Mario and Sophia are, in many ways, a typical married couple – European with apartments in both Cannes and Milan and carrying Italian passports. They are professional people with no children, approaching the age of 50 and both are very attractive and pleasant individuals.

But, like so many individuals who fit the above description, no matter what side of the ocean is lived on, they experience marital strife! They do love each other, have been together for over 20 years and, even without children, would like to work out their problems.

I know them well, met both about 10 years ago, keep in touch and visit with them every time I go to their part of Europe. Mario and Sophia are, what I would like to call, good friends of mine. I like both of them very much!

Their marital problems lie in the sexual area – they are no longer attracted to each other in that way! The carnal aspect of their partnership is no more – not an unusual situation in the annals of marriage.

It can, of course, be ignored; the “bullet bitten,” so to speak, and the couple carries on – possibly overcoming what might develop as an ephemeral, non-issue or lead a “sexless,” or what some would describe as a “soulless” marriage.

Sophia and Mario have elected for an “open” marriage heavily laced with the particular French tradition of “libertinage,” so they take individual, occasional lovers outside of their marriage and, in so doing, “refresh” their sex life with new faces and, presumably, new excitement. This tactic, of course, leads to instances of jealousy and new problems and issues arise.

In the case of more untrammeled, sexual action such as group sex, regular attendance at sex clubs, etc. – the excitement and variety is certainly provided, but, of course other, attendant problems may soon arise.

Historically, the European, married individual – and in particular, the French person, or so we’ve been led to believe – has been quietly carrying on these activities for years thus protecting the marriage institution from an unacceptable divorce rate – the influence of the Church, in particular. Has it worked? I wouldn’t know.

So, in case of our troubled friends, has sexual profligacy and excess worked? Yes – to a point. New faces, friends, lovers and situations always adding “spice” to a threatened relationship, for sure, but what of the other issues that arise such as jealousy, etc.?

Well, they rear their head, or course and often the mutual agreed-upon sexual libertines curtail the activities and retreat to what becomes an inevitable monogamy, or at least one that keeps the “adventures” and extra marital liaisons quiet. But secrets are not good and, in the end, don’t seem to work.

Mario and Sophia encountered another problem, which goes with this territory; the “power” of erotic lust began to blind them to the realities of their situation – which is that they wish to stay together. But the power of erotic lust in full bloom is like a fever and, often, will and cannot be denied. They ran into such a vortex of desire that sense and reason went out the window very much like the erotic “tsunami” described in the film “Damage.”

They survived – and today seem very happy and settling down for the long-haul. But watch “Damage” with Jeremy Irons, Miranda Richardson and Juliette Binoche and be swept away on a destructive wave of lust and eroticism!

Movie Review:

Damage

Directed by Louis Malle — New Line Cinema 1993
Starring: Jeremy Irons, Juliette Binoche, and Miranda Richardson

“Damage” is a story of obsessive love ignited into an explosion of erotic expression by a “glance” at a cocktail party that turns into a sensual ten second “stare” – this between a hitherto fore staid Cabinet Minister of the British Government and a mysterious stranger with a tortured and chaotic past.

The experience of an obsessive, sexual affair driven by uncontrolled and unmanageable lust is not that unusual an event in the life of human beings, so in that respect, “Damage” is a film about things human to which we can all relate. This film by Louis Malle based upon a best-selling novel by Josephine Hart received mixed reviews. Roger Ebert is full of praise saying in his conclusion that “we cannot look away.” Janet Maslin, however, writing in the New York Times on December 23, 1992 says that “Not even a film maker of Mr. Malle’s intelligence and taste can make this stilted story add up.”

I like “Damage” very much – I find it erotic, enthralling and like Roger Ebert could not look away. As Ebert also noted, it was like watching an emotional train wreck in slow motion, feeling powerless to stop it and experiencing the ghastly results yourself. For me, movies don’t have to “add up,” have neat conclusions or have smooth transitions or even an orderly flow. So, “Damage” is effective, for me, as it tells the story of a bizarre and erotic love affair between two very unlikely people, particularly if you consider that the woman, Anna Barton (Juliette Binoche), while carrying on this high-intensity sexual liaison, is engaged to the son of her paramour, Dr. Stephen Fleming (Jeremy Irons).

Looked at from another perspective, Dr. Fleming, a British Cabinet Minister is fucking his son’s fiancée – and that is what it is; pure untrammeled sex played out against extravagant but tasteful backgrounds photographed beautifully (including the sex scenes made intensely erotic and authentic).

"With loves comes risk. With obsession comes Damage…"

I identify with Dr. Fleming - and the movie, in its entirety makes me uncomfortable. While Juliette Binoche is not your standard, celluloid beauty, she creates an Anna Barton that is sensual, strangely beautiful and erotically compelling. Would she qualify as a “siren” in the classical sense? Probably.

He – Fleming – gives up everything to pursue this fantastical woman who assumes the “crucifix position” in their first coupling suggesting to me that sacrifices are in the offing – as they surely are!

Thus, for me, there are many mythic references as well as the more directly personal identification with lust and its madness. At the outset of their doomed liaison, Anna warns Stephen to “Remember, damaged people are dangerous.” As Stephen writhes and screams at the experience of his first orgasm, Anna, in a protracted close-up, smiles – almost beatifically! Why, I wonder? The answer lies inside this complex, incomplete and sometimes ineffable story of human folly.

Of course, their sexual unions (I cannot seem to be able to use the term “relationship”) lead to deep tragedy causing Ingrid, Stephen’s wife (played perfectly by the excellent actor Miranda Richardson) to say, in a violent outburst, “Why didn’t you kill ourself? You should have killed yourself when it began! And then I would have been able to ourn. I would have buried you – and wept!”

The actors are great – Jeremy Irons appears as the gaunt ascetic; looking haunted as Dr. Stephen Fleming, the highly-placed man who cannot stop the game of “Russian Roulette” that he is playing with his life and the lives of others. Juliette Binoche is, well, siren-like as Anna Barton, the woman with a damaged past who may have an unconscious, psyche score to settle with males. Miranda Richardson has been referred to above and is superb in the rather thankless role of Stephen’s wife but she turns up the voltage considerably at the end of the movie.

“Damage” is an excellent “there, but for the Grace of God, go I” type of movie! You should see it!