Time to get sexy. I know I’m ready!
Robotics CEO, Romy Mathis (Nicole Kidman), has trouble getting off during sex with her husband. And when a new crop of interns start at her company, she is instantly taken by Samuel (Harris Dickinson). He exudes an attractive personal control, and quickly senses that Romy craves to be submissive, although it may frighten her. As an explosive affair is about to begin, Romy worries about cheating on her family, and about the power dynamic that’s about to be spun on its head, with a boy, perhaps 30 years her junior.
On the drive to the cinema, I started to think back to where I might have come in contact with storylines similar to this before, where an older woman dates someone so young. Usually the boy is seeking wisdom, or has a kink for maturity, and the woman feels nurtured while reliving her glory days. Or could it be a genuine love story, where the age part doesn’t factor with them at all? But either way, I don’t know if I’ve ever expected to see a brash loud movie with this dynamic playing purely about sex and power. And then, as the movie goes, why, I have seen stories like this before, where the younger partner shows an obsessive immaturity once scorned, and threatens to topple a legacy – it’s an overused B-movie plot device that shows itself every couple of years 😬 But in Babygirl, if anything, it’s Romy that loses her reality, and Samuel is very thoughtful and concise about shutting her down 😮 Every time I thought I knew where this movie might go, and I was gearing up for it, it would take a diagonal direction, and leave me contemplative on the choice. There’s never a bad choice, per say, it just wants to be different movie than I kept expecting. But I will have to say this, however, that I found the end result is personally underwhelming. Why, it’s only right at the end, when Romy and her husband Jacob (Antonio Banderas) are “together”, that I had to drill down on the thought of, “who this is for?”, and I’d pontificate that it’s probably for those closer to Kidman’s age. It’s not cutting edge, but teaching those left behind, that sex can be different, and that fresh desires can still be filled later in life. By Romy and Jacob staying together, it also suggests that one can still grow sexually, and positively, even if taken the wayward path.
And is it just me or did this feel like a companion piece to Eyes Wide Shut, but from the female perspective? Romy is learning things about her sexuality that she didn’t believe she could want. You’ve got Nicole Kidman, for one point, but the perfectly recreated Christmas trees in the corners of the movie are the clincher, along with some of the internal lighting choices. Romy has also reached the heights of her powers professionally, but conformed to herself, or lied to society that she’s normal – it’s sort’ve like Tom Cruise trying to be a squeaky clean family man in Eyes Wide Shut when everyone else at his level of power are fucking like rabbits. I question when this movie U-turns, by making Romy’s desire for dominance about dark fantasies she has had since a kid, like it’s a personal defect, and not just a repressed kink, or aspect of who she is. The fact that she has to masturbate to porn after sex is a conscious action, so she must have some explanation to herself as to why her sexual needs are so, and the fact that she needs more. But perhaps I was initially focusing on the act of watching porn more than the porn’s content, which is specifically masochism, which sort’ve aligns this movie’s narrative to a narrower lane of fantasy – instead of this movie just being about women in general, and those with unfulfilling sexual lives. After the fact, I learn that director Halina Reijn is also responsible for the wonderful Bodies Bodies Bodies, which was pointed and obvious in its commentary on a broader view than the characters it contained, and I just don’t think Babygirl is in the same way universal.
And, I only have anecdotal evidence, but I don’t think Nicole Kidman gets enough recognition in Australia. She has been an influential permanent fixture of Hollywood for over three decades, and for the longevity alone, I give her a mountain of respect. I don’t know whether it’s an issue with her not paying it back, prudishness, jealousy, or a personal judgement of her boyfriends or personal life – I don’t even know if what I’m writing is right, but I just think we should celebrate her more, as an Aussie. In any case, I do walk away from this movie feeling like Romy is unknowable, and not just because she is unsure of herself, or her past is murky, but because we don’t see her action anything outside of Samuel’s will. She is rocked by his introduction, but as a CEO, who even tells a story about how she once told her hirers to fuck themselves, I don’t see any fire that makes Romy an appealing person. She’s sort’ve blank, although that is not to say that Nicole Kidman hasn’t put the work into other places, and there are more than a few scenes that have gusto. That scene alone, where Romy succumbs to Samuel’s fingers, is tremendous. I’m a sucker for conflicting emotions put in focus, and it’s apparent Romy is having fun, but she doesn’t want to be a cheater, nor get into something with a subordinate co-worker. In Romy’s face, there’s the shock of it happening, and the relief of how good it is. Just to plan out that scene, I’d love to have been in the room with Kidman, to hear her process 🤩 And there’s so much texture to play in that moment alone, that if Kidman hadn’t agreed to the movie already before reading that part in the script, I’d imagine you’d say yes right there.
As for Harris Dickinson, my golly. Again, in a plot like this, I would expect Samuel to be much more irresistible, like an unfathomable hurricane who takes the world in his stride. They always say, “you never know who’s around the corner, that might knock you off your feet”, and I wouldn’t imagine it to be him. But Samuel is brazen, not intimidated by titles, yet he’s also still a fairly normal dude, easy to talk to with plain answers. Dickinson brings those piercing eyes, and he’s not to be confused with actor George MacKay, like I might have done, from 1917 👀 Dickinson was three-years-old when Eyes Wide Shut came out – can you imagine Dickinson’s mother saying, “you’ll have your fingers in that lady’s mouth one day, son.” Complete absurd.
I don’t like the camera coming in and out of focus within shots. I think the final shot of the movie tries to make it a feature of the theme of the movie, with Romy’s whole identity finally coming into focus, but I don’t buy it, and I think it’s sloppy. I also thought the idea that Romy works for a robotics company, and that her sex life “goes through the motions”, would come into it more, but maybe this simple subtitle connection was all the movie was ever going for. I had an idea early that Samuel would end up forcing Romy and admiring co-worker Esme (Sophie Wilde) together, in a sexy threesome, swirling dominance and power, but how’s that idea? A little too 1998? A little too Wild Things? 😄 But then at one stage, it looks like Samuel and Jacob might kiss, and hadn’t I dinked my ping pong ball off the wrong side of the clown’s mouth? But that’s not to be either, and this movie is salacious enough 😛 No, Samuel is all about teaching, that masochism being a male fantasy only, is a dated idea 👍 This movie is pretty fantastic for some of its character construction – there’s a big thing about Romy’s inability to dance, and I like that she asks Jacob to watch porn covered in the sheet, because she still needs to veil herself to hide what she wants. I love Samuel evaluating their sex, by saying, “I see us playing like little kids”, to which Romy objects that, “you’re not a little kid”, but she doesn’t say she isn’t 😮 But then, you also have to remember, that I’ve only recently just seen Anora, so examples of concise character building need to stack to the sky in the current climate to be impressive – three or four is not going to be enough 😔 Yet I also love a charming needle drop, and this movie’s use of INXS to montage their initial sex is conventionally satisfying, but George Micheal’s ‘Father Figure’ is perfect; beautifully conflicting, highlighting the romance, role reversal, and intimacy in their sordidness. I’ve already played the song five times since I saw the movie, and it’s already pushed out Bob Dylan on my stereo after A Complete Unknown. ‘Father Figure’ has found new life!
In summary, I thought this was well-made, but flat and peculiar would be the words I’d add when describing the story as a little underwhelming.
3.5
Leave a Reply