"Chloe" is a disaster, a misguided and pretentious film that believes it's making a grand statement about sex and human nature until resorting to terrible, manipulative writing in the last act in order to force a pointless finale. It's like a soft-core flick on Showtime trying to get an Oscar nomination, and it isn't smart or sexual... it's just tedious.
The great Julianne Moore plays Catherine Stewart, a repressed gynecologist whose marriage to husband David (Liam Neeson) is slowly eroding over the course of many years and his many affairs. Catherine secretly hires classy call-girl Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) to seduce her husband and test his fidelity but here's where the movie goes wrong: Catherine doesn't have any reaction to finding out her husband is a cheater.
You might expect her to be angry, hurt, devastated... but she's not. Maybe she gets a kinky thrill from the prostitute's detailed descriptions of these hook-ups: after all we do see her masturbating in the shower as she replays the scenario. The trouble is this avenue is never explored- or even mentioned- for the rest of the film. So what is her motivation? Maybe she's ready to confront her husband, to divorce him, to address the hypocrisy in her own life. Except she does none of that. She seems to be going through the motions because the script tells her to. I am a tremendous fan of Julianne Moore but her performance here is almost an intentional void. She's never allowed to behave based on her character's natural reactions, mainly because her character doesn't have any.
When she finally shacks up with Chloe herself it's as unsatisfying as it is confusing: she showed no signs of attraction to the girl whatsoever. Is she a closeted lesbian? I don't think so... first off that would be an incredibly trite plot development- done thousands of times- and secondly she describes in great detail how very deeply in love she and her husband once were. Aside from the generous nudity, Chloe and Catherine in bed offers no solution or explanation for either character. It's not even sexy... it just happens.
Amanda Seyfried is vibrant as the whore. Her eyes and face tell the story of a lost soul- too beautiful to ever be taken seriously- and she fills the non-character with as much personality as can be expected. After all, Chloe the prostitute is not a person, just a metaphor for sex. Well, she is until the third act, when the script calls for her to fall madly in love (?) with Catherine and turn psychotic. This is where the film completely falls apart.
Chloe is dumped/terminated by Catherine, so of course the scorned hooker immediately seduces Catherine's son. This makes less sense than it sounds. We're led to believe that she does this to get into Catherine's house and get closer to the woman she suddenly loves more than life itself. Reality check: the idea of a hooker falling in love with a client is beyond Looney Tunes. Secondly, there are no hints or clues of this happening- not even a single emotional connection between the two- before their sudden hookup. Third, after sex Chloe and the son simply fall asleep in Catherine's bed, both evidently unaware that they would be discovered. Chloe generously agrees to fall out of the bedroom window and die, if only to try and give the film some sense of closure- talk about your hookers with a heart of gold.
And that's that. We know less about the characters at the end than we did at the beginning. Why did Catherine do any of this? Who was Chloe? Is the rumpled and weepy Liam Neeson actually having an affair? Who cares? What makes this movie so much worse is the pretentious direction by Atom Egoyan, who moves things along at a slow and ponderous pace, giving you plenty of time to notice the lack of substance and story. Too bad... If you want a good lesbian sex scene that will get your juices flowing I suggest a soft-core porn on Showtime. It's much more honest, and much more fun.
GRADE: C-
The great Julianne Moore plays Catherine Stewart, a repressed gynecologist whose marriage to husband David (Liam Neeson) is slowly eroding over the course of many years and his many affairs. Catherine secretly hires classy call-girl Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) to seduce her husband and test his fidelity but here's where the movie goes wrong: Catherine doesn't have any reaction to finding out her husband is a cheater.
You might expect her to be angry, hurt, devastated... but she's not. Maybe she gets a kinky thrill from the prostitute's detailed descriptions of these hook-ups: after all we do see her masturbating in the shower as she replays the scenario. The trouble is this avenue is never explored- or even mentioned- for the rest of the film. So what is her motivation? Maybe she's ready to confront her husband, to divorce him, to address the hypocrisy in her own life. Except she does none of that. She seems to be going through the motions because the script tells her to. I am a tremendous fan of Julianne Moore but her performance here is almost an intentional void. She's never allowed to behave based on her character's natural reactions, mainly because her character doesn't have any.
When she finally shacks up with Chloe herself it's as unsatisfying as it is confusing: she showed no signs of attraction to the girl whatsoever. Is she a closeted lesbian? I don't think so... first off that would be an incredibly trite plot development- done thousands of times- and secondly she describes in great detail how very deeply in love she and her husband once were. Aside from the generous nudity, Chloe and Catherine in bed offers no solution or explanation for either character. It's not even sexy... it just happens.
Amanda Seyfried is vibrant as the whore. Her eyes and face tell the story of a lost soul- too beautiful to ever be taken seriously- and she fills the non-character with as much personality as can be expected. After all, Chloe the prostitute is not a person, just a metaphor for sex. Well, she is until the third act, when the script calls for her to fall madly in love (?) with Catherine and turn psychotic. This is where the film completely falls apart.
Chloe is dumped/terminated by Catherine, so of course the scorned hooker immediately seduces Catherine's son. This makes less sense than it sounds. We're led to believe that she does this to get into Catherine's house and get closer to the woman she suddenly loves more than life itself. Reality check: the idea of a hooker falling in love with a client is beyond Looney Tunes. Secondly, there are no hints or clues of this happening- not even a single emotional connection between the two- before their sudden hookup. Third, after sex Chloe and the son simply fall asleep in Catherine's bed, both evidently unaware that they would be discovered. Chloe generously agrees to fall out of the bedroom window and die, if only to try and give the film some sense of closure- talk about your hookers with a heart of gold.
And that's that. We know less about the characters at the end than we did at the beginning. Why did Catherine do any of this? Who was Chloe? Is the rumpled and weepy Liam Neeson actually having an affair? Who cares? What makes this movie so much worse is the pretentious direction by Atom Egoyan, who moves things along at a slow and ponderous pace, giving you plenty of time to notice the lack of substance and story. Too bad... If you want a good lesbian sex scene that will get your juices flowing I suggest a soft-core porn on Showtime. It's much more honest, and much more fun.
GRADE: C-