Terrible-hunting: Chloe

The one thing you must know about Atom Egoyan's Chloe (recently out on DVD):

But, oh, there is more.

The story of Chloe is basically the story of Kate Bush's "Babooshka" with a modern, Sapphic twist. She wanted to test her husband, she knew exactly what to do: instead of a pseudonym to fool him, she employed a prostitute to fool him. Or so she thought! I won't give away what happens in this erotically charged story about very erotic women and full of erotic dialogue that is certainly erotic...oh wait, yes I will: the wife in question (Julianne Moore's Catherine) is duped by her hired whore (Amanda Seyfried's Chloe), who never actually meets Catherine's "tall, strong, chestnut-haired" husband (virtual non-entity David, played by Liam Neeson) and under the guise of recounting their encounters to Catherine, spins erotic fiction for her client chock full of fur-coat diary entries like, "He said to me, ‘I can’t cum, I can’t cum, I have to go to work.’ But I didn’t stop. And then I bit his tongue.” I feel like a million pornos have been made with this plot (Take My Husband, Please...And Fuck the Shit Out of Him), but because this is Canadian, often has the haziness of a coffee commercial and doesn't show pink, it gets a mainstream pass. OK, then!

More a groaner than a thriller, Chloe is pure cheese and a hell of a lot of fun up until its conventional third act, which is tame by the standards set by virtually every other R-rated domestic suspense flick of the past 30 years (including itself in its first two acts). In spirit, it is the best kind of garbage: hilarious but unsmiling and fitting perfectly into my criteria for what makes the garbagest of garbage cinema. Come, let's put it through the ringer:

Incompetence

Keep trying to persuade me that this is hot, Chloe. I know I'm gay and male but I'm also in possession of all of my senses, and Julianne Moore and Amanda Seyfried's onscreen chemistry smells a lot more like bullshit than musty lady odor.

I haven't mentioned that Catherine is a gynecologist, so she falls into this verbal, then physical affair with ease. Her big lesson? Vaginas can be just as interesting when you're off duty. It's nothing short of erotic irony when she finally gets examined (that shot isn't exactly NSFW, but you might want to avoid it just to be safe IF YOU'RE LAME AND DON'T ENJOY LESBIAN FINGERBANGING). Patient beats doctor! Some will masturbate to this (I mean...I guess?); others will chortle. The latter group is the correct one.

I mean, ew (that one's definitely not safe for work, YOU PATHETIC HOMOPHOBE). While in bed, Chloe looks up at Catherine with the expectancy of someone who needs ice and decided to go searching in a frigid set of female genitalia to find it. Way to pick a fire crotch, asshole.

The lesser moments that supposedly factor into the sexual tension before the big bang are just as eye-roll worthy. Passing some toilet paper between bathroom stalls...

...applying a bandage to a skinned knee...

 

...and sharing hand lotion...

 

...are all supposed to moisten the atmosphere/panties. All I could think of in the scene above was, "It puts the lotion on the skin." SO NOT HOT.

Chloe, in the spirit of erotic-thriller vixens, ends up seducing more than one member of this family, targeting Catherine's sexually active son, Michael (whom Catherine's probably jealous of by virtue of the fact that he's getting laid and she isn't -- that isn't me surmising, it's practically written into the script, which: GROSS). They talk about bands and at one point, Chloe asks him, "Do you have a page?" (as in Friendster, probably) BECAUSE THAT IS HOW YOUNG PEOPLE TALK.

Absurdity

Oh, there is plenty. First of all, Catherine masturbates to Chloe and David's nonexistent affair, more connected to him than ever, as these dissolves point out:

 

 

Her head on his, her hand on his. They are connected via nothing! How fraudulently poetic. How perfect for Chloe.

In the aforementioned knee-treatment scene, Catherine goes to cut off Chloe's stockings, but instead Chloe decides to pull them down. They're ruined anyway with a giant hole in the knee, but how often to you get a legitimate excuse to pull down what's covering your ass in public?

Catherine is a total nightmare, by the way. She's so uptight, Chloe might as well have gone digging for diamonds instead of ice cubes (yet another reason why her erotic awakening feels so contrived -- she goes from zero to oozing in seconds). She micromanages Chloe's supposed dalliances with her husband ("I didn't ask you to do that!" she says when Chloe reveals that David asked if he could kiss her) and is extremely concerned with everyone's STD status (this is how life is for a gynecologist, I suppose). This reveals a major gender divide -- men tell whores, "Show me your tits"; women tell whores who are sleeping with their husbands, "Show me your results."

When Catherine finally pulls back and Chloe isn't ready to give up her red-floss source, she starts harassing Catherine, leaving messages at her office and sending her blackmail potential via email. At one point, Chloe calls...

 

...and it turns out that the call...is coming...from...

 

...inside the gynecologist's office!!!! HORRORS.

Melodrama

Chloe is even more attention-starved than her frustrated-wife client, and so she does things to win Catherine's sympathy:

 

Chloe's overacting, but then, so's the woman who's playing her:

 

On the upside (or is it?), Julianne's patented crying face is at a minimum.

Still, the movie itself is full of pauses (more on that in a sec), including this one:

 

I guess gynecology must be feeling the recession, because she's clearly on dial-up. Whose images load that slowly? That shit was taken with a whore's cell-phone camera, which could only be, like, 2 megapixels at best. How big could the fucking file be?

Extreme view points

 

In several situations, it is implied and observed that whores are everywhere. Apparently, they infest Toronto like a greedy bunch of cockroaches in heat. It's just as well, really: the bigger the whore population, the better to eat your pussy with! Bwah! Ha! Haaaaaa!

Miscellaneous weirdness or quirks

For a movie about a lesbian affair, it's pretty ironic that there are so many pregnant pauses here. Sample exchange:

Catherine: How do you do this (whoring)?

Chloe:

 

Catherine:

 

Chloe (finally): I try to find something to love in everybody...

(The fact that Chloe is a clingy whore could probably have been filed under each one of the Terrible-hunting categories.)

Anyway, these women mostly communicate via their eyes and expressions. They are mimes, basically.

And acting is reacting (or whatever!) and I guess every movie is full of still, contemplative moments, but they seem in abundance here. It all feels like forced subtlety, like these characters are buckling under the weight of their own introspection ABOUT WHORING.

It ends with a confrontation in front of a giant window -- Chloe is eventually pushed out, and she accepts her fate graciously.

I consider that quirky in the same way that I consider the guy who dies in a plane crash in Alanis Morrisette's "Ironic" ("Well isn't this nice") quirky.

The last image is, of course, ridiculous -- Chloe's dead (if she ever was alive in the first place!) and Catherine can continue her life with her family. We see her hosting a party, and as she turns around...

 

...we see that she is wearing the hair thing Chloe gave her. Chloe is still part of her! She's lucky that's all Chloe gave her. When you mess with a hooker, you could come away with something far itchier. Good for Catherine!

Comments

[sairentohiru]

I was just sort of meh on seeing Chloe until I read this review. I shall kick it up my Netflix queue immediately! It sounds like the sort of faux artsy trash I love.

[Drew]

What more can I expect from a movie that shares its name with a whole legion of dumb/pretty girls I went to elementary school with? Had Seyfried's character been named ANYTHING ELSE, the movie title of FIRST NAME (NO LAST NAME) might have worked better, but as it stands now it's only slightly less awkward than if a Tiffany or Brittany or Lisa Frank were being cast as the terror who only needs one name.

[Jason]

Oh come on. "Chloe" wasn't TERRIBLE. When it remained in psychological character-study territory, it was fairly compelling (and well-acted by Julianne Moore) and only slightly ludicrous. And I admire the way it lets the audience gradually realize that the protagonist is really the villain. I still don't know why it was directed by Atom Egoyan rather than Adrian Lyne, and I wasn't even remotely aroused (but I'm also a gay male). But we're not exactly talking about "Obsessed" here.

[Liz]

I haven't watched Chloe yet but I generally like Atom Egoyan. Have you seen Exotica, Rich?

[Charlotte]

The best thing about Chloe was the gorgeous Anthropologie coat Seyfriend wears

[Luke]

faux artsy = fartsy

[DLCF]

Please please pretty please do "The Room" next. It would be two pop culture juggernauts colliding in a universe-collapsing blast of awesomeness.

[Andy S.]

LMAO, lord knows I love my BB Seyfried, but this looks so deliciously BAD

[Dodger]

ok i'm not reading this, i'll just see it. i had heard it was just OK, but if the terrible erotic cheese factor is high, i'll check it out. I need an Obsessed for the year ya know?

[matthew]

I liked Chloe a lot. But then, I like most erotic thrillers that take place in giant crazy houses that bear no resemblance to any house I have ever myself been in. Also, I think I read that the Liam Neeson part was cut back because Natasha Richardson died in the middle of filming.

[Simonweston]

I saw this in the theater because I've had a strange, Chole-esque obsession with Julianne Moore ever since "SAFE" about a decade or so ago (have you seen it, Rich? Directed by Todd Haynes, who's marvelous; you should really see it if you haven't, I'd love to read your opinion of it). And I always thought Seyfried was the most talented and promising of the Mean Girls. "Chole" is strange and, well, stupid in parts, but yeah, no "Obsessed," and, as usually, Ms. Moore is acting her freckle face off.

[Jan]

Agree with you on this one - Egoyan's lamest outing yet. The only thing I really liked about it was the fact it made no bones about being set in Toronto, but that is just my own personal nostalgia train kicking in. See Exotica instead!

[Rob]

I am going to see this, but I'm going to wait at least 10 years because it will be even more terrible (and thus better) when it's completely outdated. See: every erotic thriller from the 80's and early 90's.

[jimmy choo]

Owo! It's very interesting! I am going to see!

[Aion kinah]

I tried to think so, but i found it was not as the same in the actual process. As you mentioned, I still have doubts, but really thank you for sharing!

[Matt B.]

First, how appropriate is it that I'm listening to Kate Bush right now!??!

Second, I seem to recall you doing a post (or semi-review or something) on the movie "Teeth" at some point (and, btw, I can't believe how many hits came up when I did a search on "fourfour+teeth"). And this is my one memory of that movie: if there's one thing my grad school roommate and I had in common (besides a first name, age, general place of origin, and the fact that we both attended the same college/grad program) it was that we both liked movies. But our respective tastes couldn't have been more different (he tended more towards crappy modern horror while I enjoy classic crappy horror, etc.). Anyways, one day I came home from school and he was watching "Teeth" and I immediately thought of Edy Williams from BVD, thanks to this blog! I honestly don't know how this is relevant.

Excellent, per usual.

[FayeH]

I saw this post: "Please please pretty please do "The Room" next. It would be two pop culture juggernauts colliding in a universe-collapsing blast of awesomeness."

And I thought it read "two poop culture juggernauts" (sorry Rich). Of course that reference would certainly apply to "The Room," except that movie is so astonishingly bad it is hard to know where to even start.

[Cho Yung Tea]

I watch this all video, first of all i would like to thank you tube, this video seen it all today because of the you Tube, and i like it all video.
Cho Yung Tea

[AndyRadicalPossumTackler]

Honestly, did Chloe never see "Pretty Woman"? This is why kissing isn't allowed. It's how you fall in love.

I think one of the big problems with the movie is that the character Chloe makes no sense outside of her relationship to Julianna Moore. Like, try and think what she was doing even a week before this movie started. She's terrible at her job, obviously, because of the emotional issues. But what's her deal, exactly? All we really know about her is her fashion tends towards patterns and layers, and she maybe speaks one word of Japanese.

[Vanessa M]

I almost went to see this in the theatre. I always read reviews before I see a movie or read a book (because I'm 41 and hence old and I have to be choosy now with my time on the planet.) I was all psyched to go see this but the pretty much universal panning changed my mind. Well, that and when I caught wind Atom Egoyan was the director. I suspect any shitty acting is due to Egoyan's direction as he is into weird Pinteresque pauses. Also, he is mad overrated.

I do love me some Amanda Seyfried (Big Love will not be the same.) And I dunno-her and Julianne getting it on still sounds hot to me. Might have to get from the library.

[Paolo]

This movie was mad ridiculous. "Do you think you can just get rid of me?" Yes, bitch, you're a hooker. Characters go against their roles. A gynecologist and a hooker feel love for each other. God. Thank God I saw this later in its run because I was able to yell at the screen.

I feel bad for Amanda Seyfried because after Mean Girls, this makes her look like a terrible actress.

[vibram five fingers]

I think I read that the Liam Neeson part was cut back because Natasha Richardson died in the middle of filming.It is a moving film.

[Your Mother]

I liked this better when it was french, starred Fanny Ardant and Emmanuelle Beart, and was called Nathalie.

[Lala]

I'm a straight woman and i thought it was hot as hell, there's something wrong with you...probably too many boobs for your liking.

[Sir]

Your Mother, I couldn't agree more. The French one was at least a little raunchy and dangerous. This one looks like it was toned down to suit anglo prudes. Booooring.

Worse, now that Julianne Moore's been on 30 Rock, I can't watch this movie without hearing her Boston accent in voiceover.