GOOD LUCK TO YOU, LEO GRANDE

UK, 2022, 97 minutes, Colour.

Emma Thompson, Daryl McCormack, Isabella Laughland.

Directed by Sophie Hyde.

A sex worker is hired by a widowed religious education teacher for an evening at a hotel.

That answers the question: what is the film about? It does not indicate how the subject is treated, though there is a genial message in the title for Leo Grande, the sex worker.

The film is a two-hander which could be performed on stage. It consists mainly of dialogue and is expertly performed by Emma Thompson as Nancy and Daryl McCormack as Leo, Irish and with his accent.

Watching Leo and Nancy at the press preview made me realise that there were two basic responses. For “secular” Western audiences, the film was an interesting, often humorous, easy watch, comfortable in talking about bodies, male and female, about sexual experience and pleasure, about looking at past attitudes and restraints, restrictions, about new calmer freedoms. This is a particularly Western society perspective.

But there is another approach, to a film dealing with sexuality, perhaps a subject that is too private and delicate for a film dramatisation. And the question arises as to what we mean by prudish and how much of this is sensitivity, how much fear of the subject. Many cultures and many religions and church traditions approach from a more prescriptive perspective: Thou shalt, Thou shalt not… (With an intransigent intolerance).

In the film, Leo Grande represents the former view. He is more than comfortable in his chosen role as a sex worker, providing a service, perhaps able to provide some healing for a client’s bad past experiences or attitudes (except that he has not told his mother). That is his philosophy of life and he is at ease with it.

Nancy, on the other hand, is very straight-up-and-down in all aspects of her life, with her husband of 30 decades, her children (though she finds her son boring, her daughter reckless). And she has been strict with the girls in school, especially in essays on sexual morality. She likes plans, order, lists…

But, in her late 50s, she realises she feels deprived, her sexual life having been one of very matter-of-fact, brief and rapid “conjugal duties”. No corresponding awareness, of course, of sexual pleasure. (Memories of Robert Mitchum and Sarah Miles, 50 years ago, dramatising the matter-of-fact proper conjugal rights and duties and Ryan’s Daughter dissatisfied, yearnings, set in an Irish Catholic moral framework of commandments and expectations.)

Now, two years a widow, Nancy has hired Leo, a list of suggestions of what is to be done.

Yes, there is sexual activity. However, it is in the context of four meetings between Nancy and Leo, their discussions, telling their stories (and sometimes not), analysing past codes and their inadequacies, speculating on changing attitudes and behaviour, Nancy and a sexual curiosity, a desire for awakening late in life.

Leo faces some of his own realities, challenged by Nancy. Nancy is very much challenged, has a revealing confession conversation with a past pupil and, eventually, stands at the mirror, naked, acknowledging the reality and limits of her body.

Which means that the audience realises, at the end, they have been looking at the film as in a mirror, looking at bodies, sexual activity, pleasure, mirror-testing their own values and stances, wondering about their own reflections.

In the past 60 years, Catholic theological reflection on sexuality has moved from Moral Theology Manuals and their declarations of principles to a deeper understanding of marriage, psychological awareness and even, as with Pope John Paul II and his writings, a theology of the body.

And we remember that this is just a film, just over 90 minutes, two characters, conversations, personal and moral questions, particular perspectives – and remembering that it does not cover every aspect of sexuality and relationships, that they can be helpful conversations (as Leo and Nancy find out). For instance, the renewed Catholic moral awareness of deeper aspects of sexuality and marriage could provide further questions in challenges.

And there is always the answer to the Gospel question: how did Jesus relate to sex workers?

The title and tone? Jovial? And the audience wondering who Leo Grande was?

1. The British two hander, adaptable for the stage, the emphasis on dialogue? The hotel room and its layout? The fourth sequence and the restaurant downstairs? Limited spaces?
2. The casting, the performances, Emma Thompson and her long career and reputation, awards? Daryl McCormack and his career, making his mark with this film? The chemistry between the two?
3. The basic premise: the hiring of sex workers, business, prostitution, the language of sex worker rather than prostitution? The accusation of this sanitising issues?
4. Sex workers, their clients? Treatment of clients, respect, listening, attentiveness? Dialogue and learning? Challenge? In the case of Leo and Nancy?
5. Nancy, in her 50s, married for 30 years, her husband dead for two years, her career as religious educator, ethics? Her son and his studies and she thinking him boring? Her daughter more reckless? The daughter’s phone calls? Her personality, straightforward, somewhat rigid, planning, lists, principles?
6. Nancy and her reflection on her marriage, her relationship with her husband, sexuality aspects, conjugal duties, the brief sexual encounters and the husband’s response, her lack of response, feigning? The years passing? Reflecting on this, feeling deprived, the need for some kind of awakening? The decision to hire Leo? Bringing her list? Sexual activities that she wanted to test, orgasm, fellatio, sexual positions?
7. Leo, at ease, his personality, Irish accent, the later revelations about his mother, not knowing he was a sex worker, the further revelation about his being a teenager, with his friends, his mother catching them, disowning him, not acknowledging him in the street? His saying that she thought him dead, his indications that he worked on an oil rig? His relationship with his brother, not telling him, later revealing the truth to him? His decisions, his ease at being a sex worker, no moral qualms, open to all behaviour?
8. Nancy, tense, with her list, wanting to get things done and finished, peremptory, yet talking with Leo, finding out more about him, her opening up herself about her life? Even to her setting essays for the students on sexuality and morality? The transformation in her, her belonging to a former generation, conjugal duties, no emphasis on sexual pleasure, supporting of the husband and his will?
9. The structure of the film, the four meetings, the level of discussions, intimacy? Nancy’s list, the discussion about the fellatio? The move towards the cunnilingus sequence and its effect on Nancy? Her further list for behaviour? And gradually fulfilling the list? The comparative visual reticence initially, expanding visually, the final, Leo naked, Nancy and the orgasm, and her finally looking at herself in the mirror, accepting herself? But transformed by the experiences with Leo?
10. The bond with Leo, the easy times together, the dancing and music? Conversation? Yet the probing, Leo upset, his walking out?
11. The final meeting, the different venue, the waitresses, Becky remembering Nancy, the discussion about calling the girl sluts, the essays? Leo’s arrival? The conversation with Nancy, mellowing, reconciling, and Leo urging her to relate better to her son? Her decision to make a full confession, publicly, Becky listening, bewildered?
12. Leo, the end of his work with Nancy as a client, achievement, satisfaction, and his walking out of her life? And her accepting this phase of her life?