Girlhood (Bande de filles, France 2014)

GIRLHOOD

From left: ‘Fily’ (Mariétou Touré), ‘Adiatou’ (Lindsay Karamoh), ‘Vic’ (Karidja Touré), ‘Lady’ (Assa Sylla)

Two of the best films I saw last year at the London Film Festival had to wait more than six months for a UK release. Phoenix was one of those films and Girlhood is the other. The title ‘Girlhood’ refers both to that period of a young woman’s life and to the concept of girls controlling their ‘hood – moving in on a genre previously seen as male. The English title, unusually, is better than the French – Bande de filles which suggests ‘Gang Girls’ or ‘Girl Gangs’. Girlhood is set in les banlieues – or les cités, those giant housing estates on the outskirts of Paris made famous in global cinema by Mathieu Kassovitz’s La haine (France 1995). Director Céline Sciamma (known for Water Lillies 2007 and Tomboy 2011) states quite clearly in the Press Pack that she is aiming for something different than La haine. She argues that CinemaScope is the best screen ratio to show gangs and although she shoots on the estates, all the interiors are shot on studio sets so that she can control the colours/décor etc.

“We used static shots with a very deliberate perspective as opposed to the Steadicam’s predictable energy. We relied on travelling shots and often used sequence shots. It’s an episodic narrative, with dramatic accelerations.” (Sciamma in the Press Pack)

The writer-director goes on to suggest that this is a new kind of narrative, a ‘fictional manifesto’ for a group of girls discovered through public casting sessions. It certainly does have a new kind of energy and it challenges representations of young women and in particular young African-Caribbean French women. Unlike many of the films set in les cités, this film is not dominated by North African French characters. The narrative seeks credibility rather than the ‘authenticity’ of social realism. Even so the resolution of the narrative is ‘open’ but not triumphant. This is a start – there is a long way to go before these girls achieve complete social freedom.

The central character is Marieme who we first meet as she comes back to le cité with a group of young women. The opening scene suggests that all the young women have been playing for a team in a game of ‘American Football’. I wondered if this might be a fantasy sequence (it seems an expensive sport to play because of all the equipment) but I would be grateful for any confirmation that such things happen in Paris. Perhaps it signifies an aspiration towards American culture among French African-Caribbeans that mirrors earlier French interest in American popular culture? Marieme has a difficult home life. Her father is absent and her mother is a cleaner in a hotel, working long hours. Marieme looks out for her two younger sisters – and tries to avoid her big brother Djibril, a dangerous character who abuses his sisters in taking control of the household and attempting to restrict their social behaviour.

The ‘inciting incident’ in the opening section of the narrative is when a dejected Marieme, learning that her only future after the summer is to go to vocational school (which she doesn’t want to do), meets a trio of seemingly tough ‘gang girls’. The leader of the trio sees something in Marieme and eventually invites her to join the group. Marieme changes her hair, her taste in clothes and her name. She gets out of the summer job her mother has organised in a hotel. Now she is ‘Vic’ (for victoire/victory), named by the gang leader, ‘Lady’. Collectively the girls have fun – even if it involves petty crime and fights and shows of bravado – before Marieme/Vic is forced to make decisions. These inevitably involve young men – the boy she has a relationship with, her controlling older brother and the local ‘boss’ for whom she works and who affords her ‘protection’ once she has become ‘known’ in the male world. The film has an open ending. We don’t know what will happen to Vic, but we have learned a great deal about the life that she and her sisters face in les cités.

I found the whole film captivating and in particular Marieme/Vic as played by Karidja Touré. Seemingly without prior experience, Touré is a strong presence, moving from being quiet and withdrawn to fierce and commanding as required. When she smiles, her personality fills the screen. The other three young women are equally striking in different ways. ‘Lady’ is a clear leader, Adiatou is street-smart and Fily is the quiet one, sometimes the butt of jokes but a strong physical presence.

There isn’t much ‘plot’ in the film. The narrative structure is in some ways unusual and I don’t want to give too much away and spoil the pleasure of an unfolding story. Watching it a second time I realised that I had been so taken with my first viewing that I hadn’t really noticed how the narrative divides into sections and that the final section – when Vic moves to another estate – is longer than I thought. In fact this is quite a long film for the genre. The power of the film resides in the relationships of Vic with the other three girls, with the boy she is attracted to and in perhaps the most moving scenes of all, with her younger sister who appears to be following, quite literally, in her footsteps.

Girlhood has been successful and I was pleased to see reports that in France it has been shown in multiplexes in les banlieues, reaching the audience who are represented in it. In the UK it has been generally very well received but there have been gainsayers, in particular on Radio 4’s Saturday Review. I found the discussion about the film on this show both annoying and disturbing. It was annoying because of the obvious contradiction. We were told that films like Girlhood were very unusual because there are very few other representations of young Black women in French cinema (certainly that is true of the French cinema that makes it to the UK). But at the same time the young women in Girlhood were ‘stereotypical’ and their behaviour/representation was ‘clichéd’. How can they be stereotypes if we haven’t seen them on screen before? This is sloppy thinking – it suggests that the audience is reading these young women as if they were in a British or American film. In fact, they are shown in quite distinctive ways that sometimes demonstrate connections to American culture and sometimes seem unique (an entertaining game of Crazy Golf or a dance contest in a city centre square). On the Saturday Review panel was Bim Adewunmi, a Guardian columnist and herself a young woman of West African heritage. She complained that for her this was a film utilising a ‘white gaze’ on young Black women. Obviously I can’t argue against this but also I can’t see it in the film. Céline Sciamma in interviews has said (see the Jonathan Romney interview below) that she herself grew up (as a middle-class white girl) in or close to one of the new estates outside Paris. Much has been made of the fact that only one of the four leads is actually from an estate like the ones in the film (the other three were non-professionals from other parts of Paris). But is this really important? As the young women themselves pointed out, seeing themselves as four young Black female faces on posters all over Paris was an exciting new experience. A girlhood that was invisible in mainstream media in France has been give exposure.

For more background on the film and the young actors see the very useful Jonathan Romney piece in the Observer. This one of many pieces in the Guardian/Observer and the film seems to have made a significant impact on the ‘liberal left’ in the UK. I’m hoping it will be possible to use Girlhood extensively in UK film education. I’ve watched it twice but I think it will need several more viewings before I discover all its riches. I need to explore both its cinematography and the music soundtrack by Para One – also responsible for Sciamma’s earlier two films.

The UK trailer:

Advertisements

3 comments

  1. keith1942

    Good review Roy – great film.
    I am rather worried by the appearance of ‘the white gaze’; there has been a lot of mystification over the years around ‘the male gaze’; I even saw an example recently that employed ‘the female gaze’.
    Unfortunately my partner has passed on or I would submit a post of the canine gaze.

  2. Rona

    The ‘burden of representation’ is visible here perhaps. When there are so few available representations on offer, there is such a sensitivity to the origin and the perspective from which they come. And, of course, it’s maybe a moment to remind ourselves that even a white female director is still unfairly unusual. As far as a portrait of teenage girls from the banlieues, it was in equal measure moving, uplifting and entertaining. Its misdirections – using some of our stereotypical expectations in relation to not only the social types but also the history of these narratives in the cinema – were nicely played. Rejecting the course mapped out for her by the school was not turned into a tragedy for the central character without avoiding the fact that life was going to be extremely difficult. The performances were incredibly mature and I wondered what work Sciamma had done to create that group dynamic and bond before they started filming.

    The way dance was used expressively at part of the ‘dramatic accelerations’ added to the emotional impact. The use of Rihanna’s ‘Diamonds’ as a way of representing a moment in the group’s evolution was bold (using the whole song) and really expressed the way those girls were sharing an intimacy at exactly the same time as indulging in their own personal fantasies. Sciamma captured – and celebrated – something of the secret joy of that dancing ritual onscreen. As you say, Roy, the use of public spaces as they are gendered was subtly but clearly done, with a recognisable sense of young women’s discomfort when moving through them. Dancing in public, then, was a strong statement of reclamation.

    I’m not qualified to judge, but I hesitate to upbraid Sciamma personally for what is visibly entrenched systemic issues for the film industry as a whole. However, the idea that ‘any’ representation may not be the ‘right’ representation is a relevant point and one tackled head-on by Lee Daniels. After successfully establishing ‘Empire’, he is making clear and persuasive statements about the problem of white people representing black people’s experience. A clip here: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/lee-daniels-empire-black-people-801113

  3. keith1942

    Some good comments by Rona. However, the critical approach tends to the partial [not Rona]. What is ‘flavour of the month’ or the most visible contradiction.
    When do we get a working class standpoint on the working class? And the treatment of the oppressed peoples and nations [rather than colour or ethnic groups] is overall appalling.
    I have posted on We Are Many on the Third Cinema Blog: and I had to do the same with the earlier The Spirit of ’45.
    I recognise that there are issues about who represents who. But we are also in the territory of Pierre Bourdieu and ‘discriminations of taste’. I would want to praise Girlhood and recognise its limitations, as I did with La Haine.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s