Sanctuary

Sanctuary has only two actors, and the entire plot occurs inside a hotel room (and very occasionally in the corridor outside the room) over one night. Rebecca (Margaret Qualley) is a dominatrix; her client is Hal (Christopher Abbott). They are engaged in a BDSM relationship. The plot is very twisty, and the motivations of the two characters are not revealed to us until the last few moments of the movie.

The performances of Qualley and Abbot are exceptional. There is a deep sexual chemistry between them that is palpable throughout the entire movie. They are complex and flawed characters, and why they behave the way they do is often unclear. This is the intriguing mystery that is the focus of the story.

The direction of Sanctuary by Zachary Wigon is very skilful; he knows how to create a sense of danger within the tightly controlled experiences going on in the claustrophobic hotel room. I found the movie engaging, and I kept guessing until the movie's end. There is hardly any music, and what there is complements the film's tone perfectly. The cinematography is excellent, and the intimate, claustrophobic space of the setting is used to significant effect.

The BDSM theme of the story is a metaphor for the power dynamics that go on in relationships; this symbolism is subtle but effective. Power in relationships is complex, shifting back and forth between individuals who often use it to control others. Sanctuary suggests that power dynamics in relationships are complex and are influenced by gender, wealth, and social status and can have both positive and negative consequences.

Sanctuary is slow-paced, and the controlled chaos that finally leads to what is going on in the relationship can be frustrating. But the delayed gratification is worth it, and the story's last moments are satisfying. The dialogue is witty and engaging, and the banter between the two characters reminded me of some of the old-fashioned screwball romantic comedies we used to watch.

Sanctuary is a well-made film, and it was engaging. However, the circular nature of the dialogue and the late reveal at the end made the journey there often frustrating. This is the biggest problem with the movie; it would have been easy to give up well before the end. I'm glad I persevered, but the movie's enjoyment is mostly in retrospect. I suspect many viewers may give up before seeing the worthwhileness of the film and the point of it all in terms of the theme of power dynamics in relationships.

Sanctuary is for those who enjoy character-driven dramas and twisty plots. However, the slow pace and limited setting may not be for everyone. Additionally, the BDSM theme may not be suitable for all audiences.

And yet, somehow it's better than 50 Shades Of Grey! It's the same messed up, kinky sex thing. It's the same messed up, kinky relationship thing. And in the end, it's the same messed up, kinky love thing. I don't know why, but everything felt way better, deeper, and more visceral than 50 Shades. Maybe it's the directing? Maybe it's the acting? The screen-writing? Who knows? But I get more satisfaction from watching this movie than when I watched 50 Shades trilogy. Maybe because it's more concentrated than 50 Shades? I don't know. All I know is that this movie is more interesting than 50 Shades trilogy.

Nice actor showcase film. Both performed well, with Margaret showcasing her depth as a "screen takeover" actor. A rare thing to be seen. She fully dominates the role (both literally and figuratively).

It's an up and down ride of domination and submission, game or no game. Freedom or going with the narratives you're assigned in life.

It's also a love story of sorts, maybe not the healthiest, but that's how it goes sometimes in life. The acting really saves the issues with the overall dynamic and plot I had, and some unbearable scenes (the music/yelling scene I had to mute).

Overall it's a claustrophobic actor showcase film with only 2 characters. I found it engaging and packed with tension and great acting. 6.8/10.

When is a game not a game? When it's real life? Is real life though, not a game? Aren't we all playing games all of the time in some way or another? Games, roles, responding to the situation, never quite sure what's real or not.

How much of this film was a game? Was their game, just part of a larger game? Is play the only way to be who you really are? Assuming a role to be the person you want to be and having another along for the journey?

In the early stages of the film I wondered why they cast Margret Qualley. She's pretty, and a very good actor, but this role is beneath her and she's not especially sexy, so she can't pull off the role of the dominatrix properly. Then it dawned on me: she wasn't playing a dominatrix, she was playing his girlfriend, playing a dominatrix.

There were some truths in there, not all of which we will ever know, as the interplay between role and reality was clever and vague, but we can guess at many them and still come to the same end conclusion.

I look forward to watching this again in the future and seeing if I can work any more of it out.

In a world that makes you feel fragile and brittle, you get your kicks from being ridiculed, belittled, cleaning round the toilet stem, while your taunter does condemn, as they wait for you to conjure, your remittal. It plays out to a strict script but then a tangent, as it seems you've come across a steeper descent, smoke and mirrors might explain, is this for real or just a game, just who's genuinely showing, their lament. All in all it's quite a curious entangle, although dependant on your perspective and angle, the dialogue creates, a connection, of love and hate, where two people force themselves right through the mangle.