For Shame

Although the film itself did not receive an Academy Award nomination, Shame had quite a lot of buzz around it in critics' circles last year. Its lead actor, Michael Fassbender, was thought to have been a shoo-in for a Best Actor nomination, but like the movie, was overlooked. And much was made of the fact that its explicit sex and NC-17 rating probably hurt it with the Academy on both fronts. I was curious to see what all the fuss about.

Having seen the movie now, I still don't know.

The film is a fairly explicit and thoroughly uncomfortable look at a man struggling with sex addiction. The title is apt, as the film certainly doesn't make sex look glamorous in any way, despite the multiple contexts in which the film presents it. Fassbender (along with co-star Carey Mulligan) are both fearless in their roles, exposing themselves emotionally as well as physically.

But there's just not much more than visual poetry at work here. I would imagine the script to this film ran barely half the length of a typical movie. There are numerous scenes of lingering camera shots and little or no dialogue. In many cases, it's hard to tell just what the scene is meant to contribute to the movie. (Do we really need to watch the protagonist jog for two whole city blocks? Or hear the waiter describe all the evening's specials and suggest a wine for dinner?)

In short, this film is all style and little substance. I suppose it does sometimes make you restless from discomfort, but more often it just made me restless from boredom, waiting for something to actually happen. This is another movie for those who exalt film as a lyrical, visual medium... and maybe not even those people would like it. I grade it a D-, and feel generous at that.