Blog - Wednesday, May 27, 2009 17:20 - 0 Comments

Full Frontal: The Not-Sharing Experience

By Kalvin Henely

When we go to a movie we sit with strangers in silence; when we leave we go our separate ways. If we share our thoughts and feelings about the movie with anyone, it’s almost always with people we already know. Thus begins Steven Soderbergh’s new movie, The Girlfriend Experience, as upscale call girl, Chelsea (played by porn star Sasha Grey), sits with a client in a New York City restaurant discussing the movie Man on Wire. While the nature of their meeting makes the conversation private, there’s also something casual about this encounter; the path of least resistance becomes a goal.

This is a lesson of the trade that Chelsea herself knows and speaks of: you turn into what the client wants. It’s easier to handle one thing rather than two. An extra voice would be the mark of an intruder, someone breaking the skin of the couple’s comfort bubble. Could this be partly why we don’t share or inquire into strangers’ opinions of movies? Is there a fear of disagreement, embarrassment, and disharmony? Or would it be because our answers would be dishonest, like Chelsea’s, since we don’t really have a strong interest in one another due to our lack of companionship? While social etiquette and rules of personal space play a large part, one suspects whether these rules of the game were created to avoid awkward moments and whether or not this leaves our curiosity about others to find satisfaction.

The internet is where our curiosity leads us. There’s RottenTomatoes, the collector of professional opinion and easy consensus, for starters. But those kinds of critics probably weren’t the people you were sitting next to in the theater. Looking up the trailer for The Girlfriend Experience on YouTube, one can find 21 pages, or around 210 comments, from people who probably weren’t invited to advance press screenings. Better yet, their opinions don’t reflect those of a million-dollar newspaper; they don’t have editors nor are they edited before publishing. In less time than it look to watch the 2-minute trailer, one simply types a word, a sentence, a paragraph and presses submit. What you get is something close to a raw, emotional opinion as opposed to carefully articulated ideas, well-chosen words, and politeness. Some of these comments come from people who were in a theater, others from those who downloaded the movie, and most, as it turns out, from people who haven’t even seen the movie at all. The internet thus provides a direct pathway into the reactions of audiences we might otherwise not have interacted with. Myspace, incidentally, is also how Sasha Grey was contacted and offered the part.

Taking a look at the YouTube comments written in response to Soderbergh’s new movie, one can see that the choice to use a porn star in a “cinematic film” (as one YouTuber put it), as well as the trailer’s emphasis on money, caused a strong, mostly negative, and moral reaction. A level of discomfort and bewilderment remains. From the comments, the movie seems to be drawing a few different crowds and a couple prominent reactions. Most notably, there is a sense of amusement and curiosity: “A porn star in a mainstream movie!? That’s something else.” And it’s true. The worlds of porno and mainstream films rarely mix, despite being in the same business. One can represent or acknowledge the other without ever actually combining them. There are, of course exceptions: Catherine Breillat’s Anatomy of Hell features porn star Rocco Siffredi, who took his stage name from Alain Delon’s character in the 1970 movie, Borsalino. (Sasha Grey mentioned that she considered using the name Anna Karina, stemming from her own cinephilia).

Those who are opposed to Sasha crossing over feel outraged that the dirty could become clean. As these comments reveal, there’s a sense that a woman who enters the world of sex for money can never back out.

“I think it’s cool that she did this if that’s what she wants to do, but I would never pay money to see it. The only thing I want to see Sasha Grey do is drop to her knees, open her sweet little mouth, and drink some cum like fucking whore that she is. I like when she stretches her anus really wide too. Unless she’s doing something like that - I ain’t interested.” -jimjiminy76 (3 days ago)

“ugh…they just validated her shit life choices by actually putting her in a mainstream movie…now shes gonna be proud of being a porn star…society is fukd” -justforwatchingcraps (4 days ago)

“This is about a whore playing a whore wtf? stupidest movie ever”-1337speeed (1 week ago)

“Boring movie, no real meaning to it or purpose.. you just end up where you started.. just a waste of your time watching it. I think Sasha Grey is gorgeous, but what a waste of a beautiful smile.. She is a disgusting person.”-Shawkab (1 week ago)

“Looks shallow and stupid. She’s still an empty, burned-up porn star, no matter how articulate she is. Another throw-away project by an over-rated director. Hope the b.j. was worth it.”-philcr (2 weeks ago)

This desire to keep those like Sasha “hidden” isn’t without reason. For one, it’s in a person’s interest to keep their affairs away from their families and those that would judge them unfavorably. But there’s a difference between having sex with a real person and being a viewer of pornography, a distinction that may be beyond our evolutionarily programmed behavior. For the creators of these comments, the thinking seems to be that, since she’s had sex with many people outside the parameters of a romantic relationship - because she is in a business relationship, after all - Sasha Grey is “disgusting” and poses a threat to their idea of how the world should be. If someone were to witness this kind of scenario in his or her own lives (say with a coworker sleeping their way to the top), there would be good reason to react sharply because it would invalidate an honest effort. This sentiment is stated here:

“So what does that movie show us? In my modest opinion, A DECADENT world…promiscuos…thats a movie that show u how to make easy money, just FUCK for money….. bad for people litle heads…plus a Boyfriend tHATis cool with it?!??!?WTF?? is he a PIMP??….uau how nice…”-Navalhas81 (2 days ago)

In show business, however, crossing over is hardly unheard of. Think of all the people who were not professional actors and who appeared in movies throughout history. Sports stars, comedians, animals, singers, and entertainers of all kinds. Grey is an entertainer (and not a bad actress), who also happens to have appeared in many movies.

Money is another cause for commotion in the movie. As we watch the trailer we hear the drumming of Shakerleg over images of Grey and her boyfriend, dressed in black, but only together once, crossing the street, going to boutiques, eating, getting dressed, etc. During this sequence, we are shown pieces of text: “This is Christine. She is 22 years old. She has a boyfriend. He’s a personal trainer. He charges $125 an hour. Christine charges $2000 an hour.” (Yes, the name is different). Rarely do movies reveal how much money a person makes, unless it’s a heist picture (Soderbergh’s made those before), in which case the number is so large that we don’t relate to it; or a Charlie Chaplin film, where the money is so little that we feel the same way. But $125 and $2000 are figures we can comprehend; we can wrap our minds around these sums like Chaplin can wrap his fingers around his cane. Which is why many of us we can’t accept that someone could earn $2000 an hour for providing a “girlfriend experience”:

“Who on earth is going to pay $2000 an HOUR for an evening with a call girl? I dont care if you are a rich businessman who needs to impress a client at a lunch or dinner, or movie, and need a girl on your arm…………………….. A five or six hour “date” with someone that makes 2K an hour would be over $10,000 bucks. I doubt this really happens in the real world.

Some “pros” might get $300 bucks an hour, but I doubt its more than that.”-taghl (1 week ago)

“Some guys pay more than that. 300/hr is for a prostitute a step above what you’ll find on craigslist. A street hooker alone… STD’s and all, will run you 100 or 150 just for the sex itself, which usually lasts less than 20 minutes. Sex is expensive. It’s why women who aren’t desperate choose the profession, despite what the average feminist will say about the average prostitute.”-ryanman7 (1 week ago)

“$2000 an hour? God damn it! I take two months to earn this.”-diogo86 (1 week ago)

“i’ll pay 300hr for some low grade teenage ass in lower alabama, whereas a place like atlanta has high end girls at around 1200 and up.”-amplexorj (1 week ago)

Thus, trailer brings up something people don’t readily share: their wages. The movie, however, brings up even more. Chelsea keeps a diary that we periodically hear her read from in voice-over, wherein she describes all the luxury apparel she wears on each “date” in ways that recall a Mastercard commercial. We see her primarily in high-end settings, making it clear that a lot of money is being spent both on her and for her. In one scene, her boyfriend explains the cost of a personal training session plan, detailing the price differences of other plans. He also negotiates a salary with his boss after finding another job opportunity. Surrounding these activities is background chatter about the economic crisis and Hard Times For All. Shot during the 2008 presidential election, discussion of Obama and McCain can be heard; in the last scene, one of Sasha’s clients tells her that she must vote for McCain to save Israel. One YouTuber commented:

“Who edited this trailer? Obama?”-FefuFX (1 week ago)

FefuFX is referring to the general agreement that the trailer is bad:

“this trailer sucker.. bad editing.. i dont ecen wanna watch this movie… SPANKWIRE HERE I COME! lol” - roger3001

“This bucket of shit wasnt much to brag about.. The person who had the responsibility for the making of this trailer should be fierd, and be made to watch this clip for 48 hrs straight as punishment” -alrathas23 (1 week ago)

“any better than her previous movies?” -elocholero (1 week ago)

“This trailer makes me hate the editor more than anything in the world.”-n0time2spare (1 week ago)

“agree . worst trailer ever in history”-jitpunkia (1 week ago)

“stupid ass movie. i wish they could make movies like the onces in 1992s and 93s. Now they all suck.” -saykey2009 (1 week ago)

But there is a minority who do like the trailer and who may or may not have ever willingly paid money to see a Soderbergh movie: 

“this film looks quite interesting. havent seen this kind of trailer in ages…. i miss watching non-action films.”-dwasten90 (3 weeks ago)

“this looks soooooo strange…..but resently i’m pleasantly surprised by weard films,so why not” -874497 (6 days ago)

“love the trailer and looking forward to seeing this film. geez, ppl are critical these days…talk abt being judgemental to a pornstar…. truth is, film’s not out - watch and then comment.”-withOphelia (2 weeks ago)

And those who most likely are interested because it is a Soderbergh movie:

“looks interesting. i think soderbergh has always been a risky film maker, judging from films like Solaris, Eros, and the Che films. I think it’s a brave thing to cast a porn star as the lead of a film and genuinely want to make a cinematic film from it.” -MyMelancholyDodo (4 days ago)

“I’m actually really interested in seeing this. I think Steven Soderberg is a brilliant filmmaker, and I’m curious to see how this Sasha Grey actually does with the roll.

The way Ebert described the film made it sound mature and tragic, and I’m kinda interested to see where it goes from there.”-KiernanMooney (15 hours ago)

“Soderbergh is overrated as is, but his movies lately have been complete shit. Ocean’s Eleven and Out of Sight are easily his best films.

Hopefully this is good. He has to redeem himself.” -Voltmx45 (1 week ago) 

And then there are those who may like or dislike Soderbergh, but are interested in movies in general - movie buffs:

“For those of you who think the trailer is boring, then this film is not for you because the film is basically 77 mins of that. Majority of it is dialogue, shot in cinema verite style in a non-linear, fragmented narration with minimalistic sense. I mean it’s a decent film. It’s just not for everyone or even the general mass. Certainly not for guys in basement, masturbating to hardcore porn in front of the computer wanting to sit thru this film at a theater.”-genericaccountuser (2 weeks ago)

“this seems like a rip off of Lodge Kerrigan’s Claire Dolan.”-jcinla76 (2 weeks ago

What’s interesting about reading these opinions is the surprise (”Do you really think that?”) they can cause, even though one is aware that a variety of opinions exist. We went to the theater, shared a movie-going experience, had reactions that we kept to ourselves or amongst our friends, and then went home. Some of us then shared those opinions on the internet, but most of us didn’t. But it’s a movie that stirred up and brought to the surface a variety of feelings and opinions. It’s a fear of confrontation about politics, money and morality, that keep us from sharing our experience. But it’s movies that we keep going back to. What other medium does such a good job at getting us to think about our lives and our society in a communal setting? While movies provide the opportunity to engage in discussion, they also preempt discussion precisely because we aren’t fully aware of differences between one another; we simply aren’t wired in such a way. If you were watching The Girlfriend Experience in a theater where everyone in the audience freely shared their opinions (like on YouTube), the situation would be uncomfortable. We need the distance that the internet provides to give us comfort, just as we need the distance movies provide from real life in order to reflect and think.

So, The Girlfriend Experience is a movie upfront about the situations and feelings we keep private. The trailer is at once frank and confidential: you know that the movie is about Sasha Grey, her boyfriend and how much money they make, but the images don’t tell you much besides what these people look like. Presenting the movie in this way can leave you feeling “bored,” as so many reported, or curious to get behind that cracked door, like the one Sasha says that she’s closed for the majority of people she meets. Soderbergh’s frankness about money makes us feel as uncomfortable as when we confront our own differences. The movie is as fractured - scenes happen out of order - as the general consensus about it is. It is as private as the internet.