Rating the film 7.2, but it seems to me just not mass.
There are so many hidden messages, metaphors and ambiguities. Like in life.
1. The heroine, who at first is shown to the viewer as the most stupid, turns out to be the most honest of all the main characters. But. She was with the man, opened her heart to him, but did not tell him her real name. I think it's because he wasn't honest with her. She reveals her name to Larry because he is honest with her and vulnerable.
2. Many dialogues, where the characters ask each other about the details of the connection with others illustrate the behavior of a real person who learns about the betrayal. We want to know the details, timeline what happened and when, because we need to reassess the reality in which we lived with the traitor. And only such a revaluation can help to establish relations between partners, leaving not closed questions, passing through curiosity and speculation.
3. The film focuses a lot on sex, but the film is not about sex. Just sex is a big part of relationships between adults and to get around it would be strange.
4. Skillful hard manipulation of the main characters in relation to each other. Larry's acquaintance with Anna is the result of manipulation and provocation. Anna's return to Dena is the result of manipulation and provocation. Anna's return to Larry is the result of manipulation and provocation. Dan's return to Alice - similarly... But only Alice is not led on provocation and when Dan pins her to the wall and asks to be created in connection with Larry - she very clearly makes her choice not to play this game and leaves London.
A movie is not for someone who wants to be entertained. This film is for those who like to deal with the subtle interweavings of relationships, lives and explore the metaphors of the author. For psychologists, it's a treasure trove.
Every woman should have a riddle or revenge, a dish served cold.
Mike Nichols liked the “proximity” primarily for its naturalness and maturity. First of all, I want to mention the work of the composer. In my opinion, well-chosen music is a big part of success. The picture pleased with soft directing, a well-written script and moderate presentation. The film is well shot. The characters in "Proximity" are real. And everyone evokes empathy. Great cast: Jude Law, Julia Roberts, Clive Owen and Natalie Portman. Everyone has more than successfully fulfilled their role. But first of all, I want to note the strong performance of Owen and Portman, who were deservedly awarded the Golden Globe. And it was their heroes who got the most response. Young Natalie is incredible. Her character is really "catchy." I would certainly not resist the "charms" of such a girl. The final was quite natural and did not come as a surprise to me. But this does not reduce the positive impression of viewing.
8 out of 10
In 2004, the screens were released stunning in its depth tape “Proximity”. Its director was the author of mostly psychological dramas like “Who is afraid of Virginia Woolf” Mike Nichols, and the characters in the whole film, in fact, four – and a decent cast: Natalie Portman, Jude Law and Julia Roberts do not need an introduction, Clive Owen at that time often played brutal men in Hollywood blockbusters.
What does this movie have to do with it? Basically, this is a good story. On the third viewing the other day with a friend, he suggested how it would end, about 40 minutes before the end of the film itself, and said the plot was quite banal. But just in the last 40 minutes, the main drama unfolds. In order not to spoil, I will go through the plot briefly: a young writer Dan (Low) meets Alice performed by Natalie Portman. The circumstances are not the most pleasant: the girl is hit by a car, but Dan’s courtesy and his care for Alice brought two lonely souls together. A little later, Dan is trapped in feelings, falling in love with photographer Anna (Roberts) and, due to the inability to possess her, substitutes her for the extremely dubious doctor Larry, played by Clive Owen. The situation is complicated by the fact that Anna Dan also fell in love, and Larry would not mind spending time with Alice. The whole film is a cavalcade of difficult decisions, people’s struggles with themselves, their feelings, their partners and their own thoughts. Of the serious advantages, I will also highlight individual scenes, in combination with the musical accompaniment, fascinating and attractive to the screen - here and the dialogue between Alice and Larry, and a wonderful scene at the photographer's exhibition, where all the characters of the tape crossed.
The film was a box office success, but its main problem was its main advantage: a complete and logical plot in its essence - there was nothing to continue in it. The disadvantage of the picture is to call the lack of the feelings themselves on the screen: the characters talk a lot about love, sympathy, talk about each other, but for 1 hour 50 minutes of timing we were shown only the negative sides of their stories, and in an attempt to cover the whole plot with several twists, timing was brought only for sad moments and difficult choices of heroes.
I recommend for viewing everyone who reads the review: in the case of “Intimacy”, the picture tries to reveal this concept not only from the carnal point of view, but also to show its opposite side – how dear to each other people who call themselves close, in fact, and what they are ready to go for the sake of that “intimacy”, which more than once and not two reflect in each other’s arms.
8 out of 10
In the beginning, this movie made me angry. In view of the assessment and such a brilliant cast, I had good expectations, but in the first minutes of the film the weight went to pieces. Throughout the film, the thought “what nonsense” is in my head. And nonsense in the worst sense. Absolutely unrealistic personalities and totally unrealistic dialogue. Love at first sight I can and can understand, but some kind of devoid of stupid awkwardness, sincere communication, impregnated with love and tenderness, warmth that happens between people who communicate for a long time, which at the same time in the film happens between people unfamiliar! It's a sur! And this senseless and ruthless flirtation between writer and photographer. The complete absence of motives and such dialogues, as if they had long been familiar, are confident in the reciprocity of their feelings and yet have a keen desire to change. Of all the characters, the dermatologist seems to be the most realistic, but even he sins with some over-the-top aggression that results in a senseless cry. Meaninglessness is the main word of this film. Complete meaninglessness in the actions and words of each of the heroes. What it is and why it is - I don't know. Maybe it’s so bad that it’s good, but maybe it’s not.
The love quadrangle has more facets. And each refracts in its own way.
The love of four is a corner, an interesting figure in human relationships, unlike the banal love triangle – there are more faces.
It is interesting to see how the system tends to balance. The film subtly shows that man is alive and not always predictable. Feelings change everything.
From the pain of their own or from unsatisfied desires, jealousy can change the line of behavior of the hero.
The same character can appear on different sides of the barricades. Today he is a “loser” (victim), tomorrow he is a “winner”, if this word is applied here at all.
There are things that kill love, and there are things that kindle it, and it depends very much on the nature of the characters themselves.
The cast is stunning, showing the character of the heroes and their spiritual suffering.
The plot is interesting and very clear. It happens.
sex-bipolar in the performance of 4 and nbsp; beautiful actors
After reading reviews and seeing the list of actors, I expected if not a deep psychological drama, then at least a quality melodrama - to feel sympathy and sympathy for at least one character.
As a result, watching 2/3 turned off - none of the characters did not cause empathy or antipathy, all the time there was an expectation that it was about to begin a psychological "action", the disclosure of the characters and their motivations.
In fact, the characters randomly fall in love, what their love is built on is unclear - if on passion, then this passion was not shown to us, but was told in detail in boring dialogues (sorry, I do not believe); if their feelings are based on the same intimacy - intellectual, spiritual, community of interests - then we will not see it.
The viewer is simply invited to believe in the behind-the-scenes story out of the blue and plunge into the world of boring showdowns “who-how-where-what” under a sauce from pseudopsychology.
And the actors are great, only thanks to them was able to watch 2/3 of the film.
Just revisited again - I got a lot of impressions - this is a real masterpiece, opening a lot of facets of relationships between people, of course, the part of the youth that expect action and the release of hormones from scenes of nudity and unrestrained sex, in this film there is nothing to catch, other things are exposed here, much deeper and more fascinating, and make you think. Therefore, questions such as “what was the tape about?” simply talk about either inattentive viewing, or the unpreparedness of the beholder, because the storyline is that there are people who know how to love and forgive, and there are those who do not know how to both the first and not the second, although the need to be loved and forgiven them is present, and to a large extent. The heroine Portman from the first moment wanted to love without a trace, which is why she took the name of a girl who died in the rescue of others, but to someone she did not love, she did not hesitate to call her real name and surname even in conditions where such data are hidden.
I note that in an interview, Natalie told about this tape that her parents, friends and personal agent were categorically against filming in it, but Portman did not refuse (especially because of his admiration for the director of the film, the legendary Mike Nichols - one of the few winners of all the main awards of the American entertainment industry: Oscar, Golden Globe, Grammy, Emmy and Tony). And Natalie was right - she played just amazing, and the film itself is very interesting, and completely unconventional, after the first viewing I wrote about it:
“Yeah, this is the movie I watched today, on the day of all lovers – a more inappropriate day to watch can not think of – in the tape is talented, with a wonderful cast proves that in the modern world love has died, that modern Romeo and Juliet enjoy betrayal of each other (well, the heroine Natalie – the purest of all this circle, despite the fact that the stripper – maybe because of this) – it’s even in the theory of the “glass of water” of extreme socialists – when everything was reduced to the satisfaction of natural “sexual needs” – and then it really goes to where it is, and it’s farther, and it’s going!”
The annotation here at Kinopoisk did not fulfill its function - and did not attract enough, and hardly reflects well what the movie is about. The slogan from the authors (in the hat) can be even more confusing, since the film is more about relationships, flirting, affairs, sex or jealousy.
Should we take what we see seriously? After all, it was a film version of the original theater play. The last film has in common the fact that there are many dialogues in which the characters are revealed. However, not everything is uniform (Woody Allen can sleep well).
I like the fact that British cinema is recognizable from the very beginning. Includes 'American' make it boring, especially thanks to Portman. I was even more impressed when I switched to the original language. The voiceover joined the picture shown by emotions, and then the perception became more complete and brought more pleasure.
Definitely, Lowe and Portman, being in the frame from the first minutes, capture the entire focus of attention (precisely because of the desire to see and hear all their accents, tones, I had to abandon my native Russian).
They are then joined by a louder name, Roberts. However, her character in the script was written ' endure' rather than shine like that couple. Then another new character - Owen's hero - eclipses all the others with almost every scene (largely thanks to the lyrics again).
I don’t think we need to go into detail because it’s not a drama or a thriller. In general, it is a fun, sometimes vulgar melodrama, from which you can suddenly enjoy. How much and how much (and who) can be intimate with the other half. Those who are older make decisions about this more intelligently and carefully (if in their youth they crossed the road on the green light).
8 out of 10
“You don’t understand love because you don’t understand compromise.”
It's an unusual melodrama. Lots of interesting plot twists. You either play it or you play it.
4 main characters: Dan (Jude Law), Anna (Julia Roberts), Alice (Natalie Portman) and Larry (Clive Owen). Brilliant lineup. Love quadrangle. Every time I watch the movie, I try to get to the truth, to find answers to a lot of questions. Who to love in this story, who to hate.
I think this film is about weak and strong people. One may be weak and the other strong. This is the kind of alliance we have.
No matter how dirty you play, did you come out victorious?
I first met Clive Owen in this movie. Okay, you can't say anything. Larry fucked everyone. A man with a rod, a character. He gives you confidence.
People suffer when they don’t get what they want. But he suffers even more when he can’t figure out what he wants... that was Dan. Weak chick.
Bad guy. It made me disgusted.
I can't say anything about Anna, she's flat.
I'm warm to Alice.
Honestly, I was attracted to the cast. Having seen Portman, Roberts and Lowe in the same movie, I found no reason not to include it or watch it. I even endured the beginning, waiting for interesting progress in the plot, but let’s be honest: there is no plot. Just London, where two couples, four, were placed, watching their further actions, making absolutely no sense. I thought Intimacy was not only in the physical plane, but also in the spiritual, but, alas, there is little spiritual here, or rather not at all. These empty I love you, actually seemed to me like I love your body.
Dan is at first a little lost, lost in the labyrinth of life, trying to find himself, but instead finds a girlfriend, and accidentally! He seems modest, shy, timid, but the acquaintance with Alice adds to his lack of courage. Therefore, having met Anna, he allows you to behave with her boldly, and somewhere even impudently. I thought the character would be interesting, but it turned out to be a rag. Especially after he started sobbing in Larry's office, not shy in words. Jude played great - definitely! But the hero turned out to be stupid and boring.
Alice, who doesn't even turn out to be Alice! And this revelation confirms how much falsehood is ingrained in the souls (if any) of the heroes. But at first, it also seemed interesting, with its own philosophy. And along the way, you realize what a perverted philosophy she and others have.
Anna, for all Julia's talent, seemed amoeba, faint-hearted and weak-willed. With her inner beliefs, which she betrays several times. Men are insignificant, says Anna, and proves his own insignificance by giving himself completely to these men.
Larry is the most vile of all heroes. If the rest are full of indecision, then this character has enough. To blackmail his wife, to insult his opponent, to bring him to tears to take a young Alice.
The film is full of empty arguments, who owes what to whom, what truth is worth telling, and what to keep secret, how to love, promise to love, and then prove your dislike. For me, the film is more than unpleasant. A quadrangle in which everyone cheats on each other, and then claims something else. Gross. But such films should be to open the eyes of the ordinary viewer to such an unpleasant truth. But now I prefer to erase this truth from my memory.
4 out of 10
It turns out that melodramas can be watched. If the director is all right.
All these women's films about love and passion, about ah-sighs and betrayal are almost doomed to failure. Boring is terrible. Usually, for the millionth time, we are asked to revise the same in a consistently bad performance.
I came across this movie by accident. No fan of Roberts, let alone Portman. But suddenly?
Pushed the play and hovered. 4 images. 4 bright, original powerful images with dialogues in which there is meaning. I'm a little nuts. I was amazed not even by the acting, but how harmoniously they complemented, picked up each other. And each of these images deserves a separate analysis.
A loser writer, a photographer, a stripper and a doctor... that's a rattling mix of heroes. And everyone fights for their happiness, although sometimes they do not understand what it looks like.
Writer for twists 10 out of 10! In some moments I waited, or rather mentally demanded this particular denouement of the episode, but did not believe that it was possible. It’s easier to do like everyone else and as always. And in the end, yes!!
One of the main charms of the picture is the choice of heroes. It's not like a boring office plankton, it's like a more or less developed person. And it is a series of actions and "wishes" of the characters that twists the plot, brings it to a puzzle and even, sometimes, absurd.
The picture is also beautiful in that there is no one main character. All four are in charge. There are no good or bad. Each viewer will choose. I think everyone is good and disgusting at the same time.
In general, the super script was added to a great game of actors. The cameraman didn't pump, the soundtrack didn't push the brain. So what else do you need for an amazing dialogue movie? Nothing. Enjoy it. It turns out that melodramas can be watched.
At first I was very disappointed with the film. But gradually I cooled down, thought, read reviews and slightly changed my attitude.
It's a relationship movie. Love square, if you will. And the whole movie is just talk. And in such films, it is not the plot that matters anymore, but the characters and the dialogue. So let’s talk about the characters and a little bit about the story. Because without discussion it makes no sense to write a review.
4 very different people who overlap, change their relationships with each other and change themselves. Dan (Jude Law) is a journalist who writes obituaries in a magazine while writing his own book. He is an infantile and very loving kid who looks very much like a 19-year-old. He is an egotist who gives love but does not allow himself to be loved. Capable of love, but not capable of strong actions and too subject to emotions. Alice (Natalie Portman) is a former stripper who has come to England to start a new life. She's kind of a simpleton (and only in the final scene does she show that she's not). They met Dan, he naturally fell in love with her, she became his muse and he immediately finished his book. But for a long time Dan was not enough and he falls in love with Anna (Julia Roberts). Anna is a professional photographer and is a little old (which does not stop Dan by itself). It is in a constant state of either depression or life doubts, so it is easily fed where the wind blows. It flexes under the circumstances and the people who use it. So Dan easily falls in love with herself. But Anna knows he's dating Alice, so she's trying to get away from Dan. And a little later on the stage comes the 4th corner of our love square - Dr. Larry (Clive Owen). And this is the most curious character in the whole play. For at first, Larry seems to us a preoccupied fool - he even comes to the meeting place in a white doctor's coat under the cloak, as he and "Anna" in the chat and agreed, rolls up to the real Anna and without much questioning begins to dump various vulgarities from their chat: "You're Anna, right?" The one who is “wet” and “wants with everyone”? You can call me Sultan. But in the final third of the film, it turns out that this Larry, who was a preoccupied fool, isn't that simple. At first he is broken, humiliated, angry, and even begging for help (a classy strip club scene). But then it turns out that at the right moments, he can be calculating, smart, assertive and tough. And if in the first half of the film, Dan is more of a manipulator of people, then the second half of the film is played by Larry. The one when Dan comes into his office, you have to see it. How much, that drooling in a sex chat man in the beginning, transformed into this imperious humiliator, and Dan from a loving manipulator turned into a pathetic whiner.
There are certain thoughts in the film and many of them. Here are some: first, how different people understand love, sometimes saying empty words. Second, do you need all this “full truth to trust” in a relationship? Characters there more than once or twice confess to each other in certain actions and this completely destroys their lives. And in the end, this idea reaches its climax. Don’t think I’m against honesty in relationships. Third, don’t jump to conclusions about people. For the same Alice and Larry, who seem to be supporting characters, then come to the fore and are not so simple people, and the same Dan, on the contrary, moves back. Fourth, it is a mistake that man makes and its price later. Does the other person have the right to make such a mistake and/or take revenge? And so on, there are many more such thoughts and everyone will probably find something of their own.
To sum up: a very good performance about human relationships, betrayals and consequences. Curious characters, their transformations in the process of events and further turns in their fates. Played well.
Those who do not like chamber movies, where the action takes place in several rooms, only a few (in this case 4) characters are involved and the entire film is made up of dialogue. Those who don’t like melodramas and “all those love movies,” relationships and everything related to them.
If you think you’re going to love someone who’s been with you forever, that’s great, but that’s what you think now. What you will think tomorrow about your connection, about yourself, about him is not known.
This film is a beautiful illustration of reality. Love as bright flashes: one! two! Relationships are concepts. These are social roles that restrain people within certain limits, moral norms. If we didn’t, we could love a new person every day. Being able to bond is the key factor for love.
Suffering is all the lot of those who guard the family hearth, one who is completely relaxed, satisfied and happy. The one who is on the crest of the wave, the one who is open to new experiences, who continues to search, move - a new page of new love opens for him, and the old partner remains on the bench. This is how life works.
I recommend the film to those who are ready to feel, suffer, love, be touched. The film is deep and sharp as a razor.
Before describing my impressions about this film, I would like to note that this genre of cinema attracts me quite rarely. But I've heard so much about 'Proximity' that it just didn't work out. In the end, I was knocked off the path by a lot of positive reviews, and of course, a very attractive cast. Overcoming my skepticism, I decided to devote two hours of my time to this film. To be honest, it wasn’t worth it.
The topic of relationships between men and women is as old as the world, but this does not diminish its relevance. The theme of human feelings is truly inexhaustible, and despite the fact that millions of films have already been devoted to this, you can always discover something non-trivial. But not in this case.
Simply put, the idea is banal, but good, but the performance in the context of this film is a failure.
In general, what we have: two men, two women. Their chance encounters, passion, pain and breakups from nowhere. But why is it so superficial? Why not dig deeper where a whole range of colors could spill out on the viewer?
For example, after the scene at the exhibition, where all four characters meet, there is a scene where Dan informs his girlfriend that he has been cheating on her for more than a year, and it began from the moment they met at the same exhibition. How did this happen? How did they get there?
I am inclined to believe that the first physical intimacy between a man and a woman is almost sacred for the further relationship between them. I understand that the film was not stated as erotic, but it would be more than appropriate to please the viewer with foreplay, exposing the gust of passion between secret lovers. But no, the most important moments seem to be cut out, making the picture seem absolutely bland. There is no salt, no sugar, no pepper.
All four were indifferent to each other. Their suffering seemed ridiculous, their passion was fake. In a word: I don't believe it!
To summarize, I recommend: sixteen-year-old girls.
I do not recommend it to anyone else.
5 out of 10
For the strip club scene with the charming Natalie Portman.
I guess since I got online in 2006, I've been hearing about this movie from all over the place. What only epithets have not met: the best of the best, genius, subtle, deep and so on. And I couldn't get to see it. And finally, my list got a little poor, and I got to the paintings put in a long drawer.
Four people, two women and two men, unwittingly become participants in a love game with each other. The film is based on the story that each of them is looking for stability in relationships, but not averse to sometimes play frivolity. Here rule “accident”, “jealousy”, “property” and “lies”. Any variation.
In the end, the film did not impress. Yes, there are subtle moments that make you think and follow the heroes. Yes, there is a stunning cast: Natalie Portman, Jude Law, Julia Roberts and Clive Owen, but he is impressive for the "loud" names, but about the game liked only Julia and Clive>> Yes, there are no secondary characters here, and the script clearly plays out four different characters. But that's it. In the rest - the usual melodrama, showing what relationships really should be, and which are doomed in advance.
In search of a good psychological drama, I came across the film “Proximity”. Of course, bribed the cast, the four performers of the main roles are not different, it was decided to watch.
To say that I am disappointed is to say nothing. What's this movie about? It’s like love and difficulties in relationships. I didn’t see any love or relationship there. It's full of sadism. People live nearby and gladly give their loved ones pain. It seems normal to them.
The film, in principle, is all gray, depressing tones, there is no hope for any enlightenment in the lives of the characters. Heroes generally look like perverts, but I cannot accept that this is the norm for ordinary life. What about average people, no, I don’t want to believe it.
I feel sorry for the actors who starred in this absurd dark color, although the actors themselves played with dignity. For each of them a point.
Why? How'd it come out? How does this happen to us?
The action of the picture takes place in the “foggy Albion”. Throughout the picture you can feel the depressing grayness, the coldness of London. And this contrasts the bright feelings that our heroes of the picture feel. They warm up in their feelings, and after a while “burn in them to the ground.”
The plot of the film is the complexity of relationships, when a person is not happy with a little, and wants more, forgetting that his actions hurt another person who loved him with all his heart. And then he will understand it, but it is far from certain that he will be able to return as before.
The film begins when Dan and Alice meet. Confused himself and confused others Dan - an obituary writer, as he himself admits - obituaries are written when people are still alive. It seems to me that a person whose work is somehow connected with the death of people is himself an image of one who turns everything into rubbish, with which he comes into contact.
The protagonist Dan is an egotist who clearly knows his worth. He wants to give love, but he doesn’t let himself be loved, as Alice tells us in one scene. It is difficult for us to understand his deepest desires. Maybe he's longing for the loss of his mother and hasn't recovered yet. Meeting Alice gives him a chance to find love, write a book, find himself in life. But he doesn't use it. I think his contradictory, illogical actions, as an example: when he meets Alice, he achieves Anna, and then gets her, calmly throws her on emotions. And he wants to find her again, asking Larry to. I do not try to judge him, he is a man, and nothing human is alien to him. But when he wants to, he hurts everyone else. Dan is undoubtedly a key figure in this film, he is the “first violin” and master of manipulation, deftly plays with people. The performance of this role Jude Law was on top, his manners, speech, gestures, emotions – all this created exactly the image that the director wanted to see from him. He was able to open up completely. Bravo!
Alice is a beautiful, charming girl who came from America to forget about her previous affair. Trying to start a new life, it seems to me that she is stepping on old rakes, giving to another more than she receives. She loves Dan sincerely and loyally, but the more she loves him, the more selfish he becomes. In general, this is one of the most revealing roles of Natalie Portman, and after her, no one left any doubt about her skill to play the most unusual roles. And what a voice she has in the Russian dubbing! - as she said to Larry: "Paradise tastes," - and I will add - And to the sound ...
Larry is a doctor, a man who acts directly and decisively, and in the end still gets his way. But still he was beaten, and his tears looked very convincing. We believe them. He's the exact opposite of the slutty Dan, "There's no chance - if it comes to a fight, I can handle it." His play is the strongest emotion! The scene of breaking up with Anna is anger, hatred. The moment with Alice is despair, a request for help. The episode with Dan is a mockery, humiliation and destruction of his opponent, albeit not noblely, but effectively. Clive Owen is an image of masculinity and brutality, and he coped with his role.
Anna is just a photographer, a weak woman who is influenced by every man who is with her. Anna is constantly tormented by doubts. She's very suggestible. The exact opposite of Alice. People and circumstances decide for her, and she only obeys them. Against the background of other heroes, she looks dull. The only moment worthy of applause is a quarrel with Larry, where her emotions came out. There we see her alive, who wants to live, love and be loved. Like you, only sweeter."
"Intimacy" is a tragedy. There are no happy people here, and if the main characters have a happy face, then this is a temporary moment. There are no serious events, tragedies or unforeseen circumstances in the film. Life goes on, its measured course, and gradually filled with love drama, coupled with passion and sex.
Director Michael Nichols made this film at the age of 74. This suggests that he knew what he was doing and put his vast experience of human relationships into the film. With great skill in this film, dialogues filled with such great meaning and colored with such vivid emotions are filmed. And all this is captured with great taste - close-up and with a rich, bright performance of the actors. This movie will appeal to those who want to see real human drama, tears, suffering, love, doubt, experiences, self-doubt, distrust of neither others nor themselves. Proximity – the film is very atmospheric, creates a certain mood and takes it into the sphere of love feelings and sensations. In the film you try to sympathize with all the characters without exception. Trying to empathize with experiences, I feel what each of them feels. The one who betrayed himself or was betrayed by others.
Alice: These people died saving others.
P.S. And when, after watching this movie, you want to prolong your feelings, just put Damien Rice – The Blower’s Daughter and immerse yourself in this light, gentle flow of sadness.
Dan, Alice, Anna, Larry are four heroes, four fates, cunningly woven into a single string of intrigues, revelations and heart wounds. But if you look closely, are all the characters really so different?
I saw here only two pairs of soulmates, who are antagonistic to each other, but they also attract each other so fiercely.
1. Dan and Anna
Did this couple really have that love at first sight? No way. Through the prism of the lens, the heroes saw their mirror image in each other and did not believe their eyes. Is there anyone in the world that is so similar?
Both heroes are irrevocably in love with themselves narcissists who do not accept life according to other people's rules. Their concept is absolute permissiveness, inviolability. They should be loved by everyone, they are perfect. Humans are magnets, black holes, with which the victim has no chance of getting out. And one day, magnets collide with the same polarities. Their passion, the first betrayal kiss is only an attempt to assert themselves, to prove to themselves and others that there are no restrictions or prohibitions for them. Everything is available to them!
But none of them want to give up so easily. There are no two winners at the same time - only one must stand in this fight. As a weapon, the heroes use the sincere human feelings of their victims, whom they managed to conquer so easily. Without a sense of remorse, they go to treason, betrayal and lies. They throw away and return to their original passions.
Both heroes are depraved and corrupt, despite the fact that both have a decent social status and profession, unlike their victims. Their so-called love is just a mask covering the greedy desire to be madly loved, giving nothing in return.
2. Alice and Larry
Here are the victims. They are not as similar as their tormentors, but what unites them is the immense love for their halves. They also don’t want to give up too easily. They try to become like Anna and Dan, but because of their (as paradoxical for a stripper and a sexually anxious) purity can not become such.
The film definitely deserves the highest praise. This stunning contrast of mental purity and external depravity, illumination of the selfishness of modern man, permissiveness and lies, gives the viewer a distraction from everyday clichés and look into the very essence of the human soul. But it's hard to watch. First of all, because he is incredibly truthful. And it's very sad to admit that.
Proximity. What is the value of the words of an incompetent writer?
Men and women. How many ties do we have? If you do not go to extremes, and do not remember that only man is created in the image of a God, while a woman is sculpted from a rib. And then became the subject of temptation. No, no, I didn't mean to be sexist by calling it a living thing. So I drink too much water. The same suffered Dan Wolf (Jude Law), whose craft was to rattle (or look for ready-made) obituaries.
Great, pure beauty. Attraction, passion, lust. When you meet a young Natalie Portman, it's hard to experience anything else. It's not that simple, uh. Besides instincts, there are feelings. A stranger to a stranger. Dan falls in love with former stripper Alice aka Jane. He's writing a book about her. He steals her life (takes a loan). He's rattling his head, secretly scheming with photographer Anna. And the same Anna is not easy. Stranger Larry becomes her chosen ones. Brutal, harsh, knowing what a dermatologist wants doesn’t stand out for lofty goals. He just takes what he wants and then protects and protects. While Dan, a mama's son, a chick...he tears up Alice and Anna's soul. Promises. He does. I swear. Kissing. But what to do with his love? She's not worth a penny. Thinking only of himself, he confesses and releases a delicate flower named Alice (Jane) a year after his affair with the married Anna. Anna, in turn, choosing the right moment, confesses everything to Larry.
And now they're free. There are no barriers to their love. But. There is no love without barriers. A series of dirty events, and now ... everyone receives according to their desires and strength. Although it's hard to talk about power when only men shed tears on screen. Men’s feelings are more valuable than women’s. And then again, I got bored.
This is a real, lively and atmospheric movie, soaked in dirt, love and cigarette smoke. Heroes are weak and strong. They are unrestrained, anxious and suspicious. Remember that scene where Larry found out that Anna was sleeping with Dan? There is so much fire, power and direct questions in this dialogue. He asks exactly what might be of interest to a man when he is informed of an affair. To hell with subtlety. Where did they fuck, did she come, and did he have a big dick? But you, those who wrinkle at these words! Wake up! Get rid of the nasty pollen in your head and call things what they are. And yes, I can't hide that I liked Clive Owen's character more than anyone else. Your purity and directness. To me, only such people are useful to meet on your life path. And Julia Roberts understood that. Or she was made to understand it, which also speaks to the strength of the male character. On the presence of a shoulder capable of shielding from poisonous and rusty arrows seeking to penetrate into the flesh and soul.
I first saw this movie seven years ago. My not-yet-completely dry lips were open all screen time. And now, by my standards, a long time later, I decided to relieve myself by writing a timeline about what stuck in my soul.
Now, I’ll just smoke a cigarette (even though I’ve quit smoking) and remind myself once again that we are responsible for those whose souls and bodies expect us to be honest, if not warm. And if anyone does not understand, I am also talking about the duty to myself.
In short, “Proximity” is a vanilla-snot melodrama shot for three pennies by a fig director.
Less briefly. Characters are a freak circus. There are four of them: two men, two women. Two men are a weak-willed, hysterical thing, ready to stick everything that moves and does not belong to their sex. After this action, as a rule, they like to cry on the vest to their “beloved” and hysteria on the topic of love. “Beloved” is not better: they too, especially no matter where, when and with whom. And after the next act of intercourse, they too, as a rule, do not mind to cry in the vest and hysteria on the topic of love.
The plot is based on the interaction of these four: first he with this, then with that, while that with this, then with that, and in the end he with this, and that with that, and before that was with this. In general, a typical cliche of melodrama a la Santa Barbara, only stitched in 120 minutes, and not in 120 seasons of 120 episodes each.
As for directing, I don't know how it happened. Such a gray, uninteresting, tasteless picture without a drop of your style or any original solutions still need to be removed.
1 point is thrown for the musical composition, which in the last two minutes of the action drew a dull directorial visual. It’s a pity that she hasn’t played all two hours, but who knows, maybe something would have been better, there was nothing to lose there anyway.
P.S. There's also Portman, a stripper. Anyone interested can go to YouTube.
everybody knows that you've been faithful, give or take a night or two
Good and very good films are divided into two categories: the first leave an unconditionally pleasant impression, the second - a long, sometimes very bitter aftertaste. What to give preference is a purely individual question, but in my list of favorite films of the second, perhaps more.
“Proximity” is one of these, although at first glance the plot may seem like a collection of all possible bad clichés. Judge for yourself: a film about love with Hollywood superstars in the lead roles, Jude Law with invariably wet puppy eyes and Julia Roberts in the role of a strong woman. Does not the director deceive us, shamelessly exploiting worn-out images in the hope that we will tolerate?
No, he's not. In contrast to their heroes.
Four completely different people, four moral cripples, each of whom with masochistic pleasure destroys his own life, simultaneously causing pain to those whom he loves. Or at least he says he loves it.
A stripper from New York, who fled to London in search of a dubious better life, childishly comes up with the perfect man, the love of his life and, it seems, even life itself – can you believe that Alice really loves Dan? Doubtful. She cries quite sincerely, but these are tears of resentment, tears of "from-me-not-go-away-I-go-myself," having nothing to do with real feelings. Alice masterfully plays a variety of roles: in front of Dan she is touching and fragile, a little naive, desperate for love; in front of Anna – a girl with a past she does not talk about; in front of Larry – a confident, beautiful, sexy woman.
“In a way, a journalist”, scrupulously making edits in advance prepared obituaries, waives with boredom and torment of creativity in the absence of any talent. He cannot come up with his own plot for the book, but he designs truly virtuoso mental anguish. Dan revels in the role of a deceived victim, not worrying at all about others, and his monstrous cruelty is paradoxically combined in him with softness, indecision - no less monstrous. Dan, in fact, is just a complete egoist, who does not take the trouble to get to know the people around him even a little better. And why? People get bored so quickly.
A successful and attractive photographer is probably the loneliest person in all of London. She does not live with her husband, and from the phrase “they raised their hand at me”, one can assume that her love life could hardly be called joyful. Dan’s infantilism and his inability to answer for his actions she somehow takes for tenderness, for which she clings convulsively – and immediately repels in horror, because she has no idea what to do with it. Larry with his coarse sensuality and others like him are simpler, more familiar, more comfortable, and their desires are more understandable.
A successful dermatologist, presumably of German descent, who fell victim to a prank in an anonymous dating chat. In many reviews, I came across the phrase “at least he knows what he wants”, which for some reason is customary to justify his behavior – yes, indeed. Larry wants to break people, mentally and physically, he enjoys insulting and humiliating people, he enjoys it – and unlike Dan, he doesn’t try to disguise himself as a victim. He is a tormentor, and he feels great in this role. Larry is not an animal, as one might think, he is a man in his highest manifestation, vindictive, evil and extremely selfish.
None of the characters evokes a single positive emotion – weak-willed, selfish, not knowing what they want, they bully each other and themselves, and ultimately, predictably, remain at the broken trough.
The actors are really amazing, it would be difficult for me to imagine anyone else in place of any of them. A peculiar, slightly mannered game of Jude Law, Natalie Portman, who more than ever skillfully maneuvers between the “charming baby” and an adult woman, deceptively stingy, but at the same time extremely expressive facial expressions of Clive Owen – everything is as it should be. Many people say that Julia Robert in this film seems bland, but I can not agree with this – in order to be convincing, you do not need to play “aortic rupture”.
The film leaves an impression – unpleasant, but strong. We seem to have forgotten how to be happy – or maybe we just got bored of it, and so we are piling mountains of unnecessary and monstrous lies. We don't want to be happy because it would be too easy for us, right?
The relationship between two couples in different configurations. Their meetings, breakups, repeated meetings and repeated breakups. They are all close to each other, but in different ways.
You know, I was reminded of Woody Allen with his simple plots and endless dialogue. The whole movie is built on the play and interaction of actors who, by the way, are chic (actors, play and interaction). All the characters are worked out, revealed, and hence interesting, in connection with which their dialogues, experiences and actions are also interesting.
In fact, the plot is really very simple and simple, but a great acting, constant drama and unexpected twists in the style of Santa Barbara give the film volume and colorfulness. Plus, it’s all at a high level too.
Lovers of drama and good cinema, fans of actors, and just pass the evening.
7 out of 10
“What do you have to do to achieve intimacy somehow? ?
4 people. 4 amazing, multifaceted personalities caught in a contradictory web of feelings, attractions, mutual sympathies and dislikes. The web, in which during the viewing of "Proximity" the viewer will have to understand.
Mike Nichols takes us two hours into the heart of human relationships. There is love, and tenderness, and passion, and desire, and attraction of bodies. The most paradoxical conclusion that can be drawn: all feelings are true, all have a value and a right to exist. But the question arises edge: what to obey at any given moment - the call of the heart or the call of conscience?
The heroes of the film respond with their actions without hesitation: hearts. Each of them is attracted by momentary impulses that headlong them into the cycle of a love "quadrilateral".
Despite the typical melodrama plot, this film is a quality psychological drama, with worked-out characters and not banal actions and dialogues of the characters. Dulia Roberts (Alice), Natalie Portman (Anna), Jude Law (Dan) and Clive Owen (Larry) became a real decoration of this film. The actors convey the subtlest shades of mood on the screen, it is impossible not to believe and not to empathize. You can’t help but believe the feelings of the characters, and their love on the screen looks especially sweet.
I am pleased with the color scheme of the film and the setting of the frame. Unusual angles give dynamics to the picture, while not violating its leisurely charm. The gray-blue scale helps to plunge headlong into the soft alluring atmosphere of the film.
Not disappointing and the musical design of the picture. Classical melodies are harmoniously combined with modern compositions, creating the mood of the tape. Ramien Rice’s “The Blower’s Daughter” track at the beginning and end of the film becomes the main tune of “Proximity”. It symbolizes the souls of the heroes, seeking, lost, but still constantly burning.
The film is multifaceted, multifaceted. Mike Nichols, of course, wants to tell us a lot, but all in allegory, riddles. The red line through the film passes both the theme of art and the theme of the “aquarium”, and only an attentive viewer can notice and solve them.
Everyone will see something of their own in “Proximity.” Someone will recognize themselves in the contradictory, often rash actions of the characters, someone will condemn them, and someone will be inspired by a beautiful love story and say: yes, this is life. Full of unpredictable events, unpleasant surprises, full of lies, pain, but still at the same time beauty and love.
Love you. And let the dance of your selfishness not cause you to lose your closest person.
9 out of 10
Dan (Jude Law) falls in love with Alice (Natalie Portman) at first sight after barely seeing her face in a crowd of passers-by, but that's when she's hit by a car. He accompanies her to the hospital, where it turns out that she got off with slight bruises, and she then escorts him to work. They soon become lovers. A year later, Dan releases a book based on Alice’s life, and during a photo shoot dedicated to the release of the novel, he begins to flirt with the photographer Anna (Julia Roberts), who, unaware of his connection, will kiss him. Over the next year, Dan will pursue Anna, who rejects his courtship.
Falling into despair, the main character, under the name of Anna, meets in an Internet chat with Larry (Clive Owen), appointing him a date in the city aquarium, one of the favorite places of the heroine. Arriving at the meeting, Larry unexpectedly encounters Anna, who, having compared the facts, understands who set it up. They soon fall in love, calling Dan their Cupid. And four months later, at the opening of Anna’s solo exhibition, all the characters will collide by chance, and their fates will be intertwined forever.
The exhilarating chamber drama “Intimacy” is directed by American director Mike Nichols, who all his life shot paintings with the stamp “relationship between the sexes” (“Who is afraid of Virginia Woolf?”). The film is an adaptation of the modern classic - the scandalous play of the same name by the former unsuccessful actor and card player Patrick Marber. He perfectly described the love quadrangle, consisting of delusions and mistakes, in which the characters try to be closer to each other, and therefore possess each other. Marber created a frank drama in which nothing candid is shown, but they are very frank.
Mike Nichols invested in such a sharp and pompous play a lot of personal, as he witnessed the unsuccessful marriage of parents who tried all their lives to understand each other, but dissecting the relationship, and did not achieve intimacy. The cast, which was at the disposal of the director, gave the film splendor, although it is not clear to the last who is soloing and who is on the pick-up. Although the Hollywood Foreign Press Association said its weighty word in this regard, handing Natalie Portman and Clive Owen Golden Globes for Best Supporting Actress and Actor.
This film is not about some fictional people, it is more about us, about our misconceptions and how we can not cope with them. It allows each of us to understand what is annoying in the relationship of men and what women and shows how the truth sometimes destroys relationships. And how that same titled “intimacy” pushes people to lie in love, forcing them to grasp the cruelty of a time in which words are sometimes nothing, and emotions say much more.
This film fascinated me for many years, so much so that I have watched it 10 times. Selecting such actors for the main roles was a win-win decision, since this four throughout the film kept in suspense and attracted empathetic glances.
It would seem that the banal story of the meeting of a novice writer and a young girl, and later what happened as a result of this, not without a bit of irony, the meeting of a beautiful photographer and a doctor, eventually formed such a powerful quadrangle. And all this entanglement in the relationship between the main characters was shown very vividly, emotionally, passionately and dramatically. Their relationship was really interesting and fascinating to watch.
But what was the closeness that the title of the film indicates? Could it be that Jude Law’s character stayed with Natalie Portman for many years, because he felt tender feelings for her and felt responsible for her? Could it be that despite her love for the young writer, Julia Roberts’s character ends up with her husband, even though she feels compassion for him? Maybe it's an intimacy that you can't see or feel, something that connects people with special invisible connections.
The process of watching an interesting movie for me is very intimate. At the same time, I need a dialogue, an opportunity to discuss what I saw. Most often I turn to reviews of other moviegoers, and sometimes even “meet” like-minded people or “enter into a dispute”, ending with the birth of the Truth. "Intimacy" deprived me of the pleasure of finding allies or opponents, and had to settle for a monologue. I hope that the conclusion that follows from it is the one that is immutable. First of all, let’s talk about why it didn’t work.
Acquaintance with, about a dozen full-length reviews and no less than a number of short comments on the film, gives me reason to say that 99% of people who watched (commented) this film, evaluated the actors, tried to figure out what intimacy we are talking about and came to the conclusion that this picture is a kind of ode (and at the same time, censure) of lust. At this point in the path of the audience and dispersed. Some dressed in costumes, ironed shirts and blouses, buttoned up on all buttons, others admired Natalie Portman and forgave the author of the play (on which this film is shot) all the dirt about which the first gossip. The image of the heroine, played by the mentioned actress, and really the dream of an erotomaniac. The whole movie seems like that. I think Alice (Natalie Portman) is the protagonist. She is an accent, a hint, a symbol, or, if you want to be simpler, the main character of the prologue and epilogue (here is, rather, the only one). This character helps the author to convey his main idea to the listeners.
In the square, which we see instead of the traditional for love twists and turns of the figure - the triangle - Natalie Portman is the point from which you begin to draw this equilateral rectangle, and which, in the end, complete the picture. The duration of the film reaches almost 2 hours, but the director manages not to give the viewer and think about the need to accelerate the course of events.
Everything that happens on the screen is so rapid that it seems as if the film began with the credit, in which the director asked the audience to pick up a sheet with a pencil and involve them in a game that has a touch of excitement - gave the task to draw a certain geometric figure with one line (without tearing off his hands - and in this case, the eye). Perhaps this is all I want to say about the stylistic and visual techniques of the picture.
I want to get to the point, share my vision of the figure that the creators of the work (both the author of the play and the director) asked us to portray. The fact that this square is not difficult to guess at the stage of acquaintance with the poster, besides, I talked about it a few sentences earlier. The only thing she kept for the final of her opus was the name of the peaks played here in a quadrangle. I do not rule out the possibility that I have complicated the problem too much and therefore the solution is wrong. But, nevertheless, I take the liberty to say that the equation that became the leitmotif of this work is as follows: Proximity=Truth=Pain=Love=Intimacy. As you can see, it's recursive. Perhaps in reference to this phenomenon lies the answer to the question, what is Love? What is it, if not a feeling turned into itself?
The movie was long on my “watch” list. And so on a Friday night, over a mug of fragrant tea under the plaid, I got comfortable to watch. The melodrama was announced and I was waiting for the calm development of the plot. But the movie kept me on edge all the time. At first I could not understand where the present was, where the past was, where the future was. Time stories were switched without any second pause. By the middle of the film, I began to enjoy the director’s discovery. I wouldn’t give this movie 18+, but 25+ or even 30+. Some scenes can cause outrage, but they show the characters as they are until the end. And someone might not like it. But that's intimacy. People alone with each other can do just that. These are the heroes of this movie. Their love is on edge. It is not love in a traditionally perfect perception, with borscht, patties and children.
The film did not leave me indifferent and I will watch it again.
9 out of 10
The whole world - Theater, a & nbsp; People in it actors
The film "Proximity" is one of those shot on plays. While watching, I had this idea and was confirmed when I looked at the Kinopoisk after watching the section “Interesting Facts”. Films based on plays are immediately recognized by several signs: a limited range of characters closely related to each other; most of the film is given to dialogue and philosophizing and a certain isolation of the interiors, creating a sense of theater, isolation from reality. In this film, I like the taste of the play, it's a bit of theatrical staging: interiors as scenery, long dialogue - it's all very happy.
Also pleases the cast: Natalie Portman, Julia Roberts, Jude Law and Clive Owen.
Natalie Portman is beautiful in this dramatic role of a fatal beauty. Her Alice is very diverse: she combines a mysterious alluring magical attraction, the weakness of a loving woman and the core of a strong-willed person who knows his place in this world. Her opposite is Anna (Julia Roberts): at first glance, solid and independent, confident and successful, but later revealed as a fragile and weak-willed person. Perfectly played by Julia Roberts, a magnificent reincarnation.
As for the male culpability of the troupe, some will consider their play unnecessarily hysterical, not typical for male characters, and I will say an interesting vision. Strangely enough, the really male half was more emotional than the female half. The beautiful images are opposite to each other. By the end of the play, Dan changes his character completely. His moral decline, starting with the plot plot, increases like a snowball, and this inner tension of the character is perfectly conveyed by Jude Law. The facial expressions are great. Clive Owen, who played Larry, I was very pleased, I have not seen many films with him, but his role in the Golden Age made me come to the conclusion that he is a mediocre actor. "Intimacy" changed everything, and from now on I will be happy to watch movies with Clive. As for his character, he is a very interesting explosive and charismatic personality. The inner strength of the character from the screen beats the key, one of the most interesting characters in the film for me. In the game, Clive will highlight the plastic movement.
In its content, the film is multifaceted, each interprets each character in its own way and will make up its own hierarchy. The plot twists are not to say that they are unexpected, but interesting in their development. Like the masterpiece Mike Nichols "Graduate", "Proximity" ends very ambiguously, which gives the viewer a place for the flight of thought.
A wonderful artistic visual solution of the film. Restrained color conveys tension. I would call the scenes with Alice striptease restrained, since only two colors are always the main ones, and there is no distracting variety. I repeat about the impression about the interiors: it seems like scenery. This gives the cameramanship of the picture and focuses on the experiences of the characters. Of course, the first scene stands out from this chamberedness, it is like leading us into the theater of action.
Atmospheric soundtrack, especially the main song: Damien Rice - The Blower's Daughter, suitable for both content and melodic drawing.
Finally, this is a great deep drama about the eternal, about love. With all its joys and complexities. I didn’t comment on the movie’s tagline: If you believe in love at first sight, you’ll never stop looking for it. My understanding of these words is that the search for intimacy is an eternal search. Doubt, attraction, choice are all our way of life.
I do not make an assessment, fundamentally against alignment on one criteria. I will draw a conclusion from all the above: a film for those who like to watch the subtle shades of human relations, lovers of psychology and drama in films. And also for theater lovers.
This film is based on a theatrical play, and therefore worked out to small details in the field of acting, and the actors are perfectly selected, plays into the hands and the presence of such famous actresses as Natalie Portman and Julia Roberts, although, in my opinion, the latter was not what her heroine should have been, because Kate Blenchett was originally going to take the role of Anna, but because of her pregnancy had to change plans.
The beginning of the film is intriguing and fascinating, in the conversation between Dan and Anna we hear many sincere and memorable phrases, as well as in other dialogues of the characters, which clearly traces the origin of the socio-psychological drama.
' Proximity' has a naturally intermingling structure. We learn the secrets only when one of the characters from whom it was hidden learns them, which transports the audience to the bodies of all the characters at the same time, because each of them had secrets. So we have a common puzzle of events and experiences of heroes, which are very unexpected and saturated and of which there are many. The structure is also distinguished by the use of one song (about the inability to take your eyes off Her) at the beginning and at the end of the film with the same scenes, in different places (in London and New York) at different times with the same heroine Alice Jane, where she goes in the crowd and everyone notices her, which shows and proves the randomness ' non-random' meeting views, if you pay attention to the development of the events of the film after the first, similar from the last, scene. Natalie Portman perfectly played her simple and sensitive stripper heroine in armor from the whole world and, at the same time, open to him. She is very strong, although she does not seem so at first glance. Her character is very complex and multifaceted, but Portman was able to express it immaculately, because the beginning of her career began with the same hairstyle and with a similar role in the legendary film ' Leon'. You could say that now it's the same girl who grew up - just as crazy and strong.
Hero Jude Law reminds his infantilism and sensitivity of the main character Patrick Dever from the old French film ' Stepfather' however, the fate of the Writer is less tragic and unique, and therefore the role is not so epochal.
Owen, who played Dan in the theatrical production, not Larry, brilliantly embodied the latter in the film. The vulgar, cunning, winner - it is in this order that the personality of his hero is revealed to us, showing the heterogeneous nature of each of the characters of the production.
Overall, the acting four worked well, despite the slight dissonance with Roberts, as for me, her character is too complex to play it so easily.
The film shows us how not to live and why not to lie, it shows the horrific consequences of intrigue and omissions - a swamp in which all these people are stuck, such quicksands that they have poured themselves, and from which only a cunning snake or a winding snake can free itself, whose essences are the same as that swamp, while everyone else, floundering more, sinks faster and faster.
The film also raises the theme of the magnetism of opposites, but for the time being. What attracts them is not love itself, but the promise of love, the promise of revelation, which is why they are attracted to strangers. They don't know your secrets. With them you can only open what you want, and therefore you can be sincere with them - this is the illusion of attraction 'to strangers'.
It is the fact that you can keep a person at a comfortable distance for you - temporary magnetism, which is necessarily disturbed as soon as either of them decides to get closer, and as a result, both magnets move away, as opposed to if this desire to get closer is mutual. This explains the name 'Closer'(closer).
The only thing I disagree with is Larry’s line that if people lie, they are no different from animals, but animals don’t lie. . .
However, the moral of the film is one thing: either you need to learn to lie skillfully, or not to lie at all. At the same time, the second option is much simpler, more real and more pleasant, if you do not start with the first, otherwise you will have to unravel for a long time.
This film can not be sidelined, as it is impossible and unambiguous to speak about it. Without planning to write a review, I apparently got carried away, and all because ' Proximity' - the film is unusual and difficult, primarily because it is a socio-psychological drama built on dialogue and interaction of actors, discouraged by candid conversations and daring details, striking the impossible truth and true lies, but undoubtedly leaving a mark on the minds and hearts of the audience.