Talking to a family friend about films he was after,I got told about an indie movie starring David Suchet. Checking on Amazon,I was surprised to find that it had only come out on DVD in France,which led to me watching it before the end of the week.The plot:Walking back home with a plant, former actress Madeleine Vesey spots a homeless man who looks just like film maker Matthew Delacorta. Believing him to be Delacorta, Vesey takes him for a bite at a diner. Attempting to talk about his work,Vesey finds Delacorta's memories to remain vague. Over the next few days "Delacorta" hints to Vesey that he is actually a different guy called Oliver,which leads to Vesey struggling to tell what is real and what is fiction with Oliver/Delacorta.View on the film:For a title shot in the US with two non-American leads using fake US accents and the film itself only being on DVD in France,co-writer (with James Lasdun)/director Jonathan Nossiter fittingly goes for a peculiar atmosphere,with the indoor scenes being shot in cramped camera angles that bring a tight closeness to Oliver/Delacorta and Vesey's relationship. Making his first non-documentary work, Nossiter retains the grit in his fiction debut via taking inspiration from the American New Wave and shooting on the streets of Queens New York.Subtly slipping in an ingenious twist ending,the screenplay by James Lasdun and Nossiter keep the dialogue wonderfully brittle,as Oliver / Matthew Delacorta vagueness over his identity allows Vesey to paint their relationship/ the "homeless man" into the corner that she sees fit. Bravely appearing naked in sex scenes, Lisa Harrow and David Suchet each give impeccable performances as Vesey and Oliver / Matthew Delacorta. Openly stating the pity she feels for him in front of his face,Harrow gives Vesey an expressive bohemian vibe,which strikes a fuse when Vesey learns left-field secrets about Oliver / Matthew Delacorta. Playing his real identity constantly in doubt, David Suchet shines in his timed exchanges with Vesey,and a fumble nature in revealing personal info at the end of the week.

I doubt many people will care about this review of a 20 year old movie. I've read over 30 previously posted reviews and the verdict seems pretty consistent. This is a unique, brave, sensitive project with two stellar performances at its center. There's a lot of ambiguity and confusion in the script, leading to quite a range of reviewer interpretations. Is he, isn't he? Can they, can't they? These two lost souls have the ability and opportunity to rescue each other as friends and lovers, but come the crunch seem to back away from it. They come tantalizingly close, but just can't make it happen. They're both too broken. She refuses to let him be who he is, even though he's risked everything to admit his identity. She just won't have any of it. When he wanders off into the lonely night at the end, you realize they aren't capable of more.Only two reviews I read here, both "professional," commented on the nudity. It is so refreshing to see un-self-conscious nude scenes by two middle aged actors. Lisa Harrow was a beautiful 54 year old woman when she made this film. Women everywhere, especially those who rail against the cult of youth, should applaud Ms. Harrow for her willingness to bare all for her art. One critic observed that her character seems more comfortable in her body than in her life.The documentary-like footage of a homeless shelter was my least favorite part of the film, but arguably it is necessary to establish the indignity to which David Suchet's life has fallen. All in all, this is a rewarding film. It's not a date movie (unless you want to get a real quick read on your partner). It's not a family movie. Are they still making indie films like this? If not, the loss is ours.

I watched this movie only because David Suchet was in it. I have followed his career for the past 7 years or so. It is frustrating to find anything beyond the 'Poirot' series with his name in the credits. I am not here to analyze the story but David Suchet's contribution to the overall success of the film.According to his website, Sir Laurence Olivier was Sir John Gielgud's mentor in acting. Sir John Gielgud was David Suchet's mentor. That means that from a thespian genealogy, there is a relationship between Olivier and Suchet. In this film, I realized why Suchet's talent for years has mesmerized me. His performance reminded me of Laurence Olivier in his powerful quietness. He evoked such angst and emotion without any outburst, tears or flailing of arms. He said volumes silently through quiet eyes. I simply felt like I was watching Olivier performing in Suchet's skin. I have seen this briefly in other films but never so unleashed as in 'Sunday'. This was the right script and the right director for David Suchet's talents. It was not a perfect script. It may not be the best film but it was a good script and a talented director. I know because I got to see a brilliant actor shine.I found the movie a bit difficult to follow but attributed that to artistic style. Every author and director has their inclination and desire to make their own voice heard. I can accept that and suspend my own sense of disbelief, at least for a couple of hours. After all, it was for the performance of the lead actor I had settled in.

Sunday (1997) is a beautiful film about a lost day in the lives of two lost people. It is also about their attempts to locate themselves and connect to each other. It is complicated, sad, haunted, angry, hopeful, sweet, awkward, mysterious, confusing, gritty, and ultimately quite everyday and ordinary. Something tremendous is happening in this film, and this something is poetry.