www.WhyIsMaVieEnRoseRatedR.com
The film is careful to keep its focus within childhood. It's not a story about homosexuality or transvestism, but about a little boy who thinks he's a little girl.
Maybe Ludovic, played by a calmly self-possessed 11-year-old named Georges du Fresne, will grow up to be gay. Maybe not. That's not what the movie is about. The performance reflects Ludovic's innocence and naiveté. There is no sexual awareness in his dressing-up, but simply a determination to set things right.
--Roger Ebert
"Ma Vie en Rose" ("My Life in Pink") is, to my knowledge, the first cinematic exploration of gender identity in young children. It is about Ludovic, a seven year old French boy who is convinced he is meant to be a girl .... [The film] has no action, no violence, no romance, no aliens, no natural disasters -- not even a recognizable star. It is certainly no comedy and, though it is a film about children, many conventional parents will not want their children to see it. In sum, it has no targeted audience ....
Yet in a world that genuinely prized and did not just tolerate difference, this film would have been made by Disney. It marks a new, truthful departure in cinematic understanding of difference in human sexuality and gender identity in children ....
Think of all the "sinister" stereotypes that have traditionally been associated with left-handedness, and the unnecessary discipline and punishments we visited on left-handed children. We may someday come to think about children like Ludovic in much the same way. "Ma Vie en Rose" is an enlightened beginning of that process.
--Alan A. Stone
IMDB: Ma vie en rose (1997)
Tagline: Sometimes you just have to be yourself.
Plot Summary: Ludovic is a small boy who cross-dresses and generally acts like a girl, talks of marrying his neighbor's... (more) (view trailer)
Official site: Ma Vie En Rose: Main Page:
"Ma Vie en Rose" ("My Life In Pink") is the story of Ludovic, a little girl born in a little boy's body. For him, nothing is more natural than to change his gender. As a hopeful and sensitive child, he truly believes that a miracle is going to happen. He will be a girl, no doubt about it, and he's in love with Jerome, his school mate, and son of his father's colleague. Initially a source of amusement, an outrage begins in their suburb when the two boys are discovered pretending to get married. The family begins to realize with horror that his desire to be a girl isn't just a little boy's fantasy. They try to make him change his mind, to no avail. The situation turns into a real-life drama of intense reactions from neighbors, friends, and teachers, resulting in a profoundly optimistic ending.
This was one of those movies I resisted seeing like a complete and utter prat, until I was dragged kicking and screaming. . . and loved it, just as I was told I would.
Don't worry, I'm still capable of being a complete and utter prat. Think I've demonstrated that quite well around here the last week or so, in fact.
Any road up, it's been a while, but from what I remember there's no good reason for that R rating. You can understand someone making a site dedicated to pointing this out.
Oddly enough, said site
is blocked by CyberPatrol(CyberLIST Checkpoint Code:1) Discovered July 2002
I'd swear, there's a moral here somewhere, but damned if I can figure it out.
Update: And somehow, I did an entry about the site, using the URL as the title, and never linked the site itself.
Apparently, being veiny and evil also makes you stupid.
Oh, and clicking the graphic up top gives you a friggin' huge version, suitable for printing.
Comments
Ma Vie En Rose is a beautiful and touching film, honestly exploring a difficult issue without specifically telling the viewer what they should think. THAT's why the bastards gave it an R rating.
Posted by: j. brotherlove | December 4, 2003 3:51 PM
Dammit, you're gonna make me rent the thing.
Eh, Women and Children First can use the money. Like the $3 I donated to not watch Antonia's Line a few days back.
So, I take it you like the movie too, then?
Posted by: Aaron | December 4, 2003 4:40 PM
You mean you still haven't seen it? Get your ass moving. If I wasn't a poor boy in Brooklyn...
Posted by: ronn | December 4, 2003 10:32 PM
Ronn, sorry, should'a been clearer about that in the entry. After a few weeks of suggesting the film and listening me whine, "But I don't waaaana see it," Heather finally shot me with a stun dart, strapped me to a chair, and forced me to watch it.
And I did like it, but since I'm veiny and evil, I can't say nice things about our time together. Hey, I don't make these rules, pal.
Er, and I'm joking about the stun dart.
She just mixes very, very strong drinks, is all.
Posted by: Aaron | December 5, 2003 6:29 AM
You're forgiven. Only because you've inspired me to go out and rent the flick again.
Posted by: ronn | December 6, 2003 8:16 PM
Ronn, tried to rent it yesterday at Women & Children First, and it was out. Probably some bastard who reads this. Screw you, buddy, screw you!
So I got Antonia's Line again instead. I'm going to actually watch it this time. Or keep it an extra day and pay the $1 late fee, instead of returning it and then turning around and renting it a third time. I am dumb.
Actually, can do that now, since the updates from Debian security are going to take about two hours to download. Dialup. Again I ask, how do people live like this?
Posted by: Aaron | December 7, 2003 11:21 AM