"Good Luck to You, Leo Grande": Fantasy or (faint) possibility?
I had already been primed by the—so to speak—teaser: what's not to like when Emma Thompson is on screen almost every minute of a film?
But to consider the plot, suppose we remove any references to Thompson: A woman who has never had even okay sex finds herself a widow at age 60, and decides, now or never. She has a to-do list, and a specific delivery system in mind: a young, beautiful male professional. So, she hires him, buys new lingerie, books a good hotel room, and gets on with business.
That premise will draw interest, but Thompson elevates what could be an awkward farce into something more nuanced. I cannot resist: you have to hand it to her.
Thompson shows us Nancy Stokes' contradictions and conflicts, and the fierce determination behind the self-deprecation. And I'm all for a sex-positive film starring a mature woman who finally takes charge of her desires. (Nancy Stokes observes, "There are nuns who have had more experience than I have.")
Then there is Leo Grande (Daryl McCormack), possessed of glossy youth, a six-pack of Carrera marble, a kind heart. But wait, he also has intelligence, an empathic presence that Oprah would envy, and blithe disregard for a client's age or physical attributes. He can dance. Leo is a paragon bookable through an online escort site; Nancy strikes gold first time. Ah, the movies!
Nancy gets her happy ending, Leo garners a glowing reference, the audience receives a speech on the salutary effects of sexual services for the unfulfilled. You can't always get what you want? Then, the message seems to be, you don't know where to shop.
I suspect that sex workers of Leo's perspicacity, never mind patience, are not the norm. Or are they? If you are willing to share, please enlighten us.
I asked widowed friends and acquaintances, "Would you consider hiring a person to provide companionship or more?" All had seen the film, which tells you something. Answers: Two women said, "No, too dangerous!" One said, "Why, do you think I should?" and then changed the subject. Other responses: "I think this is against my values... maybe." And, "I'll have what she's having."
Susan said, "I didn't like that the writers made her husband a bore in bed. Why couldn't Nancy just be a widow? The women in my bereavement group say they miss the intimate relationship with their partners. Isn't losing your lover enough reason?"
A word on Emma Thompson's wardrobe: apparently nothing signals a proper sixtyish English lady like florals; from the first establishing shot of her slightly demodé aubergine skirt suit and floral blouse, the image is firm as her handshake. Even her new negligée is flowered:
Her carefully co-ordinated, conservative ensembles underscore her intention: to appropriate a dash of Leo's youth, and recapture her once-vibrant sensuality.
When Thompson eventually stands naked, it is her superbly-transmitted self-acceptance more than her release from decades of frustration that moved me. She said of her decision to do that scene, "If you want the world to change, and you want the iconography of the female body to change, then you better be part of the change. You better be different."
Comments
When I was in my 20s a glamorous young male chum of mine was in a relationship with a successful businesswoman of a certain age. He was, essentially, a 'kept man' with a monthly allowance and he lived with her in her beautiful London house. He was often alone because she travelled a lot for business, and he was free to socialise with his own friends while she was away. But, once she returned, his time was hers.
It was made pretty clear that he was expected to provide value for money as required. I found the set up very odd, and could never establish whether there was any relationship on either side over and above the obvious transactional one.
My chum was very aware that his shelf-life was limited, and that she would probably get bored with him and replace him after a year or two. In the event, he left before she could tire of him, and - annoyingly! - remained very discreet.
I definitely recommend it, and she also wrote several books after her first became a bestseller.
Jane in London: The setup your chum had is unusual because of the reversal of the roles, but I suspect is more common than may be obvious. There are "Sugar Mama" dating websites; some of those matches result in live-in arrangements.
Roberta: Oh, that book is a favourite of a longtime friend, but I have never read it. The difference is that (I assume) Ms Juska had experienced good sex before she placed the ad, and as I recall she was not paying her partners.
I think prostitution has little to do with sexual liberation, or fulfilment.