MUBI

Atom Egoyan is known for his non-linear narratives and an unconventional method of telling a story. In each of his films, he presents a series of characters that, at first, seem unrelated but as the story progresses, we are given some information regarding their lives, as we begin to piece together the overall story. This results in parallel stories between characters, as we begin to discover that they are all related in some way. Egoyan, in a sense, tells his story backwards. He wants his audience to interpret the ending, piece together the lives of the characters, and ask questions about the film. His latest film, Chloe, stars an ensemble cast of talented actors, including Liam Neeson, Julianne Moore and Amanda Seyfried.

Chloe revolves around a wife who suspects her husband is cheating. When she hires an escort to test his limits, things begin to get out of hand as the story delves into the personal lives and passions of the characters. There’s something different about this film, though. Chloe tells a straightforward story and is very much linear, with no congruences between space and time. That’s because it is the first screenplay Atom Egoyan has directed that he has not himself written. His films have always been considered a work of art by many, simply because of the writing. Exotica is a beautiful story between a series of characters and is set partly in a strip club. The Sweet Hereafter is Egoyan’s adaptation of Russell Banks’ novel of the same title, but features Egoyan’s touch in its narrative. Chloe comes from a new world, it is written by Erin Cressida Wilson, and it allows for Egoyan to supply us with his vision through his visuals and images.

Film Independent presented an advance screening of Chloe at The Landmark in Los Angeles. Atom Egoyan and Erin Cressida Wilson joined us for a Q&A following the screening. It’s tough to talk about the film because what I want to say and what everybody expects me to say will result in two completely different discussions. I’m sure anybody who is interested in this film would like to know the film was, its group of actors, and how this story played out in the hands of Atom Egoyan, as a director and not a writer. I would much rather go into depth about what made this an Atom Egoyan film, and whether or not it is still the work of an auteur, rather than a director for hire. I’m going to steer away from speaking on its genre or how the film compares to other films of its kind, because truth be told, I haven’t seen many of them. Chloe exists within these genre films (we will hear a lot about Fatal Attraction and such), but Egoyan explores the complexities and layers of a marriage.

I fell in love with Egoyan’s work because of his writing and formal strategies when it came into exploring the narrative of a film. I didn’t know quite how to feel about Chloe, because it is an unwelcoming change, especially if the screenplay isn’t well written, to begin with. Chloe, however, is exceptionally directed and I believe that’s what makes the film work. Its actors fit perfectly together as part of an ensemble and the most important thing is that Egoyan doesn’t treat them as stars. He doesn’t make you feel like Liam Neeson is Liam Neeson or that Julianne Moore is Julianne Moore. Egoyan doesn’t even photograph Julianne Moore as we think of her, and instead photographs her within any filters. In the film, we don’t feel her sense of glamour or beauty. We see her as her character is represented, a woman going through difficulties, torn between the possibility of a failed marriage. In this film, they are all performers, with great performances being handled by a great director.

I went into the film with the intentions of discovering what was Egoyan about it, considering the screenplay wasn’t written by him. Is it the opening sequence? No, Egoyan usually gives us a long tracking shot and allows his credits to spill over. Is it the unconventional narrative? No, Chloe is a linear story, in a rather conventional structure. Somehow, however, Egoyan finds a way to make us aware of his directing hand. Their are recurring visual motifs, such as hands, a comb, mirrors and glass, that all highlight certain characteristics about the characters. Egoyan introduces Chloe through a monologue, then emphasizes her entrance into Catherine’s life. He does this all through visuals, and expresses their characteristics and behaviors through imagery. Catherine spends much of her life looking into the lives of other people and understanding them, and at times, controlling them. Egoyan makes us aware of her personality through the use of production design, visuals and cinematography.

In the third act of the film, there is a shift in the tone as we move into a thriller. If I reveal anything here, it will be nothing but spoilers, so I can speak on how it is handled rather than what happens. Egoyan doesn’t rely on gimmicks and instead brings his own style into the film. He relies on technology throughout the entire film and allows it to develop the plot; live discussions on webcams and text messaging. He allows us to break apart the characters and put them back together during the ending of the film, when a significant twist is revealed. He does this, once again, through visual motifs. I would have to kill the film to explain the ending of the film. I would like to say, however, that the ending consists of one of the most beautiful shots Egoyan has pulled off. It’s breathtaking and is a true testament to Paul Sarossy, the cinematographer of the film.

Chloe allows you to feel the directing hand at work, and we can feel Egoyan constructing the film and telling a story visually. Mychael Danna, who has been Egoyan’s composer throughout all of his films, gives us a beautiful, surreal score that highlights the scenes. In a sense, the music is haunting as it comes back to revisit us throughout the film. It seems Egoyan makes everything work here, from the cinematography and music to the production design and art direction. Chloe’s costumes emphasize her personality, Catherine’s controlling behavior is suggested through the production design of the house she lives in, and David is often revealed through different formats of technology.

During the Q&A, Egoyan and Wilson discussed adapting the film and their approach to the material. Wilson said she viewed Exotica numerous times for inspiration, prior to learning that Egoyan would attach as a director. They both also mentioned that the film is not so much a remake of Nathalie… because it touches on a slightly altered premise. Its characters intentions are somewhat different and the story unfolds in a different manner. Egoyan mentioned that some of the inspirations for the film came from Persona (which I immediately felt during scenes between Catherine/Chloe), Rear Window (Catherine’s need to control her family), and Let the Right One In (surprisingly, for the atmosphere and tone of the film). Chloe holds a special place in my heart as well as Egoyan’s filmography. Throughout the film, we make assumptions about characters and learn otherwise by the end of the film. Because of this, it is difficult not to be reminded of Egoyan’s earlier works. It is essentially cut from the same cloth of Exotica and is set within that world, not because of its sexuality, but because of the way Egoyan explores the personalities of his characters. Chloe ends just as mysteriously as it begins, and as the credits begin, a final title card reminds us that this was “An Atom Egoyan Film.”

Title: Chloe
Year: 2009
Country: USA/Canada
Language: English
Genre: Drama
Director: Atom Egoyan
Writers: Erin Cressida Wilson, Anne Fontaine
Cast:
Julianne Moore
Amanda Seyfried
Liam Neeson
Max Thieriot
R.H. Thomson
Rating: 7/10

I happened to watch NATHALIE…(2003) a few years earlier, the French film directed by Anne Fontaine which Egoyan’s version is based on. So the biggest plot twist has little affect to me, though he changed the ending to make the story subjected to a more wider audience, but shamefully became a faulty stroke as the intention is feasible as Egoyan simply failed to do so by rushing hastily to finish the film in merely 96 minutes, the intense climax should have been handled with more care instead of a banal fall-from-the-window kitsch.

One thing for sure is that the film is highly entertaining, for me it is a little bit surprised to see Egoyan has shucked off his auteurism wind coat to take on a mission for a more Hollywood erotic thriller/drama. Luckily his personal traits permeate all the way among the high-end aura, plus Toronto could never be more lovely in this film.

This gripping film virtually analyzes a sad-but-true paradox traps most modern married couples, to question loyalty and sexuality, to recoup orgasm which has chronically waned away with one’s significant other. Although the intruder Chloe in the film is an extreme complexion, the thrilling experience has given me some goose bumps.

It is interesting to see Julianne Moore has been on her reborn trilogy to become a lesbian, from A SINGLE MAN (in love with a gay man), now is CHLOE (time to kiss and have sex with a hot young girl and really like it) and finally THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT (yet to be watched though but her wife is Annette Benning, would it be scary?). Moore is superb to portrayal a vulnerable/desperate middle-aged wife which totally differs with Fanny Ardent in NATHALIE… (a typical Fanny Ardent). Seyfried is as delightful as an innocent angel in this film, her charm is truly irresistible. Neeson is marginalized, but solid as well (her wife Natasha Richardson died during the shooting, but I could never tell in his consistent performance, bravo!).

A closing remark: one could expect more from Egoyan with his exuberant cast.

Reading the reviews before watching this movie caused a slight hesitation. However, I often find Atom Egoyan exploring more territories then just skin. He may present the obvious, but I also believe he is attempting to look at the deeper disconnect of a relationship that is surrounded by wealth. How people can often live without emotions in their daily routines. Through the weaving web of lies and money the wealthy class can purchase services to hopefully help them full-fill their emotional needs.

Cathrine (Julianne Moore) obsessed with controlling her relationships, and loosing her sense of touch is desperately trying to feel an emotion. While her husband David (Liam Neeson) has disconnected himself emotionally and flirting with temptation on a hope to discover the roots of a youthful love he once shared with his wife. Leaving Cahtrine suspicious of an affair, she attempts to prove her husband guilty by soliciting a call girl by the name of Chloe (Amanda Seyfried). The contrast of these two characters is intriguing. Chloe spends her days finding fractions of love in her clients to help heal/care for their emotional/sexual needs. While Cathrine inspects women with an emotionless cold touch. Cahtrine finds herself faced with a crumbling love, unexpectedly bonds with Chloe’s sensual words and touch. While, Chloe finds someone who has compassion and offers a glimpse of what it could feel like to love someone. Both empty of life and love, discover a deeper sense of who they are and wish to be.

Celebrated Canadian filmmaker Atom Egoyan (“Adoration” & “The Sweet Hereafter”) teams up with screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson (“Secretary”) for a misguided move into the mainstream with this out-dated erotic thriller based on the French film “Nathalie…” by Anne Fontaine.

Ageing gynaecologist Catherine (Julianne Moore) recruits fresh-faced call girl Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) to discover if her college professor husband David (Liam Neeson) has been cheating on her with all too predictably disastrous results.

Acclaimed American actress Julianne Moore (“Far from Heaven” & “The End of the Affair”) holds the production together with a powerful central performance and generates perfect chemistry with a visibly haggard Liam Neeson, who lost his wife mid-production.

Burgeoning starlet Amanda Seyfried (“Alpha Dog” & “Nine Lives”) channels the spirit of Shannon Tweed as the bewildered sexpot without a back-story at the head of a supporting cast which includes slightly less bewildered turns from Max Thieriot and R.H. Thomson.

The director and his long-term cinematographer Paul Sarossy bring Toronto to life as a surprisingly atmospheric backdrop to a slow building set-up between the two female leads which is ultimately lost to a ludicrously melodramatic final act.

The eroticism drawn from such classic fare as “Single White Female” and “Poison Ivy” is done well enough but as is so often the case with this tricky sub-genre the story spins wildly out of control and ultimately provides more chortles than gasps.

“This business transaction, which is what this was, is over!”

A pleasant surprise, considering most reviews were pretty tepid. Egoyan is a classically cold Canadian director, but he really warmed up with this one. The style is still clinical and beautiful (love the Toronto setting – as in, not doubling as another city) but the storytelling is good ‘n pulpy. It reminded me of the psycho/semi-erotic thrillers of the 90s (ala The Hand that Rocks the Cradle, Pacific Heights, Single White Female, etc) or even all-out erotic thrillers of the same era (the Shannon Tweed oeuvre has been referenced in numerous reviews). While those comparisons might not suggest a recommendation in most cases, the comparison is favourable here, thanks to Egoyan’s style, the three solid lead performances and the overall tone of the story. The plot twists were all telegraphed well in advance (I won’t get into spoilers now, since the DVD/Blu-ray is only coming out today) but that didn’t stop me from enjoying exactly what I was expecting. It’s always good to go into things with lowered expectations I suppose. Also, I watched it on an airplane last week and I’m certain most of the nudity was edited out, so it’ll only get better on my next viewing.

Sutradara asal Kanada, Atom Egoyan, memang lebih banyak dikenal sebagai seorang sutradara yang lebih banyak memberikan film-film bertema art-house daripada film-film komersial yang seringkali dirilis murni untuk mencari keuntungan belaka. Walau begitu, bukan berarti Egoyan tidak berani untuk mencoba sesuatu yang bersifat komersial. Chloe adalah sebuah usaha Egoyan untuk mencampurkan teknik penyutradaraan art-house yang sering ia terapkan, dengan sisi komersialisme untuk dapat dinikmati oleh publik umum.

Chloe sendiri merupakan sebuah remake dari film Perancis berjudul Nathalie… yang disutradarai oleh Anne Fountaine dan sempat dirilis pada tahun 2004. Untuk naskah ceritanya, Egoyan bekerjasama dengan penulis naskah Erin Cressida Wilson, yang sebelumnya dikenal atas naskah yang ia kerjakan untuk film Secretary (2002) dan Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus (2006).

Berkisah mengenai David Stewart (Liam Neeson) dan Catherine Stewart (Julianne Moore), pasangan yang telah menikah lama dengan seorang putra berusia 17 tahun, Michael (Max Thieriot), yang kini menemukan bahwa diri mereka berada di sebuah posisi dimana hubungan keduanya sudah terasa sangat hambar. Kurangnya komunikasi sekaligus keintiman antara keduanya membuat Catherine memiliki prasangka bahwa David telah melakukan perselingkuhan dengan wanita lain.

Prasangka ini memuncak ketika David, yang sedang berada di luar kota, menunda kepulangannya ke rumah di malam ulang tahunnya. Padahal, Catherine ternyata telah menyiapkan sebuah pesta ulang tahun kejutan untuk David. Perkenalannya secara tak sengaja dengan seorang wanita panggilan, Chloe (Amanda Seyfried), memunculkan sebuah ide gila: Catherine meminta bantuan Chloe untuk menggoda suaminya dan melihat apakah David benar-benar memiliki kecenderungan untuk memiliki seorang wanita lain selain dirinya.

Berdasarkan perjanjian antara mereka berdua, Chloe kemudian melaporkan segala tindakan yang David lakukan bersama dirinya. Chloe sendiri mengungkapkan bahwa David sepertinya menerima godaannya, bahkan sepertinya ingin mengajaknya ke sebuah tahap hubungan yang lebih jauh. Bercampur amarah, Catherine kemudian memberikan instruksi lanjutan kepada Chloe, yakni untuk menggoda David agar ia mau tidur dengannya. Suatu hal yang mungkin akan Catherine sesali seumur hidupnya.

Dengan menawarkan pendekatan erotic thriller, Egoyan patut dipuji atas kemampuannya untuk mengolah sebuah premis jalan cerita yang sepertinya telah berulang kali digunakan oleh Hollywood menjadi sebuah sajian yang cukup memikat. Pengalaman Erin Cressida Wilson, sebagai seorang penulis naskah di film drama erotis Secretary, sepertinya juga digunakan dengan sangat baik di film ini. Chloe tidak terjebak menjadi sebuah film kacangan yang hanya menawarkan berbagai tampilan panas tanpa arti. Di tangan Egoyan, naskah tersebut menjadi sebuah tampilan erotis kelas atas yang membuat film ini mampu tampil sebagai sebuah thriller yang cukup pintar memainkan para penontonnya,

Chloe beruntung memiliki jajaran pemeran yang luar biasa mampu menghidupkan jalannya film ini. Kredit terutama tentunya diberikan pada dua aktrisnya, Julianne Moore dan Amanda Seyfried. Seyfried, salah satu lulusan Mean Girls yang mampu bertahan dan akhir-akhir ini semakin bersinar di Hollywood, tampil berbeda dengan apa yang telah ia tunjukkan pada penampilan di film-film sebelumnya. Hilang sudah imej Seyfried yang baik, manis dan ceria berganti dengan Seyfried yang eksotis, cenderung gelap dan sedikit menakutkan. Apa yang dilakukan oleh Seyfried di film ini, termasuk dengan kenekatannya untuk tampil ‘polos’ di beberapa adegan, adalah sebuah langkah besar yang mungkin akan semakin membuktikan kemampuan aktingnya di Hollywood.

Academy Awards mungkin belum mampu memberikan rekognisi tersendiri pada Julianne Moore. Walau sering tampil pada film-film low profile, Moore selalu membuktikan bahwa dirinya adalah salah satu aktris watak terbaik yang pernah dimiliki Hollywood. Akting Moore sebagai seorang istri yang dibutakan oleh rasa kecemburuannya di Chloe akan semakin membuktikan pernyataan tersebut. Di tangan Moore, Catherine muncul sebagai seorang wanita yang sangat rapuh, di balik seluruh kecemburuannya, dan memiliki amarah yang luar biasa besar walau tertahan oleh berbagai pemikiran untuk mempertahankan potret sebuah keluarga yang bahagia. Tampil hampir di seluruh adegan yang ada di film ini, Moore jelas menjadi nyawa utama yang menjadikan Chloe begitu dapat dinikmati oleh penontonnya.

Karena naskah yang lebih cenderung berfokus pada dua karakter wanita utamanya, aktor Liam Neeson mungkin hanya dapat tampil dalam kapabilitas yang sangat terbatas pada film ini. Walaupun begitu, Neeson mampu memberikan sebuah gambaran yang baik atas karakter yang dapat memberikan sebuah kebingungan tersendiri pada penontonnya: apakah ia seorang pria yang berselingkuh atau ia hanyalah seorang pria yang menjadi korban kecemburuan sang istri. Sebuah premis yang menjadi twist menarik yang ditawarkan Chloe di penghujung film. Aktor muda Max Thieriot juga memberikan penampilan yang tidak buruk sebagai seorang anak yang tidak tahu menahu mengenai apa yang sedang terjadi di dalam keluarganya.

Tema yang dihadirkan Chloe mungkin sudah banyak dihadirkan di film-film Hollywood sejenis. Yang menjadi keunggulan utama film ini, harus diakui adalah kemampuan jajaran pemerannya untuk menghidupkan karakter yang mereka perankan dengan sangat sempurna. Egoyan juga harus diberikan kredit atas usahanya untuk mengangkat sebuah bahan dasar cerita yang bisa saja menjadi sebuah bencana, menjadi sebuah film yang sangat memikat, cukup pintar sekaligus menghibur. Beberapa orang mungkin kecewa atas pemilihan ending yang terasa terlalu ‘normal’, namun secara keseluruhan, Chloe adalah sebuah sajian yang sangat tidak mengecewakan.

Rating: 4 / 5