Let's Get Real (SPOILERS)

I'm getting off the fence about this movie. I viewed it after it was recommended in a documentary on the IFC about sexuality in movies.

The director ruined what might have been a fine treatment on adolescent sexuality, sibling rivalry and the politics of beauty in the female community by tacking on one of the most ridiculous, out in left field, absurd endings ever put in a movie.

Talk about pretentious and heavy-handed. But Catherine Breillat's heavy hand was evident throughout. Some of the dialogue from the precocious mouths of both sisters, even the older one, was more the director than what each of those characters might have known to say. The problem with many adults is that they view precociousness in children through rose-colored glasses. They are charmed by the idea of 'out of the mouths of babes.' And when writing such a character, the writer, if too in love with this idea, forgets that children, even precocious ones ARE children and bound by the limitations of their own immediate experience. No doubt, some kids have keen minds, but part of their wise-beyond-their years ability is having learned to listen and retain information and apply it in the right situations. Their alleged wisdom is virtual wisdom. This dazzles adults to such an extent that it blinds them to the reality that these same children, when confronted with a life of experience of profound proportions, respond like most children because they simply do not have the life experience and perspective to be wise.

Some of the things that came of the mouth of the fat younger sister were simply defied credibility. I don't care if it was France and she was supposed to be precocious. Experience is the teacher that makes us wise. It's what forms perspective. Without it, you are just a kid.

But Breillat has this idea in her head of creating this girl who is so deep and so much more special than her beautiful sister that she manipulates the character in such specious ways that her specialness never comes forth. She is not the 'crystal' (Breillat's word) that shines in comparison to the bitch of a vain, cruel, exhibitionist sister. She simply looks like a greedy little, sullen, adolescent fat girl that when her mother slaps her you almost wish she'd slap her a few more times. I watched the interview at the end and there were a number of shots of the actress who played Anais getting fitted for costumes where she smiled the most enchanting smile. Breillat never captured even a single frame of that. Even sullen, moody adolescent girls have a moment of pure fun because they are, afterall still children capable of such abandon. It's the reason that that period of life is so difficult. It's the tedious transition into adulthood. And it's painful.

The ending. WTF????

What we're supposed to accept is simply the old adage that 'Sh_t happens.!' And yes it does. The rampant random violence in the world today is undisputable. And yes, it could happen this way. A family on the way home from vacation, coming from a life-changing revelation such as the loss of innocence of the older daughter, is brutally murdered by some nut on the side of the road. But really? Why choose that ending for a film whose principle discussion was of such validity?

If the point was to connect the end to theme of sexuality, all I can say to Breillat is SHAME ON YOU! If a male director had done that, this film would have been burned. Of course, the last scene was probably why she got the funding.

Too cynical? Not if you understand that men never tire of watching rape scenes in film. To men, such scenes titillate, stimulate and arouse. Rape is a sex act to men. If it wasn't, then the nut would have simply killed all 3 of them. No, he chose to get his rocks off with a little girl and an obvious virgin. For a woman director to fall into that trap is beneath contempt. RAPE IS NOT AND WILL NEVER BE A SEX ACT FOR WOMEN!

These 2 points are irreconcilable between the genders, which is why I gave up. If I never see a re-enactment of a rape in a movien again in life, it will be too soon. I refuse to watch. You've seen one, you've seen them all. If you're a woman, what's the point? To relive some other female's violation? (Actually, if Breillat had really wanted to make a point, she would have had the nut KILL Anais after he raped her. Showing how ugly rape/murder is and how little such men value a woman as a human being.)


There is no way to spin this ending. PERIOD! Anais says she wasn't raped. Is that supposed to be her way of coping? Excuse me, but the rape wasn't the only traumatic event happening at the end. A 12/13 year old girl witnessed her mother and sister being brutally murdered and her response is this? HELLO.... her mother and sister are DEAD!!!! The only rational thing you should draw from her response is that the kid has to be in SHOCK!!!

I'm not going to even go where someone on another board suggested, that the girl was glad he chose her instead of her sister. Sorry, but if that's true... then she has to be the most despicable character ever created in film. Not only is she an ugly fat girl, she's a miserable, contemptible, hateful little witch. (Wrong consonant)

If you want to see a few naturalistic scenes approaching the theme of adolescent sexuality, watch the film, then turn it off when they stop at the rest stop. The film is over. Breillat's 'ending,' is strictly for the boys.