Young Adam (2003) Movie Review

“Young Adam,” the new film from David Mackenzie, begins with an image that it is worth remembering throughout the film, and that a lot of people will overlook. We are shown a swan swimming along a canal from above, looking, as swans do, elegant and calm, and then we see the swan from under the water, its feet flapping furiously. I was reminded of an early shot in “Blue Velvet” where the camera moves through the grass to the bugs and insects underneath – suggesting things are uglier than they appear - and one at the start of “Lantana,” which moved through a plant that turns out to be more complicated than it seemed.

In “Young Adam,” the image was similar: the contrast between above and below the surface. The image did not suggest that one was more ugly than the other, or that one was more complicated; just that they are different. This brief but significant image is followed by one of a dead body floating in the canal, which is fished out by Joe, a young worker on a barge in Glasgow, and Les, his employer. Les has a family consisting of a wife, Ella, and their son, Jim. Simple enough. On the surface.

We learn quickly that, right under Les’s nose, Joe and Ella are having an affair. The early sex scenes in the film – there are many – follow a pattern; Joe approaches Ella, she says something suggesting she is not interested, but her body itself offers no resistance. She is bored with Les, and gives in too easily to Joe (the concept of giving in to temptation is perhaps the key to the film’s name). The film unfolds slowly, patiently, and in unexpected ways. The body at the start turns out to be of greater significance than we may have suspected. Joe does not restrict himself, sexually, to Ella.

He uses sex as a way to add some colour to his otherwise pretty sad life, although he does not seem to get any great deal of pleasure from it. In flashback, we learn of Joe’s old girlfriend, Cathie, who did, it would seem, love him on a more than physical level (we are not sure if he feels the same way about her, and he probably isn’t either). They share scenes of affection and scenes of bitterness, including one that I will only describe as almost ridiculously kinky. That’s one of those scenes where I was left unsure how I was supposed to feel; unsure whether the characters were enjoying themselves or whether they were finding a way to express their rage.

In a film where the plot moves slowly and rarely hits anything big, the attention and care of the audience depends on the script and the actors. The script is curious; the film’s dialogue is often so dull that I could only think that this is the way people talk in real life, not in the movies.

That, though, is not a criticism, especially when you consider the performances. Joe is played by Ewan McGregor, and this may be his best performance yet. It’s certainly his most subtle, so much so that some audience members may be unimpressed by it, forgetting that it’s sometimes most difficult for an actor to reserve emotions and still be a three dimensional character. He certainly is an interesting character, who surprised me constantly. We learn that he reads a lot, he once tried writing – and failed, using his writing time to make custard, leading to the afore-mentioned kinky scene… but I’ll let you discover that for yourself – and that he wants (or wanted) to go to China.

Tilda Swinton plays Ella as a typical wife of the time – the film is set in the ’50s – doing things that are perhaps not so typical, i.e. the relationship with Joe. Her habit of asking Joe if he wants some tea at awkward times gives the film a very slight edge of humour. Her husband, Les, is played by Peter Mullan. When he finds out about the affair, his character acts true to himself, rather than to the conventions of scenes about husbands finding out about their wives’ affairs.

These characters do not express a great deal of emotion, and when they do, it is unexpected, and makes us reconsider the characters once more (such as a scene where Ella and Joe, rather cruelly, laugh together at the misfortune of Les). The film is also shot with patience and care, with a lot of scenes in the dark, and a lot of shots using a haunting symmetry, as when the barge is slowly consumed by a dark tunnel. It is not ugly, nor flashy, but right for the material.

“Young Adam” is a patient, thoughtful film, for patient, thoughtful viewers. Shots sometimes linger on characters for a while, and some people may find themselves fidgeting, others trying to work out what is going on in the characters’ heads, below the surface.

The film ends somewhat abruptly, but it is perhaps the best climax the film could have. Alternatives would have Joe do a far, far better thing than he has ever done, which would be unlikely and unrealistic; or a more neat, happier ending. I prefer this ending’s ambiguity. The whole film is ambiguous, and so are the characters. They are stuck in dull lives, not heading anywhere, not moving.

And that is where we leave them.