It seemed like the director thought "ok..lets be shocking" for the sake of it, and it just ended up being crap.
Up until then I liked this film..an honest/real film about losing first love etc. it had some great dialogue and the relationship between the sisters was genuinely touching..
All that was completely ruined by the ending. Totally ruined an othewise great film
That's my take exactly. It's one thing to have a genuinely shocking film; it's quite another to shock for shock's sake alone. That's what I felt happened at the end of this film. To me, it's a sign of an amateurish/immature/unbalanced director. I've come to the conclusion that Breillat is just a total head case, and that's why her films are so messed up. It's not a matter of art; it's a matter of mental imbalance on the part of the director.
"Love isn't what you say or how you feel, it's what you DO". (The Last Kiss)
I agree, its not the material, is how it was delivered, that ending came out of nowhere and brought down the movie a lot.
her films are unbalanced and shocking for shocks sake, and i have seen some twisted and sick directors, but they are either:
a)fortright about their intentions(takashi miikee) or consistant in the tone of their films (refn, solondsz) they dont pull shocking endings out of their asses, they work for them
I have defended Breillat on several threads here, and I still stay behind my words. But I can also agree with these three posts sent in this thread so far. There is no real reason to change the mood of the movie and make this ending as you say "out of nowhere". But Breillat isn't and never can or will be Haneke who is usually even more shocking, but in some logical and (in his own standards) rational way.
The only thing that could (to a certain level) justify this sudden and unannounced shocking ending would be the author's intention to show how suddenly a shocking events can happen in anybody's life. However, I'm afraid that this (supposed) intention would collide with the final scene, the result of (this shocking) event. And I still believe that this scene has some interesting explanations and important messages, but having it used for this purpose there was no need to make the rest of the movie in a rather light mood (almost like Diane Kurys or Bertrand Blier movies, even Yves Robert's ones) and then terminate it in an unexpected shock.
The message, if there was one other than men are a-holes, could be that all of your current woes, cares, worries mean zip because in an instant we could be dead. That older girls world of problems were resolved with one crack of an axe! She wasted her final hours fretting and crying over things that would ultimately be non-issues.
The mother? No sympathy. Sorry she treated her daughter, in their last hours together, like crap.
The younger sister? Why did she live? More randomness.
Life is random. Crap happens. One moment you are alive the next you are dead. That is what I surmise was the directors intent; unless there is much meaning behind the younger girl saying to the police "You don't have to believe me if you do not want to" regarding not being raped. Was that it? The final denouement was that she wanted to be examined??
I can agree with you completely. The movie can remind us how vulnerable we are, that anything than we can't even think of can break our peace, happiness, freedom, health and even life. But instead of looking for some unfulfillable terminal, ideal security people should do their best not to waste the time that they have.
And as for raped girl's unexpected reaction - I think that she felt this several minutes physical (sexual) rape rather unimportant compared to mental and emotional rape she had been suffering for years. This is also shocking for us who have been raised in western, Christianity led civilization. During centuries sexuality has been given a special place - it was kept hidden, never openly spoken about, but sins in sexual sphere have been emphasized more than any others and by far more than it can be justified from the Bible where all the sins are considered and condemned merely equally.
So, I don't want to sound as if I find rape something else than a crime, but the religion and civilization that make people kill their spouses rather than divorce them or simply have an affair (because generations taught their youngsters that adultery is a great mortal sin and murder obviously a minor one, if mortal at all) have a serious problem with themselves for creating such an absurd deviation in moral cathegories and consequently in people's minds.
The civilization which uses a phrase that sexual rape is worse than death (I can remember persons who have recovered from being raped, but I have problems with remembering persons who have recovered from being dead) and doesn't even recognize other forms of rape, or which condemns sexual prostitution and overlooks its other forms (emotional, mental, social, political, professional/existentional) and which finds itself threatened by sexual more than any other contents of life brings sexuality in unreal, undeserved top position, as the most important thing in life, while in the same time doing its best to minimize it (persuading people how unimportant it is) and even denying sexuality in some cathegories of people (old people, children, mentally retarded, handicapped etc).
But if Breillat wants to tell us this (and if she does I can agree with her) it is hard to expect for majority of people to see, understand, believe and accept it when presented this way, no matter how relatively mature girl appears to be she is still too young to experience and understand this cultural abberation.
Well put!
As for the younger girl being too young to understand the complexity, perhaps she then is the perfect one to shine a light on it. She is, at that age, a pure product of such societal mores yet unaware of them due to having them be part of her reality for her entire life.
I am certain Breillat would be very happy to know that after all these years people are still talking about the film!
Probably you are right, the girl does it automatically, instinctively, again - she is mentally mature over her biological age (due to her family life her emotional maturity is very hard to estimate, the circumstances had been very unfavorable for her to develop emotionally; however, she did realize, due to her mental maturity, hove depraved she had been and how the situation was doeing her wrong so she may had even matured emotionally more rapidly as people often do in tough times) and this final rape, final act of violence (this time physical and not emotional) seemed not to affect her so much because it was just a rather unimportant change of form of rape and violence and humiliation that she was so used to be exposed to (some discussions emphasized the additional emotion - she was finally, for the first time, the chosen one, not her mother or sistavers that have been favorized so far, it was her who was a kind of final winner in this family competition - but this doesn't have real importance for our subject).
The problem, however, is that the big majority of people wouldn't bother to analize and try to understand why would a girl that young have so unusual and socially inadequate response to the horrific traumatic experience. They simply blame Breillat for manipulation, for child exploitation, for unrealistic shock with no meaning; and I wouldn't be surprised that within few years this movie becomes (un)officially banned first in USA and then consequently worldwide. In 21st century it is by far easier to ban things than try to understand them. And that probably won't make Breillat very happy (BTW A ma soeur has been broadcasted here on national TV few weeks ago in a line of Breillat recent movies).
IRL violence can come from out of nowhere.
And IMO her line at the end 'I wasn't raped' was a powerful statement about how alienated she felt from her family/father and was a great line to end the movie on.
IRL violence can come from out of nowhere.
I think you missed the point if you think that was Breillat's reasoning. The ending forces us to question why. There are so many potential directions of interpretation and I really doubt a cheap shock is one of them.
shareYou miss the point of the ending by looking too deeply into it. There was no point to it. The director is an idiot. Shock for shock's sake. Ruin the film. Indeed as this thread says, the ending is a pile of crap.
"But I have infinite tenderness for you. I always will. My whole life."
There might not be a point, but many times life doesn't have a rhyme or reason either. I doubt if Breillat did it just for shock. Seems like a way for a non thinking person to explain the ending. The ending has definitely stayed with me after all these years, so it absolutely had some kind of effect on me.
shareI disagree. I thought it was a fantastic ending.
shareIt was shocking like Looking for Mr. Goodbar. The ending comes out of nowhere, but there is a point to it all. Try watching it again and get back to us. I think several people here explained what Breillat was doing quite well.
share