MovieChat Forums > Le Week-End (2013) Discussion > Why does Meg reject Nick's sexual advanc...

Why does Meg reject Nick's sexual advances?


Meg and Nick may not have the happiest of marriages, but that doesn't mean it has to be a sexless marriage. I had a little trouble deciphering the English accents, but it was clear to me that although he was interested, she wasn't. Was that ever explained in the script? If so, what what the explanation? If not, why would it be the case? Red-125

reply

She wasn't happy with the marriage at that stage, I don't know how you could have missed it. She was angry with him.

I find your post a bit disturbing. Do you think couples ought to have sex out of duty? So even if you are unhappy you should still have sex with your husband?

Sheesh.

reply

Dear Spellbinder,

I wasn't implying anything. However, I didn't hear her mention divorce. And, there they were in Paris. Sorry to disturb you. Red-125

reply

Some people loose interest in sex when they grow older. It is sad when one still feels the urge but the other doesn't. It can even happen in a loving relationship.
In this case there is more going on. She doesn't seem to respect him anymore. Which doesn't help a healthy sex life. He responds by begging and humiliating himself. Also not a good idea. These people would have benefited from counseling a long time ago. Now it is perhaps too late to change.

reply

Dear alardd, Thanks for writing. Great thought about counseling. My guess is that when Meg met Nick, he was a young
intellectual superstar. We don't know why he ended up in such a mediocre academic situation. Their main problem may
have been of expectations not met. Those circumstances could have benefitted from working together to make her
respect him, or--at least--accept him. Red-125

reply

It was also mentioned that Nick had had an affair with a student many years ago. Perhaps Meg had never gotten over her anger and resentment. They probably could have benefitted from counseling.





And all the pieces matter (The Wire)

reply

Dear filmfancy, Thanks for writing. I had forgotten about the affair. Red-125

reply

I see that Filmfancy beat me to it. Yes, one of the problems is that Meg still holds onto the anger over the affair with the student 15 years prior. She still smarts from that one-time betrayal (if we are to believe the husband and I do). Consider this in light of the fact that she has always remained faithful in her 30-year marriage.

reply

Dear clunybrown, It looks like we're starting to build consensus here. Still, they've gone to Paris to rekindle their feelings of love. Obviously, there's more to love than sexual love. Still, I think that would have been the time to try to rekindle that part of their relationship as well. Red-125

reply

Then allow me to break with the "consensus" -- if there was one. If Meg, those years ago, had been even half as scolding, scalding, cold, and generally cruel as she was in the "present" of the film, that could surely have driven Nick to an affair? And I wasn't sure if it was clarified in the film, but if her sexual frigidity preceded his affair, obviously that too could have spurred him to happier pastures.

They reminded me a little of George and Martha in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" -- ready to have it out at any time and place, and better when there's an audience of stupefied onlookers who might learn a thing or two from their toxic misadventures. Meg's brutal honesty to the pregnant young wife of Morgan was just like that of Martha viz the naif in Albee's play. Of course, as with such expert fighters (they both assure one another of the Gordian Knot of love/hate in a long relationship), the cruelty and fighting will five minutes evaporate and something like tenderness will prevail. Meg even reminds Nick that he has a knack for deleting the awful bits.

I found the presentation of this couple as frank, believable, painful, sobering, and uncommonly shown on screen (apart from Albee, cf. also Bergman's "Scenes from a Marriage," one of the greatest psychodramas and tributes to Walpurgisnacht of all time. Compared to that dose of acid, Nick and Meg's battles are child's play.)

reply

Dear johnkstone,

Thanks for your thoughtful letter. If there's a consensus, I missed it. Yes, there's a chicken-and-egg paradox here. Did Meg lose interest--at least sexual interest--when she learned about Nick's affair, or did Meg's lack of sexual interest cause--at least in part--Nick's affair. I think an equally likely explanation is Nick's professional failure. Don't forget, he was an academic superstar in graduate school, but his trajectory was almost flat, and he ended up teaching English in a technical institute. Some would consider that job a noble challenge--show students, who may not be all that interested in your subject, why they should be interested. But, from context, Nick felt that the job was not suited to his skills, did perfunctory work, and managed to get himself fired. Meg married a rising young star, but that's not the person with whom she ended up.

It still seems bizarre to me that they would go to Paris to relive their earlier love--which surely included sex--and then not be sexually active. How could Meg think that she could rekindle anything if she rejected her husband in bed? Some people have argued that it's her right to reject him--otherwise it's rape. OK, but why reject him if you're trying to rekindle your love. It's like rekindling your fire without matches!

Thank you for pointing out the connection with "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf." I saw that film when it came out, and the sense of the acid remains, but I don't remember the dialog enough to comment further.

Red-125

reply

Howdy. what you wrote reminded me of another parallel with "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf": George (also an academic) is treading water, and his wife scolds him mercilessly on his failures to achieve success. (Which also reminds me: Jeff Goldblum's hilarious, shallow character -- a guy who also enjoys un-deserved success, is similar to the glib hack Alan Alda plays in "Crimes and Misdemeanors" who, just like Nick in this movie, keeps wondering aloud if he's not intellectual enough, while simultaneously enjoying his incredible success.)

As for it seeming bizarre that they'd not have sex despite best intentions for rekindling the flame, as we all know, best intentions can get lost very quickly when faced with habit, reality, a sudden change of heart. Meg is instantly turned off by the first hotel room, by Nick's cheapness and ostensible lack of joie de vivre, by the phone call he takes from their son in which he seems to cave in too quickly, etc.

On the other hand, her quip about preferring to view the Eiffel Tower rather than his "limp sausage" comes so quickly and early on that's is safe to say there is no amount of romance or perfection in the setting that could reverse her cruel and dismissive streak. How or why she came to precisely that frame of mind seems to predate the start of the film, and suggests a marriage that is barely held together, if anything only for convenience and force of habit.

reply

Dear john, I think you have summarized the situation extremely well. Thank you!

I guess the only question is, Why did they go to Paris at all? It looks like the venture was doomed from the start. Of course, that's in retrospect, because we know how badly it turned out. Red-125

reply

When you've been with the same person for any length of time, and their quirks and yours are at odds and only sometimes come into alignment, you'll understand.

reply

Dear rob, Thanks for writing. I've been with the same person for 47 years, but our quirks aren't at odds. Apparently, I'll never have the chance to understand, which is a good thing. Red-125

reply

I see an interesting discussion here :)
I come with the point of view of a 5 year marriage. There are quirks of my wife that I cant swallow easily. Nothing serious, eg how she likes to keep the shades and the curtain down with the balcony door, or how she leaves the garbage bin open in the kitchen. I am afraid that one day these small things may seem like a mountain to me.

Appart from the autoreference, I would like to say one more thing .
I saw Virginia Woolfe years ago, but I thing that film had left me with the bitter fighting and shouting still echoing in my ears. While this one, finished with a more positive note.
I am 38, maybe not the same experience like you guys,but there was something in their childish pranks and little cons, and especially the dance in the end, that made me optimistic abou these old timers. Maybe they will split up in the end, but in a friendly manner.

Dimitris

PS. Meg is not saatisfied with her career as well. Hence the urge to quit and pursue something more artistic.

reply

Dear dim 1377, Thanks for writing. I appreciate your optimistic take on the marriage, although I personally think it's done.

I'm still interested in why Meg rejected Nick's sexual advances. Several people wrote to say how angry she was with him, and other reasons that made perfect sense. However, my point was that they had gone to Paris to rekindle their romance. How can you rekindle a romance--recreate your honeymoon--without sexual relations? I can see her rejecting his advances at home, but during a romantic trip to Paris? Red-125

reply

Above poster, Johnkstone, recalled her referring to his penis as a "limp sausage," and if she meant that literally, it could also add to her lack of enthusiasm to have sex with him. Any woman who has endured a session of limp sausage sex knows it seems like a never-ending exercise in futility as far as her complete satisfaction is concerned. She will not be jumping at the chance to repeat that experience. He needs a visit to a urologist for some hints.

reply

Dear holchie, Thanks for writing. I don't remember anything about "limp sausage, but maybe I missed it. If Nick does, indeed, have erectile dysfunction, that's doesn't mean he cannot sexually satisfy his wife. Also, the trip was their attempt to revive their marriage by bringing them closer. It just doesn't make sense to me that they should take this romantic getaway to Paris, and then have Meg refuse any kind of sexual activity. Why bother to go to Paris, if you're going to act just the way you act at home? Red-125

reply