Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Load of rubbish!!

An action-packed slog

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

I loved this movie. It opens with the "adapter" telling his fiancée on the phone that "all the candidats are pretentious who speak like : "oh, it's like, you know, just awesome, real f** stylish or something (oh c'est genre grave stylé quoi...)" The heroine witnesses the scene by the cracked door and decides at that moment -at least that's what I thought- to teach him a lesson. He who believes in his superiority will soon understand that it's not the case. This is a movie about words, "intellos", gender issues, artistic creation and interpretation, masochisme and so on...

The Austrian author Leopold von Sacher-Masoch's controversial erotic novel "Venus in Fur" has been filmed on a number of occasions, but by no means all those versions are faithful to the original. The last one I saw was Jesus Franco's from 1969, which is (at best) only very loosely based on the novel, keeping little except the title and the name of the heroine (Wanda). Roman Polanski's version, "La Vénus à la Fourrure", is not based directly upon Sacher-Masoch's book but upon a French translation of a play by the American playwright David Ives. It is set not in the 19th-century Austro-Hungarian Empire but in contemporary Paris. Thomas Novachek, a theatrical director and author is putting on an adaptation, written by himself, of Sacher-Masoch's "Venus in Fur" and auditioning actresses for the role of Wanda. One evening, just as Thomas is about to leave the theatre, an actress named Vanda Jourdain arrives and begs him to let her read for the part The film observes the classical unities of place, time and action; there is no attempt to "open the story up", as is often done with films based upon stage plays, or to bring in more characters. Thomas and Vanda are the only two people we see, although we do occasionally hear Thomas talking on the telephone to others. We learn that Thomas is married, but Madame Novachek never puts in an appearance. Our attention is therefore focused upon these two individuals and the way in which their relationship progresses. At first Vanda comes across as a rather uncultured and unpromising young woman, but as the reading progresses she begins to show a greater intelligence and insight than Thomas had originally thought her capable of. Thomas finds himself attracted to Vanda and their relationship gradually begins to mimic that of Wanda and Severin in the original novel.The film is centred upon sexual politics and relations between the sexes, something highlighted by Thomas and Vanda's contrasting views of Sacher-Masoch and his novel. Thomas, whose own sexual tastes and preoccupations seem to be those of Severin and his creator, regards the book as a great classic of European and world literature. Vanda has read it, but dismisses it as a nasty piece of sado-masochistic pornography. In her view sado-masochism is all about acting out male fantasies and is therefore an expression of male power over women, even when the woman nominally plays the "dominant" and the man the "submissive" role.Given that Emmanuelle Seigner, who plays Vanda, is actually married to the director, it is interesting that the film critic of the New York Times described Amalric's performance as Thomas as "very close to a Polanski impersonation". I can't really comment on that- I don't actually know Polanski personally- but there is certainly a strong contrast between the two characters. As played by Seigner, Vanda comes across as a volatile, energetic and aggressive personality, whereas Mathieu Amalric makes Thomas quieter and more passive. (Perhaps it is not surprising that he should identify with a character like Severin). Both actors are excellent- Amalric is much better here than the last time I saw him, when he was giving a feeble imitation of a Bond villain in "Quantum of Solace". Perhaps he finds it easier to act in his own language than in English.The story unfolds in real time within the confines of the theatre, and this can make the film seem rather claustrophobic. I do not, however, necessarily regard this as a fault. Indeed, it seemed to me that Polanski was deliberately trying to evoke this sense of claustrophobia in order to focus our attention on the "battle of the sexes" being played out between Vanda and Thomas, without the distractions of changes of scene or the introduction of other characters. This is not a film which will appeal to everybody; those allergic to sexual references or bad language should give it a wide berth. (Those who wish to increase their knowledge of the earthier elements of French vocabulary will, however, probably be richly rewarded). In many ways, however, it is an absorbing drama which takes a provocative look at aspects of human sexuality. It is certainly a lot better than Franco's dreadful version which rarely, if ever, rises above the level of nonsense. 7/10

Polanski brings another piece of art that is quite hard to compliment without swearing! That said... Let's try in the most polite way possible! In the stage, both Mathieu Amalric and Emmanuelle Seigner give a terrific performance... Floating between characters, but yet playing only one character each... The dynamic between the actors are amazing... Sensual, honest, believable etc... There was no room for any other character or actor in the scenes... About Tom, he's familiar, a cool guy you know, and for this your fear for his life, for his relationship, still, you would like if he died, or betrayed his love interest... Now about Vanda, there's no way of not loving her, even when you just know her name... She can be the most unlucky person in the world that appears late for an appointment with you or the queen bitch that appears with an unknown objective... Both ways you would kiss her feet with pleasure! the plot is quite mesmerizing and thrilling... The adaptation by Polanski and Ives is very contemporaneous... Making it feel it even more fantastic... Not sure if thats the word i want, but anyway... It was brilliant as Carnage, the last feature film directed by Polanski before Venus... It follows the same recipe with only leading roles and a deep dive into the human nature... Once again, i'll have to talk about how sensual is the whole movie, with one exception... The scene when Venus reveals herself... It's freaky, funny, trying to be frighting (maybe), but not sexy... Even being Emmanuelle Seigner only in fur...

After "Carnage" another play from Roman Polanski. He seems to have found a muse in filmmaking (adapting) them. He literally found one in E. Seigner who plays the lead here. Some would call her a Femme Fatale. Even if you don't know the book this is adapted from (Venus in Fur) like myself you will get a feel for the piece.Put two great actors in a room (a big room) and let them do their thing. Now don't get me wrong, this movie can be very annoying, especially if you start thinking about patterns or character behavior that might not be your reaction to things happening. You can argue who is evil in this though. Or more accurate more evil than the other person. Or maybe you're looking for the good in the characters (of course bad traits are easier to find).Mesmerizing and an ending that is very theatrical. Not everyones cup of tea, but professionally made nonetheless