Conference bookie::movies

    Well-acted, I'll give it that.  But I'm afraid I found this hokey,
    dumb, verrry slow, and repetitive.  I mean how many times do we need to
    see Jeremy Irons trying to have sex without taking off his clothes. 
    Frankly, with all the hype about this film's eroticism, I was
    disappointed.  I don't think directors know what eroticism is anymore.
    
    There's almost no plot, which means this is A Psychological Film. 
    Trouble is, there's no drama, except for a few minor revelations that
    sound like something out of Pop Psychology 101.  And when things
    actually get dramatic at the end, it's too late and too stupid, as if
    director (and perhaps author) were anxious, suddenly, to wrap things
    up.
    
    -Rob

I saw this last night and was quite disappointed.  I read the book last year
and couldn't put it down.  The movie, while visually interesting, was extremely
dull.  I wondered if I felt that way because I had read the book but the
friend I went with who hadn't read the book felt the same way.

I didn't feel there was much chemistry between Jeremy Irons and the Juliette
Binoche, certainly not with the intensity described in the book.  I also felt the
sex scenes were not at all erotic.

I went expecting to like the film and was extremely disappointed.  

I saw this Sunday, and entered a positive review here.  Then I thought about it
some more.
    
The movie is a portrait of a perhaps stereotypically repressed upper-middle-
class Brit who destroys his career and family for the sake of a sudden 
obsessive passion for a young woman, his son's fianc�e.  What there is of a
plot turns on the past of the young woman, whose motives are explained by the
emotional "damage" she has suffered.  She is played by Juliette Binoche.  The 
main male character is played by Jeremy Irons, his wife by Miranda Richardson.  

Most of the movie shows the Irons character obsessively pursuing the Binoche
character, as her romance with his son also proceeds.  We also witness a number
of their sexual encounters.  Eventually, there is a rather pat catastrophe,
which unfortunately makes the whole plot seem gimmicky.

The good things in the movie are the social comedy of the interactions among
the secondary characters; one or two isolated, powerful scenes near the end,
as Irons faces the consequences of his behaviour; generally good acting; and 
some very nice pictures.

It is rather fundamentally flawed by the artificial-seeming psychological
machinery that drives the plot and explains the characters' actions, and by 
the sex scenes, which I guess are meant to illustrate the expression of mad,
uncontrollable passion, but which are problematic. 

I found it interesting, and, on balance, I'm glad I saw it.    

        
-Stephen

    I can't imagine seeing this, since I read the book and found it
    riveting ... I don't know if I could stand watching it.
    
    Leslie

 >>   I can't imagine seeing this, since I read the book and found it
 >>   riveting ... I don't know if I could stand watching it.

	Same here.  The beauty of this work is in the way the book
	is written.  Even if the movie is good, it can't be the same
	experience.  I work part-time at a video store, and even though
	I'd be able to see it for free, I just won't.

	Di

    Was Damage the title of the book?  Who's the author?
    
    Jodi-

    
    Hmmm.  Not sure, but I think "Damage" was written by Josephine Hart.
    Anyone have a confirmation of that?  Also, I think Hart just had
    another book published.
    
    Ron

    Yes, Josephine Hart is the author of "Damage."  Her latest book is
    "Sin."  I think "Damage", although a small book, was one of the
    most powerful I have ever read.  Therefore, I am reluctant to see the
    movie.

    Thanks for the authress' name. The book sounds intriguing.
    
    Jodi-

    Finally saw this movie and was also disappointed, though I did not
    read the book before.
    I can fully agree to .1 and .2, the acting was good, but the chemistry
    between Irons and Binoche was not there at all. 
    BTW,  was it Miranda Richardson (Irons' wife Ingrid) who was 
    playing the role of Patty Hearst in the movie about Hearst's life.
    And isn't she the daughter of Vanessa Redgrave? She looked so old 
    in "Damage".                        
    Andrea

    No,
    
    	That was Natasha Richardson who played in the Patty Hearst flick,
    as well as in "The Handmaid's Tale".
    
    Jean Costello

    Now that I've read the book...how long before it
    makes it to video?  From the reviews, I don't
    want to pay full price to see it but I also don't
    want to have to wait too long.
    
    Great book, easy/fast reading style.  It's Josephine
    Hart's first novel. Her second is called Sin and
    will be in the bookstores soon.
    
    Jodi-
    

I don't know about OLD, but you hardly recognize her
from her days as QEI in "Blackadder II", do you?

She's related to that theatre crowd, but I can't remember
how.  Tony Richardson/Vanessa Redgrave's child and 
Natasha's sister?  Some relation of Ralph Richardson?
Does anyone know?

    re .14, I recently read in a magazine or newspaper article (don't
    remember where), that she *isn't* related to Natasha Richardson.  But, 
    don't know what the truth is.
    
    Lorna
    

> ...how long before it makes it to video?

	It's on video now.  It was interesting, and I found it even
	more interesting that it made on it both Siskel's and Ebert's
	top 10 lists for 1992.  I'll give it a thumbs up but not that
	high up .....

	FWIW, the video, after the trailing credits, has about a 10
	minute interview with the director.  No additional footage
	is shown however that didn't appear to of made the final cut.

    I saw the video last night.  I agree with most of the comments earlier,
    but I'll venture to say the first sex scene was pretty dramatic.  After
    that all the broken and tossed furniture seemed irrelevant, distracting.
    And somehow I just can't buy the Paris street scene, even if Henry Miller 
    got away with the same maneuver.
    
    At the end of the movie we see Fleming (Jeremy Irons) in some village,
    living a rather quietly insane existence.  Are we supposed to know what
    country he's in?  Not that it matters much, but it seems important to
    me to know how far removed Fleming is from the First World.
    
      John