The Principles of Lust (2003)

Saw this tonight and felt obliged to look up this film online, its apolitical kitchen sink drama for the naughties - or noughties, or whatever - but its more than kitchen sink, its Shakespearian with its symbolism. Poor Britain, it has descended into lad-ism and porn, gone mad between temptation and boredom, the sickness of newsfeed represented by shocking violence, irresponsibility and real games. I'm seriously impressed with the writer who got all this into the script, I "got it" Its not for the faint hearted, a lot of things aren't, but if you're a player, or want to be - well you might be surprised what actually goes on. I hope to see more from this director.

Granted the Principles of Lust is patchy, but it's nothing like as bad as you would conclude from other user reviews. It pushes at the boundaries, challenges the viewer with explicit images you would never expect to see even in an 18-cert movie, but does also say a lot about relationships in the process. Paul and Juliette's instant attraction and failure to communicate effectively echoed much of the love-hate nature of real life relationships in my experience, right down to the closing shots where love and bitterness combine while Juliette's son looks on, uncertain. Secondly, Paul's uncertainty about himself and his status as a writer speaks volumes - and thereby he represents the vast majority of us. Ultimately, do we know what we really want? Maybe we are all drawn to the dark side but are afraid to admit it, even to ourselves? So from my perspective, bravo to Penny Woolcock for making this film, which inevitably will polarise its audience - but remember its nod to Fight Club, and the fact that it is adapted from a novel by Tim Cooke. It's hard to imagine a feistier adaptation than this.

The trouble with this film is, there are at least three good films struggling to get out, and none of them do. There is a good film about the effect of charisma and its ability to draw weak people into situations. That's touched upon, but the characters are not really that believable. Then there is the exploitation of minors film struggling to get out, with the clever subplot of the child's OTHER pastime, the community play - but this is hardly ever touched upon; it should be the main focus of the film, really. OK, I can't think of a third good film struggling to get out - but what we are left with is a rather dreary flick that struggles to get out of second gear. All the acting with the exception of the "charismatic" Marc Warren is of the 'ultra-realist' school in which the height of ambition is to 'gel' with normal people. The trouble is, the normal people the characters represent are quite stupid, all things considered. Although they are all 'artistes', they seem to inhabit a world where no one can exist without sex and where no one is really ready to point up the obvious - such as a kid used for bare-knuckle boxing. Thus, you don't care about the characters. When the main actor tells the kid that he isn't getting a 'fucking dog' you just wish the whole film would go away. Pathetic stuff.This should have been a one-hour special on BBC1, but they wouldn't have got the hard-core porn in. Not really worth the admission price. Filmfour at its worst.

I found the philosophy of what this film was after very persuasive. Looking at the schism that forms in any artist serious about their work, and the agony of the personal choices that come out of sacrificing for one's work. The film looks at how artists make this choice. The characters are well defined and the acting is compelling. I felt the tension of the central character's choices palpably. The motivations behind the actions of each character were well exposed and added depth to what, in less able hands, would have resulted in inexplicable behavior. This central theme of choice, the choice of what type of life we pursue and the conflicts that emerge between desire for adventure and comfort are beautifully drawn in this film.