A few days ago I went to the dollar theater to watch Colette. I haven't yet spoken to a single other person who has watched it. I remember seeing commercials for it and wanting to see it, but I totally missed it coming out, and honestly I went because it was the very last day that even the second-chance theater was showing it! And I'm so glad I did.
A lot of what I liked so much was just the way the film made me feel Hardly objective, and it might have to do with a bit of context. It's been a long time since I've seen a film in theaters - or I should say, it's been a long time since I've gone by myself to see a film and didn't just tag along with friends who were going anyway. There's nothing wrong with going with friends or with the films we saw, but I don't know. I feel like I myself am still working to remind myself that I am an independent person, and doing things for myself by myself without needing permission of some kind is still important to me. It was something I did a lot in Oxford and almost never since. And on top of that, all my family is together for the holiday. Which is super exciting and very nice. But no matter who company is, you know the feeling where you feel obliged to spend all time with them - even if it's doing nothing. The morning of I was thinking of going and thinking "oh but they won't want to go on such late notice" and something about the realization of "you can go anyway it's fine" was just... really nice. Because it's my day off too.
Anyway. Basically I enjoy going to the movies by myself and I forgot about that.
But I haven't said anything about Colette. My first thought when the film started was: Wow I don't know how long it's been since I've seen a period piece in the theaters! It's been a long time since I've seen anything other than Superhero and fantasy films. Nothing wrong with those of course but this was nice. It would be very hypocritical of me to ever call superhero films "not art" but Colette was a different kind of art. A work with very different intentions, and I enjoyed it.
Colette reminded me a lot of another film I've been meaning to write about for some time; Professor Marston and the Wonder Women. In fact they remind me so much of one another, I might as well just combine the two posts into one! This is going to be a long one, so buckle up.
I want to start with some comments about the films similarities. But before I go any further, I need to give yet another disclaimer, for both films: I don't know who all reads this blog. But I can tell you right now that not all of you will enjoy these two films or approve of them. In fact some of you might judge me for watching and enjoying them. These films are both rated a strong R for sexuality, and feature several sex scenes. Both of these films also include romantic and sexual scenes between non-heterosexual couples, and are stories supporting lgbt+ relationships and characters of various types. If you don't want to watch a film like that, don't watch these two. And if you don't want to hear about them, then I guess don't read this post. If you wanna chat with me about it, feel free, but I just wanted to say this up front so you're not surprised later.
Cool so Colette and Professor Marston and the Wonder Women. I'm going to talk about both of these separately, but they do actually have a lot in common. Mainly, both of these films are based on true stories. And you can tell. One of the most interesting things to me about both of these films is the way they choose to tell the stories already written in history. As Willy himself said to Colette (in the film at least) - the hand that holds the pen (or camera) writes history.
Neither Colette nor Prof. Marston attempt to tell the entire story. Both of them start in the middle and end in the middle of people's lives. And both of them move at a pace where many years are covered in their around-two-hours of film. A large amount of time passes between scenes. And because of this, they seem very open about their biased nature. By not showing every detail, by explicitly asking the audience to assume and imagine that other events occur, and to focus on what it shown, the films seem to me extremely upfront in saying that this is not the whole story. This is the story we want to tell. And I think the pace really works. Also, one thing I really liked: both films start with a marriage/already married couple, instead of ending with one. These aren't traditional romances. They're stories about people being people and figuring out what that means together.
Ok I can't do these generalities anymore. Let's go back to talking about just Colette. Colette is unlike any other period piece I've ever seen. Is it a romance? Is it, in a Shakespearean sense, a comedy? I don't know. Maybe? The central relationship of the film is between Colette and her husband Willy - but as I said, this is not some great Elizabeth/Darcy duo who fall in love and marry at the end of the film. Their marriage occurs between, if I recall, the third and fourth scene of the film. Or thereabouts. The wedding isn't actually shown. First they are engaged, and then he is introducing her as his wife. This film isn't about falling in love. This is about what happens after, about marriage. In fact - spoilers: This film ends in a divorce. Or rather it ends with a separation, which after the film ends in a divorce. But it's not a tragedy either.
In fact the most remarkable thing about Colette may be it's tone. For a story about a woman who was so often refused and used, whose relationships fell apart and who was denied her due and had to work very hard, Colette is a remarkably happy and inspiring film. And I think that says a lot about it's main character. This is a film about waking up to the possibilities of life and embracing them. It's a film about learning from your past and about figuring out what it is you want and can do. It's about sacrifice and trying hard and helping others, but also about discovering oneself. And while I'm sure that the real Colette's life wasn't always as uplifting, it was very refreshing to find a film with such content and such a tone. No one dies in the end. And for a film like this, that says a lot.
It would be extremely difficult to do a full run down of the plot so I'm going to just sum up the different running stories. Spoilers abound for the rest of this paragraph and the next so skip if necessary. The setting is this: Colette (which is actually her maiden name and pen name. First name Gabrielle.) is a country girl who is genuinely in love with a man known as Willy (pen name) from the Big City in Paris. Willy's business is as an author of reviews and short stories - but most of his "writing" is actually done by ghost writers, who (he contests) could only publish under his name since he's letting them use his reputation. The main plot is how, because of financial struggles, Willy pushes his wife Colette to write a book and then a series of books, which become the best selling novel series in France. They are all published under Willy's name as if he wrote them - despite being nearly autobigraphical and written almost entirely by Colette. He pushes her to write more, which makes her a better writer, sure, but doesn't help their marriage at all. They are in and out of financial trouble - most of which is hidden from his wife until it is too late. In the end, Willy, without Colette's consent or knowledge, sells the copyright for her series, and at that she leaves him for good, and embraces her up and coming career as an actress and pantomime (another thing which he initially told her she wouldn't be able to do.)
(cont. spoilers) The second plot that weaves in and out of all of this is Colette and Willy's sexual escapades. When they are relatively newly married, Colette almost leaves Willy after she finds him sleeping with another woman. However what really matters to her is not that he is sleeping with someone else, it's that he didn't tell her about it, and lied and hid the truth. What matters to Colette is consent. Later in the film in fact Willy becomes involved with another woman, and this time Colette knows all about it, and is unbothered, because this time she had the opportunity to give her consent. And this consent is probably easier for her to give because she has a partner of her own. Colette has two extramarital sexual partners throughout the film, and unlike her husband, she never attempts to hide any of them, and in fact explicitly asks Willy before perusing the first. However unlike Colette, what actually matters to Willy is, unfortunately, whether or not his wife's extramarital partners are women. This becomes complex because while Colette's first partner is a woman, the person she ends the film with - Missy - is first introduced as a women who wears men's clothing - and in facts inspires Colette to try the same - but by the end of the film, is referred to with masculine pronouns. Missy was of course a historical character, and as is oft the case, it is hard to tell what terminology to use. Was Missy a woman who enjoyed dressing as a man, or was Missy a trans man, but society refused to remember him that way? For the real Missy, who can say, but for the Missy of the film Colette, I'd go with the latter, but definitely see it as a process. In ANY case, Colette and Missy's relationship is a lot about how they inspire and support each other, always encouraging the other to try and do more. This is in contrast to Colette's relationship with Willy, who encourages her to do more only if it will make them money, and discourages almost everything else Colette does to realize herself - such as dressing in trousers, and learning to act and dance and pantomime.
The overpowering theme of these two plots is very interesting. Colette faces very little oppression from the outside world in the film - there is a part where Missy faces some for being himself, and Colette shares in it, but very little against her directly. Her husband Willy constantly tells her that she would face oppression or be unable to make it on her own - that books would never sell under her name, that people would attack her in the street if she goes about wearing men's trousers, etc. But all of the oppression actually comes from him. In both business and sex, Willy insists that "that's just what men DO!" and such, and also hides things from Colette. Willy believes, somehow, both that men ought to be the higher class and the only ones who operate in and are catered to in the world of business and the world of literature, and ALSO that men are naturally driven by their baser desires and do not have the strength to resist (unlike women), and so should be excused for their actions. Willy is catered to again and again by Colette, and forgiven by him, until finally he takes it too far. But one of the REALLY interesting things is how despite all this I don't feel like Willy is painted as a villain - most of the time you genuinely believe that Colette loves him and you want their marriage to work out somehow. Until it becomes clear that while she has matured, he is in the same place he started. And it's not a good place for her.
Colette is very interesting to me for many reasons. But chiefly I think because it managed to tell such a story of scandal and toxicity, but tell it in such an uplifting and beautiful way, and without a villain. The gorgeous costuming, camera work, sets, scenery, actors, and music do help of course. But the tone and message too. It's individualistic, sure it is, and if I wanted to critique it morally I could. But it was very well done.
That was a LOT on Colette and now I'm going to do ANOTHER film? Yes, yes I am, so hold on to your socks.
I can't believe I haven't done a post on Professor Marston and the Wonder Women yet. I watched this film some time ago, over the summer I think. It's not a new film, but one I heard very little of when it was (around the same time as Wonder Woman, I think). It is, again, about an author and his wife, and they do, again, have a rather non-traditional marriage. It is, again, a true story but told with an extreme and open bias. And I like it very much.
Professor Marston and the Wonder Women has two distinct goals, and they are very obvious. The first goal is not to recount the entire story of William Marston, but instead to recount just the parts of his life which helped create his most famous legacy: Wonder Woman. Every aspect of classic Wonder Woman has a reference point in Marston's life in this film. From her outfit to the villains to the invisible jet, but much more importantly, the message of conquering through love, and the Golden Perfect (Lasso of Truth). I admit that I don't know everything there is to know about Classic Wonder Woman - I know the Rebirth series and Gal Gadot's WW more than anything else. But it's a very interesting storyline, because it shows Wonder Woman as a natural extension of Marston's firmly held philosophical/psychological beliefs and teachings - That true happiness can only be attained through willing submission to a loving authority. Which is something I could write a whole post on, and kind of already have (see the WW Rebirth post). It also ties in Marston's other greatest invention - the first mechanical lie detector. Which of course ties in to the Lasso of Truth in it's way. All of this is one of the goals of the film.
The other center of the film - the primary plot in fact - is the relationship between Mr. and Mrs. Marston and their partner, Olive. The film begins with William and Elizabeth Marston already married, and it is all about how they meet Olive and how their relationship grows, and crumbles, and grows again. There haven't been many films (that I am away of) explicitly about polyamorus relationships, and this one really makes a point that they WANT the audience to support this relationship. They focus on the consent and the love involved on all sides. And one of the reasons I find it rather compelling is actually just that: Not enough romances of any kind focus on the consent and love involved AFTER marriage. Colette does a bit, but Willy is hardly a hero in Colette, where William, Elizabeth, and Olive are all the heroes of this tale. Do they agree on everything? of course not. Do they know what they are doing? does anyone? But they are all the heroes of the story.
Again, what's interesting in this film to me is how you can see the intentions behind it - how there was an established story to be told, and it is very clear that this is not the entire story by a long shot. And also the tone. In Colette it is about finding freedom. In Prof. Marston is it, in a sense, about surrendering that freedom - submission to loving authority. Which sounds horrid, but is not. Although Marston's story doesn't have quite as uplifting an end (simply because it follows him closer to the end of his life than Colette followed her) and it has a lot more darkness in it, both were clearly made with a lot of love. And both have very strong expectations of their audience, which I think is something else I liked. These films are sincere and they hold their audience to a high standard. They trust you to understand, but that doesn't make them confusing. And they trust their sincerity too.
Ok. I think that's all I've got for now. Thank you for reading if you did. And I'm sorry this one is so poorly organized (as if the others are better!). Finally, again, I know that not everyone who reads my blog will approve of the content of these two films, and might feel like I ought to object too. And of course there are aspects of these films I could discuss morals on. But that doesn't make them bad films. I find them very interesting and simply gorgeous.
If you've watched either of these, I'd love to hear what you thought!
Praise God from whom all blessings flow. Praise him all creatures here below. Praise him above ye heavenly hosts. Praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Amen.
R
