Venus in Fur is the new film from famed French director Roman Polanski. The film tells the story of Thomas, (played by Mathieu Almalric) a playwright who has decided to try directing because as he says, "other directors always get it wrong." He choose to adapt the novel Venus in Fur, written by Leopold Von Sacher-Masoch, (the founder of machoism) but is struggling with finding an actress to play Vanda, the lead female character. Just as he's about to leave, one final actress, whose name happens to be Vanda, (played by Emmanuelle Seigner) shows up to audition for the part. Very quickly Thomas decides that Vanda is perfect for the role, and they start to go through the play acting scenes out, discussing the play, discovering things about each other and the lines between reality and fiction begin to blur. Venus in Fur is adapted from a play, which makes it Polanski's second play-to-film adaptation in a row. (The previous being Carnage.) If you told me I was going to be watching a Polanski film about machoism, this is not what I'd expect. I mean this is the guy who brought us Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby. But instead of being a dark twisted psychological horror film, Venus in Fur is instead a subtle subdued film that studies the relationship between author and subject matter, and how art imitates life and life imitates art. A concept that was, unfortunately for Venus in Fur, explored much better in Alejandro González Iñárritu's Birdman a film released only a year after Venus in Fur. That's not stay that Venus in Fur does a bad job, the film raises several interesting questions about how much of themselves authors put in their work, and how the audience interprets that work.If you somehow knew that the two leads in Venus in Fur also play the two leads in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly just by reading their names and recognizing that they were both in it, then good job because that is some serious name recognition skill. Both actors, like in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, do great work in Venus in Fur. The characters conflict with each other perfectly, I don't mean that they completely disagree on everything, I mean that they disagree on a certain number of things and they agree on a certain number of things for their characters to have great chemistry. The entire film relies on these two characters being good and the actors being good, and luckily both of these things are true. Venus in Fur is at heart a teleplay and while it's no 12 Angry Men, it's still pretty good. Venus in Fur can be a little dull and tedious at parts, but never for to long, and the ending is far from satisfying. Besides these two things, I don't really have any other issues with the film.Venus in Fur is not the best Polanski film, and if you haven't ever seen another Polanski film before in your life I would recommend checking out Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby, or Chinatown before watching Venus in Fur. I'd like to end by saying that the film feels like one that you would put on a rainy Sunday afternoon, a very calm slow film that lets you soak in the atmosphere and style while never forcing any dark heavy stuff at you, Very comfy.6.8/10

Roman Polanski has it still. He has caught the intensity of emotions in David Ives play. He chose well his two protagonists: the beautiful Emanuelle Seigner as Vanda and Mathieu Amalric as Thomas. In 'Venus in Fur, Polanski palpably infuses his film with moral climate that Sade knew best to serve up, or better still Genet. The cat-and-mouse game that Vanda and Thomas engage in has a tension keeps you on the edge of your seat, as roles are reversed. In a way, Amalric reprises an obsessiveness that he brought in 'The Blue Room'. The equally talented Seigner breathes full life to Vanda in all the complexity of a dominatrix who abandons Thomas, tarted up as a streetwalker, captivated by her Delilah-like charms and wiliness.

Polanski brings another piece of art that is quite hard to compliment without swearing! That said... Let's try in the most polite way possible! In the stage, both Mathieu Amalric and Emmanuelle Seigner give a terrific performance... Floating between characters, but yet playing only one character each... The dynamic between the actors are amazing... Sensual, honest, believable etc... There was no room for any other character or actor in the scenes... About Tom, he's familiar, a cool guy you know, and for this your fear for his life, for his relationship, still, you would like if he died, or betrayed his love interest... Now about Vanda, there's no way of not loving her, even when you just know her name... She can be the most unlucky person in the world that appears late for an appointment with you or the queen bitch that appears with an unknown objective... Both ways you would kiss her feet with pleasure! the plot is quite mesmerizing and thrilling... The adaptation by Polanski and Ives is very contemporaneous... Making it feel it even more fantastic... Not sure if thats the word i want, but anyway... It was brilliant as Carnage, the last feature film directed by Polanski before Venus... It follows the same recipe with only leading roles and a deep dive into the human nature... Once again, i'll have to talk about how sensual is the whole movie, with one exception... The scene when Venus reveals herself... It's freaky, funny, trying to be frighting (maybe), but not sexy... Even being Emmanuelle Seigner only in fur...

I fund myself sort of dozing off at certain scenes in the film. Whether it was due to a failure of the film or that I was just really tired when i saw it, is anyone's guess. But I had still enjoyed most of it, and once the final act came on, I knew I was watching something special. The performances are exquisite, especially Seigner who I'm sure people who've seen the play will be more than delighted. The final ten minus take on this really dark tone that's completely enthralling, and I should've known where the film was heading. By the time I did, I immediately wanted to rematch the film for more nuances, and as it is right now, I'm sure I will in he near future. Really well- done film.