There is supposed to be give and take in every relationship, but I want to say, instead, that there are, more accurately, givers and takers, the selfish and the selfless. But what about everything and everyone in between? The collateral damage of our codependent relationships. This got me thinking about spatial relationships, gravity, the universe, and our place in it. Some of us are stars. Others planets or their moons. Even fewer, like myself, are the Plutos, classified somewhere between the planets and planetesimals of the galaxy. And who knows what to make of asteroids, dark matter, space dust and the rest? The Water Lilies cover describes the movie as being a love triangle. I think my metaphor is more accurate.
A star will shine bright, giving life to the planet and contrast to the moon. Those same rays that radiate life will also radiate a cancer. And when the star shines no more it will consume the entire system. In a star’s eyes this is just because what would a system be without its star? What would they revolve around? Nevermind the billions of other stars. A moon will revolve around its planet, if only to find a purpose that is not completely defined by the star. The impact on the planet’s tides is coincidental. The moon is always there, but shines brightest at night, and can still get lost in the dark sky it is all too aware it shares with a billion stars. The planet has no function, outside of existing at the whims of the star.
I wouldn’t consider Water Lilies to be about lesbians either. The relationship between the different girls is more complex and less sexual in nature than that. Still, it falls in the same category as Lost and Delirious and Wild Things. (Water Lilies is French, Lost and Delirious is Canadian, and Wild Things is American). All three movies are, with varying accuracy/realism, representative of high school girls experiencing and defining their respective sexualities. I thought, based on the love triangle description and overly sexual posing on the cover of Water Lilies that that’s where I was headed. In my last post on Cold Fish I wrote about being tired of Asian sexploitation but still being open to exploring European sexploitation. I came in to Water Lilies with my exploring gear on and full of arguments about the legitimacy of portraying mid teens as sexual objects. I left more critical of how North Americans tend to show young female sexuality on film.
The girls in Water Lilies are supposed to be 15 years old. Adèle Haenel (star) was 18, but showed no nudity, despite her characters reputation of being a slut and constant sexual antagonization. I didn’t find a birth date for Pauline Acquart (moon) or Louise Blachère (planet) but they were supposed to be around the same age as the characters they were playing. Blachère, the only one to be nude in the entire film, could be as old as 19, but more likely 17. Acquart struck me as being something closer to 13, which made her scenes with Haenel uncomfortable (it’s not often I’m confronted with the idea of prepubescent sexuality, mostly because the idea of the inability to consent makes it moot in my mind). Something about this movie struck me as being authentic, which made me able to relate to every character, which, I think, makes Water Lilies a good movie.
Considering what I wrote in the beginning, this is how I classified the relationships in Lost and Delirious and Wild Things. I included their ages because I think it’s an important factor in considering how the people from these different countries attacked the issue of the muddied sexuality of a teenage girl.
Lost and Delirious:
Jessica Paré (star) – 19
Mischa Barton (moon) – 15
Piper Perabo (planet) – 25
Wild Things:
Denise Richards (star) – 27
Neve Campbell (moon) – 25
If child pornography laws were changed, I wonder what impact it would have on this subject in cinema, more specifically in North America. Maybe you wouldn’t see actresses in their mid-twenties or early thirties playing characters ten to fifteen years their junior, or those same actresses enacting improbable sexual circumstances, which never passes the eye test anyway. But maybe changing the laws isn’t necessary. There was something more powerful about Water Lilies, which showed the least skin of them all.
I’ve come to the same conclusion I always do. American cinema is doomed, regardless of what laws restrict them or what cinematic rules they choose to follow. I’ll seek refuge elsewhere (still waiting for the people from my planet to come scoop me up).
I’ve come to the same conclusion I always do. American cinema is doomed, regardless of what laws restrict them or what cinematic rules they choose to follow. I’ll seek refuge elsewhere (still waiting for the people from my planet to come scoop me up).
http://www.waterliliesmovie.co.uk/trailer/