The film The Nature of Love is full of opposites. Short-lived passion versus enduring companionship, beauty against intelligence, messiness versus sophistication- each major theme in the narrative has its opposite. A woman called Sophia (Magalie Lépine Blondeau) is at the center of this story whose peaceful life becomes complicated when she meets Sylvain (Pierre-Yves Cardinal), and their relationship threatens her stable long-term connection.
This movie’s main concern is if faithfulness and commitment are possible. We are continually asked to make definitive choices, forced to take sides as a result of every turn offering layers of contrast. But real-life doesn’t work like that; it only takes account for nuances. Thus they try to put all experiences into boxes in this binary world making it an interesting but not a realistic view. The level of how much one values realism can make it equally an exercise for thought and frustrating.
Sophia forms the nucleus of this story hence acting as a grounding influence despite her tumultuous existence. Initially she seems like a sophisticated 40-year-old teacher with great stability. However, things change once Sylvain–a contractor who’s renovating her holiday cabin–enters her life and plunges headlong into passionate affair with him. Predictably, he is quite different from her – he works with his hands, lives in the country and does not always say things the correct way around them. Whether or not these differences work in their favor, they constitute a critical aspect.
Sophia finds herself leading an entirely different life than what she had already been used to where there were fewer ups and more downs as they both experienced periods of intense love followed by moments so tense you could cut through them like butter on a hot knife! She brought up herself that was laying dormant during those previous years within 10 years relationship which was animalistic, noisy and messy aspects about others earlier relationships .Simultaneously, she was trying to change his way of dressing and speaking to suit her own life. Unfortunately for her, Sylvain is much more successful in his efforts.
The Nature of Love appears as a fantasy one would have when in a monotonous marriage due to the intensity of emotions portrayed alongside stylistic choices (to be discussed later). If characters are reduced to archetypes, they can be bent to your will. Again, it is not realism that many would describe this as but rather it acts like a dream through which viewers’ lives may merge with theirs on the screen.
Binaries that come with the relationship between Sophia and Sylvain are the significant features of the story itself. Physical appearance or intellectual standards or workability versus companionship. There is a great deal of importance put on intelligence to beauty ratios of most women in this story, and it’s a double-edged sword. For instance, a lot of ridicule is directed towards those women who are more concerned about how they look, for example, wear lots of make-up, but what Sophia receives in return is “at least for once [Sylvain’s] not with a sex symbol.”
Even though Sophia does not seem as physically attractive as Sylvain’s previous girlfriends, he doesn’t measure up to her world’s intellectual standards either. He uses slang; refers to artists Sophia finds low-brow; and mostly dresses gaudily in colors that clash with her usual beige and brown shades. Nonetheless, his good looks are enough to make him presentable such that other qualities do not matter much. Thus when he attends dinner at Sophia’s friends while donned in an electric blue shirt, one tells her that it doesn’t matter because he is so handsome.
These differences between them makes their relationship really fiery. Everything is heightened: love and hate alike. This isn’t the first film depicting characters from different social classes being romantically involved nor will it be the last but unfortunately it’s not very convincing either. It is hard to understand why Sophia has such an issue with Sylvain speaking like this because it seems quite normal really. This might be because French-to-English translation does not bring out all the nuances of his words but even as things stand now they sound utterly confusing.
Therefore, besides the fact that there are some inherent weaknesses in how well these two actors portray their characters’ conflicts over class distinction which may cause viewers to question if ugly people can be smart and good looking individuals can only be considered stupid and crassly deferential. This, for one thing, creates a problem by presenting the options as opposites with no continuum between them, which it is intended to do. While the characters themselves may not be agreeable in what they say or think, the movie would not exist without its binary structure. And this is why we need to somewhat believe in it.
Having said that, I have to take a moment and appreciate the cinematography work carried out by those who were behind Nature Of Love film. Notable among these are Monia Chokri who wrote and directed the film; Colombe Raby the production designer; and André Turpin who was responsible for cinematography. These creatives together (and many more) create an immersive unique world with depth to it that compels you into their storylines. The visuals appear like a much-needed blanket on a Canadian winter landscape of beautiful landscapes warm color grading dressed sets with impeccable sense of style during its shooting period in Canada. With such things on board, who would blame Sophia for taking a plunge into life with Sylvain?
However, the movie’s visual style is overblown in some instances. Thus, we have those moments where the imagery and symbolism are thought to be too much. The big disconnect between Sophia and her husband’s beds at the start or Sophia buying a leash for herself and Sylvain to use in bed – all these tend to be heavy-handed as well as not very different from overly expositional dialogue. On other occasions, it does work with on the nose imagery but here it felt like a step too far.
This drama has some great elements but is constantly flawed by its themes, ideas and images that are extreme beyond measure. In every case, they go one step ahead of themselves — instead of leaving some gaps for our understanding; everything is spoon-fed. This is why it would have been more successful as a short film since you can’t afford to drag on — Go hard or go home period.
Chokri’s work attempts to uncover what love really means but at times feels out of touch with reality. At best, it’s frustratingly philosophical, but at worst it is just plain frustrating. This movie is ambivalent in itself. However, it isn’t necessarily the most satisfying movie because ultimately, that conflict forms its essence.
Watch free movies on Fmovies
