I agree with PoppyTransfusion and bluesdoctor. "Never On Sunday" wasn't intended to present a slice-of-life drama or to be realistic. Instead, it's to be viewed as kind of a modern version of an Aesopian fable, in which its moral is: don't try to change another person's life to fit your standards or make you more comfortable; you won't succeed and you have a big enough job integrating your own life and values to live comfortably.
Besides, there's a lot that seemed unrealistic to me (but which fits nicely with the fable perspective):
Would any prostitute only take on men she liked and let them set the price? Could she possibly service THAT large a male following (as shown)? While there's often some trauma in their backgrounds that lead women into this, nothing of Ilya's pre-hooker life is shown.
Could ANY person studying Shakespeare's plays + Greek philosophies + classical music + fine arts + geography + world history + the sciences for JUST 12 DAYS be that transformed? [As a beginning college student, I was mystified why people liked modern art (including Picasso) -- it took me a 1 semester course (3 hr.) on art history + a 3 hr. sequel on modern art before I finally joined their fold.]
In my therapy work (clinical psychologist) I saw maybe 5-7 former prostitutes -- all of whom had problems transitioning from sex as a business chore to sex in an enjoyable, loving single relationship.
Granted, these were obviously women with problems -- former prostitutes without problems have no reason to seek therapy. [But many surveys of sex workers indicate most do have psychological traumas & problems (and any suggestion of that was absent in this film)].
So, IMO, it's FAR better viewed as a "fable" with an obvious moral -- or as an "un-Grimm" 😁Fairy Tale.
reply
share