Blue is the Warmest Color

Directed by Abdellatif Kechiche.

2013. Rated NC-17, 179 minutes.

Cast:

Adele Exarchopoulos

Lea Seydoux

Salim Kechiouche

Aurelien Recoing

Catherine Salee

Benjamin Siksou

Mona Walravens

Alma Jodorowsky

Anne Loiret

Benoit Pilot

Adele (Exarchopoulos) is your typical high school student. She seems to be a fringe member of the in-crowd. this isn't some all-powerful elite crew like in movies for teenagers. It's just a group of girls who seem like they're the cool kids. They hang out together at school, talk a lot about their sex lives and exert a bit of peer pressure on each other about it. So when they tell her that a cute guy has a crush on her, the news comes with advice on how she should handle the stiuation. She pursues him and sure enough, winds up in bed with him. In the immediate aftermath, we see that something's amiss. She seems conflicted about the event. Her issue isn't whether or not she should've done such a thing. We can presume she was not a virgin before this. It appears she's not sure she really enjoyed it and doesn't know why.

Things would soon change. Adele decides to hang out with a gay male friend from school. He takes her to a nightclub full of guys where she stays for a while. Eventually, she wanders off on her own and finds herself in a lesbian bar. There she meets the blue-haired Emma (Seydoux), a budding artist and college student. The two hit it off right away. Emma pursues our heroine and before you know it, the two are in a committed relationship. We follow them for an unspecified number of years, well into Adele's adult life.

One thing that sets this apart from other movies about same sex relationships is that that is not the focus of the narrative. Early on, there is some hesitance on Adele's part as she comes to grips with her sexuality and a bit of cruelty suffered at the hands of her school friends when they only suspect she's a lesbian. However, that passes quickly. For the rest of the film we focus on fairly universal themes. Adele struggles with her place in Emma's life as Emma advances in her career as an artist, has friends more sophisticated than her, and an uncomfortably chummy relationship with an ex. She fears being left behind as Emma outgrows her. At times, she also feels neglected. On the opposite side of the coin, Emma is driven, climbing the ladder of success, and proud to have Adele in her corner. Unfortunately, she's somewhat oblivious to Adele's concerns. Adele hasn't verbally communicated her feelings and Emma hasn't picked up on them. Both Exarchopoulos and Seydoux give wonderful performances conveying their characters' emotions and motivations.

Normally, watching a three hour movie has me looking for things that should've been cut. I'm speaking to you, Peter Jackson. In this case, I actually found places where things could be added. Most important of these is finding out how Adele's parents feel about her relationship. I've already mentioned that the fact the couple in question is a lesbian one is not the movie's main focus. However, judging by the reaction of Adele's friends, the climate toward homosexuals isn't completely friendly, either. This is confirmed by the fact that Adele hides the fact that she is in a lesbian relationship when she introduces Emma to her parents. She presents it as a platonic friendship between two straight girls. Following this scene, her mom and dad just disappear from the movie. I'm not saying they have to disapprove of their daughter's lifestyle to create some massively melodramatic scene, but they should at least have knowledge of it and acknowledge it in some way. Without their input, there seems to be a gaping hole in the narrative of Adele's life. This is especially true when, just a short while later, we're shown that she has moved in with Emma. We're left to assume her parents are still in the dark about her relationship. This doesn't seem logical unless it were something that was expressly communicated to the viewer.

Delving into the parents' feelings may have placed more emphasis on the fact that our lovebirds are of the same sex than what was wanted. However, that is clearly the visual focus of the film. There are a number of sex scenes and they are almost all lengthy and graphic. It gets dangerously close to all out porn, if it isn't already that. It's hard to believe we aren't seeing actual sex. The way these scenes are shot, I wonder how it's possible that they are not doing what it looks like they are. Even during the one hetero sex scene we're shown something not seen in American movies outside of the adult industry: an erection. Cinematically, if there is a place to shave the runtime, it is here. Most of these scenes can be cut in half, if not reduced by two-thirds and change absolutely nothing about the movie. Of course, my inner-pig won't let me actually suggest that, so deal with it.

When the closing credits roll, we realize we might not be at the end. Ignoring the obvious, that we're told this is chapter one of two, the film concludes in such a way that suggests there could be more. I say could because if this were to be a standalone film then it functions as a fully self-contained unit. We've ridden the roller coaster of a relationship and come to a satisfactory finish. On the other hand, we can see there is possibly lots more to tell. What closes the movie could be interpreted as the chance for a new beginning, or at least a restart. We enjoy the ride we've had up until now and hope there is more to come.

Female Trouble

Directed by John Waters
1974. Rated NC-17 (uncut version), 97 minutes.
Cast:
Divine
Mary Vivian Pierce
David Lochary
Mink Stole
Edith Massey
Cookie Mueller

The very strange life and times of Dawn Davenport (Divine). If you're at all familiar with John Waters, you know that the word bizarre only scratches the surface. His, is a truly demented world with warped sensibilities. After not getting what she wants for Christmas, 16 year old Dawn throws a tantrum, beats up her parents and leaves home for good. She has sex with the guy that picks her up while she's hitchhiking, literally on the side of the road, which begets a daughter she's forced to raise alone. She then embarks on a life of crime, has a stint as a stripper, marries her hair dresser and things really get out of hand when she tries to break into show business. Think about all these things and remember that Dawn is played by Waters' muse, 300 lb. female impersonator Harris Glenn Milstead, better known as Divine. To her, or his, credit if you didn't already know this, the illusion is maintained quite well, here and in a number of other John Waters' flicks. None of the acting is award show ready, or even fit for most B-movies but Divine is a force of nature that elevates the material to strangely mesmerizing levels. Waters' gift for shoving the proverbial envelope off the edge of a cliff to its bloody death has a charm all its own that also keeps you watching. You simply want to see what could possibly be next. And unlike many other movies of the era, Waters' films still have the power to shock and amaze. The passage of time has hardly dulled their edges. Combine that with the fact he shot on miniscule budgets and at that time was not quite competent in the technical aspects of filmmaking and you get something totally raw. He would go on to make more polished films such as Cry Baby, the original Hairspray and Serial Mom. I like to think of it this way: that creator of slightly perverse but palatable and often sweet goth, Tim Burton is like Dr. Jekyll and Waters' is Mr. Hyde, the id run amok. He's an inmate not content with merely running the asylum, he's hell-bent on burning it to the ground. Therefore, you don't enjoy this movie because it is good in the sense you would normally mean. You enjoy it because it is original, raunchy, appalling, told from a unique perspective (how Dawn is allowed to become a customer at the exclusive beauty salon is evidence of this), has a twisted sense of humor and is horribly made. Coincidentally, you may hate it for precisely the same reasons. This is why, for me, it's in the so-bad-it's-awesome hall of fame.

MY SCORE: -10/10

Gummo

Directed by Harmony Korine.
1997. Rated NC-17, 89 minutes.
Cast:
Jacob Reynolds
Darby Dougherty
Chloë Sevigny
Nick Sutton
Carisa Glucksman
Wendall Carr
Ellen M. Smith
Charles Matthew Coatney

I don’t know what I just watched. Bear with me. We can get through this, together. I think.

What is Gummo about? I haven’t the foggiest idea. I’ll hazard a guess, sorta. At the start, we’re told a tornado came through Xenia, Ohio and killed a bunch of people and animals alike. Then we spend the next hour and a half with a number of the locals, most of whom are teenagers. Much of that time, we hang out with two boys who roam around town killing stray cats and collecting odds and ends to sell to a local storeowner. With their earnings they pay some sleazy guy so they can each have sex with a mentally challenged girl that I think is the guy’s relative of some sort. The older of the two boys lives with his dad who has wild drinking parties and includes him in the action. The younger boy lives with his mom, a widower who seems to be a hoarder with stacks of junk all over the house. Neither parent appears to have a clue or care what their child is doing most of the day.

There’s also a set of sisters, three of them, to be exact. The older two put most of their effort into making themselves look pretty to boys that obviously aren’t interested in them while the youngest just follows behind. Throw in another mentally challenged girl, the transvestite boy who is also fond of killing cats and the numerous random people who all get their moment in the sun and we feel like we’ve at least met just about everyone in town. And I haven’t even mentioned the random boy we keep seeing who runs around town with no shirt on and bunny ears on his head. Those with disabilities aside, we don’t like any of them. And most of them seem physically dirty. Even when one takes a bath, the water he’s sitting in is nearly black. Yet, he cheerfully drinks some and even eats a candy bar after it fell into the muck. No, Mom doesn’t mind.

I gather all the dirtiness must mean something. I feel I’m missing some deep metaphor that might change my view of the world, or at least of this film. Then I think back to something famed critic Roger Ebert once said, I’m paraphrasing, “If you can’t tell what something symbolizes, it doesn’t.” That becomes my outlook on the whole movie. It’s striving hard to tell me something without actually telling me, so I’m not getting it. The pretentious voice-overs don’t help. It just goes on showing me one deplorable act after another with seemingly no purpose besides voyeurism. There is no plot, nor does there seem to be any social commentary or moral to be learned. The camera is simply pointed at these unlikeable people without framing them in any manner that might suggest a point to it all.

Along the way, we forget about the tornado until its winds take over the soundtrack at the film’s conclusion. By this time, our sympathy has been exhausted, or turned into mortification. Gummo fails to be the human tragedy the filmmaker appears to want it to be. Instead, it feels more like Mother Nature practicing natural selection.