Sirens

I knew nothing about this movie, but offered to accompany a woman I had known for some time, but had never been on more than vaguely friendly terms. I was not prepared for the charm, playfulness, joy and raw sensuality that this film captured. Sam Neill is the ultimate sensualist, yet indulges his children's fancies with innocent abandon. Hugh Grant is a likable doofus, and he is far outpaced by Tara Fitzgerald's acceptance of the pleasures of the flesh. In many ways, this couple reminded me of Brad & Janet in "Rocky Horror" - the man is either unable or too clueless to accept the sensual awakening that his companion does. Thus, I was pleased at my date's choice of film, and any discomfort of my own at being seduced by the screen on a first date soon passed from my date's reactions to the sexy scenes. On the anniversary of that date, I paid the outrageous price of $59.95 for a VHS copy, and the repeat viewings were as pleasant as th first. We later married, and this was her idea, too.

P.S.: I recommend "The Advocate" for those who like "Sirens".

P.P.S.: I agree for the most part with Eamon Buchanan's comments, but, the models were "painted"in the nude, not "painting", and it was the Anglican church that was upset, not the Catholic (the Campions could not have been married if they were Catholic).

"Sirens" (title refers to Homer's sirens) tells of a young church official who is dispatched to visit a painter at his remote Aussie studio/estate to dissuade him from showing a painting of a nude on a cross. Hugh Grant plays the minister who, with his wife, encounters four beautiful models (one is the artist's wife) who bemuse him with their nude romps and sensual ways. Moreover, he's distressed by his wife's apparent interest in the unabashed frolicking. "Sirens" is a not too serious and somewhat sensual film with a thin plot. The film's appeal is in the moment-to-moment situations, the shangrila "feel" given to the harsh outback locale, the feminist antics of the bevy of babes, etc. Some will find the film tedious while others will be captivated by it's subtle charms.

I never heard of this film until the director for our theater company mentioned it as a possible project to adapt to live theater. I have to say when I first viewed the film I was a bit shocked for personal reasons. We have a fairly small group and if taken directly it would mean I would be playing one of the nude models. After studying the film's critiques and background I slowly came around to appreciate the film's merits, if not completely comfortable with the nudity. The point is that the nudity is not suppose to be comfortable from the audience point of view. The story takes place in an almost mystical world untarnished by outside influences and taboos. It is indeed a wonderful Eden. As an actress I had to be comfortable within the Eden created on stage, despite being uncomfortable in front of fellow "actors" and the audience. This has become one of my favorite films for helping me grow as an actress and as a member of the audience.

While this film is often not taken seriously because of its explicit nudity, it is in fact one of the most thought-provoking commentaries on religious values I have ever seen on the screen. This film provides us with the stark contrast of the repressed preacher from London and the artist's three models in rural Australia, a throwback to Shakespeare's "Green World." The fulcrum of this contrast is the preacher's wife, being pulled in both the oppressive, "moral" direction by her upbringing and her husband and the free and expressive direction of the artist. The breathtaking cinematography and stunning visual symbolism of this film contribute to make it into a powerful attack on the Christian moral code that dominates western thinking. I have been scoffed at on more than one occasion for praising Sirens, but I left the theater questioning my own views about what is and is not moral. The fact that this film's sexual content seems to invalidate it as art in many people's eyes merely underscores the value of its message. Along with Sling Blade, Sirens to me stands as the most provocative film about morality made in the 1990's. A solid 8 on a scale of 1 to 10.

"Sirens" seems to have touched a nerve here. Some reviewers dismiss it as derivative soft-core drivel. Others love it. It probably helps to know that there's little derivative about the story-it's based on real people and a real incident. Sam Neill's character--Norman Lindsay--was real. Lindsay, a prolific artist and novelist, was also a libertine living a Hugh Hefner lifestyle when the rest of the world was awakening from the Victorian Age. "Sirens" was filmed at the Lindsay home and gallery, a 40-acre estate now run by the Australian National Trust. The artworks are all Lindsay's. And the storyline is based on an incident in which the Anglican Church dispatched a cleric to convey concerns about "The Crucifixion of Venus." As for the plot, it's simply a humorous retelling of what might have been--with lots of voluptuous nudes and erotic symbolism tossed in for good measure. Yes, it's all quite predictable. You know five minutes into the film that the Converters will become the Converted. But it's a fun ride getting to that inevitable destination. `Sirens' is not for everyone. If full-frontal male and female nudity offends, you will be offended. If ridiculing the Church or its values offends, you will be offended. And if the notion that the cure for a boring marriage is a little extra-marital dalliance offends, you will truly be offended. Otherwise, it's a little erotic gem and a great way to start an even better evening. :)