Le secret

There have been many contradictory reviews to this 22 yr old movie as has been complementary ones during the same time period From the outset I felt that all the main actresses and actors were not only excellent but expertly cast with relatively unknown protagonists allowing one to identify with a not impossible meeting between Marie and Bill which was coincidently occurred between her being a top saleswoman door to soor avert thouhgt.

'Le Secret' is a frustrating film. You know it must be doing something right because you walk away emotionally exhausted, and with the sense that you have seen something of the human condition expounded. At the same time it is wanting in enough ways to undermine its claim to greatness. It is wanting dynamically to such a large extent that, whilst it is a good script and a good story, it it is not a good film. And as a piece of narrative, it is inconclusive, and not in the sense that it terminates with a poignant and provocative question. Arguably this is a film which could be remade, utilising the same script and the same cast, but using different artistic and technical direction. The camerawork adds nothing to the film. It creates no tension, no atmosphere, does not enhance the mood or emulate the powerful experiences of the characters. It is flat, weak and pedestrian. The film lacks any geography and fails to resound the timing of events (essential in a film about this subject). In short, its elements are powerful, but its construction is poor. It lacks focus. The film treads a clumsy path between an intense emotional struggle that borders on the surreal, and an ambivalent realism. It achieves neither. The direction needs to be more decisive, it needs to choose one over the other; and it needs to employ the camera more effectively to realise it. There is no differentiation in the filming between the house of the lover and the family home. Additionally we get no sense of atmosphere of either one. There is none of the seduction in the former, or of tedium in the latter, that the protagonist might be feeling. Are we supposed to believe that Marie is having fantastic sex with Bill? If so, it is only through her inadequately exposed acting. What keeps Marie coming back? Only she knows. What is driving her to maintain this relationship? We can only speculate, because the film gives us little insight into the personalisation of her experience. Additionally, the conclusion is weak and vacillating. However, this film will undoubtedly touch a nerve with anyone who has been in a similar situation. It powerfully depicts the insidious destructiveness of infidelity on both the individual, the family, and to some extent society. To conclude, a wasted opportunity, with much unrealised potential.

Marie, trim bordering on skeletal, is married to only slightly dull François, who wants a 2nd child, (Marie doesn't but doesn't know why) (the 2 year old son comes up with some of the best acting in the film - how do they get them to do it?).

In the course of her work as an encyclopaedia sales person (echoes of Paper Moon) Marie meets Bill, a big black American who lives alone in a villa and seemingly never goes out.

She is simultaneously intrigued and put off by his large direct presence. Gradually the intrigue wins and she overtly seduces him (echoes of Belle du Jour). Mind blowing, graphic, complicated and frequent sex ensues.

It seems as though what Marie is getting from the relationship is more important to her than her husband (desolate), child (confused and weepy) or invalid mother (disapproving, though at least seems to show a flicker of understanding when Marie explains the attraction of sex with Bill being that Bill "invades" her).

The story fairly bowls along and Ann Coesens (Marie) is riveting throughout. The best acting in the course of sex I have ever seen.

The sex is not at all pornographic, actually - although pretty graphic, it serves to explore Marie's motivation rather than titillate.

Bill is something of a cypher: the figure of Temptation. Marie is given much more space to develop than any of the other characters - but Cousens' performance fills the screen.

Recommended.

It's a common theme where an ex-marital affair almost destroys a seemingly happy family. Under the pretence of a heavy workload promoting the sale of a "World Encyclopaedia". Marie makes repeated visits to Bill a dance director who formerly had his own Dance Theatre in America. He is big and strong and dominant and black. On her second visit after a whiskey or two she disrobes while he is answering a telephone call in an upstairs room. Imagine his surprise when he returns. She virtually offers herself to him. I cannot believe what I am watching. No subtlety at all. It seems a most improbable situation. Just a wisp of a woman and a mountain of flesh!

Apparently Marie finds excitement in their continuing sexual encounters (although she shows very little emotion) and is constantly knocking on his door for more. He is happy to be of service. His sexual acts become increasingly wild and violent and love bites on her neck finally give her little game away.

The acting throughout is truly professional, even their baby boy is great and lovable. The script is questionable at times. The ending in the swimming pool is utterly ridiculous. I guess the script writers are trying to tell us something...they are giving us a symbolic gesture of cleansing...a washing away of past sins...and a promise of a new beginning.

The 3 stars I give this are for the performances - little else is worthy of respect. The direction and cinematography are completely flat, and the script is a mixed bag.

Where the film really falls apart though is in the behaviour of the central character. We begin with a woman who has apparently spent 12 years happily married (at least the couple appear happy at the start of the film), and who remained faithful during that time, save one brief kiss with a neighbour. She begins an affair with a man she meets whilst working, and instantly becomes an entirely new character - one that feels no guilt or sympathy towards her husband, in fact who seems to actively seek to humiliate him, and who almost allows her child to fall to its death. No explanation for this U turn into an amoral narcissist is even hinted at, and the character's own explanation consists of little more than a brief burst of existentialist waffle at the end of the film. Ultimately, the character is completely unbelievable, as her actions are irreconcilable with her history.