IN THE CUT

The critics back in 2003 really gave this erotic thriller from Jane Campion a thumbs down - a wretched 35% on Rotten Tomatoes tells its own story.

Whilst there was acknowledgement of the superb cinematography by Dion Beebe, the story came in for a lot of flak.  And there was widespread disapproval of ‘America’s Sweetheart’ Meg Ryan trying to move out of her romcom lane and indulging herself (so it was seen) in graphic sex scenes.  Plus it was too arty and pretentious, which is certainly true in places - Meg Ryan's character, Frannie, reading aloud bits of poetry off posters on the subway for example did nothing for me.

The film (for whatever reason) is clearly intended to evoke the 1971 classic ‘Klute'.  Both are psychological thrillers set in New York about a woman who is at risk from a murderer and who gets herself involved with a police detective.

'Klute' was a commercial and critical success, and Jane Fonda picked up an Oscar, even though her playing a prostitute at the time was as big a risk as Meg Ryan's character having real orgasms as opposed to the fake one in 'When Harry Met Sally'.  I guess Fonda got away with it because her exceptional performance is embedded within a terrific picture, whereas Ryan's perfectly fine performance is in a film which is not so great.

That being said I think it's better than the critics of the day allowed.

But first, there's no denying that the thriller element of the story is poor.  The main tension is supposed to derive from the fact that Frannie suspects that the homicide detective she is attracted to (played by Mark Ruffalo) might actually be the guy who's killing women in the neighbourhood in a gruesome manner.  

But given that this doesn't stop her having sex with him at every opportunity how seriously can we take her concern?  Not very in my case.  And it doesn't help that Mark Ruffalo doesn't have it in him to project any underlying menace that might make him plausible as the killer.

What he does seem to be is a pretty hopeless detective given that (spoiler alert) the true killer turns out to be his partner.  Not that he seems to be taking the case that seriously; at one point he takes Frannie off to some woods (in New York?) so that they can just while away some time together.

We also get a couple of characters who crop up from time to time without contributing much, at least not to the thriller plot.  One is a student of Frannie's (she's an English teacher) with whom she has an odd, flirtatious relationship.  At one point it it seems like he might be a suspect but that goes nowhere.  The other is a guy who Frannie had sex with a couple of times and now won't leave her alone - he's played by Kevin Bacon, whose talents are wasted here.  

The story finishes with a scene that ought to be very tense, when the real killer has Frannie at his mercy, but Campion is unable to get much juice out of it, but then again is she really trying to?

After all, the main reason why this film bombed is that audiences and critics were expecting a thriller with some sex thrown in, whilst Campion was aiming for a film about a woman who enjoys sex, with some thriller elements thrown in.  This was somewhat ahead of its time in 2003, but in the years since this film's reputation has been on an upward path.  

Another unusual aspect is that a fair bit of running time is devoted to Frannie's relationship with her half-sister Pauline (played by Jennifer Jason Leigh).  Mind you I'm not sure that their conversations fully pass the Bechdel test since they revolve around men and sex. 

If the story or sex scenes don't grab you then at the very least there is the excellent cinematography to enjoy,  setting some beautiful imagery against the grime of some of the seedier parts of New York. 

RATING: ✓ Cheers