Let’s talk about sex, baby! Or rather, let’s talk about sex scenes and why I am conflicted when it comes to the impending release of Netflix’s Obsession. By all means, my favourite actor playing the lead in a show that has been dubbed an “erotic thriller” shouldn’t get this fangirl’s knickers in a twist but be a reason to rejoice. Or should it? Since the release of the trailer yesterday, and even before that, as teasers and pictures trickled from the set in advance of the premiere, it has become clear that Netflix is really not lying when they are promoting this show as “steamy”. Reactions to the trailer on Social Media have been overwhelmingly positive. It looks as if the promise of bondage, plenty of skin, and explicit sex scenes is getting the majority of fans and audience pretty hot under the collar – and in both ways, as a small handful of people have also voiced their displeasure with the explicit nature of the show and the themes of seduction, adultery and promiscuity.
My own response is somewhere in the middle of all that. Up until now I have felt cautious, if not downright trepidatious about Richard starring in the raunchy remake of a successful 1990s film. And my reticent reaction has made me curious about the motivations and reasons for what appears like uptight prudishness on my part. Why am I less than enthusiastic to see my favourite actor in the nip and perform intimate scenes? One would think that I, as an “infatuated” fan, would be thrilled to see “more” of my favourite actor. Material for Kopfkino, if you get my drift. And if I am honest, I won’t be looking away in shame when Richard’s gorgeous arse is going to grace the screen in two weeks’ time. My curiosity will get the better of my inhibitions, of that I am sure. But yeah, there are some reservations that have kept me from expressing my joy at what is to come.
In the hope that we can have a respectful, interesting discussion in the context of Obsession about the issue of explicit sex and themes of seduction, promiscuity and sexual obsession – and our reactions to that, I am opening up about my own expectations, hopes and trepidations about the forthcoming drama. The intention here is *not* to discredit dissenting opinions or to question Richard’s role choices. If anything, Richard has proven again and again that his choice of roles highlights his desire to challenge himself (and his audience???) with new material and genres. I appreciate that his role choices have widened my own horizons (enjoying both fantasy as in TH and highly stylised suspense veering in to horror as in Hannibal despite previous reservations about either). Neither do I want to persuade anyone to change their approach to this (or any other sexually explicit) show. Whether we want to watch the impending erotic thriller or not, is entirely up to ourselves. Berating *others* for their decision to watch or not, is beside the point. No need for personal criticism!
Ad res!
Having pondered the whole topic over the last few days, I have identified a number of issues that can be subsumed under three different POVs – the fangirl’s viewpoint, the female film audience’s perspective, and the personal POV. BTW, we are talking specifically about Obsession, not about other explicit films. (I am usually not shocked by explicit sex, whether in literature or on film.)
As a female filmgoer
Much time has passed since the original film, entitled Damage, was released in 1992. I am pretty sure I saw the film then. It was huge, it had a well-known cast (Jeremy Irons and Juliette Binoche) and director (Louis Malle) and it made waves thanks to its explicit eroticism. Unfortunately that is mainly all I remember of it – which may already say a lot and account for my concerns with the new adaptation. The 1990s film was visually devised with the male gaze in mind. Whether Anna (the young woman) was an active driver of the plot or not, the depiction of the “young seductress” objectified her and made her the victim. It’s unfair to presuppose that Obsession is going to go down the same route, so I hope this is a pit-fall that the new adaption will circumnavigate. 30 years later it simply is not acceptable (for me) to see a drama about sexual obsession victimise and objectify a female character for the benefit of garnering sympathy for a male character. One of the two directors cited for Obsession is a woman. Among the producers are four women – I trust that they have made sure that the female gaze is predominant in their film.
Nevertheless, I am also concerned that a drama that has been promoted with so much emphasis on the sex scenes, may not do justice to the psychological dimension of the plot. Essentially, the series should be about sexuality – the inexplicable attraction between two people against better knowledge etc etc – rather than sex. It’s a balance that is hard to achieve. The sex is undoubtedly an essential part of the drama as it visualises the addictive nature of the characters’ relationship. But it’s a slippery slope down to gratuitous nudity which all too often doesn’t serve the plot but merely viewer gratification. And I would hate to see my favourite actor involved – even if inadvertently – in something that could potentially come across as misogynist. It’s not so much about the explicit sex in this regard. With Anna (hopefully) given more agency in this iteration, the danger is that she will have to shoulder the responsibility for the catastrophe. Here’s hoping that feminist scriptwriter Morgan Lloyd Malcolm has Anna’s (and the female audience’s) best interests at heart!
The fangirl perspective
This is a tricky one, because I don’t want anyone to feel I am personally berating them. I firmly believe that everyone must fan the way they fan, and that there is no absolute right or wrong. Some people are in it for the looks, others need the cerebral celebration of the OOA. Both are equally valid and most of the time there is a cross-over between the approaches. It’s unfortunate that an unflattering stereotype of “the fangirl” exists – voyeuristic, fanatic, obsessive. Shows like Obsession might attract attention from those who are looking for reasons to gender-stereotype and shame us (fans) once again. And I hate being stereotyped thus. (Not a convincing argument for me to not see the show, though, since me watching or not watching the series will not have an impact on gender-biased sexists who are seeking to discriminate against women.)
But here is a weird one that I have been pondering: As a long-standing fan of Richard’s, I have come to the point where I feel an (of course entirely one-sided) familiarity with him. Yep, 10 years of reading articles, interviews and blogposts, devouring photo shoots, listening to podcasts and watching films of the man have created the illusion of “knowing” him. And you know the way you wouldn’t want to walk in on your friend having sex? Yeah, there is a hint of that when I think of Richard performing intimate scenes. Overthinking much, Guylty? Right on! He’s playing a role and he’s not himself, so if anyone, I am walking in on William…
The personal POV
Without going into too much detail here, my reticence regarding the erotic thriller says probably more about me than about the show. If brutally honest, my trepidation is likely much more based on personal sensitivities than on the more rational arguments listed above. And I do not mean morals when I talk about personal sensitivities. In a way, Obsession *is* a morality play, albeit hoisted into the 21st century, concerned with right and wrong, obligations and selfish gratification. Topics such as adultery and promiscuity are interesting to me – they are part of the human experience. But maybe, just maybe, at this point in *my* (middle-aged) life, I am less interested in the visual representation of these topics, than the emotional and psychological dimensions of them.
To conclude – the upshot of it all is that I have convinced myself that the material is in good hands. Plenty of women are involved in the production, which makes me expect a sensitive exploration of an explosive plot. The participation of an intimacy coach in the filming of the explicit material will hopefully make sure that the sex scenes are both sensitively and sensually choreographed without exposing the performers (and the audience) to gratuitous nudity. I actually also trust Richard – especially since he recently seems to be emphasising his reluctance to be cast as “the guy who takes his shirt off” – to have chosen this role for the artistic scope. He’s always had a great instinct for challenging material that offers him the opportunity to hone his craft, to display his abs… ooops… abilities and to foster discussion. It’ll be alright. And if it all gets too much, I’ll just lean back, close my eyes, and think of England. 😂
So, comments welcome – from those who enthusiastically look forward to the series, those who are on the fence, and those who are not enchanted by the prospect of flesh and flashing. Let’s keep it light and respectful 😉
Guylty Pleasure 
I think your reservations mirror my own, only you have articulated them much better than I could! I’m still not sure if I’ll watch it or not. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m simply baffled by my own reticence. It’s not as if I don’t appreciate the fine form of a well-shaped man or woman… I’ll definitely watch it, though, not least because I want to see what Richard does with the material – and whether the show manages to refrain from stereotyping the female main character.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’ve put a number of questions which I’ve been asking myself, but I realise that what’s really putting me off, and the reason why I won’t be watching, is because I really dislike the theme of people justifying satisfying their own gratifications but at the same time wanting to retain other relationships, and I would rather not watch my favourite actor in it. But that’s me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And that is a perfectly valid reason why you have decided against watching. Admittedly, there is more to the series than the sex. The “fatal attraction” aspect of the story is not to everyone’s taste.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Guylty, for such a thoughtful and, for me, healing discussion. For me, the subject of the story is more problematic than the sex. A father in a torrid affair with his son’s fiance. And also, a woman’s affair with her fiance’s father. I do understand that the book and 1990’s movie dealt with the emotional and psychological, not to mention tragic, consequences. I will be interested in how this is handled in this version.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am glad that you have found some views in this discussion that you could identify with, Andrea. The material (of the show) is problematic – or rather, how to tell that story within the parameters of what is allowed on TV and still reaching the maximum amount of people. Personally, I probably also feel more interested in the dynamic and the internal and external conflicts of the characters. But then again, the show is labelled as an erotic thriller, not a psychological thriller, so the makers are giving us a clear indication what their intention with the show is.
LikeLike
Thanks, G, so good to know I’m not the only one with ambivalent feelings about this. I do intend to watch it, but the emphasis so far on the sex and bondage aspect has me a bit leery.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hehe, better leery than leering 😉. No, but in all seriousness, sometimes it is actually a good thing to go into a film/series with some well thought-through reservations. I’m open to being convinced of the artistic and dramatic merits of the show. And now, that I have figured out why I have been so reticent, even more so. Looking forward to it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on pamelakeenanblog and commented:
Interesting summation Guylty. I have read the book and seen the older version of the film. I feel the change of title is odd as ‘damage’ is exactly what I see and feel when looking at this book. I felt Jeremy Irons was extremely wooden emotionally in portrayal of William. Julie Binoche however was wonderful. Whilst seeing physically more of Richard always gladdens my heart I always find that it the emotional side that he brings that moves me the most. Unfortunately to book it as they have can cause worries but Richard would not choose a part when sexually eroticec scenes were there for gratification. The emotional acting he will bring to this series I think will elevate this way about what is being portrayed as. I’m looking forward to seeing it & as I have the opportunity I’ll be going Tu the preview and Q & A at the BFI next week. I can’t turn down the opportunity to see Richard twice in one month especially as he’ll probably be bombing off to NY very soon.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I share your trust in Richard’s well thought-through choice of roles. There is obviously more to the script than sex, and he is interested in portraying that obsessively, fatally attracted man. I have no doubt that he will bring depth and nuance to the character. Hopefully the script and cinematography will do so equally. For me, a lot will also ride on how Anna comes across.
I hope you will share your thoughts and impressions of the show (minus spoilers) after you have seen the preview and Q&A. That is definitely an opportunity not to miss. Probably more unmissable than last weekend’s Coben book launch. Alas, unfortunately it’s my daughter’s birthday on the 7th and I could not in good conscience justify another trip to London, especially on those days…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Understandably in the circumstances Guylty I’ll do my best x
LikeLiked by 2 people
Interesting thoughts…I admit I haven’t found much time to reflect on my expectations and my opinion on all of that. I’m quite intrigued though. Because…also perhaps a bit strange to say…I have developed a kind of trust into Richards job choices. In the past I nearly always found something interesting, some aspect of a topic I hadn’t thought of before. So I’m positively expecting this effect too about this piece of work. I’m pretty certain I wouldn’t watch this without Richard having raised my interest. And about the hopes on seeing a female version of the story I read an interview with Charlie Murphy who had high praises about exactly that.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I don’t think that trust in Richard’s role choices is a strange reason at all, Dorothea! I completely agree with you. RA has never really disappointed me in that regard (even though there are some films of his that I haven’t watched.)
Yes, I read Murphy’s interview (in an Irish newspaper, btw), too. Here’s hoping she is not promising too much. She seems like a straightforward, smart woman. But yeah, it’s a tough one in this show. On the one hand I would like to see the female character empowered – but not with the consequence of making her the scapegoat.
One thing is for sure – we are already talking about this show… Sex sells – even to the prudes 😂
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s obviously true…🤣
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have only been aware of Richard’s work for two years. In that time I’ve tried to watch as much of his work as I can. Somewhat difficult as some of his work is not available in Canada. But I have learned to trust his instincts. I understand that the media often/usually focusses on the salacious nature of a story as opposed to the actually story. I’m hoping that the story is as strong as I expected to be.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I suppose it is to be expected that the sex scenes get priority in the promotion of the show. And sex is essential in the story as such, so it has to be included. I have high hopes that they have indeed modernised the material. Whether I love all of Richard’s projects or not, he’s always had a good reason for his choices, and that inspires trust.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Great breakdown, and as you see from the earlier comments, your reticence is mirrored by a few of us.I’ve been reading (wikipedia etc) about ethical and feminist erotica in comparison with mainstream pornography. I think the makers of this series will have done their best. More interviews coming online from the cast that talk about this and the use of an intimacy coordinator. The difficulty, I think, is that we have seen a mainstream trailer only. The trailer markets this series without emphasising the producers USP, that this is erotica from the ‘female gaze’? I am hopeful the series will be better than the trailer? One example is that Richard is looking (earnestly) into Anna’s eyes whilst they are together – it is her pleasure he is seeking? That’s not a typical pornography care point, nit that I’ve watched much at all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It was precisely because I read some measured comments on Twitter from people who also had some reservations about the material, that I decided to explore my issues a bit closer. Like yourself, I also delved into theory. And I checked out the women who are at the helm of this show. They have good credentials, and that inspires trust. I am a bit surprised how much fuss they are making about the use of an intimacy coordinator, though. I thought that was standard practice in this day and age? In any case, I am glad that the presence of the intimacy coordinator provided a safe space for Charlie Murphy and Richard to play these difficult scenes. In her interview with the Independent she mentioned that they “thankfully did not start filming with the intimate scenes but had time to get to know each other beforehand.” I am appalled that that apparently isn’t always the case. It seems downright malicious to me to throw two actors into those highly demanding scenes, however comfortable they might be with nudity. I really think that the film industry needs to establish binding rules in that regard, to protect actors – both female and male.
LikeLiked by 3 people
An article including Richard’s thoughts on Obsession! A good critique of the original book & film too! https://twitter.com/rcarmitage/status/1641833965911769093
LikeLiked by 2 people
Richard mentions other actors previously having sec on film as a badge of honour. I hope all partied involved fully consented?
LikeLiked by 1 person
That comment had me somewhat confused. Badge of honour? Because they are doing “the real thing” rather than faking? In a true-to-life kind of way? *shrugs* I guess that is a possible approach, although I’d personally not expect actors to go all that far in order perform a sex scene convincingly.
LikeLiked by 2 people
in relation to that I liked what his costar said about the choreography of the love scenes protecting her from relying too much on her own experiences, that it lets them play the scene *as* their characters.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yep, and RA also pointed out that each and every fist fight on film is choreographed, so why isn’t a sex scene. It’s a very good point. And Charlie Murphy’s comment was really good. Sex scenes are easily misunderstood as the personal experience (preferences, kinks) of the actors feeding the performance. Making it a choreography separates the actor from the act.
BTW, I was a bit dismissive initially that they were making such a fuss about talking of their intimacy coordinator as if it was something new and ground-breaking. But our conversation here already shows that it has sparked further discussion. Not only of (the filming of) sex scenes as such but also the separation between actor and role. I find that fascinating.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Interesting article in the Guardian by Zoe Williams. She mentions that “Richard is remarkably convincing as a dominant but in real life he is very submissive!” I was quite shocked by this apparent admission! 😮 It begs the question how does she know? Did Richard tell her? I would not have divulged this kind of information if I had been Richard…so incredibly personal and private. Now I can’t help thinking of Richard in a “dungeon”, wearing a gimp mask, trussed up like a turkey whilst dangling from the ceiling, being given 50 lashes!….Hmm ….awaken the dominatrix within! 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Richard has said he’s quite a passivist in real life though he’s known for action roles. In BDSM, as I understand it, the submissive should be the one in control, ie both should know and respect their ‘safe’ word? 😬 I think this is what they are saying about the Anna character. I din’t think the writer was referring to Richard sexually, just his natural caring nature? But of course you are free to imagine … 🙈🤣
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, I think the writer was referring to Richard’s personality b/c he would allude to something and be really hesitant about following through with the thought, so much so that she had to coax it out of him. and yes, in BDSM (as I understand it) the Dominant has the physical power but the Submissive can ‘safe word’ at any time to stop, so they have power too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, my impression also.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just re- read section of article. You are right Kelly! I mis- read section. On reflection, I think the Journalist is actually poking a bit of fun at Richard. 😆
LikeLiked by 1 person
The writer may not meant to have been referred to Richard’s submissiveness in a sexuality related way but given the context of the article, the subject matter being discussed, and the focus of the Obsession narrative, I think it could very easily be read that way if you didn’t know much about Richard and were not a fan. That’s why I was shocked….I wouldn’t be thanking the journalist for her phrasing if I was Richard.
Nonetheless I am looking forward to watching Obsession after all this discussion, my curiosity well and truly piqued; just hope it doesn’t end up being a bit of an anti-climax! 😅
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks, yes. Guylty reminded us of his book, so perhaps the writer was hinting at SM, as Daniel and Helen use this in Geneva too?
LikeLike
Agree with you that that passage could easily be misread. In Martin Freeman’s words: Richard’s “publicist is having a coronary”…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Oh yes! I hope he sees the funny side!
Agree, there is a lot to unpack in article. It’s his responses, not Charlie Murphy”s, that get my eyebrows raised…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Same here. I was surprised by his rather absolute pronouncements on the utmost importance of an all-consuming orgasm…
LikeLiked by 3 people
and if you’ve never had an obsessive all-consuming sexual relationship then he feels pity for you…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very unfortunate choice of word. 😬 I don’t think many people appreciate being pitied…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep. Why did he go there? He didn’t have to make those kind of pronouncements. I think Freud would have a field day…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Control in BDSM: Isn’t there this coinage “power exchange”? I think that describes the approach very aptly: The submissive willingly relinquishes the control to the dominant – in sexual matters. So the dominant exerts control, but only within an environment (a set of rules) “controlled” by the submissive.
LikeLiked by 2 people
So when MLM describes Anna as a dominant submissive that means Anna is in control of the encounter but ALSO sets the rules (even though she is the one being bound, etc.?
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is how I would understand it. But it is a weird term. I have read erotica where the concept is more aptly described as “topping from the bottom”.
LikeLike
What?! Oh Lord, this entire discussion makes me feel so old and out of touch. I’m just going to have faith that Richard knew what he was doing when he signed on to this project. Then just grit my teeth, keep my fingers crossed, and try to watch with an open mind.
LikeLike
Touché, Zigzag, that’s how that passage in the interview came across. Although I thought she did not mean that as a fact or as something he had disclosed about himself. Rather, that the way he was easily persuaded by her insistence that he finishes his sentence, proves that he is submissive to other people’s demands rather than stand by his decisions. But yeah, that whole passage can easily be misunderstood either way. Tbh there were a couple of other comments by him, though, that I found either very clumsily expressed or better unsaid.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Re: the graf that begins with ” Armitage … is convincing … as dominant” should have ended right there imo. The author says he tends to not finish his sentences, then precedes to include some of those half thoughts/utterances. No wonder they don’t make much sense! Knowing how a subject’s words can be misinterpreted by the interviewer and then misunderstood by the reader, this graf did nothing to dispel the WTF?! reaction many appeared to have.
LikeLike
Yes, I also thought the rest of the sentence was superfluous. I took it as an attempt by the writer to be funny. Surely, submissiveness in the bedroom is not defined by how easily convinced one is to finish a sentence… There was a lot of good stuff in the article, but the quotes were weird, possibly misleading.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh my. Thank you so much for flagging that. I read it last night and have to admit my jaw dropped! There’s some stuff in there that should really be unpacked. But it also really shed light on what we can expect from the show. There is no question that it will be uncompromisingly focussed on the sex. I am actually glad to know this now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, G, for putting this issue into perspective. I, too, was anxious about Rich appearing in Obsession, having read the book and seen the 1992 film. The trailer did nothing to alleviate my trepidations. But I had to remind myself it’s just a trailer, designed to elicit the strongest feelings in potential viewers and draw people to the show. Then I read interviews with the screenwriter Morgan Lloyd-Malcolm and Charlie Murphy (Anna) and am now much more inclined to expect a sensitive retelling of the story, one that will address the issue from all sides and, most especially (for me anyway), be the kind of vehicle that has challenged Rich, elicited a top-notch performance from him, and one that he can personally be proud of. In light of recent statements where he seemed less than satisfied with the acting side of his career, my only hope is that this role fulfills his artistic needs. After all, if he’s proud of his work that will reflect in his performances, and we all benefit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s a good point re. the trailer. Of course, they are promoting their “erotic thriller” with material that highlights exactly that. It’ll be interesting to see how this version of the story differs from the 30 yo original and I am really looking forward to exploring the retelling from a female POV.
I can totally see why RA would’ve seen the material as a new challenge for him. Sure, he has taken his shirt off before. And it is a normal part of his job. But this seems to be much more explicit than his previous nude scenes. Plus, working with a feminist screenwriter and a team of female directors/producers is most likely also a different experience than his usual work in the male-dominated industry. He likes his challenges, and this one is definitely a new one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting. I’ve kind of gone off Richard a bit and so my first thought every time something comes out is that maybe this will rekindle my interest. My second thought was a bit of a giggle that, for a guy who thought no one would want to see a 50-something man without his kit on, he is still willing to take on a role that requires it.
I don’t mind a bit of titillation, especially if there is emotional tension involved and it is well-done. That being said, I couldn’t make myself sit through a full 50 Shades movie — not enough to hold my interest and with the woman in a very weak position.
When I really did question Richard’s judgment was with that Wanderlust audiobook. Not well written or researched. Listening to his shower scene really did seem voyeuristic. Yikes.
Regardless, I am actually looking forward to Obsession. We’ll see if it revives my “obsession”. Lol.
LikeLiked by 4 people
😉 I think we all rolled our eyes a little bit when Richard – having complained of being cast as eye candy too much – announced his participation in an erotic thriller. Good for him though that he is willing to bare all in serving artistic needs.
I’ve never even seen even one minute of “50 shades”. (Read a pirated copy of the book, though. That is: skimmed through it from sex scene to sex scene, getting frustrated from chapter 1 at the timid, wet-flannel characterisation of the heroine. Ugh.) Not sure whether RA as the male lead would’ve made me watch that.
That audio book was such a weird choice of his. I can’t remember where he said this, but he recently mentioned in some interview something that made me think he was talking of Wanderlust. I think it was in context of role/project choices, and he said that only once in his career he didn’t really check what he had signed up for and he regretted his decision. It made me wonder whether he meant Wanderlust. It’s quite possible that he saw that he was offered a “romance” and did not realise that “romance” as a genre nowadays is not just a romantic plotline focussed on love relationships, but often (always?) includes explicit sex.
Fingers crossed that Obsession relights your fire 😉
LikeLiked by 4 people
That’s interesting about Wanderlust. I’ve often wondered which show Richard wanted to withdraw from. It didn’t occur to me that it could be an audiobook. You might be right!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Do you remember when and where he said that. Was it even last weekend in convo with Coben? I can’t for the life of me remember where he said that…
LikeLiked by 2 people
If it was the same occasion it was at the RDC5 Q&A. I think Richard wanted to withdraw from a project and his agent persuaded him not to.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He said something there about being extremely loyal to a production once he has signed up for it, yes. But that wasn’t the quote I had in mind. With the commentary here having moved on since we were responding here, it has already been corroborated that I must have heard it at the Coben convo.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I just rewatched the Coben Convo and couldn’t catch any reference to the project he regrets taking. Do you recall when in the program it occurred?
LikeLike
Unfortunately not. I only recall that this was said very recently, and the only occasion I can think of, is the convo.
LikeLike
I think it was Between the Sheets, but I couldn’t give you chapter and verse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, that could be it. Thanks!
LikeLike
I think he did make that comment at the Coben thing this past week, and I wondered the same thing about Wanderlust.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You know thinking about it he did say something like that too at the Coben Q&A, about using difficulties off-camera to aid performance.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Great, thanks for corroborating that, too!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Great, thanks for corroborating that, S! I thought it was there but wasn’t entirely sure. But it stood out to me because in the past RA has always maintained that he stood behind each and every of his projects, no matter how successful or how well/badly received by the public. (All to his credit.) And this admission was quite honest and human, too. I totally do not blame him for that. Plus, it’s a tiny bit funny, if he was really referring to Wanderlust…
LikeLiked by 2 people
I remember his first mention of regret about not reading something through before accepting it, snd can imagine it was Wanderlust, because that’s quite tame in the first half of the book? And he’s not done anything similar since? 😬😅 So Obsession must have been a bit daunting. I wonder if his mention about past sex scene experiences when the director would set up and then everyone leave and just keep the cameras rolling was about Between the Sheets? That’s probably the last most explicit scened he did – bare bottom jiggling! 😬😅 I think his experiences on this movie, and his working relationship with Charlie, might have helped him to come out publicly about his own sexuality?
LikeLike
Exactly. Wanderlust appears quite fluffy and romantic – and when the “romance” blossoms, it doesn’t shy away from the explicit sex. I like to imagine RA sitting in his recording booth, separated from the sound engineer through a window, performing the explicit scenes and breaking down in giggles. No shade on the romance genre. I have enjoyed reading romance books myself. It’s just that I personally prefer it all playing in my head than having it read or visualised for me.
I can definitely see how Obsession is a valid challenge for any actor. I mean, getting the balance between eroticism and porn right, is already a matter of deciding what to show and how far to go. For the actors it may also be pushing their own boundaries of how much they want to expose themselves physically. And also working with an intimacy coordinator may have been something that RA was curious about – especially if it is as you argue/ask (no guidance in BTS). Both Charlie Murphy and RA are really pushing the envelope with their roles, I think. There is definitely a lot of courage, curiosity and openness involved in order to perform the two roles.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When he made that comment, I immediately thought of Wanderlust. For me it’s been the one “off” narration out of all the audiobooks he has done, the oddest choice of all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It doesn’t really fit into the rest of his audio oeuvre. With Obsession under his belt, it may now seem different. But at the time I also thought it was somewhat contradictory that he was engaging with such material while being very clear about keeping his TL clean.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The main bugbear I have is the other performer in Wanderlust wasn’t very good? The character was from the South of US, went to a northern US college, then returned to the South before going to France. Yet she doesn’t have a southern US accent? 🤔😂
LikeLike
Agree that the female Wanderlust narrator seemed totally out of place voicing Joy. TY for offering one explanation (accent), but truthfully, I just didn’t think she sounded like the woman I would have pictured with Griffin. BTW, until Obsession, Wanderlust was my RA guilty pleasure. So sue me! 🤣
LikeLiked by 2 people
It was definitely jaw-dropping for me when Griffin was first in the shower! 🙈😂 Richard said he had enjoyed playing a 30 year old, which would have been difficult in a visual medium when he was already mid 40s? 😬
I’m not sure if the Joy narrator is a bad actor 😬, I didn’t like the character actually.😅 I’ve met chemists involved in perfumerie and I don’t think the author researched that very well, which put me off the audiobook and author.☹️ I’ve relistened to a few key chapters again, but not for awhile! 😜 I have a huge ‘to be read/listened to list’ and Wanderlust is mediocre, to me, apart from the Richard uniquely ‘talking dirty’? 🤓😝
LikeLike
I also thought it was mediocre. And hearing RA’s voice talking dirty just didn’t convince me. Somehow, with the way he has policed his TL, I have this “prim and proper” image of him in my head, and I could just not get over my *own* imagination, seeing him break up laughing over the stuff he had to read… Haha, I guess I was wrong – his role choice proves that he is not as prudish as I thought 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can’t really make any judgments on US accents, but I also did not find her as good as RA, and within the piece as a whole it grated that *RA* used different accents and “acted” the part, whereas she had only one accent and seemed much less characterful in her performance. But overall, I just didn’t think the quality of the material was all that good…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Found it! Graham Norton’s Book Club podcast ep 4, mid- February. Rich and Nicola talking about recording Geneva and how they prep for narrating a book. Rich admits there’s one he got halfway thru and wished he’d turned it down. Shower scene in Wanderlust is ch 16 of 36. Give G a prize! 👏
Me? I wasn’t even close. My brain immediately went to Christie’s Poirot series because of all the French characters he had to voice (and according to Rich, he only has one French accent! 🤣)
LikeLike
Ah brilliant. Yes! That’s where I heard it. thank you for finding that out, Lou! I still think that he was hinting at Wanderlust. I would have thought that he still relished the challenge of Poirot, despite the many different French characters to voice…
LikeLiked by 1 person
🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
La sécurité ne serait pas assurée sur TikTok, Netflix ou Instagram…
Désolée , cette série n’occupera pas mes soirées.
J’avais apprécié le film: “My Zoe” . Mais, à cause du sujet traité , il fut ostracisé. Shade!
LikeLike
Oh, I recently watched My Zoe for the first time, too. I thought it was interesting, although somehow strangely different as if it was made from two halves. And the ending really had me flummoxed.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I do like is acting, Julie Delpy succedded in taking the best from his “art” (trosdem clothed on from beginning to the end).
LikeLike
Junie Delpy succeded in revealing his “art” his best acting skills, even without any clothe off
LikeLiked by 1 person
The movie is asking the good question of sciences versus ethics.
LikeLiked by 1 person
et les excès délirant de
l’ amour maternel.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The premise was really interesting. I wasn’t quite into the resolution of it all. But yes, Richard, as usual delivered.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve been avoiding watching it because of the death of a child in it. I couldn’t face watching that, but I’m hoping I can watch it later this year. 🥴
LikeLike
I hope too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That was exactly the reason why it has taken me so long to finally watch it. And that whole part of the show was tough to watch. I did cry.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I´ve always been more (maybe too?) sensitive than others, I want to see “real” acting, facial expressions, drama, etc. and think less is more but too often (at least for my taste) I got quite the opposite and often saw so many comments that made me cringe tbh. What you say about feeling like walking in on a friend describes it very well, in my case it´s my older brother, by chance I thought exactly that a couple of days ago… I admit I was really upset and said I would stay away from it but after seeing that they apparently put a lot of thought and effort into their approach to get all aspects “right” it got better for me. I´m still not comfortable at all and haven´t decided if I´m going to watch though, we´ll see. And I´m relieved to find that there are quite a lot of people who have reservations, more than I expected and some of them actually surprised me tbh, I often felt like I was pretty much alone in the past…
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t necessarily think that sexual content excludes the possibility of nuanced, serious, emotive acting. Surely, in this case we *know* that Richard will imbue the character with his trademark nuance, even if the sex scenes are an integral part of the piece. But it’s perfectly fine if explicit sex is not your cup of tea. It may be a good idea to give the show a chance. Like you said – from what we have heard from the women at the helm of this production, they seem to have approached the material from a female (if not feminist) POV. That could make for a very interesting take on the plot. It’s totally up to ourselves to switch off when or if we feel uncomfortable. BTW, I don’t think that any of Richard’s work is universally liked or welcomed by his fans. A lot of people simply don’t voice their reservations.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sorry for being so late with replying… Of course sexual content doesn´t necessarily exclude nuanced acting but it´s often used for the sake of it and distracts from the nuanced and emotive acting. Richard always challenges himself to grow as an actor and I really admire him for that and most of the time also trust him with his choices, he often provides me with food for thought. I read and watched a lot of the coverage and interviews about Obsession and found that it´s actually not that different in terms of challenging oneself and that I´m getting more relaxed with it (much to my surprise to be honest), it´s just a genre I´m usually uncomfortable with (and thought he was, too). It also helps to see that there are obviously quite a lot of people who had/have their reservations and the discussion here is great as well. And it´s true, his work is surely not always liked by everyone.
LikeLike
I have felt the same, and the recent spate of interviews and info from the actors and others has helped me as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, and especially with yesterday’s Guardian article I feel that we now know more what to expect from the show. It’ll help people make up their mind whether they want to watch it or not. That’s a good thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It´s the same for me…
LikeLike
I’m finding this discussion interesting b/c I’m surprised that so many fans here are ambivalent about this production. ‘back in the day’ I think most would’ve been in Heaven with something so seemingly sexy that will show so much skin, meanwhile I would have been watching with my hands over my eyes, lol! ((I had to turn away from Berlin Station’s wallbanging b/c I was too embarrassed to watch. I’m a regular reader of erotica, I just can’t watch it 😛 ) now though I’m actually looking forward to seeing what he does with a role like this. I know nothing of the book or the prior movie but the trailer sets a very sensual tone and seems like it will be tastefully done. the sexual obsession angle sounds intriguing to me and as others have said, I don’t think Richard would have signed on to a role like this unless there was some real substance to the story/he felt challenged by the character.
having said all of that, I totally get where you’re coming from with the voyeur ‘I can’t watch my friend have sex’ angle, b/c that’s how I generally feel with my favorite actors. I delve into their offscreen character so much, what makes them tick and how they think and what they’re passionate about, etc. that I really grow to respect and admire them. so when I see them take their clothes off, it almost feels like it’s tarnishing a sacred thing for me. admittedly I can be rather prudish, even though I throw around sexual innuendos left and right. I’m always a contradiction 😀
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m NOT prudish, but feel the same about not wanting an actor I admire (both on and off screen) to do anything that might tarnish his rep.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve been wondering about that, too. At the beginning of my fan journey I might have been much less inhibited about Richard in a sexy role. It would have fitted in with my (then) newly inspired imagination. Meanwhile, time has passed, we’ve learnt more about RA, and needs and preferences have changed over time. To me it still looks like the overwhelming majority of feedback is positive, and only a small minority of people have been on the fence. Much of the feedback, btw, is happening outside of our small circle of oldtimers. I had a look at IG yesterday and there was hardly a sceptical voice among all the enthusiastic responses. There are probably plenty of newer fans active on other platforms of whom we don’t even know, and they are chomping at the bit to experience a sexy and uninhibited RA in his latest role.
Respect and admiration vs enjoying the (nude) performance of the favourite actor – I wonder whether we are overthinking this, Kelly. I agree with you there – it feels forbidden to leer at the actor’s nude form. And yet, sexism aside, that is part of their job, isn’t it, to evoke responses from the audience? They have agreed to performing in an explicitly sexual show, so the appreciation of the audience in that regard should not only be expected but also allowed. So, yeah, I think I’ll give myself permission to appreciate what I will be presented with.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t mean to imply that ‘sex and admiration’ is in opposition to visually enjoying nude scenes or that they are separate from each other, I was just referring to my own preferences/struggles. you can certainly respect an actor and still enjoy them in a nude scene. I personally am someone who is uncomfortable with sex scenes in film that have very little to do with plot or character building. I’m also someone who shys away from skimpy bathing suits and underwear ads, so it’s not a pretentious literary or art based aversion, it’s simply the abundance of skin. b/c I think skin is the sexiest ‘sex organ’ and so I prefer not to see it displayed too casually? I don’t even know what I’m saying at this point, lol. after viewing this movie trailer I feel that in this instance the nudity has everything to do with the plot and it’s relation to the psychological aspects of the story (if I’m wrong please correct me on that b/c like I said, I know nothing of the book or prior movie) and so I’m looking forward to seeing how that plays out while at the same time knowing that I’ll be seeing a lot more of Richard than we might normally see but being okay with that b/c of the setting. and he does have a beautiful body, so it will be aesthetically pleasing to watch. b/c sometimes you might see an actor that you’re growing to like, with his clothes off, and it’s not what you were expecting, like you don’t like the pattern of their chest hair or their backside is nothing to write home about, and you’re like ‘damn, that’s unfortunate’ and it ruins the allure. I hate when that happens. 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Beaucoup d’acteurs ont recours à une doublure pour les scènes dénudées. Si Richard Armitage préfère jouer “himself” ces scènes, il doit en retirer plusieurs “bonnes” raisons, voire satisfactions. Peut-être, pourrait- il être rémunéré en fonction du nombre de cm2 de chair exposé et de la durée d’exposition à l’ écran? “Bad joke!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
exposée
LikeLike
hahaha, now, at 6’2” he’d make a mint…
LikeLiked by 2 people
🐡🐬🐟
LikeLike
🐟🐠🐬🐡 premier avril oblige!
LikeLike
It certainly fits the day that is in it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Apologies from me. I didn’t really mean to sound as if I thought you believed admiration of an actor and enjoying nude scenes to be opposed. Although that is apparently a belief held by some fans. (No judgment implied.) I think you nail it with “skin is the sexiest sex organ and I prefer not to see it displayed too casually”. I think that some of the most attractive things about sex and intimacy is that not knowing/seeing *everything* maintains a mystique that creates even more attraction or temptation. For me, that also applies to my favourite actor. Not *knowing* what his private parts look like, maintains the fantasy and the mystique. Not sure if that is a contradiction to being a fan, but there 😂
LikeLiked by 2 people
exactly! you said what I meant so much better than I did 😛 😎
LikeLike
It’s just a real bummer (pun intended) that that approach is often misinterpreted as prudishness or inhibition. I think there is a lot to be said for the creation of sexual tension by *avoiding* full-frontal nudity.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks a lot, this is exactly what I meant earlier and it´s great to hear I´m not alone.
LikeLike
Well, they decided they wanted to take on the characters, so it’s to be hoped they are well acted, in all aspects. I guess it’s why some of this material survives the original films because they are more sensual in a way if well acted where as straight up explicit material isn’t 😀 You’d expect proper actors to convey the feeling of it better because that’s their job.
Maybe we’re making more of a fuss over it because he’s taken such a long time to do a character that includes quite a bit of sex on screen. If we put things in perspective, it’s just part of acting and depicting humans overall. Ewan McGregor, McAvoy, Hiddleston etc have done it at some point or other, Emma Thompson, Nicola Walker, etc It’s part of depicting humans and their lives on screen. One would hope they were well directed and the scenes were filmed in safe environments, which was probably the case in most cases i would think. It’s never something that defines their careers in time, it’s different roles and different requirements, it all passes and the focus always is on the next role, etc.
I hesitate to say it, it’s perceived maybe as a big deal because he’s made a big deal of taking his kit off or his appearance, which other actors generally dwell much less on it. It says more about him and his personal feelings about his roles/acting/person, than it does about nekkid scenes on screen in general.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said! I would hope his fans have faith that Rich has chosen roles based on artistic merits. He hasn’t made it easy though, has he?! His self-deprecating remarks re: his appearance and professed doubts about his career have muddied the waters big time. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that Rich and his fans will be proud of the work he’s done on Obsession.
LikeLike
I saw Emma Thompson in Good Luck To You Leo Grande last night before I saw mention of her in your above comment, Hariclea. I was a bit taken aback at her being in explicit sex scenes and her full frontal nudity but kudos to her for being so courageous as a more mature woman. I daresay a female director and screenwriter, plus the now mandatory intimacy coordinator would have helped her take on the requirements of the role. I’m also curious to see how the physical relationship between William and his wife is played out as a more mature couple.
LikeLiked by 1 person
She’s an admirable., lovely woman, i would love to be like her when i grow older 😉 She’s got some hilarious anecdotes about running round naked at her property in Scotland, nudity is not an issue 🙂 But i admire her for taking on the role; the world would have us whittle away and disappear as we grow older as women. She one to stand up and say we’re still very much alive 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
I saw that film recently, too, and really enjoyed it. The fact that she was completely nude in it in that pivotal scene at the end, felt really right to me. It was part of the character’s progression, and I am completely in awe of Thompson for baring it all. Were you taken aback because you had seen the clip quoted by Charlie Murphy? That clip, I presume, was part of promoting her film, hence Thompson talking about nudity and the need for a safe environment. She talked about having an intimacy coordinator on that shoot, and how it helped them all create these scenes.
LikeLike
I really enjoyed it, it was a delightful find browsing through Amazon Prime, and hadn’t been on my radar before then. I like Emma Thompson, there doesn’t seem to be any fakeness about her, but I don’t track her interviews etc. If one of her films turns up that appeals, then yes, I’ll watch it. Thus I was unaware of her propensity for running around in the nude but I love her chutzpah!
I can’t recall Charlie’s quote, will have to revisit the promo interviews (they’re getting jumbled in my head now), I was taken aback (not offended) simply because I never thought to see Thompson in explicit scenes. The role was absolutely made for her, but I guess I was expecting implied, fuzzy-around-the-edges intimacy if you know what I mean. That scene at the end was incredibly powerful. I read one review which said it was “creepy” but on the whole the reviews were very positive.
LikeLike
Agree with you – the full-frontal nude scene at the end was powerful. It was the visual representation of how far Thompson’s character had come, and the fact that the film (and Thompson) did not shy away from that, has my respect. How strange that one reviewer found that scene “creepy”. (Or did they mean the whole film?) The whole film was an intense chamber play – just those two characters and their psychological background. It really chimed with me. But that’s because I am a woman and am of that age, too. I wonder how it came across for younger women…
LikeLike
This is a really interesting discussion and comments, thank you. Despite my flippant comments about seeing Richard down & dirty, I do share these feelings somewhat of seeing someone now so familiar doing something so intimate (but perhaps once we get drawn into the drama and the characterisation this may pass). I hopefully will attend the preview next Thursday but hadn’t considered the effect of watching with many other people my OoA perform intimate scenes. I certainly wouldn’t want my reaction (stuffing my fist into my mouth, toes curling) to be filmed!
I not convinced cinema can be truly free of the male gaze, certainly not the voyeuristic aspects nor objectification. We shall see whether Anna is depicted as vamp or victim (neither positive stereotypes) hopefully something more nuanced, we shall see, we just don’t know yet.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hehe, I am even more relieved now that I can’t attend that BFI preview – watching intimate scenes together with a roomful of people also has me cringe a little bit 😉. But hey, it’s all art. It’s fine. But I am even more grateful that we will that way already get some insights prior to the general release. I hope you’ll share your impressions post-event!
In a male-dominated industry, the male gaze is probably ever-present, I agree. But I do believe the scriptwriter that they have attempted to give equal time to the development of the female character. Both stereotypes are really difficult to overcome. I have a sneaky feeling that the character of Anna just can’t be spun in a way that doesn’t stereotype her.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Netflix are looking for Richard Armitage fans!
They want to find his greatest fan to promote Obsession
My toes are curling already
LikeLiked by 2 people
I saw that. And I wondered why anyone would willingly sign up for that and expose themselves to the inevitable fan shaming that is to follow. Or maybe I am just too cynical when it comes to the way film PR only addresses the fans when it is convenient for them…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m late to the conversation, waiting until I was back home with access to my laptop (last minute trip to the city for a couple of days)
What a fabulous discussion, thoughtful and thought-provoking! I haven’t read the original novel nor watched Damage but I am really looking forward to seeing Obsession. I’ve looked at the original movie trailer and to me there isn’t the heat between Jeremy Irons (who I’ve always considered wooden) and Juliette Binoche as there is with Richard and Charlie. I’m a fan of romance novels but they need to have engaging characters and be well written, I find gratuitous sex boring to read, just as I would be bored watching it. However, I would choose it every time over horror and gratuitous violence! I’m glad that I can watch Richard’s recent projects without my hands over my eyes (Hannibal, Pilgrimage – his fine performances notwithstanding)
I live in happy anticipation of seeing more of Richard in the flesh, he is a beautiful man, but it’s what he brings emotionally to a role that has kept me coming back after all this time.
I think there is a lot in what you and others have pointed out – maybe it’s our “familiarity” with Richard that makes it somewhat discomforting seeing him in intimate scenes. The self-pleasuring scene in one chapter of Wanderlust had me feeling second hand embarassment – it’s one thing reading it for myself, totally another listening to him verbalising what was happening (and the erotic passages as well) William’s masturbation scene as shown in the trailer has the same effect. Usually Richard is so fully immersed in a role that I don’t see him, just the character, so I’m counting on that this time lol.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Gratuitous sex is definitely less harmful than gratuitous violence. In conventionally explicit films, that is. So yeah, a lustful middle-aged man obsessed by his carnal desires is certainly much easier on the eyes than a violent serial-killer.
It’s funny, isn’t it, that for many of us it is totally ok to *read ourselves* an explicit sex scene with bondage, masturbation, what-have-you, yet feel less comfortable with exactly the same content when presented in visual or audio form. I put it down to sex being so private and personal. And ok, there are also still taboos around verbalised sex. While the material and expliciteness may make me feel uncomfortable, I am very curious to see what RA does with exactly that and whether it is possible to see more than just copulation but the headspace beyond the act.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I do think there is a difference between reading erotica and watching porn, but I can’t explain it? 😅
I think I’ve read studies that say there is a difference; that we as humanity are harming young people because they have such easy access to porn on their phones, at formative stages of their lives? 😫 But I don’t have those studies to hand as references for these opinions. 🥴😥
I think the writer misunderstood Richard’s naturally collaborative and easy-going, open nature with submissiveness? Openness to other’s ideas is not equivalent to submissiveness, I think. 😫
LikeLiked by 2 people
Re. difference of reading erotica and watching porn: I would say that the difference is that when you are reading erotica, *even* if the acts are described in detail, your own personal imagination will still filter out the “images” and you can blank out some of the stuff that you don’t like. When watching porn – it’s there and harder to ignore.
And yes, I also think that porn has become far too easily accessible and is therefore harmful for immature viewers. (Hence in my comment I wrote “conventionally explicit films”.) I didn’t mention this in my post, but one of the reservations I have about the show is that it reinforces a view of sexuality and of the *type of sex* people are having. Do younger viewers then think that intimacy is “kinky sex”? What do young males take from it?
As for the writer’s quip about RA’s alleged submissiveness as proven by being easily convinced to finish a sentence: I took that as an attempt by the writer to be funny. Backfired spectacularly.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Pingback: À la recherche du temps perdu — not | Me + Richard Armitage
Well, I’m just going to throw my 2 cents our there, why not 😉
The cynic in my has a view on why Netflix even made this; they have been walking the path of ‘sex sells’ recently, because they are under pressure financially and have been somewhat loosing subscribers as the world as a whole reels from cost of living increased. So they are searching for material that would make people curious. And given what recommendation have come my way, there is a theme 😉 A few weeks or even month ago it was Lady Chatterley’s lover etc. I don’t mind, i really liked the more or less recent BBC adaptation but haven’t watched the Netflix one, heard mixed reviews. I just don’t have much time and given my very limited viewing history with N, i find it funny how the recommendations IA gets it wrong in my case most of the time. Anyway, Netflix needs eyeballs and searching for material that could attract people is clearly one way they are going about it. But they might run out soon of literary material to adapt if this is theme they are looking for 😉
I wouldn’t worry about it being explicit, again Nteflix needs broad viewing, not content to exclusive to its audience. I think it’s PG 16 or an equivalent, it’s not PG18. What is in the trailer is probably as far as it goes, there will be a lot implied, part images etc, but no explicit, body parts falling about sex.
Then i looked into the book a bit, the author sadly dies about 11 years ago or so. But she was a reasonably well off lady, who was Irish and grey up in a Catholic boarding school and had some unfortunate life experiences with siblings dying i think pretty young and also a first unsuccessful marriage from what i gather. The book was written end of 80#s, published in 1990, post Aids epidemic. I think it’s unavoidable her lived experienced and the time period played a role in the material in the book. I don’t want to ride the cliche about catholic education too much, but yeah 🙂 There is a lot in there i guess driving the ‘morality’ theme and sin/consequences of reckless behaviour which is related to sex. Sorry, but .. yawn. It’s also written in the male character voice.. double yawn. I’m not saying literary material which is in a way historical (more than 30 years ago) can’t be relevant, but right at this point in time, sexual oppression/addiction , morality issues around well to do individuals, some with childhood traumas… is not the kind of subject that can or would interest me personally. It’s a very particular social and moral bubble, that just isn’t something i was or am interested in. The sexual element, whatever; it’s neither shocking nor unseen or unusual anymore. How many politicians have been involved in all sorts of scandals re mistresses etc. And if individuals of either sex are curious about specific sexual acts, the internet is full of information and there are safe ways of trying new things out. It’s just not ‘scandalous’ or ‘new’ etc or shocking.
The female protagonist’s perspective could be more interesting, but then again the book eventually identifies where her trauma comes from and well, not something i’m very interested in and certainly not a subject matter i am keen on exploring either. It’s always sad when any individual lives in a world of trauma or pain and finds no way out and goes down some path of addition/destruction. I’m not sure this is an interesting and relevant enough rendition of that sort of theme. Nough’ said. Whichever way you twist it, it’s still a misogynistic view of the world.
Gven that this is how i felt about it the Guardian article did not help; i’m just going to say it’s probably a good thing to have a think when promoting material what you actually say and how you place it. Because you might end up looking a tad entitled, uninformed and blinkered, which will probably not serve the material much. Maybe it’s easy to become trapped in the weird social and physiological bubble of the character when you film it. Viewers’ perspective might be very different.
I think i’ve still got much more interesting material on my list of his work to go through, this won’t be up there; it’s just a bit blah. I respect his choices of roles and i am sure slipping into the skin of new characters can be rewarding or at least challenging and interesting. Doesn’t mean the material is interesting for the viewer. As a woman in 2023 there is unfortunately very little in this material to interest me.
Onto the next one 🙂
LikeLike
Pingback: Sort of *ooof* – but with a plot | Guylty Pleasure
I watched the first episode and I enjoy it so far. RA plays the character in a way that definitely makes me feel for him even though he is a cheating pathetic probably alcoholic bastard. I like how the story so far plays with the theme of “what the others think about someone” – his wife, his father in law, his son, his colleague at the hospital…the tension is there!
And some “random” things I liked so far:
the locations are so beautiful and beautifully shot (won’t go into more detail yet because of potential spoilers)
RA’s character William reminds me in nuances of John Porter – the kind of troubled look, involuntary shaky breaths because of self-blame… even if for totally different reasons… and RA does this SO WELL!!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks for sharing your impressions, Anja. Have you finished watching yet?
LikeLike
now I have finished watching 😉
LikeLike
Hehe. Are you still digesting? Would you like to share your thoughts? We have delved into discussion over on the round-up post for this week (#8), in case you are interested. No pressure, of course!
LikeLike