Frank trying to tell us something about their own secret fantasies? Despite all that, "Love Crimes" never raises the temperature high enough, probably because of the two leads: Patrick Bergin is miscast as a smooth charmer (especially after just coming off "Sleeping With The Enemy" where he played Julia Roberts' abusive husband), and Sean Young is wooden - which actually fits her character at the start. The problem is that she stays wooden even later when she shouldn't be (she is also a little too skinny for my tastes in this one). ** out of 4.

Does a woman become exquisitely androgynous when her hair is cut short and combed like a man's, and she is made to look boyish? Hell, yeah! At least, as long as she has her clothes on. For an erotic psychological thriller, try "Love Crimes" (1991), with an exquisitely androgynous Sean Young and a handsome Patrick Bergin.

Sean Young's co-star, Patrick Bergin, is special as the perp. Her voice is velvety and seductive, and so is his. Prosecutor/detective Dana Greenaway (Young), is good-looking, and so is photographer/perpetrator, David Hanover (Bergin). They're a perfect match, on opposite sides of the coin, since he's the evil one and she is trying to nab him by switching jobs from prosecutor to detective and going out into the field alone.

Nothing is far-fetched in cinema any more than in life, and the plot of "Love Crimes" is based on events in the life of fashion photographer, Richard Avedon.

It's so gripping and near-perfect a movie, that I postponed watching the denouement for one night so as not to spoil what I'd seen so far, by an ending. Then, I thought to watch the movie to the end in increments, or to never know it. But, I gave in the second night and watched it through.

If "Love Crimes" has anything but a Hollywood ending, it will make for a rare American movie because the potential is there. And, in part, that's where director, Lizzie Borden, leads us. Aren't we right to expect something unusual from a director with the name, Lizzie Borden, named after America's notorious axe-murderer?

In "Love Crimes" Sean Young does something erotically outrageous, the likes of which hasn't been seen in a movie since beautiful Maruschka Detmers fellated her co-star, Federico Pitzalis, in Marco Bellochio's gem,"Il Diavolo in Corpo" ("Devil in the Flesh"), fifteen years ago.

In "Love Crimes" an exciting cat and mouse chase is enacted between photographer, David Hanover (Bergin) and prosecutor/ detective, Dana Greenaway (Young). Something strange occurs in several confrontations between Greenaway and Hanover when Hanover disarms himself by giving up a loaded gun--and more than once. By this act, the director suddenly ups the tension many notches by abruptly shifting the balance of power.

Lizzie Borden is up to something and on track for deviating from the Hollywood norm. The episodes of power shifting played slowly (as they should be) make us wonder what the good guy will do. They may be the best moments of a remarkable movie. See how far the director is willing to take it.

"Love Crimes" like any movie has flaws but they don't take away from the delicate psychological jousting of the antagonists Some time in their lives men and women possess a physical beauty that reaches its height. When that beauty is exploited by a director and captured by the camera, beauty's pleasure is transmitted to whoever is sensitive to it. Such is the beauty of Sean Young and Patrick Bergin when they made "Love Crimes."

Patrick Bergin may engender as much sympathy as we give Don Juan, but we shouldn't confuse that with a fine performance. He is the perp and he is superb as a convincingly seductive confidence man.

Bergin is gentle, smart, soft-spoken and manipulative. He is also liable to self-destruct or to attack when his mind or emotions dictate. We don't know what he'll do next, or what Sean Young will do either, and that is the film's charm.

Some of the new female directors either like having their female leads appear mannish, like Robin Wright in "Loved" and Sean Young in "Love Crimes," or choose to make a movie in which the lead character calls for a male impersonator like Hilary Swank in "Boys Don't Cry."

If you look at some films directed by women going back to Diane Kurys' "Entre Nous" to "Thelma and Louse," "The Incredibly True Adventures of Two Girls in Love," "Loved" "Kissed" and "Love Crimes" you get a refreshingly varied perspective on the nature of women and men. The new female directors travel along interesting paths with their unique vision of the human animal and the human condition, and hopefully they'll let us come along more often.

District attorney Sean Young goes undercover to catch a crazed maniac (Patrick Bergin) who sexually humiliates and terrorizes women, fooling them by posing as a photographer. Naturally Young was a victim of child abuse herself and thus she becomes sucked in by Bergin's sick actions. Strangely there might actually be an attraction between the two leads. Now how sick could that possibly be? Soft-core trite the whole way here as director Lizzie Borden (who had minimal success with sexually-motivated productions and premium television programming in the mid-1990s) would rather get her performers naked and in compromising positions than tell a cohesive tale. Bergin and Young, two people that have never had any business in front of a camera, are not good enough players to give "Love Crimes" any substantiated success. Turkey (0 stars out of 5).

I read somewhere that when director Lizzie handed in this film, the producers so objected to her ending that they sniped it before release. Granted, it concludes abruptly, but the reason we're left hanging is far deeper than that. Sean Young is so puckered, she barely squeaks any personality into the character. We are left with puzzling, blue-tinted flashbacks of a sexually traumatic event, that, possibly ends in a death, I'm not sure. There's a story here--especially in the photographer/seducer--it just wasn't filmed.

But bad writing and acting are only the tip of the iceberg, unfortunately. Titanic is overall cinematic style. I'm not sure if Lizzie was going for a gritty, quasi-documentary look, but the over-lighting and shoulder-high camera angle make the film look just amateurish. Even the dark scenes at the cabin incorporate the light source in the frame, effectively ruining any atmospheric interiors. Thematically, this is about assigning blame when things go sexually awry--a very interesting and exciting subject. Fortunately, the script doesn't accept the "fry 'em" attitude of date rape that is currently correct. Unfortunately, the visual argument is hopelessly bogged down in misdirection.

At best, it's a hung jury.

This is by far my favorite film of all time. That's mainly because it's not afraid to delve into some very politically incorrect topics (such as spanking and female submissiveness) that other mainstream films are just too timid to touch. Nothing seems to be off-limits in this film as the director freely develops the story without any concern given to possibly offending the viewer. However, I don't think anything was done here purely for shock value or to purposely offend anyone. Sean Young turns in an excellent and courageous performance. Most established mainstream actresses would not have taken on this role or would have asked for some major script changes before accepting it. The other cast members do a fine job as well.

Have you noticed that this movie hasn't appeared on pay cable since an obligatory brief run a year after it hit the theaters? Have you ever wondered why? The obvious reason is that it just doesn't fit today's political atmosphere. It seems quite ironic to me that some premium channels now carry softcore porn (that's getting closer and closer to hardcore porn) but will not carry a mainstream movie like "Love Crimes". Sadly, even though this movie is only 11 years old, it could probably not be made today.