Posts Tagged ‘lesbian’

Mulholland Dr.

Mulholland Dr.

Wednesday, September 22nd, 2010

“Don’t play for real… until it gets real…”

Like Images I watched this after spending far too much time reading online discussions about Inception, amidst which these were the two movies mentioned most (except for Paprika, which I’ll keep an eye out for) that I hadn’t yet seen. I guess I can see why, but it’s a stretch. This most certainly resembles Images, however, I’ll say that, and it’s bound to require even more than the two viewings I gave it to truly process, so I can only apologise for this review.

Where Images took a woman and saw her break apart, here we meet two distinct female characters that through the course of the movie seem to merge and ultimately cross over (is there a connection here to Bergman’s Persona? It’s been a while since I saw that, I’m not sure, but what I just wrote rings a bell…) If you’re familiar with David Lynch – that is, if you’ve even seen one other of his movies aside from The Straight Story – you’ll probably come prepared for something challenging. I’ll just say this: for at least an hour, even on the first viewing, I found it a lot easier to watch (if not entirely understand) than his most recent feature Inland Empire. On a second viewing, much to my surprise, I’ll actually go so far as to say I almost began to enjoy it even… but please don’t ask me to explain the plot! Okay I’ll try…

To begin with (aside from one strange intercut diner scene where someone relates an absurd dream in much the same I way I’m relating you this), we have Naomi Watts as a wannabe starlet coming to Hollywood and staying in her aunt’s house, where she meets a mystery woman who we saw at the start narrowly escaping a car crash, though she seems to have amnesia, remembering nothing about where she came from and holding no clues except a purse containing money and a blue key. Meanwhile a young film maker is being pressured to cast another actress he doesn’t want in his movie or possibly be killed.

Watts attempts to help the mystery woman find out who she was and follow the lead of the woman possibly remembering her name after a seeing it on the nametag of a waitress at the diner. They seem to find her old apartment, and discover a severely rotted corpse. They go to a bizarre theatre where Watts discovers a blue box that appears to match the key. When she gets home and unlocks the blue box… that’s when things get really weird.

My review of Inland Empire pretty much expressed the attitude I’m surprised I don’t have to this movie: and that’s that, simply, no movie should be this complicated. Like I said, I really began to enjoy it a second time around and I think on subsequent viewings I might really start to love it, even though I may never formulate a solid opinion of what it’s about. This movie just seems to be so together in its tone. For example, there are several scenes of actors either rehearsing lines or auditioning. They play these scenes with the exact same degree of realism as they do their “real” lines elsewhere in the movie, so that these scenes from other movies within the movie kind of blur emotionally with everything else. The moment when Watts opens the blue box actually came much later in the movie the second time around than I felt it did the first time, and up to that point it actually all makes a lot more sense than it seems to… or at least, it feels like it.

It’s a tough one to write about, and one I’m surprised to find myself recommending. It almost makes me want to check out Inland Empire again. One thing is for sure, you really need to adjust your thinking when entering a Lynch movie… and for that, I guess we must be thankful.



Is-Slottet [Ice Palace]

Is-Slottet [Ice Palace]

Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010

I have some reviews from the past month to fill in before this one but I want to jump ahead and write this one while it’s fresh in my mind the very day I watched it. This is another movie that has been on my “to watch” list far too long. The initial reason was that I only had a dull VHS copy of the movie with no subtitles on it, and I decided to wait either until I found time to learn a little Swedish (something I still want and plan to do for a variety of other reasons) or some subtitles showed up on the net. Then, I waited so long that I decided perhaps I should read the book and then watch the movie with no subtitles, which is what I eventually did. I read the (translated) book over the past few weeks, and it instantly became one of my alltime faves. The simplicity of language and degree to which I related to the emotions conveyed, the likes of which are rarely, if ever, conveyed, just blew me away. I had a hard time thinking how it could make a movie, let alone one that clocks in at a mere 75 minutes.

By the time I got to watching the movie, then, I had the book as a background and I had also acquired subtitles, so I was set. The irony is – and this serves as encouragement to anybody reading this and having the same hesitations about watching – the smattering of dialogue in this movie is really nothing to worry about, should you either have no subtitles, or even if you have them and just don’t like reading them. This is a visual interpretation all the way, and frankly, it’s the only way you could even hope to attack the complexity of the inner world of these characters in the novel: by practically ignoring it, and letting the viewer fill in the gaps, which is as pure as cinema gets if you ask me.

The story is almost embarrassingly simple and does nothing towards selling you the experience of either reading or watching (but if you need this kind of movie “selling” to you then you’re frankly on the wrong site, lol): two young girls, Siss and Unn, meet and immediately connect on a level they can neither understand nor communicate. Unn is new to Siss’ school and distant from the other kids. Siss goes to Unn’s house and they share an intimate moment in Unn’s bedroom, after which Unn says she has a secret she wants to tell Siss. Siss gets uncomfortable and leaves, and the next day, Unn mysteriously disappears. I won’t go further than that, except to say that what follows not only continues a much-needed exploration of unspoken feelings but also the grief process, growing up, and moving on (I feel like I should at least acknowledge the lesbian aspect of the story but I honestly did not even think of this while reading the book, reading the girls’ attraction to each other on a much deeper spiritual level, with all that follows stemming merely from Unn’s secret that Siss, and us, never learn*… the book is just that minimal, not to mention so averse to such easy descriptors as the ‘L’ word…).

I would recommend the book much more enthusiastically than the movie because there is just so much more there, including a heartwrenching “second ending” which is understandably excised here (I was overjoyed, if that’s the right word, by the portrayal of the ice palace’s collapse, however). But considering this was made in the late 80s for what can’t have been an enormous budget, I was seriously impressed by how well the film simply visualises the book (this does, by the way, entail some underage nudity, for those who need to know these things). I really didn’t expect the scenes of the ice palace itself to be so overpoweringly visceral. I almost didn’t expect to see the ice palace at all, assuming a film of such paltry length would somehow take the story on a more metaphorical and talky level. This is a film that takes a minimal novel and strips it down even further. It’s all about the images, the faces, and a haunting (if a little synthy) score. It actually interests me how a person who hadn’t read the novel first would take it. It didn’t blow me away nearly as much as the book, which left me teary-eyed and speechless, but I really can’t imagine a better way it could have been filmed.

* This secret, now I’ve had time to process both book and movie, seems simply to be that Unn is afraid she won’t go to heaven, and it follows perhaps that this is because of the attitude towards homosexuality at the time the story is set, in the 30s – but again, the way it read to me in the book, it seemed to me that Unn was afraid of not going to heaven, but equally afraid of elaborating on why, which is what unsettles Siss, who leaves before such a thing can ever happen…



Lemora: A Child’s Tale of the Supernatural

Lemora: A Child’s Tale of the Supernatural

Tuesday, November 17th, 2009

Following the super-natural Celia, this rather cheesy effort could really only pale by comparison. It’s a very straightforward vampire story with a few unique twists. Lila, a small town’s prize virgin church singer, son of an infamous gangster, receives a letter from mysterious Lemora asking her to come to her father’s deathbed and forgive him etc, and being the good Christian she is she obeys. What Lemora really wants is to recruit her into the family tradition. There’s some proper old-fashioned make-up horror and a lot of messed up lesbian, possibly incestuous activity. What struck me most is how much it reminded me of my first ever attempt at writing a screenplay years ago, lol. Strip away the vampire stuff and combine it with Fucking Åmål and you pretty much have my “Angel Leaves” which perfectly explains why my version sucked LOL. It’s not a great movie, but it’s certainly an interesting one I’m glad to have collected.



Pretty Persuasion

Pretty Persuasion

Thursday, March 13th, 2008

“There are just so many stupid, annoying, worthless people on the planet. They just like, get in the way of what you want.”

The first thing this movie reminded me of was my most shameless personal fave, Slap Her … She’s French (especially considering that movie’s alternate title “She Gets What She Wants”) … but it’s a lot more subtle, extreme and subversive than that. It’s funny I found myself watching it during the BBC’s “White” week, in a way. The moment Evan Rachel Wood starts her speech about how wonderful it is to be white being as she wants to be an actress, all of this told to a Muslim student, listing Asian as her second choice, then Afro-American, and finally Arab … it certainly makes you gasp if anything more than I remembered “Slap Her” did – and where that race line goes in the end … I still don’t know quite what to think of it except to compare it to the other stereotypes in the movie, like, yes, the male and female ones, and say that it is one of those movies where the stereotypes really never bother me quite as much as they should, basically because the script just oozes smarts and Wood delivers those smarts in a way I really think nobody else could. It seems like she gets better with every film I see her in, and the final shot of her here is just phenomenal. James Woods, Jane Krakowski and Selma Blair are the icing on the cake.



Oranges are not the Only Fruit

Oranges are not the Only Fruit

Thursday, July 27th, 2006

Not gonna write anywhere near as much as I felt I might write about this one, as with my last review it’s a case of right now or write never :P This TV movie reminded me of a lot of other movies – from Whistle Down the Wind to Heavenly Creatures (Geraldine McEwan’s Mother very like the mother in that movie at times), An Angel at my Table (probably just the ginger hair I’m thinking of) and Breaking the Waves, but more ultimately of My Summer of Love, which to me it resembles beyond the mere lesbian factor. In the end, like “My Summer …”, the movie kind of fizzles out when it feels like it ought to explode. An IMDb reviewer noted the movie’s “plainness”, and when I first read that, following the first part, though I agreed with them, I thought the plainness worked in the movie’s favour … and it does, but to a point.

Most of all I was glad the movie doesn’t suffer from “Jane Eyre” syndrome – the entire first third of the movie is dedicated to a pre-teen Jess, and the actress is so perfect and compelling, I dreaded the inevitable growing up – but Charlotte Coleman fills the girl’s shoes not only brilliantly but almost seamlessly for the remaining bulk.

I was surprised to find the movie was made in 1990. I was initially under the impression that it was from the same era of Ken Loach’s “Poor Cow”, “Kathy Come Home”, and the like, and even as the movie began, the production design is so terrific I still would never have imagined it was made so late were it not for familiar faces like Celie Imrie and David Thewlis. Rachel Portman’s music is a minor giveaway, too, once it gets going, but it’s still all surprisingly old school.

I’d‘ve personally liked it to be a little more electrifying, but it’s still highly recommended.

“Is she saved?” “No, but she’s nice.”



Fucking Åmål (aka Show Me Love)

Fucking Åmål (aka Show Me Love)

Wednesday, August 17th, 2005

I guess I’m watching this now to try and get the foul taste of Moodysson’s latest Hole in My Heart out of my mind. This one has a happy ending, I recall, it will therefore make me happy. Weird thing is, coming back to it after Hole and the similarly shattering Lilya 4-Ever, in addition to the very disturbing short movie, “Talk,” included as an extra on this new Region 2 DVD (annoyingly only available in the Lukas Moodysson box set), I couldn’t help focusing in on the more negative aspects of this movie now. Gee, thanks, Lukas.

It’s still a lot more fun to watch, though. For better or worse, it probably paints the most realistic portrait of teenagers ever seen in the movies: at once beautiful, pathetic, and inconsequential. The soundtrack is excellent and the two leads are perfect for each other.



Heavenly Creatures

Heavenly Creatures

Tuesday, July 5th, 2005

An all-time favourite that never lets me down, yet I don’t know what to say about it. It’s the ultimate romance-gone-too-far-gone-sour movie. I don’t think Kate Winslet has ever been better; I almost want to say the same for director Peter Jackson; and Melanie Lynskey is great in everything she does. The combo of Peter Dasent’s score and Mario Lanza songs make for one of the best soundtracks, and the visual effects, while a little on the low budget side, are somehow perfect for the young girls’ fantasy world. I don’t think beautiful and disturbing have ever been so close.



Monster

Monster

Sunday, March 28th, 2004

This is possibly as difficult a movie to watch for any “good-natured” person as, say, The Passion of the Christ is to watch for any non-Christian… do you carry your own agenda to it? Reject the movie because it tempts you to sympathise with a criminal (in The Passion‘s case, reject it because either you don’t believe in it or you feel you shouldn’t get involved with a faith you don’t follow?) Or do you watch it as a work or art, take it in and extract its basic message as it applies to other aspects of life?

I’m one who tries to take every movie as a movie. If it speaks to me it’ll speak to me. Monster, though, really is a tough one. I think when I last watched it, my first viewing, I actually came out saying I sympathised with Aileen Wuornos. I can’t entirely say I didn’t mean that, because there is a part of her that I definitely do feel sorry for… but I did overlook a lot of the movie that hit me on this viewing. The way the killings degenerate towards the end, when finally (and apologies if this is a spoiler) she kills a completely innocent man, who hasn’t even done anything immoral or unethical let alone illegal, he’s even offered her help, and she knows she shouldn’t kill him, apologises, and kills him as if she really has to… she left little room for sympathy.

I feel like this movie’s greatest success is that it really does let us inside the head of Wuornos… but this might be its greatest failure too. This is the definition of character study, and considering the character, it really does stir a lot of discomfort. It paints a bleak picture of the world that tells us that love is the answer etc, (“They gotta tell ya somethin’”, Wuornos says in her last voiceover) but presents us with a heroine, or anti-heroine, who claims to be seeking love yet who shows practically none herself. Theron plays Wuornos as a woman with severe communication problems, she loses her temper rapidly, even with the one person, Selby, who she’s able in her gentler moments to share a calm with. It’s hard to sympathise with her, extremely hard, but uncomfortably possible. She’s a representation of everything that is wrong with the world – we need her so we can point the finger because she shows us how good we are, that classic dilemma of evil.

This movie doesn’t entirely succeed in saying what I think it wants to say, but you’ve got to give it praise for trying. And Christina Ricci definitely deserves praise for balancing Charlize Theron’s Oscar-winning lead performance. I think each time I watch this movie I’ll find something new in Christina Ricci’s performance – in many ways I think she comes out of the movie the better actress, there are just so many layers in there. If she looks uncomfortable, it’s not because she’s a bad actress, it’s because she’s playing a character who truly doesn’t understand what she’s doing… like Wuornos, she just wants love, but for her it’s much more innocent. Take that into account and you might just see beyond the initial strangeness of her performance.