From the "People" Archives:

by Anthony Kaufman

Okay, so it's not actually pornographic. But the original title of Belgian director Frederic Fonteyne's second feature was "Une Liaison Pornographique" ("A Pornographic Affair") before distributor Fine Line changed it to "An Affair of Love," no doubt to avoid any misunderstanding among the culturally over-delicate. Though a smart irony is lost that establishes the film's tensions between true love and pure sex, one must praise Fine Line for being brave enough in the first place to acquire the small French-language film out of last year's Toronto Film Festival.

Starring two of France's best actors, the great Nathalie Baye and Spanish-born newcomer Sergi Lopez, the film concerns two nameless singles, referred to in the film's credits simply as Her and Him, who meet by way of the personal ads and engage in a mysterious relationship, at first simple, then made multi-layered by the inevitable complexities of human emotion.

Written by Fonteyne's long-time friend and novelist Philippe Blasband, "Affair" is a feather in the cap of Belgium's film industry, which except perhaps for Alain Berliner's "Ma Vie En Rose," hasn't had a successful export in years. Prior to opening the New Directors/New Films festival last March in New York, Fonteyne spoke to indieWIRE's Anthony Kaufman about the film's title, sex, intimacy and capturing the moment. The movie opens Friday in New York and Los Angeles.

indieWIRE: Can you talk about the title change?

"It's not so easy to speak about intimacy. But that's the little pornography in this film. It's that nowadays to speak about intimacy is quite pornographic."

Frederic Fonteyne: In French, it's "Une Liaison Pornographique." I like the title because for me, it's about two people who meet because they have a sexual fantasy and in the beginning, they're not looking for love. So it was important for me to settle that in the title. But also, from the beginning of the writing, with Philippe Blasband, we knew that we wouldn't show any pornography in the film. That was the idea. For us, it was quite clear that if you put the word "pornography" in the title. . . I mean, I've never seen a pornographic film with that word in the title, so I was aware that people would be curious, and say, what is it about, but know that it's not pornography. But that word is quite strange. Because people don't want to see what's behind it. In France, the title was good and not good. Because people said, oh no, not another film about sex. I suffered a bit about that. So in Italy, they also changed the title and called it, "A Private Relationship." And it did well. I just want people to go see the film and I don't want people to be afraid because of the title or misunderstand the title for people who would like to see sex. I made a real film with a lot of different feelings, also eroticism, but not only this. It's also a film speaking about love, so why not?

iW: So who came up with "An Affair of Love"?

Fonteyne: It's Fine Line. I think the distributors in each country; maybe, they know better than we what is possible. Maybe in New York, it was not such a big problem. Maybe, in other cities, it could be.

iW: In that title, "A Pornographic Affair," it does cut to the irony of the situation and unfortunately, that's lost.

Fonteyne: That's true. But you have to have seen the film to understand the title, so that's the strange thing about it.

iW: There's a line in the movie, "It's not like sex in the movies." How much were you playing with this idea of "sex in movies" when making this film?

Fonteyne: Usually, when I see films, it's true that there's the film and then a sex scene. And the things are separated. There's the people in love and then suddenly, you have music and dissolves, then just sex, and after that, there's something else. There may be one sex scene where they make love normally in my movie, but for me, the eroticism is all over the film. Even in the café, because they have the fantasies in their heads, you can see it in their eyes. And when they're having sex, they have a special way of breathing, but it's also a scene where they discover they're in love. So everything is quite mixed. It's not only how they meet, and then they have sex. Here, it's mixed.

Also, there are a lot of films now -- and not only films, everywhere -- where it's so easy to talk about sex. It's everywhere. But it's not so easy to speak about intimacy. But that's the little pornography in this film. It's that nowadays to speak about intimacy is quite pornographic.

iW: You create a lot of suspense around the actual sex act; it's almost very Hitchcockian.

Fonteyne: Yes, it is. For me, the fact not to show it, it makes it stronger. If you show it -- it's a bit of cliche -- but if I had shown it, it wouldn't be so true. Fantasies are very particular for each person. So the only real way to show a fantasy is to make an abstract thing. But it¹s something very intimate.

iW: I was surprised that you actually revealed one sex scene. Why did you decide that it was finally important to show it?

Fonteyne: There's a little paradox and irony with that sex scene, because it's completely cliché; they just make love, as they say, "normally." Which implies that when they were doing their fantasy, they were doing something special. So it was the irony that when you go into the room, they are doing something which is for us usual and for them, a completely new experience.

iW: Are you trying to say something about what is "normal"?

Fonteyne: For me, there is no normality. It's just in that scene; it's a joke about normality. That's why I made the film. Each person has a really personal way of thinking about sex and doing it.

iW: The opening shots of the film are these out-of-focus images of crowds -- it's not what we'd expect. The movie's about these two characters, but you introduce them by showing all of Paris.

"I really try to shoot something else than the words. Of course, they are speaking a lot, but that's because they are afraid of silence and they have to talk. I try to film their feelings."

Fonteyne: For me, it was very important that you have two people, you don't know anything about them, they are in a big city, and they could meet and they could lose each other. So it was important if they lose each other, maybe they will never see each other again. That's why I shot it in Paris. I am from Brussels. If I shot it in Brussels, there's the same café, the same places. I really wanted to make an abstraction about a man, a woman, a city.

iW: How do you work with your writer?

Fonteyne: We know each other very well. He writes, I direct. More and more, it's like that. In the beginning, I wrote, but I think Philippe is really the author. I don't feel like we work together. He works, then I work.

iW: How much does it change from the version he gives to you and what we see on the screen?

Fonteyne: In this case, almost nothing. The script was very intricate, simple, little things. So I knew I couldn't miss anything. I made some improvisations with the actors, but the film really deals with the people and how they talk and the way they talk; you discover things about them and also, they say a lot of things that are contrary to what they feel and I try to shoot that.

iW: There's an intimacy in the film that reminds me of theater.

Fonteyne: For me, I really try to shoot something else than the words. Of course, they are speaking a lot, but that's because they are afraid of silence and they have to talk and sometimes, they say stupid things. She speaks a lot because she's afraid. I try to film their feelings. I think that's very cinematographic. In the theater, you couldn't see those real things close up.

iW: In film, sometimes action replaces character, and here there's pretty much just all character.

Fonteyne: It looks simple on the surface. But you can see a lot of things if you go further; it goes deeper. Like in life.

iW: Did you shoot the interview scenes [where they speak in retrospect about their relationship] after the filming of their meetings?

Fonteyne: No, I wanted to shoot it at the very beginning, so they couldn't have a precise idea about the events, so they had to imagine something that was far away. They really found their characters doing that. There, they had to go into themselves, to find things they really lived. But we did end the shoot with the love scenes. First, we shot outside in Paris, then we went into the studio and they knew at the end of the shooting, they would be touching each other, so the curiosity became higher and higher between the actors.

iW: They are, of course, incredible actors. Did you have time to work with them before shooting?

Fonteyne: For me, the most important thing in filmmaking is to work with actors -- it's the thing I like the most. With actors, I often work with the actors and construct the characters. But here, we very quickly learned that it was not interesting, and it was better not to know anything, to concentrate on what was happening between them. It's a story about two people who don't know each other and the present moment. So we just tried to know each other before the film. I spent a few days with Nathalie, not working on the film, just getting to trust each other. With Sergi, also.

iW: We normally hear about directors and actors creating detailed pasts and relationships, but here, the characters don't even have names. Did that force them to use themselves, more?

Fonteyne: For them, it was more about being in the present moment. There was nothing else to rely on.

iW: What's your next film?

Fonteyne: My next film will be completely different. Philippe is writing right now. It's an idea I had. It's a film in English, but in very bad English, because it's about people learning English who are trying to make a film -- an American film -- because they like American films. It takes place in a little village in Belgium, and the unemployed people who have to learn English to have a chance for a job. And they try to make a science fiction film. It's completely crazy.

iW: Sounds very different.

Fonteyne: If you've seen "Max and Bobo," you'd see it's completely different, also. I like change. I never filmed a love affair before. So I made my film about love, I had to do it, it was a need and it's okay. I don't have to talk about that topic for 5 years. It was with two actors and my next film will be with 30 actors. I like human beings, but I don't have one genre. I like challenges. I would like someday to make a film about The Crusades, but not tomorrow.