Natalie + Sinclair Vs. Natalie + Richard

Well, you’ve put your finger on the things that bugged me in this movie too.
On the first issue, that of naked vs. nightgown. Yes, I definitely would have to agree that psychologically, keeping your gown on is indicative of the barriers that are between them (and there are many). She doesn’t feel free to be herself with Sinclair, so she isn’t …she doesn’t let her guard down so to speak.
As to Mr. Rickman’s comments, I believe you have misunderstood him. To say that someone “doesn’t know any better” is not necessarily to say that they are uneducated in that particular area. I’ll get to more on that in a moment. I’m moving on to the issue of Sinclair’s nearly incessant talking, because the two topics are related. They are keys to his psychology.

Just watched this movie again for the third time and was reading the reviews posted here and garnered some new insights. Sinclair’s character has always bugged me. Even though I’m a psychologist, there are some people that I just don’t “get”. He is one of them. But I think I’m getting a handle on him now.
Sinclair is used to getting it all. He’s rich. He has his own loot plus inherited loot. He’s got the swanky house, the ritzy car, the lifestyle…the whole nine yards. He also has a very interesting and somewhat odd job, which fits him, because he is odd. He has this childlike interest in everything. He walks around constantly looking and when he sees something that strikes his imagination, he’s off like a shot over there looking at whatever the new thingy is. His attention span is Short! (The dude almost has ADD.)

Now look at this, he collects things. The whole purpose of the car scene is to underline the point that he likes showing off what he can get, implication being the new wife is somewhat of a trophy wife and I’m enjoying showing her off too. Not very flattering for Natalie. So why’d she marry him? Did she want to be the trophy wife?

I don’t think so. Oh, and by the way, not only is Sinclair used to getting it all; he takes for granted that he’s going to get it all. Make note of that.
Back to Natalie. I’m not buying the “she’s not as smart as he is” bull dooky. She is every bit as smart as he is. The whole movie is about her scheming and manipulation for heaven’s sake. From Nat’s interactions with Richard during the first part of the movie we see a pattern, that she looks to her brother to reassurance about herself, her self image. She keeps repeating during the whole movie, “I need someone to tell.” Yes, she does say in the birthday party sequence that Sinclair makes her feel ignorant because she is ignorant of Proust. But she says that aloud to both men and a bit poutily. I think she is fishing for attention. (Now Sinclair is ignoring me and showing off to my brother- just great!) She is needy. She seems to have no friends. We never see them, we never hear of them. There is only Richard and Sinclair.

The beginning scene where she is standing alone, isolated, in the window looking out is so symbolic. It’s just her. In here, alone. And the world out there is so big and so cold. And she’s waiting. For someone to reach out to her. She doesn’t make the moves. Other people have to gravitate into her sphere to connect with her.
Probably, and this is pure speculation, the draw to Sinclair was that he affirmed her the same ways Richard did. (This isn’t you. You can do better. Here’s a challenge- you can do it.) So she saw in him attributes that completed her psychologically. Problem is, Sinclair’s interpersonal skills are pretty meager.

Back to old daffy Sinclair. He loves running the show. He does control people to some extent, but didn’t you get the impression that those folks around him are hangers-on and not real friends? They didn’t seem to mind being pushed about. Natalie does mind and for good reason! Sinclair controls but he also ignores people. Does he know anything about real relationships? It never looked to me like he does. And that being so…when it comes to intimacy and marriage is it any wonder that he is in the dark there as well?
So we’re back to Sinclair “doesn’t know any better” (in the bedroom). Why should he? He has everything. He thinks he’s going to get everything. There is no expenditure of effort on his part. Marriage is no big deal. It just happens. Sex just happens. Everything will be all right, it always is. Right?

Oh, Sinclair’s incessant babbling isn’t in compensation for her silence. He was that way loooong before he met her. That’s just part of his eccentric thought processes. I used to have a supervisor just like that. The dear ole fellow kept up this constant stream of consciousness chatter. Drove people Wild! He couldn’t help it. He was blazingly brilliant. He constantly saw connections between things that no one else saw- mathematically, visually, psychologically, etc. and he was compelled to comment on it. Once you appreciated that it was Tom’s super IQ at work and relaxed, it could be a joy to just listen. Tom and Sinclair are cousins.

You said you thought Nat thinks herself not on Sinclair’s intellectual level and that is why she doesn’t speak. Nope, sorry, can’t agree. You have to admit, I think, that if most of us ran into Sinclair that he would be overwhelming at first. She’s overwhelmed by him, but not in an intellectually inferior type of way. It’s a personality issue. I think the Sinclair she met and fell for in the city, so to speak, is not the person she is seeing at the country house. He’s an avalanche. She feels buried. And not being the type to speak up for herself…well, that just leads to the whole ending.

What a marvelous piece of manipulation it is too. Natalie knows just where to shake up poor ole Sinclair. She shakes his assumptions to the root. When Nat has the blazing affair with Richard and makes sure Sinclair finds out, S. suddenly finds out that everything doesn’t just fall in his lap. Those really are wonderful scenes with Alan wandering and talking to himself. Sinclair is in the throes of an epiphany. He doesn’t rule the world anymore. Failure is possible. I’m not sure he ever really experienced that before. Marriage doesn’t just happen – you have to work at it. And to give the dear man credit, by the end he Is working frantically to make it work. Taking her to the theatre, etc. Ignoring the office to spend time with her, to the extent his deal falls through (gasp, horrors). She’s finally getting the attention she craves and she comes into her own as a person.
Does this help? Does this make any sense?

Oh, you said that “throughout the whole movie she shuts herself up (literally) whenever Sinclair comes near her”. I don’t remember seeing or noting that. Where or how do you mean?
P.S. I would kill (maybe) for a copy of the DVD that has an Alan interview on it! Do you live in Europe? By the way, Love your screen name!

I wonder if you saw a different version than I did... it showed both Natalie and Richard COMPLETELY naked more than once. I was expecting some nudity but I wasn't expecting all that. Of course, I was hoping to see a little more of everyone's favorite professor, but I agree that her clothing in that particular scene definitly showed her lack of comfort with Sinclair.

While reading your post one thought jumped into my head, having been married myself once:

Marriage'll do that to ya!

When you've been married a while, and especially if things are becoming a little stale in all departments, sex can indeed become a rather perfunctory "still got ma nightgown on" business, with a good book quickly whipped out immediately afterward.

Whereas, when one is with a "lover" figure who is more exciting, obviously full nudity is desired, just as it probably was at the start of Natalie's marriage to Sinclair, when they were still excited about each other, which I'm sure there was at least a moment in time when they were, to begin with.

Marital sex can often go down the road of boredom, chore, and not even bothering to take off your sleepwear sometimes. Sad but true!

For silky-smooth legs, I use Occam's Razor!

Although the original post was two years ago I thought I'd reply anyway.

The simple and practical answer is that the actress had been naked for so much of the film she wanted to be clothed for this scene. She actually asked Alan if he'd be wearing 'knickers' because she couldn't as they'd show through the nightgown.

Now from a characterization standpoint, the scene shows them not connecting with one another. She's holding back by wearing the gown and he's not really present in the moment with her as he's thinking about the book he's reading. It's almost perfunctory and not unusual in marital relations for things to devolve in this way over time. The contrast between her sexual relationship with her husband and the destructive yet deeply intimate one with her brother is well served by this scene. One is extraordinary, the other is perhaps a bit too comfortable.


I trust Severus Snape completely.

I'd also like to add she probably initated sex in order to propagate the notion things are still normal in the relationship. In other words no extramartial affair and with her own brother no less! She kept her gown on because there was no real desire. The act of intercourse could really well have been perfunctory but with added benefit of keeping her husband in the dark. If she had shown no interest in sex he would become suspicious right away. She was one manipulative woman indeed!