And I loved it, it was very interesting and fulfilling and satisfying , I would love to have some extra-cash handy to really satisfy those deep down dirty urges like the protagonist cause the sex - scene in the car is mind explosive climax! lol, yeah this was cool, the wife was a very cool actress and I thought the whole thing wrapped up in a nice climacteric to sort of expose the hypocrisy meshed with money and status and all that... I mean we are all human we make mistakes but it seems for these characters they have lost their souls if you will and by degrees have doffed off any compunction <more>
to where they know parade their vapid carcass around town consumed by the outside shell for what is inside is copiously insipid , very good screen-play I would love to see more from these people.
Just watched "ZIPPER" 9/10 - a very dark and gripping film about destruction by obsession. The central character is portrayed by Patrick Wilson and this is another very brave choice of role after "Hard Candy" where he played a man internet grooming an underage female. How many leading actors would dare to play these roles? He's not just an amazing actor he's obviously fearless with his career and image.The rest of the cast are superb too. Ray Winstone in a new kind of role for him..he's such a good actor and thank goodness he was allowed to keep his London <more>
accent after falling flat on his face in "The Departed" trying to be a Boston accented tough guy.
A film that shows us how human we are. (by tochukwu-83206)
I don't know if I should chastise Patrick Wilson for starring in two films that are somewhat similar in plot, but dissimilar in tone-in the same year-both films talk about adultery in marriages. The first film is "Home Sweet Hell" ---it follows a furniture seller as he engages in an affair with a junior worker. And how his cold, calculated, homicidal and obsessive wife played by Katherine Heigl resolves it by murdering several members of the gang who uses the said lady to extort money from her partner. While the second is "Zipper", which I am currently going to <more>
review-the plot revolves on a successful district attorney as he engages in affairs with different call girls thereby hurting any chances he has of moving up the ladder in his political aspirations. His wife here, played by Lena Headey also takes action for damage control, albeit in a different manner.Sincerely, I don't know which film debuted first and I don't care to know. But at this point, I am going to assume Patrick recognized the error in his ways by featuring in the first film, which even by comedy standards is stupid-and then he decided to use a similar scenario to correct his mistakes. By far, "Zipper" is better than "Home Sweet Hell", but given the end products, I would have liked if "Zipper" had borrowed some elements from "Home Sweet Hell": like an exchange to make one transcend from stupid to tolerable-the other, from a tense dramatic entertaining affair to near perfection.1/8 of this film focuses on sexual rendezvous between the main character and his escorts, but what drives him into such act or motivations are not expanded or expatiated upon. It gives too much room for assumption from the audience. But one of those assumptions would never be based on the fact that there is a lack of sexual intimacy between and his wife. At least, we get to see a sex scene- prior to that; there is a scene where she coerces him into the act, which he refuses. So, based on the absence of no explanation, it leaves a feeling of "effect" and no "cause"- "action", but no "drive". And even in scenes where it seems that there is a hint of "reason" for such deeds through dialogue which gives a hint at the character's back story, which is not shown-the director then quickly moves past this parts and mini-exposure-shy from developing it.There is a particular scene, where the Sam Ellis Character played by Patrick Wilson negotiates with a girl to have a sexual romp in his car. This particular moment is ironic because it comes moments after Sam discovers that he is under an investigation from the FBI for patronizing the escort agency-a distressed moment for him. And given the scenario, one would expect "a lesson learnt" or perhaps "change of ways", but still he engages in an intercourse with a character who is supposed to aid him out of his predicament. I laughed during this scene because of its paradox. While I laughed, I suddenly remembered a recent film I saw called Addicted starring Sharon Leal. But it also made me understand that the director subtly spotlights on "addiction" as a theme in the film, but never connects it to larger events like "Image" and public perception of a hero. "Because I help people doesn't mean I am better than them": that was my best line in the film and the character's admittance of mistakes which brings me to this because most people have heroes that they look up to-mentors-role models: respected public figures. But the film asks a bold question. Are role models supposed to be demi-gods in the morals department? Are they meant to be mistake-proof or bacchanal repellents? Of course the answer will vary, but if you ask me- I say a definite "No". After all, they are humans-flesh, blood and guts. Personally, I think one of the major successes of the film is that it tries to re-orientate our view of public figures and mentors from a definite white-black stand point to a more flexible tolerance understanding grey one. Here we have a respected public lawyer whom the public are rooting for to attain a higher political office-then he risks squandering his reputation by indulging in endless nights of intercourses. He risks the public's confidence in him and should prep for backlashes and dwindling in support. But one thing I admire about the character, which is quite controversial now that I think about it is that he never for once expresses profound guilt and I admire the way he goes about it with utmost discreetness in the second act of the film.Patrick Wilson is another underrated actor in Hollywood, no doubt. But his performance is a total opposite to the moronic weakling he played in "Zipper". Lena Headey in the role of a wife isn't convincing enough. Her character is an ambitious one, but her posture gives a feeling of the opposite. Tonally, the film is a dark dramatic one with mild doses of tension.
"Fatal Attraction," "Unfaithful," "Indecent Proposal," "Obsessed" and this year we get "Zipper," a steamy, erotic infidelity thriller with slices of power, ambition, and politics. Patrick Wilson and Lena Headey, Penelope Mitchell, Alexandra Breckenridge, all sizzle Patrick Wilson, who had played a cheating spouse before in 2006's "Little Children," plays Sam Ellis, a good-looking, rising star federal prosecutor with a bright future, all his peers are encouraging him to run for attorney general. Sam's wife, Jeannie, played by <more>
Lena Headey, supports him all the way, stands by his side and she's just as ambitious as he is, if not more. This is a potential power couple whose dream aims for far beyond just their district or their state. Sam's got everything, a wife, a son, a big mansion, a career and a golden reputation. But Sam has a bit of a personal demon, like a teenager with a raging hormone, he'd masturbate when his wife isn't around, and it leads him to a one-time experience with a high-end escort, a bit of an awkward start but soon enough it turns into an addiction. But nothing stays hidden forever, especially when an investigative journalist is writing a piece about you and the public eye puts you on a pedestal, one thing after another happens that forces Sam to try to cover up his mess that threatens to destroy his life, family, and career.Of all the infidelity thrillers out there, this has got to be the sexiest yet, the actors don't seem to mind if they need to go all out semi-porn if need be, but what makes ZIPPER unique, in my opinion, is this couple, played by Patrick Wilson and Lena Headey who may have been the alternate parallel version of Frank and Claire Underwood from "House Of Cards" series or perhaps they're another version loosely based on the Clintons. But my point is that behind every great but cheating husband is a greater wife who'd do anything to make sure her husband rises in politics and so ZIPPER deals with the lines that get blurred, which sins you're willing to live with, all in the name of ambition, sooner or later it doesn't seem such a bad thing anymore. I think at times the script has difficulty finding more ways to suffocate Patrick Wilson's character, Sam Ellis' life, career and reputation, as the evidence or his mess that incriminates him keeps pushing itself to surface. But again, this film does do a good job of pointing out how uncomfortable committing certain sins can be at first but once you've embraced it, unfortunately it becomes more like an every day usual thing. This is what happens when addiction gets tolerated instead of punished or cured.
First, let me reveal that I think Patrick Wilson is one of the most under-appreciated, naturalistic actors working today. His pairing with Kate Winslett in the film of Tom Perotta's brilliant "Little Children" was sublime. I even liked him in Joe Carnahan's over-the-top but still lovable "Stretch". So when I read the summary of "Zipper" and knew he played the lead, I had to see it, despite the uniformly negative reviews.Mora Stephens' film revolves around a seemingly straight-laced upstanding guy, Sam Ellis Wilson , who --- perhaps subconsciously <more>
--- lets his sexual addiction spin wildly out of control only a few months before being prepped for a senate seat bid. I say subconsciously because there are a lot of indications, through the script and Wilson's largely underplayed performance, that Sam's not a real happy guy. His "career" has been architected and steam-rolled by his passive-aggressive wife Lena Headey , their marriage is on the rocks though on the surface it seems fine and he's constantly being given the stink-eye for even mentioning ethics to his jaded boss.Wilson imbues Ellis with so many shades of gray and doubt that it really is quite riveting watching him unravel, back-pedal, and flail madly as his world threatens to crumble around him. And that's really all there is to this movie. It's a potent character not plot piece on the subject of addictive, compulsive behavior and sex addiction in particular. It really treats the dysfunction as just as potent an urge as the one a junkie craves in hard drugs. You can *see* the helplessness and frantic drive in Wilson's face and really believe that he believes he *has* to surf to that porn site, he *has* to call that escort... in his mind he has no alternative.This is brave, unflinching stuff and not many people will empathize or even care to see such repugnant behavior in action, yet Stephens and Wilson don't spare us anything, even a brutally uncompromising, cynical, and quite believable ending.It's amazing that people say things like "How could Ellis be so dumb?" Like ANY kind of addictive behavior is something people actually sit down and mull over, weighing the pros and cons, before getting their fix! Do addicts have the control to change their behavior? Of course. They just can't conceive of it. And that's the point of "Zipper".
I saw this movie after having watched the 5.7 IMDb rating. I found myself glued to it from the beginning until the end. Afterwards I couldn't understand what's about it that people supposedly don't like. The movie touches a subject that while probably very common in real life you seldom see portrayed in movies. Sex-addiction. I can only remember seeing it once or twice before, in the awful and overrated Nymphomaniac, and in the decent Auto Focus by Paul Schrader. This was easily the most entertaining one. Great actors all around. Among them a hardly recognizable Richard Dreyfuss, <more>
in a serious part. The movie maybe occasionally had a TV-movie feel to it, not that it mattered, the dialogue and ending kept you thinking. Many memorable lines. If you liked House of Cards I think you're gonna like this movie as well. Even if the main character isn't quite as psychotic as the lead from that show. 8 out of 10