Afterglow (1997)

This immoral and involuntarily couple-swapping modern-day allegory has its conspicuous foible to cater for a wider demography, a self-consumingly pitched battle falls unfulfilled, one can feel the highly-contrived scheme runs amok at the latter part, and the films ends in an emotional gratification which is too Utopian to be credible to believe. The film garners a third Oscar nomination for the divine Julie Christie (after a 26 year hiatus since MCCABE & MRS. MILLER in 1971), whose role is the thorniest among the two pairs, and the film's pathos concretely hinges on her crack knack to embody the old lady who has her personal magnetism to fling with a frigid and wealthy pretty boy (only half of her age) at a convincing ease. Julie gracefully accomplishes her mission meanwhile Nolte, Miller and Boyle are all in solid shape to enliven their characters with ample credibility, although the thunder remains to belong to Ms. Christie. The central trauma orbits a childless status quo, which both couple yearn to alter, Christie tries to find her daughter back (who has deserted her 8 years ago after overhearing a hidden truth); while the bourgeois young wife Boyle is in eager to get pregnant when his sexually glacial husband refuses or is unable to commit the task. The mirror reflection has been exerted as a recurring gambit in the film, and the not-so-often witty wisecracks could be derived from director/writer Alan's strenuous endeavor on the script. Overall this low-budget marital vignette delivers a dramatic thesis on the lust-harvesting adult world with less-than-eloquent material and theatrical mechanics. Only Julie Christie exhibits a satisfying portrayal to deserve the time and dime we proffer.

I only give it a 2 instead of a 1 because Julie Christie is always such a joy to watch.The problem is, you can't figure out what is going on much of the time. Plot lines seem to make no sense. Example: at the end, Christie is crying. Has her daughter died or not? That is never made clear. If not, what is she sobbing about? Then there is the scene where Christie tries to seduce husband Nolte. She is attempting to repair their marriage. It is not clear why he rejects her, he seems to love her and it was she who had called off their sex life, not he. There is no discussion of this event afterward to clarify things.Characters throughout behave in ways that seem very unlikely and you can't figure them out. If a movie is going to be this surreal and confusing, it should be funny or suspenseful. This is neither. The Jonny Lee Miller character is peculiar beyond belief and that is never resolved. You can't figure him out at all,even at the end.Enough said, avoid this movie. You can see Christie in Away from Her, a far superior film.

There's no doubt Julie Christie was one of the most unique personalities of the late sixties and early seventies. A remote beauty who was sexy and charming in Billy Liar and Darling, haunting and enigmatic in Don't Look Now and McCabe and Mrs. Miller and one of the few things worth remembering about Doctor Zhivago. Her notorious pickiness when it comes to choosing roles has served her well and she is one of the few stars from that time who has moved quite gracefully through a film career. Her resources as an actress allow the character of Phyllis Mann to come alive in a way that few could accomplish and the magic she creates is unforgetable. Laid back hipster Alan Rudolph's sexual roundelay has a lush look on top and a jazzy score below but it's Christie who sears the visuals with sadness, mystery, and wit. Nick Nolte's rugged charm serves him well throughout and when these two are alone together on screen, the art of film acting is proudly displayed. Watch the scene when a drunken Phyllis tries to rekindle their physical relationship and notice the body language. Note to filmmakers: Rudolph's genius is knowing when not to move the camera and in trusting his actors to do the work.The film seems ponderous and flat at first and Johnny Lee Miller and Lara Flynn Boyle are still learning their craft (their scenes do grate), but Afterglow is a cockeyed success for those with patience.

I like Alan Rudolph movies. I always thought of him as Robert Altman Lite. When I saw "Welcome to L.A." in 1902 (I am exaggerating, but barely), I loved it and it seemed very Altman-like, and even starred some of the Altman-ettes like Geraldine Chaplin and Sissy Spacek. Most of the people were unhappy and if I'm not mistaken, Chaplin spends the whole movie in taxi cabs, taking pictures of the corners of buildings. When I saw "Choose Me" years later, it had a breezy, jazzy feel to it that I loved. It was about people in love, unlucky in love, wanting more love, wanting love from someone else, etc. "Afterglow" is a little like both of these movies. It has its jazz soundtrack intact and the people are miserable. In a nutshell, Julie and Nick haven't had a decent moment together since before they can remember. Lara and Johnny Lee are much younger but also accumulating many bad moments. Secrets are revealed. Both couples switch mates. They are not that much happier. Both find out about the other. That's it. Nolte and Julie Christie have some good scenes together, but she has much more chemistry with Johnny Lee Miller, who gives the best performance in the movie by a mile. He nails his role as a yuppie/scumbag perfectly. The whole thing is way too long. There are unnecessary scenes galore. If it were not for Julie Christie, I would have lasted 20 minutes w/this one. 5/10.