User Reviews

While it is not a perfect film, Sanctuary does win points for it's creativity and craft. The story is handled with care, although it is a bit bloated. However, this allows the viewers the full view of the situation, something that I appreciated. It really doesn't skimp on the details.

The two leads are fantastic in their respective roles and manage to be the only actors on screen for the entire runtime, which is a feat I certainly applaude. Not many actors or actresses can pull that off without the audience feeling exhausted by their performance, especially with having to do such long takes as well. Very impressive.

Speaking of long takes, I really enjoyed the cinematography. The sweeping camera motions, and the way the moods are captured throughout are subdued just enough to not overshadow the narrative, but are wild enough for a slick presentation.

Coming to the ending, it was a bit predictable. But there's something about such a sweet ending that made me feel like these two deserved it. For all the mind games and the fighting, it felt like the right place, right time, even if it was a bit too convenient for this particular story. Any more would have felt like too much.

Overall, I recommend it. It has a few downfalls, but they are easily overlooked by the simple but charming story of a dominatrix and a rich kid falling in love through blackmail and vitriol.

3.5 secret videos out of 5.

The only reason I viewed this was because I've become sort of fascinated by the films that Christopher Abbott takes on. He is not remotely interested in the norm in his many indie films. I've also been impressed now and then by Margaret Qualley. I have now mentioned the entire cast of this film and for an hour and a half we watch these two strange people go at each other. He is a very rich man who has a kink about being dominated and she is a dominatrix. He wants to end these paid for "get-togethers", but she has other ideas. A lot of this is very unpleasant to view and I almost turned it off, but I'm glad that I didn't as it's an odd film, sort of a clever one, that only really provides some satisfaction because of its very final scene which out of the blue put a big smile on my face. That didn't really make it a very good film, but it did make it more interesting, sort of after the fact.

Nice actor showcase film. Both performed well, with Margaret showcasing her depth as a "screen takeover" actor. A rare thing to be seen. She fully dominates the role (both literally and figuratively).

It's an up and down ride of domination and submission, game or no game. Freedom or going with the narratives you're assigned in life.

It's also a love story of sorts, maybe not the healthiest, but that's how it goes sometimes in life. The acting really saves the issues with the overall dynamic and plot I had, and some unbearable scenes (the music/yelling scene I had to mute).

Overall it's a claustrophobic actor showcase film with only 2 characters. I found it engaging and packed with tension and great acting. 6.8/10.

Sanctuary has only two actors, and the entire plot occurs inside a hotel room (and very occasionally in the corridor outside the room) over one night. Rebecca (Margaret Qualley) is a dominatrix; her client is Hal (Christopher Abbott). They are engaged in a BDSM relationship. The plot is very twisty, and the motivations of the two characters are not revealed to us until the last few moments of the movie.

The performances of Qualley and Abbot are exceptional. There is a deep sexual chemistry between them that is palpable throughout the entire movie. They are complex and flawed characters, and why they behave the way they do is often unclear. This is the intriguing mystery that is the focus of the story.

The direction of Sanctuary by Zachary Wigon is very skilful; he knows how to create a sense of danger within the tightly controlled experiences going on in the claustrophobic hotel room. I found the movie engaging, and I kept guessing until the movie's end. There is hardly any music, and what there is complements the film's tone perfectly. The cinematography is excellent, and the intimate, claustrophobic space of the setting is used to significant effect.

The BDSM theme of the story is a metaphor for the power dynamics that go on in relationships; this symbolism is subtle but effective. Power in relationships is complex, shifting back and forth between individuals who often use it to control others. Sanctuary suggests that power dynamics in relationships are complex and are influenced by gender, wealth, and social status and can have both positive and negative consequences.

Sanctuary is slow-paced, and the controlled chaos that finally leads to what is going on in the relationship can be frustrating. But the delayed gratification is worth it, and the story's last moments are satisfying. The dialogue is witty and engaging, and the banter between the two characters reminded me of some of the old-fashioned screwball romantic comedies we used to watch.

Sanctuary is a well-made film, and it was engaging. However, the circular nature of the dialogue and the late reveal at the end made the journey there often frustrating. This is the biggest problem with the movie; it would have been easy to give up well before the end. I'm glad I persevered, but the movie's enjoyment is mostly in retrospect. I suspect many viewers may give up before seeing the worthwhileness of the film and the point of it all in terms of the theme of power dynamics in relationships.

Sanctuary is for those who enjoy character-driven dramas and twisty plots. However, the slow pace and limited setting may not be for everyone. Additionally, the BDSM theme may not be suitable for all audiences.

In a world that makes you feel fragile and brittle, you get your kicks from being ridiculed, belittled, cleaning round the toilet stem, while your taunter does condemn, as they wait for you to conjure, your remittal. It plays out to a strict script but then a tangent, as it seems you've come across a steeper descent, smoke and mirrors might explain, is this for real or just a game, just who's genuinely showing, their lament. All in all it's quite a curious entangle, although dependant on your perspective and angle, the dialogue creates, a connection, of love and hate, where two people force themselves right through the mangle.

When is a game not a game? When it's real life? Is real life though, not a game? Aren't we all playing games all of the time in some way or another? Games, roles, responding to the situation, never quite sure what's real or not.

How much of this film was a game? Was their game, just part of a larger game? Is play the only way to be who you really are? Assuming a role to be the person you want to be and having another along for the journey?

In the early stages of the film I wondered why they cast Margret Qualley. She's pretty, and a very good actor, but this role is beneath her and she's not especially sexy, so she can't pull off the role of the dominatrix properly. Then it dawned on me: she wasn't playing a dominatrix, she was playing his girlfriend, playing a dominatrix.

There were some truths in there, not all of which we will ever know, as the interplay between role and reality was clever and vague, but we can guess at many them and still come to the same end conclusion.

I look forward to watching this again in the future and seeing if I can work any more of it out.

Two good performances by Margaret Qualley and Christopher Abbott weren't enough to save me from this bloated talkfest that I felt just became more repetitive and unbelievable as it progressed.

The film's premise continually revolves around the struggle for power between a dominatrix and her client when their relationship becomes threatened (along with some dime-store daddy issues thrown into the mix), but the scenario and dialogue became so increasingly tedious that after awhile each consecutive scene began to feel like just another adaptation of what I had already witnessed. Micah Bloomberg's screenplay is set entirely in an apartment, and each time either of the characters attempts to leave and goes to wait for the elevator, the writing predictably and mechanically finds some improbable reason to pull them back into the suite so the drama can continue all over again. Besides eventually becoming ho-hum, the setup just became too far-fetched for me to believe. There's also a scene where Ms. Qualley abruptly turns on Abbott's stereo in mid-discussion and for some reason begins dancing in a wildly bizarre manner to loud music while the characters continue their repartee; it seemed at that point like Zachary Wigon, the director, was trying desperately to do something different to finally break the film's monotonous conversation, but instead the result felt cringey and embarrassing.

It's hard for me to surmise that all this photographed dialogue would be any more effective had the film have been shaped as a play; instead, I think "Sanctuary" would have had more impact as a twenty-minute short rather than increasingly struggling to stay on its feet for a full 96 minutes.

Lastly, I wholly expected a plot twist at the end that didn't end up happening... instead, I was a little disoriented by the film's very last scene, which reminded me a 60's romantic comedy trying to suddenly wrap everything up in a perfect, although completely unfeasible, bow.

I feel like I harp on this point too often, but 'Sanctuary' is another prime example of a film doing so much with so little. You could make this film with next to no budget, and simply with a terrific script and great performances you have a film that is infinitely more compelling than your average $250 million blockbuster. This was a good one.

To stretch a concept this seemingly simple out over 95 minutes without it becoming stale is a hell of an effort. There were a couple of times where I thought the film was losing steam, but then a new angle would come up and it was like the film was starting fresh again. Even when the film ended I would've happily watched another 30-40 minutes of this story.

I love the air of mystery surrounding the events in the film. I really had no idea where it was headed. In fact I had a theory but that turned out to be aggressively wrong. This was a very well crafted film. 9/10.

Pointifully performative and bitingly funny-- as a rom-com *Sanctuary* is less of a character study and more of an intense single discussion between Christopher Abbott, Danita Battle, and he prying eye of the viewer. This does feel like a more twisted Netflix or Apple TV date night movie and while the cast carries the film, it does so through both the best of times and the worst of times. While the film's opening is gripping and sexy, and the ending emotionally powerful, very little happens between minute 30 and minute 85.

To make matters less convenient, the actors and filmmakers make it painfully obvious in the first 20 minutes that the Dom is in love with Hal and feels the need to demonstrate her value without telling her Sub, "I love you." That would ruin the power dynamic. The result, is a story that feels drawn with a few aimless scenes. I would expect this from a movie with 30 minute long scenes.

Films like this seem to rest in the strength of their cinematography, acting (mostly closeups), and the dramatic tension in the dialogue. Director Zachary Wigon, and writer Micah Bloomberg can relax because of the good acting and editing on display here (many movies do); however *Sanctuary* may have had stronger foundations and really stuck the landing if they didn't.

Margaret Qualley is the indisputable show stealer here with an astonishing enactment that has the capacity to linger long even after the film finishes. She had to play multiple shades, each with a different dynamic and she did it with such grace and passion and it reflected in her performance.

However, the film failed to create a similar impression.

And that's mainly because the writing, the narration, it all felt too obtrusive, too pretentious. Albeit it did have ambition to initiate pertinent discourses in regards to topics that has importance but the execution at least for me failed to cement its aspirations and therefore the end product came to be unrewarding.

During its first hour, i thought it was watchable but definitely not recommendable. I was not convinced about what i was watching. Didn't make much sense. Even acting seemed weird to me. I kept watching it because i found it somewhat interesting.

However, the last 30 minutes were so good that made me realise i had underestimated it. The ending is so good that made the whole movie looks good, retrospectively. Everything now was making sense. Even acting. And i loved the last minute.

Sure it is not the most realistic movie of the world and i couldn't understand well these characters. Their tastes and preferences were too bizarre for me. I don't understand them but i like them. It's important though to understand what exactly is going on here. Some viewers might not get it. It's necessary to listen carefully to what these characters say in the end. It's not that confusing but it demands your attention.

It's not a great movie, not exciting neither ground breaking. So, if you want to watch a good "one location" movie, something like a mixture of dark comedy and psychological drama thriller, you will probably enjoy it. I enjoyed it for sure.

Sanctuary

It really was a very strange movie from the start, I just cannot conceive who the audience may be for this strange psychological thriller.

Basically the business arrangement between master and slave broke down and they couldn't live without each other. Why this took an hour and a half to demonstrate is bizarre. They padded this with a wordy script, running in an out of rooms and lots of strange camera angles.

I could see anything thrilling or unexpected as the movie progressed, it was quite a self-indulgent mess best avoided.

I'm giving this tripe 1 out 10, I want my hour and a half back!

I really enjoyed Margaret Qualley's mastery as much as the dance of the camera with the music.

Also liked the plot twists that were very well carried by both actor's craftsmanship. We went from liking to disliking both actors at different particular plot twists which is interesting in the context of all these mind games at the heart of this film, making us participate.

It would be interesting to have a version with a different ending although this version offers the revolutionary loving way, which is less traveled. Perhaps if more people were to embrace their true nature the world would be a better place. It is so rare, to the point of doubting this kind of scenario.

And yet, somehow it's better than 50 Shades Of Grey! It's the same messed up, kinky sex thing. It's the same messed up, kinky relationship thing. And in the end, it's the same messed up, kinky love thing. I don't know why, but everything felt way better, deeper, and more visceral than 50 Shades. Maybe it's the directing? Maybe it's the acting? The screen-writing? Who knows? But I get more satisfaction from watching this movie than when I watched 50 Shades trilogy. Maybe because it's more concentrated than 50 Shades? I don't know. All I know is that this movie is more interesting than 50 Shades trilogy.

This film is an encapsulation that you don't necessarily must have rundown entertainers and burn through heaps of dollars to create a decent film. All things considered, it's really respectable.

There are however a few things that I need to address.

Right off the bat, it's a sluggish burner. You need to hang tight for it to stir things up around town. There are scenes that feel tiring and exhausting. You need to comprehend that this film is being conveyed by only two entertainers and it's being recorded in a similar spot for 1h and 30 min straight which to certain individuals can be repetitive yet it's not frustrating by the same token.

Last take:

1. The acting is fair and right on the money.

2. The discoursed felt a bit a lot on occasion.

3. It felt long, they might have stripped it down to 30 min and (I'm definitely not exaggerating) however hello it should be a film so I surmise that seems OK.

4. The closure was disheartening. It could have ended on a better note.

What a bizarre weird movie this was. Great setup, decent middle, very disappointing ending. "Sanctuary" had so much potential but it felt like it didn't know where to go, it didn't know what direction to go towards. It was just a big puddle of mess.

"Sanctuary" follows a guy, Hal, and a dominatrix, Rebecca, who ends up in a battle of wits after Hal tries to end their relationship and things just escalate from there. The premise I had no problem with. It was a very good premise but executed half-heartedly and lazily which kind of bummed me since I just expected something more. Acting was great, premise/plot had potential, execution fails big time. I'd still recommend it though if you're just looking to watch something and everything else is either not out yet or you've already watched them.

A sensually dominant vibrance paired with a comedically dark spotlight on the societal flaws that we've created for gender roles. Margaret Qualley is an absolute movie star, showcasing a performance with utter confidence in her range and complete control with her emotions. Her chemistry with Christopher Abbott is sharp and timely with a specific whit that is admirable yet terrifying at times with purposeful misdirection. The environment is predominantly stationary, only ever expanding between a couple rooms and a hallway within a hotel, but the pacing remains tense and the score seeps in desperately for a deeply fascinating experience. An ambiguous introduction that is properly complemented by a satisfying conclusion.

Margaret Qualley's performance is out of this world, I looked up where she comes from and couldn't believe who her mother is, no disrespect to Andie MacDowell but your daughter is another level actor, she utterly captivates you, she's so alive, there's not much action and it's not needed, the performances and the writer however have made a peach without much money, that gives you after thoughts days later, I rate this 7.5/10.

If I bought stock in actors I'd buy loads of Margaret Qualley's, I've even entered her into my top 30 actors based on 1 film!

I will follow her more and hope she does not end up in rubbish like Robert De Niro.

I am really not sure what this is trying to be but it fails.

Whenever I find myself wanting to fast forward a movie, I usually resist the urge and simply turn it off and find something else. In this case, it happened more than once but instead I actually did fast forward in one place hoping to land on a worthwhile scene. I did not. Instead I ended up on what seemed to be the exact same spot because there was nothing different going on. Tedious, stressful, frustrating, and quite boring. And the worst part? It was all absolutely unbelievable. Back and forth the nonsense seems to go on forever and ever. I was thinking the ending might rescue the film, as sometimes does occur, but that definitely did not happen here. All in all, it was a very difficult watch.

Acting was decent but what does that matter when the script is so bad?

So if you h8 movies that are only shot in one place, this is not a movie for you. I wish they would have at least went to another room to argue. And yes, half if not all of the movie was of these two arguing. I did enjoy their acting some but not enough to really believe what they were acting out was an actual real life scenario. That being said, this movie was long and felt neverending. Two people fighting back and forth about things they want and need. It all got just a bit too much to be entertaining for me. So although I personally did not enjoy this flick. Maybe someone who likes a (Shot all in one spot) slow movie about 2 ppl arguing about nothing important to me or the next person, might just be interesting to them. For me though, I will not recommend or be watching it again.

The best thing about his movie are the virtuoso performances by Christopher Abbott Hal and Margaret Qualley. It is essentially a two person film with these wonderful actors navigating the complex relationship of their characters. Both of them are capable of conveying a range of emotions ranging from homicidal anger, to fear and to tenderness. The film is beautifully casted. Both actors bring intense and believable erotic energy to the film.

Some people may find the sadomasochistic nature of the these characters difficult to understand or to relate to but the film brings home the fact romantic love and sexual satisfaction come in many manifestations.