web
counter
 

Reviewing sex, lies, and videotape, the Film that Relaunched the Independent Film Movement

By Drew Morton | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (16)



sexlies_l.jpg

Steven Soderbergh’s film debut, sex, lies, and videotape (1989) probably pissed a lot of people off when they saw it. The title, linking duplicity and carnal relations with the then new media form of the videotape, seems to promise either amateur pornography or an art film akin to Bernardo Bertolucci’s Last Tango in Paris (1972). Yet, the film has more in common with the work of another Italian director, Michelangelo Antonioni’s L’Avventura (1960) with regard to misdirection and theme. The title of Antonioni’s film, translated into English as “The Adventure,” begins with a mystery (a man’s wife disappears on a trip and, rather than find her and solve the mystery, he delves into an affair) but sidesteps mystery and suspense in order to deal with how sexuality and relationships in general have become alienating, thanks to the concept of modernity.

Soderbergh’s work is similar: the title promises something that the film does not ultimately deliver (one of the studio executives asked the director “Are you sure I’ve gotten all the footage? Because I’m not seeing any flesh.”). While sex does occur, the camera does not provide witness. The video camera functions almost like a Priest at confession, silent but ultimately without judgment. Yet, the camera does inspire a certain pleasure for Graham (James Spader) however. He has become entranced by the new technology to the point where it is linked to his impotence. Technology and its inspired voyeurism have essentially alienated Graham from the ability to have both a physical and emotional relationship.

The begins as the Graham arrives in Baton Rouge to visit his old college roommate John (Peter Gallagher) and his wife, Ann (Andie McDowell). Graham, priding himself on being a social island (there are only two keys on his key ring—-one for his apartment, the other for his car), isn’t really a people person. What makes it odd, however, is Soderbergh’s editing during the opening scenes links Graham not with John but with Ann: she expresses her dissatisfaction with marriage and her sexual repression to her therapist while Soderbergh cross-cuts to Graham making a makeshift bath for himself in the restroom of a local bait shop. The point is that they both are alone but Soderbergh, through the mechanisms of cinema, has implied a bond visually. When he finally cuts to John, a yuppie in the worst possible sense of the word, he’s shown spinning his wedding ring on his desk, frivolously, while confessing to a friend that the best thing about being married is the increased attention from single women.

One of those women who have given her attention and, occasionally, her body to the married John is Ann’s sister Cynthia (Laura San Giacomo). While bound by some of the same genetic material, the two women couldn’t be further apart with regard to their personalities. Ann is repressed and unhappy; Cynthia is uninhibited and a bit of a free spirit. Even though Ann is unaware of the affair, there is a shared anger between the sisters regardless and adding Graham to the equation only throws a match onto a pile of seasoned firewood.

The beginning of the end to the marriage between Ann and John comes when the housewife visits Graham at his new apartment. She takes note of all the video equipment and cassettes lying around and, out of harmless curiosity, pressed Graham as to their use. Graham replies that he tapes interviews with women to which Ann responds “Can we watch one?” The voyeur then tries to skirt around the subject, saying “Well, I promised each of the subjects that no one would see the videotapes except for me….The interviews are about sex.” Ann leaves in disgust and informs Cynthia of Graham’s odd hobby, which prompts the free-spirited sister to visit Graham and to make her own videotaped confession.

In the meanwhile, Ann is cleaning the house and discovers one of Cynthia’s earrings on the floor to their bedroom (inspiring an amazing jumpcut sequence that would no doubt play a role in his shaping of Out of Sight ten years later). Putting two and two together, she drives over to Graham’s house and insists on making her own videotape. The mechanism of videotape, which had previously been linked to Graham’s impotence, becomes depicted in another light: it provides Ann with a psychological breakthrough that she could not reach in psychotherapy, allowing her to articulate her negative feelings towards John while simultaneously unclenching sexually. It also, through the breakthrough and Graham’s role in it, gives him the ability to feel for a person.

Finally, Ann confronts John about the affair with Cynthia and tells him of her own affair with Graham. She asks for a divorces and John, in a fit of anger, leaves the house and confronts his college roommate. The final sequence, of Graham destroying the videotapes, says it all: He is distancing himself from the technology he has used to alienate himself and, subsequently, is embracing a relationship with Ann. Soderbergh ends the climax of the film with the video of Graham and Ann kissing as Graham turns off the camera. Soderbergh puts an ironic spin on his adultery tale by cutting back to John watching the videotape and the television, which is now engulfed in white snow. This final image leaves John, unsure of his wife’s possible infidelities, paired with videotape, visualizing his alienation from his relationships because of his own sexual escapades. Ironically, Soderbergh has utilized videotape to bring two people together while utilizing sex to push two others apart.

Sex, lies, and videotape not only kick-started Soderbergh’s career but provided a gust of wind in the sails of the then budding American independent film movement. Indie film had been a driving force in the 1960s and 70s with companies like BBS (Five Easy Pieces) and Roger Corman’s company, which had given a start to so many now famous filmmakers (including Peter Bogdanovich, Francis Ford Coppola, Jonathan Demme, Martin Scorsese, and James Cameron). Yet, through the efforts of some of those same filmmakers brought up with the indie spirit, most notably George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, the blockbuster became a rival form to the auteurist art cinema. When auteur art films like Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate (1980) and Coppola’s One from the Heart (1982) tanked at the box office, studios became no longer willing to put their faith the director (to be fair, those indie films had huge budgets). The blockbuster had become a much more cost effective proposition, thanks to its ability to both capture a wide demographic and spawn sequels. Soderbergh changed all that, for better and for worse, when his $1 million dollar movie grossed more than 20 times that, garnered critical praise, and even an Oscar nomination for Soderbergh (Best Screenplay).

The film still holds up relatively well today, more than twenty years after its release. All of the actors, Spader and McDowell in particular, give career defining performances here that, ironically (given their relative inexperience), would be nearly impossible to top. They owe a lot to Soderbergh’s writing, which deals with infidelity not on the garish brushstrokes of melodrama but cerebral, dry comedy. It’s one of the most memorable film debuts to grace the American cinema (hence all the comparisons made between Orson Welles and Soderbergh, who were both 26 when they both altered the landscape of American film). For Valentine’s Day, I can make no better suggestion.

Drew Morton is a Ph.D. student in Cinema and Media Studies at the University of California-Los Angeles. His criticism and articles have previously appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the UWM Post, Flow, Mediascape, The Playlist, and Senses of Cinema. He is the 2008 and 2010 recipient of the Otis Ferguson Award for Critical Writing in Film Studies.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Spider-Man Gets A Title And A New Image | One, You Lock the Target: Magnolia Goes After Headhunters, Point Blank and von Trier's Melancholia









Comments

I've watched this movie at least a dozen times--love James Spader, and can even forgive Laura S. G. for Quigley Down Under and Pretty Woman. Andi makes a mean repressed individual.

Posted by: EllenP at February 15, 2011 11:41 AM

G.D., I love this movie.

Posted by: Caroline at February 15, 2011 12:26 PM

Fine, I'll watch it. Somehow. It's not available on Netflix in Canada.

Posted by: Brenton at February 15, 2011 12:39 PM

I can recall everything about seeing this for the first time: Who I was with, what I wore, what we ate, drank and smoked before and after. The tension while watching it was immense and intense.

LOVE James Spader. Creepy-sexy. My favorite flavor.

Oddly, Andie McDowell, who is really an awful actress, fails to ruin three of my very favorite movies: This one, Groundhog Day and Green card. Maybe they are unruinable.

Posted by: klingonfree at February 15, 2011 12:57 PM

and can even forgive Laura S. G. for Quigley Down Under and Pretty Woman.
Almost, but not quite. And then she turned into a farcical variant of Ann Milaney's character on Just Shoot Me that made me want to shoot her, just a little.

Something that not nearly enough critics have focused on to my satisfaction is an exploration of the dysfunction between Ann and Cynthia, predicated by their mother and activated by John. I mean, "the beautiful, the popular Anne Bishop Milaney..." The venom that the younger sister spews towards the favorite child, the vigor with which Cynthia attempts to co-opt bleeding chunks of Ann's life by pursuing sexual connections with the two primary men in Ann's life, speaks volumes in and of itself.

Posted by: Jerry at February 15, 2011 1:03 PM

It's been years since I saw this movie. Years. And now I need to see it again. Like, today. But it's not available on Instant. WHICH MEANS I'll be having to stop somewhere to pick it up on the way home from work.

I blame you, Morton.

Posted by: Anna von Beav at February 15, 2011 1:11 PM

Thanks for revisiting another good one. It's been years since I've seen it as well, but this is certainly one of the films that hooked me on Soderbergh. I don't remember what age I was when I watched it, but I have the impression that this was one of the first movies with these themes that left me feeling that I had actually "gotten" everything, whereas if I had watched it a couple years earlier, I probably would have been much less enthralled if not bored.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at February 15, 2011 2:08 PM

A black friend of mine once commented that this movie should be called "White People Sure Are Weird."

Posted by: Keith at February 15, 2011 3:09 PM

I really wish Steven Lloyd Wilson had reviewed this classic.

Posted by: brite at February 15, 2011 3:19 PM

Just the other day I was thinking of this movie after I lost my keys. The James Spader character in the movie doesn't want to grow up and uses the number of keys he has as an indication of his possessions. When I had to recreate my keys I realized that I only needed 2 and had no idea what the other keys were for. I guess I travel light.

Also, the bar in the movie "The Bayou" was my husband's college hangout. He used to donate plasma and then go to the bar to get drunk on cheap beer on Fridays. He only wished someone as attractive as LSG worked there.

Posted by: BlueSky at February 15, 2011 3:28 PM

Brite,

I wish SLW would have written your comment.

Posted by: Drew Morton at February 15, 2011 3:44 PM

this is one of my favorite movies and i have watched it many, many times. for some reason(s) it resonated but we don't need to get into those details here. james spader was great but, really, everyone was.

Posted by: splinter at February 15, 2011 5:03 PM

I love this movie. Spader needs a haircut though.

Posted by: Mebe at February 15, 2011 11:58 PM

I've seen this once and that was almost certainly 20 years ago, but the thing about it that most sticks with me was the way Graham stammers and stutters and self-edits himself constantly. You almost never see anyone in any movie speak inarticulately. I assume it was meant to tie into Graham's impotence in a sense that he couldn't even get a sentence out without interruptus.

Posted by: , at February 16, 2011 11:09 AM

Thank you for a wonderful review of my favorite film. I love character driven motion pictures and slv is definitely that. This film is all about the dialogue and the actors, and nothing to do with action and special effects...thank goodness! I am always amazed by James Spader's performance; the fact that he stutters and stammers adds another layer to his character that would not be there if he spoke the role in traditional movie speak fashion. His performance is my favorite (for which he won Best Actor at Cannes), but the other three thespians are excellent as well. If this film had been slightly miscast I think it would have failed, but Soderbergh committed no false steps. He delivered a thought provoking, excellent movie on his maiden voyage as a film maker.

In 1990 Soderbergh wrote a book entitled, "sex, lies, and videotape". The book contains the original screenplay and a "diary fashion" making of the film. It is an interesting read for those who are as interested in this film as I am.

Posted by: PLF at February 16, 2011 2:26 PM

I remember seeing this on Friday and turning around to go and see it on Saturday...it was one of the first movies about relationships that I had ever saw that was pretty honest...

Oh and James Spader made mental issues incredibly HOT!!!!

Posted by: Lala11_7 at February 19, 2011 10:53 PM