Venus in Fur– Review by Frank L

Director: Roman Polanski
Writers: David Ives (play), Roman Polanski (screenplay)…
Stars: Emmanuelle Seigner, Mathieu Amalric

The opening scene of a windswept, rain- sodden, tree-lined Parisian Street is followed by the camera panning to a fine old theatre through the doors of which is revealed Thomas, (Mathieu Amalric who bears an uncanny physical resemblance to Roman Polanski) lamenting the quality of the actresses whom he has been auditioning all day to play Vanda in a stage adaptation of Leopold von Sacher Masoch’s novel of the title. In fact, the film is based itself on a stage adaptation by David Ives of the novel which was performed in New York initially, off Broadway, in 2010. A stylish but somewhat bedraggled actress (Emmanuelle Seigner) comes through the doors of the theatre demanding to audition for the part. Her name is Vanda, the same name as the heroine of the play for which she wishes to audition. Thomas refuses initially to permit her as he is finished for the day but gradually he is out manoeuvred. The power between the two of them has begun to shift. It continues to do so.

Because of the physical similarity between Amalric and Polanski, you are conscious, even if subliminally, that there may, in fact be some autobiographical elements within the film. This subliminal consciousness is intensified by the fact that Emmanuelle Seigner is the wife of Polanski. Given Amalric’s physical resemblance to Polanski and given that Polanski is a director, there is a haunting sense of not knowing what is fact and what is fiction. It may well be that it is all fiction but the casting raises the issue. Given that the script is an adaptation of a play which is itself an adaptation of a novel and given that the underlying subject matter is the transfer of sexual power, there is a multitude of uncertainties about what precisely is being portrayed however deja vu the representation of sexual intimidation is.

The deserted theatre is a fine choice as the mise- en- scene for the encounter. The fact that Vanda is coming to audition gives her a legitimate reason to pull out of her voluminous handbag out- of- the- ordinary costumes and accessories into which to change. The redundant props from the current show which litter the stage are apparently from a show set in the American Wild West genre include a cut-out cardboard 6ft. plus tall cactus which stands erect in the centre of the stage. These touches give a certain sense of credibility to the events which the audience witnesses. However less convincing is the use of a vast knitted shawl, elegant in itself, to represent the fur which occurs in the title.

The dialogue is in French. In the subtitles, in order to delineate between the dialogue as between Thomas and Vanda and the dialogue which is in the play for which Vanda is auditioning, italics are used. While it works just about, it raises an additional hurdle for a non- French speaker to surmount. At the end of it all, despite the cleverness of all the staging within the theatre, the vision that remains is that of the opening scene of the windswept, rain-sodden, tree-lined Parisian street.