Venus in Furs

I am not sure did I like this film or not. I did like some parts of it. But it looked more like a porn film without explicit scenes of sex in it. It had also arts in it, black and white filming helped give it a special feel, which helped make this film looked better then it really is.

What I did not like was the complete lack of any understanding plot. I really tried to make some substance about this film, but it lacked a real plot. Fifty shades of gray had some, but this film did not.

I would not recommend this film for you to watch. If you want to watch similar film with a better plot you should concentrate on Fifty shades of grey or 9 songs. They deal with art-sexual film making, and they are much better then this one.

Unlike the novel it is based on. The feeling you get when you watched all the attempts made to put a brilliant book on screen and are left wondering if anyone who did so even read it. Leopold Von Sacher-Masoch wrote a story about unrequited love, passion, the fear of loss and sexual prejudice in society, none of which are expressed in this movie, instead of questioning the sociological structures of relationships it is yet another display of naked bodies and a lack of plot and conversation. One could argue that the writers of the film intended to express the heavy dialog thats contained in the book visually; Although to me that would raise the question why someone would attempt to do so by just showing nudity; how should nudity express copious dialogs about love, social criticism etc. Succinct and direct: Poorly executed.

I find this movie rather boring. There are many long shots with no action and there is almost no dialog in the whole movie. For example, during the opening scene, I was rather confused about whether the movie had started or that there was something wrong with the DVD.

From the description on the cover it says that there are three layers in this movie, and that reality and fantasy are mixed. But it is totally unclear which scene belongs to which level. In this respect the movie is rather confusing. Because of this, there is also not much character development in the movie.

And although there are many scenes with nudity, people who are expecting to find some erotic pleasure from it, are probably going to be disappointed, because the movie does not contain any erotic tension between the characters at any level. Also in this respect the movie is very boring.

The beautiful filming in Venus In Furs reminds me of why it was called "glorious black and white." Claire Mijnals smolders nicely and has a presence similar to Jean Harlow. Shadows abound and cool framing shows that the director may have found inspiration in German cinema or Derek Jarman films of old. It is a very faithful and beautifully made adaptation of Leopold von Sacher-Masoch's novel, which means it is both wonderful and lacking in the same ways as the book.

Venus in Furs is definitely not a film for everyone and even for "arthouse" lovers, it feels a bit incomplete and emotionally distant. It is basically an exploration of masochism, sadism, love, control and lack of control. A central question seems to be whether a lover should deliver satisfaction to her/his partner even when it is not satisfying to her/him. Where is the bond built? Where does trust, love, etc. begin and what does it require? These questions have been asked before and probably in more emotionally resonant movies, but Venus in Furs is worth a look for those who are drawn to their local black and white "arthouse" flick.