Tweekums
Shortly after arriving in Australia vicar Anthony Campion is asked by his Bishop to pay a visit to controversial artist Norman Lindsay whose works are considered vulgar at best, blasphemous at worst in order to persuade him to withdraw a particularly shocking picture from an upcoming exhibition. He is accompanied by his wife Estella to Lindsay's remote home; inevitably he and Lindsay don't see eye to eye on many things. They are only meant to be there for one night but after the next train is derailed they find themselves staying much longer than planned. Estella gets to know Lindsay's models and rather quickly the setting starts to have an effect on her; or lowers her sexual inhibitions to let her be who she really was.Given that this film only has a '15' certificate it is surprisingly erotic at times; it manages to avoid being sleazy though. The story is simple enough but well told. Hugh Grant is good as Anthony Campion, although it is a role like many he has played… the rather flustered Englishman. The best acting comes form Tara Fitzgerald; to my mind she is the real star of this film as it is far more about her character than that of her husband; her portrayal of Estella's gradually growing sexual feelings is done believably and her pale complexion stands in contrast to the tanned Australians. The rest of the cast are also pretty good; including Elle Macpherson who is obviously much better known for her modelling work. There is a quite a bit of full nudity, both female and male and a bit of swearing so if that bothers you then this isn't the film for you; if however it doesn't then this is well worth checking out.
dimplet
Hold the presses! Elle MacPherson can act! And so can Hugh Grant!I decided to give Grant another look in honor of his honorable role in exposing the phone hacking of celebrities by Rupert Murdoch's tabloids. I did not like Notting Hill because I couldn't shake the feeling Grant was just being Grant; Mickey Blue Eyes was better, but still marginal acting. I used to call him Hugh "One Grin" Grant because he only seemed to have two expressions: a wide grin and a deep frown. But perhaps part of the problem was the shallow material he had to act in. Or, more likely, I have not seen his best work. Sometimes actors do their most authentic work early on, and Sirens might qualify. But now I am curious what Grant will do next, presumably not for Fox Studios.With Sirens, Hugh Grant gets it right. He conveys a broader range of moods and emotions, though there are no histrionics. He relaxes out of his usual Hugh Grant persona, but not too much, as he is a British clergyman, though a relatively liberal one. He is confronted with a variety of unusual and embarrassing situations, where his reaction is key to the movie, and he gets it right. This time, it looks genuine. This time there is real chemistry with his co-star.I never would have guessed Elle MacPherson was a supermodel rather than an actress. There is none of the stiffness seen with some of the great beauties turned "actresses" of years past. Maybe she was just being herself, but whatever it is, I hope she keeps on doing it.The greatest actor of the cast is Sam Neill, though you might not guess it. Neill, who plays the real Norman Lindsay, provides the grounding for the story. He hardly says anything, but sometimes that is the performance that requires the most talent. And he is the one with the grin, though a subtle, sly one of understanding. (Mr. Grant, with all due respect, you don't need to flash a wide grin all the time. Look at Neill's more subtle grin which uses his eyes -- this could look good on you, too. Or you could just smile gently and sagely.)Tara Fitzgerald (not to be confused with Geena Davis) had by far the most challenging and central role, which she played to perfection. Doesn't exactly look like a vicar's wife, though. But neither does Grant. I also liked her in the delightful "Hear My Song."Music is by Rachel Portman, as fans of Chocolat might guess. The opening theme matches one in Chocolat. But most of the rest of the score is original and interesting. The shared musical theme is appropriate since the two movies share a sexual theme of repression and liberation. They both hark back to the Bacchae. Chocolat came later, and has the stronger score, but then it is a stronger movie. Sirens is more low-keyed. What is especially interesting about Sirens is not the plot, but the atmosphere of place and time it conveys, and the odd mood of the odd situation. This mood runs through the movie, and the music plays a role in sustaining that mood. There isn't so much of a plot as a situation, which is off-balanced and gives the story momentum. You naturally wonder how it will unfold, and that is what holds your interest.Some reviewers make a big deal about the similarity to a D.H. Lawrence novel, but I think Sirens is better, less dark and more willing to laugh at itself. And its actual source was a real painter, whose works appear in the film. It is fitting, under the circumstances, that Sirens is set in Australia, the home of Rupert Murdoch, who would have been born around the time of the movie, which is set in the 1930s. The impression of Australians, men at least, in this outback town is hardly favorable. They don't seem to set much store in manners or grooming. But then Neill's painter character doesn't place much store in pretension, either, unlike the British. I guess there can be something said for that. I wonder if we can find any of Murdoch's roots in these characters?Some people will watch Sirens for the beautiful women. But John Duigan - - director, writer and bit player -- has created a truly original, interesting movie, something you don't encounter every day.
Theodor
Oh, how I love this movie!It shows us how under the thin veneer of hypocrisy, religiousness, and enmity against all physical lies what God gave us to enjoy: a body to experience happiness, laughter, desire, sensuality, lust, and sexuality. And no institutions (like the Christian church in this film) have the right nor - in the long run - the capability to prevent people from finding out this fundamental truth.Watching this movie without an open mind towards sex or a joyful sense of humor surely will be annoying. So fundamentalist Christians and other prudes shouldn't bother. The rest of the audience (hopefully the majority) can expect a solid performance of the entire ensemble and many moments that make you smile and sometimes downright happy.
