Mulligan in Shame

In recent years, I’ve become increasingly fascinated with polarizing films. Movies that split people into “love it” or “hate it” camps, and net themselves scores of 50% on aggregate review sites increasingly pique my curiosity. If nothing else, they provide fodder for great arguments.

If you’re looking for a new divisive film, look no further than Steve McQueen’s SHAME.

SHAME reteams the HUNGER director with star Michael Fassbender, this time having Fassbender play a sexual addict named Brandon. This man is rather well-to-do: he’s good-looking, has a good job, a nice apartment, and a snappy wardrobe. What is not outwardly apparent, is that he has heavy sexual compulsions to the point that his computer at work is littered with porn-related viruses, and he needs to masturbate several times a day. He seems to hide everything reasonably well, until his sister Sissy (Carey Mulligan) – a vagabond jazz singer – comes to stay with him.

SHAME is very emotionally cold, and I think that might throw a lot of viewers off. It is in no real hurry to make its point, and seems to enjoy lingering in some scenes far longer than audiences would like to. It has also been painted with a lot of unsettling brushstrokes, as there is a lot of sex and nudity in this film, but so much of it comes without emotion. Because it all comes without passion or feeling, it makes you feel like you want to step out of the room. In some ways, it creates an interesting echo for Brandon’s addiction…but it will be up to audiences to decide if they can stomach his carnal habit.

With all of that said, the one thing that can’t be dismissed is the acting that is brought to the table by Fassbender and Mulligan. Fassbender plays Brandon in a way that makes you feel enticed, empathetic and repulsed all at once. He carries himself with a steely confidence, but as we listen in to his attempts at human contact, we realize that he is socially stunted and has real trouble making any true connections. Mulligan really branches out with Sissy. She steps outside of the doe-eyed-ingenue we’ve come to know her as, and inhabits someone equally damaged as her brother, but with a small flame still kindled inside.

What you make of all of this, I cannot predict. Given the large amount of nudity in this film, and the heavy dose of sex, I fully expect this film to get slapped with an NC-17 by the MPAA…thus even getting a look at it might be tricky. Even if you can track it down, most people hear about films involving massive amounts of sex and come into it with a certain level of mindset. Seeing a film where the sex is emotionless and mechanic might cause people to dig in and resist instead.

I count myself an admirer of this film…but if and when you sit down to indulge in SHAME, don’t say you weren’t warned.

30 Replies to “TIFF Review: SHAME”

  1. Damn, now I really have a feeling that I might not like it. However, I’ll be watching it anyway. By the way, if I’m not mistaken, yesterday someone on Twitter posted that it was actually given a NC-17 rating already, so you were right.

  4. Read a few reviews today, and I’m pretty excited about this one. A cold, relentless movie that’s polarizing? Yes, please. There’s just something about films that get slapped with the “It was great but I have no desire to watch it again” that I absolutely enjoy.

  5. I generally enjoy movies that explore sexuality, although i’m not totally sure if i would like this one. Mainly because i recently watched Dogtooth, which was a relentlessly cold movie and for the the overbearing coldness of it got to me. And from the way you described the movie i’m not sure if it might be too “cold” for me

    1. (Welcome to The Matinee!)

      I’m happy to report that it’s not as disturbing as DOGTOOTH, but it’s still a film that fittingly makes for an uncomfortable watch. Hope you get to track it down.

  6. I’m eager to see this based on the buzz at Venice though I don’t mind too much sex in films. As long as it does something for the story and characters. Other than that, it becomes a softcore porn film that has their moments though the sex scenes in some of those movie do get boring.

    1. Definitely more to this film than the sex scenes, but much of the rest is a rather low-boil. Not sure if that makes things better for you, or worse.

      I *should* point out that Fassbender is awesome in it, as is Mulligan.

  7. I didn’t enjoy this film. There were definitely scenes/shots I liked, but overall it fell flat. I have no problem with lots of sex in movies, but here those scenes felt overly dramatic and I get the impression that it was written by someone who thinks sex is a horrible dirty act. Though Fassbender and Mulligan gave good performances, I felt nothing for either of the characters. It’s not a bad movie, but I certainly didn’t enjoy watching it and wouldn’t recommend it.

  8. Is it weird that I really want to see this film? I think it’s mainly because of all the buzz that came out of Venice and the sheer amazingness of Michael Fassbender and Carey Mulligan. But I kinda have a problem with lots of sex in a film, so I don’t know how I’ll go with this one.

    Mind you, it’ll be forever until I see it, since it’s sure to be an R18 here so I’ll be waiting for the DVD release.

  9. I really don’t know if and when we will get this (but it will R18+ over here). We had Hunger in cinemas, and following the acclaim in Venice (and the Best Actor award for Fassbender) I think it will get a run. I am a little more wary than I was a day ago, but I’m still looking forward to it.

      1. I don’t mind a lot of sex in films or anything, but I just didn’t expect to see the NC-17 tag come out for this film. I guess the emotionlessness and coldness of the film has me entering the cinema with some caution.

        1. There’s a lot of emotion in the film – just none of it positive. There’s a lot of damaged souls, self loathing, and…well…shame. make sure to track it down when it drops. Word is that Fox Searchlight picked it up – I’ll be curious to see how they decide to market it.

  10. I kept my fingers crossed for a Fox Searchlight release because they have always found a way into Reno (granted several months after most cities).

    I’ve been keeping tabs on this film because of Fassbender’s performance. I don’t care where I have to go to catch this. It must be seen.

  11. Fassbender and McQueen and, now, Carey Mulligan and… sex. Good times. Even shameful sex is an interesting watch. I think HUNGER had the difficulty of using texture of the protests (shit, piss, etc) to portray the disgusting severity of the issue – I can imagine,in a similar way, this film despicts the exceptionally depraved nature of someone who is sex-obsessed.

    1. It’s not depravity so much as it is maladjustment. It’s the emotion – or lack thereof – which has stuck with me about this film, and both leads involved really do something special.

      In getting back to my normal viewing habits this week, I’m hopeful that I’ll be able to give HUNGER a look sooner rather than later.

  12. I’ve been hearing so much about it and I can’t wait to see it in London, at the Film Festival, in October!

    I loved Hunger, and if Steve Mcqueen continues showing me the great directing style he displayed in Hunger, I think i’m going to like it!

    Thanks for the review! It was great!

    1. Welcome to The Matinee Diana.

      Definitely track this down at LFF. A festival atmosphere will help it play at its best since audiences come in with a particular mindset that suit this film.

      My antsiness to see HUNGER is growing by the day. It’s a crime that it’s been on my to-see list as long as it has, I think now I’m left with no excuse.

Comments are closed.