ON THE
WSWS
Donate
to
the WSWS!
News Feed
Contact
the
WSWS
Editorial
Board
New
Today
News
& Analysis
Workers
Struggles
Arts
Review
History
Science
Polemics
Philosophy
Correspondence
Archive
About
WSWS
About
the ICFI
Help
Books
Online
OTHER
LANGUAGES
German
French
Italian
Russian
Polish
Czech
Serbo-Croatian
Spanish
Portuguese
Turkish
Sinhala-
Tamil
Indonesian
LEAFLETS
Download
in
PDF format
|
|
WSWS : Arts
Review : Film
Reviews
Under the Skin, written and directed by Carine Adler
Bad behavior
By David Walsh
3 September 1998
In British director Carine Adler's first feature film, Under
the Skin , a young woman, Iris (Samantha Morton), is thrown into
a crisis when her mother (Rita Tushingham) dies from a brain tumor.
She breaks off relations with her boyfriend, distances herself
from her coworkers, quarrels with her pregnant sister, Rose (Claire
Rushbrook), and enters into a series of sexual liaisons in an
effort to assuage her grief and sense of abandonment. Her desperate
activity brings no relief. In the end, after a kind of cathartic
breakdown, she seems more able to come to terms with her emotional
turmoil, as well as the people around her.
This is a serious and legitimate story. Why then is Adler's
film, by and large, so unsatisfying?
In an interview with a journalist from the Sydney Morning Herald
, Adler recounted that while making a previous film, a short,
she had come across "a book written by a psychiatrist, Estela
Weldon [ Mother, Madonna, Whore ], which dealt with behaviour
patterns--extreme sexual behaviour patterns. It dealt with promiscuity,
sexual abuse by mothers, and prostitution, and how women will
act out anger on themselves, whereas men act it out externally.
And being promiscuous is a way women act it on themselves. So
I drew a lot of the ideas for the film from that, but also from
my own observations.... I think everyone has had moments where
they have had brief encounters with the wrong person."
Certain critics have praised the film extravagantly: "emotionally
raw" is a phrase that recurs, as does the word "uncompromising."
You have to wonder what people are used to, or what they think
life is all about.
Iris picks up a man in the cinema and sleep with him. He is
obviously married or attached, but she continues to long for and
pursue him. She dances seductively with strangers in clubs and
presumably ends up with some of them. She enters into a seriously
masochistic relationship with one man, but seems capable of extricating
herself from it. There is clearly something neurotic about her
behavior, but, frankly, none of it is all that shocking or extraordinary
by contemporary standards. What is Adler's point?
This is apparently a cautionary tale, but I doubt whether even
in a better world men and women will entirely resist the attraction
of "brief encounters with the wrong person," and be
able to avoid emotional humiliations altogether. Life, with all
its inevitable difficulty and pain, seems to me to go far beyond
Adler's conception. On the whole I think the "bad" Iris
has more possibilities than her mother- and sister-loving, conformist,
respectable self. In any event, one hopes that compulsive, self-destructive
behavior and the highly questionable emotional security offered
by middle-class family life are not the only two possibilities
left open to women, as the film seems to imply.
There is a kind of puritanism at work here, and also something
quite repressive. The director obviously thinks she is quite advanced
to present goings-on about which she so strongly disapproves.
I don't know Weldon's book, but I can't avoid suspecting that
it makes a poor starting point for a film. If Under the Skin has
certain valuable moments, it is because Adler and Morton (a fine
actress, who has appeared in leading roles in British television's
Jane Eyre , Emma and Tom Jones ) occasionally break away from
the preconceived and present a real living being.
But not nearly often enough. Adler speaks admiringly of Mike
Leigh's Naked . Unhappily, there is a world of difference between
her film and that one. In creating the character of Johnny, Leigh
and actor David Thewlis were not handicapped by any self-imposed
need to offer instruction to audience members as to the proper
way to conduct themselves. They attempted to reproduce something
from life, mediated through their sensibilities and intellectual
concerns. There is a balance, which establishes itself more or
less organically, in Naked between the spontaneous-instinctive
and the rationally worked out. Adler begins with a notion of "female
sexuality" out of which she attempts to extract a film. A
futile task. Such a method has inevitable dramatic consequences.
Whether or not the film is psychologically and socially accurate
in a superficial sense, it is not especially affecting.
I question, in any event, whether one can speak of female sexuality,
or male sexuality, in the abstract in any meaningful way. In the
sense both that one is essentially considering socially-conditioned
relations between people, often of opposite genders, and that
interpersonal relationships, even of the most elementary kind
(parent-child), have a history . It seems almost embarrassing
to have to point out that responding to grief and anger through
promiscuity, for example, presupposes a variety of historical
and social conditions and that it still remains an option, if
one wants to call it that, available to a relatively small percentage
of the world's female population. To make the activities of middle
class women in certain advanced countries the basis of eternal
psychological laws seems a trifle impressionistic, not to mention
self-centered.
All of this is not entirely the director's fault. She no doubt
lives in an atmosphere where feminism and similar tendencies prevail
absolutely. Very little is more destructive to art than the prescriptions
these trends insist upon. I don't believe for one second that
Adler, obviously a talented individual, is aware of how much damage
she inflicts on her art by playing it safe and making this sort
of schematic picture about "women's issues."
See Also:
Your Friends & Neighbors
written and directed by Neil LaBute
Marketable despair
[26 August 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |