Polanski provokes in Venus in Fur | Film Review | Indy Week
Pin It

Polanski provokes in Venus in Fur 

Venus in Fur: Polanski's mea culpa or problematic alibi?

Photo by Guy Ferrandis

Venus in Fur: Polanski's mea culpa or problematic alibi?

The provocation begins with the premise of VENUS IN FUR, Roman Polanski's adapatation of David Ives' play-within-a-play version of an 1870 novella by Austrian author Leopold von Sacher-Masoch.

The novella, revolving around the themes of female dominance and "suprasensuality," inspired the modern term "masochism."

Polanski converts Ives' script from English to French and relocates the New York City setting to an empty Parisian theater. There, playwright-turned-director Thomas (Mathieu Amalric) has finished a disappointing day of auditioning incompetent actresses for his new play, itself an adaptation of Sacher-Masoch's book.

Enter the bedraggled, gum-smacking Vanda (Emmanuelle Seigner), a seemingly uncultured aspirant who embodies the vapidity Thomas detests in modern-day actresses.

Vanda pleads and cries her way into an impromptu reading for the female role in Thomas' play, a role also "coincidentally" named Vanda. As Thomas stands in for the play's submissive male aesthete, Severin, Vanda's coarse exterior dissolves as she begins flawlessly reciting her lines, transforming herself into a self-assured temptress. Thomas is instantly intrigued, and the duo's sexually and emotionally charged tête-à-tête fuels the rest of the play/film.

The dialogue seamlessly slips in and out of Thomas' play. Thomas and Vanda argue about sexual objectification, Thomas' unseen fiancée and even proper stage lighting. At a moment's notice, however, they're immersed back in the roles of Severin and Vanda: one dominating, the other dominated, in a pas de deux of gender dynamics.

Aided by Pawel Edelman's fluid camerawork, Amalric and especially Seigner's performances are filled with titillating tenacity, although the will-they-or-won't-they device grows tedious by the closing acts. Polanski poses tantalizing notions but little subsurface analysis, eventually nose-diving into a Grand Guignol finale that finds one character lassoed to a giant phallus-shaped cactus left over from a production of Stagecoach.

Within the broader social commentary of Venus in Fur, there's a more immediate appraisal of the relationship between artist and muse, and exactly who ends up influencing whom. Vanda is a strong feminist archetype, but at the same time one rendered by paternal creators (three of them at this point) that feeds into parochial stereotypes.

Moreover, there's no escaping the examination of how the film's themes relate to Polanski's infamous 1977 guilty plea to the charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old and his subsequent flight from justice.

Venus fans these flames, as Amalric is a dead ringer for a younger Polanski and the 48-year-old Seigner is the director's real-life wife. (Perhaps he avoided casting someone of similar age to Nina Arianda, the young actress who won a Tony in Ives' production, to blunt the older man/younger woman parallel.)

The film seems to argue that sexual desire in all its forms is normal, and that men are helpless slaves to it—a very convenient position for Roman Polanski to take. At one point, Thomas even recoils at Vanda's suggestion that his play might be rooted in child abuse. Where one might like a mea culpa, this seems like a problematic alibi.

This article appeared in print with the headline "Dirty laundry."

Film Details

Venus In Fur (La Venus A La Fourrure)
Rated NR · 90 min. · 2014
Director: Roman Polanski
Writer: David Ives
Producer: Robert Benmussa and Alain Sarde
Cast: Emmanuelle Seigner and Mathieu Amalric

Now Playing

Sorry there are no upcoming showtimes for Venus In Fur (La Venus A La Fourrure)

Speaking of Roman Polanski, Venus In Fur

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in Film Review



Twitter Activity

Comments

I'd be more interested with different actors, but at least it's not a fucking super hero movie or squequel, so …

by terryboo on H.P. Lovecraft Meets Art House Cinema in the Odd, Ominous A Ghost Story (Film Review)

Spiderman homecoming is the best spider man movie that I have seen yet https://goo.gl/jhKahk

by Hazel Gomez on Spider-Man: Homecoming Makes a Fifty-Five-Year-Old Hero Feel Like a Kid Again (Film Review)

Most Read

No recently-read stories.

Visit the archives…

Most Recent Comments

I'd be more interested with different actors, but at least it's not a fucking super hero movie or squequel, so …

by terryboo on H.P. Lovecraft Meets Art House Cinema in the Odd, Ominous A Ghost Story (Film Review)

Spiderman homecoming is the best spider man movie that I have seen yet https://goo.gl/jhKahk

by Hazel Gomez on Spider-Man: Homecoming Makes a Fifty-Five-Year-Old Hero Feel Like a Kid Again (Film Review)

I was born and raised in Bertie County, and believe me, this was painful and beautiful to watch. I was …

by Tar Heels forever on Know More About Manhattan Than Your Embattled Neighbors in Rural North Carolina? Then See Raising Bertie. (Film Review)

Clint's film is trashy? maybe that's why all of us pigs would like to wallow in it.

by Jovana Dimitrijevic on In Her Remake of Clint Eastwood's Lurid, Trashy The Beguiled, Sofia Coppola Probes Deeper Rhythms (Film Review)

Thanks for spoiling the movie. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean you have to ruin it for everyone …

by Carly L. on The Book of Henry Is a Blatant Tearjerker Whose Elaborate Plot Serves a Useless Solution (Film Review)

© 2017 Indy Week • 320 E. Chapel Hill St., Suite 200, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation