Roeg is always interesting and challenging so I make a point of watching his films even though I don't always like them. This film reminded me of Bad Timing, in the sense that it is a movie about an incompatible couple drawn together for the wrong reasons, their relationship put under duress and under the microscope of a reality they can't escape from, until everything snaps.
He has an obsessive, idealistic fantasy about living on a desert island with a woman, her reasons are never made clear, but they both seem to want the adventure so they ignore their problems during their first few months of their relationship, and embark on the survivalist project. The problems start already on the first day, with his ideals and fantasies getting in the way of real work that needs to be done, and she takes all the wind out of his sails by suddenly denying him any more sex, and nagging him to do more house-wo... I mean island-work.
At least that's the way I see it. Watching this movie, I found myself constantly wondering what's going on in his mind. His mind seems to be a mess, his behaviour is extremely erratic, and everything he does is criticized by her, blatantly chauvinistic to the point of being a caricature, or just wrong. He doesn't feel like a real person. Whereas she can do no wrong, and her emotional needs are explained to death.
And then it dawned on me: This is a one-sided story told only from the woman's side, consisting of rants against a man she doesn't like nor understand, who finds herself in a survivalist adventure that didn't match her romantic ideals.
Imagine my lack of surprise when I looked up the credits and found that this is based on a real-life adventure book written from her point of view.
Another flaw is the lack of realism and changes in their always-displayed nude bodies, Roeg having to insert awkward shots of another emaciated body to convey the idea that they are in bad health. Compare this with Tom Hanks' physical work in his desert island movie.
In summary: I like the idea, I like the acting, I like Roeg's constantly challenging cinematic work and inventive methods of telling a story, but the material this is based on feels fundamentally flawed and biased, with Reed's character making no sense as a result. This is fatal in a character study.
He has an obsessive, idealistic fantasy about living on a desert island with a woman, her reasons are never made clear, but they both seem to want the adventure so they ignore their problems during their first few months of their relationship, and embark on the survivalist project. The problems start already on the first day, with his ideals and fantasies getting in the way of real work that needs to be done, and she takes all the wind out of his sails by suddenly denying him any more sex, and nagging him to do more house-wo... I mean island-work.
At least that's the way I see it. Watching this movie, I found myself constantly wondering what's going on in his mind. His mind seems to be a mess, his behaviour is extremely erratic, and everything he does is criticized by her, blatantly chauvinistic to the point of being a caricature, or just wrong. He doesn't feel like a real person. Whereas she can do no wrong, and her emotional needs are explained to death.
And then it dawned on me: This is a one-sided story told only from the woman's side, consisting of rants against a man she doesn't like nor understand, who finds herself in a survivalist adventure that didn't match her romantic ideals.
Imagine my lack of surprise when I looked up the credits and found that this is based on a real-life adventure book written from her point of view.
Another flaw is the lack of realism and changes in their always-displayed nude bodies, Roeg having to insert awkward shots of another emaciated body to convey the idea that they are in bad health. Compare this with Tom Hanks' physical work in his desert island movie.
In summary: I like the idea, I like the acting, I like Roeg's constantly challenging cinematic work and inventive methods of telling a story, but the material this is based on feels fundamentally flawed and biased, with Reed's character making no sense as a result. This is fatal in a character study.