Review: Blue is the Warmest Color
Wednesday, October 30, 2013 at 1:01PM 
Adele (Adele Exarchopolous) is voracious. We first note this when she’s devouring a huge plate of spaghetti at her family’s table. She practically hoovers it down, tomato sauce staining her mouth, before going back for seconds. She reads and writes the same way, albeit offscreen, devouring 600 page novels and writing intimate diaries. But what we see is her various oral fixations and one doesn’t eat literature. If she’s not shoving cigarettes in her mouth, it’s food (and, later, body parts). In one endearing moment she shoves a chocolate bar in her wet face during a crying jag getting a huge laugh from moviegoers who've also eaten their feelings.
Adele will eat anything but seafood. That would be a sly tongue-in-(uhhhh)cheek joke if the new lesbian drama BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOR didn’t make a point of it in two separate scenes. Instead this provocative film -- already famous round the globe for its explicit sex and post-Cannes disputes between its actresses and director – risks camp by playing it straight. It shamelessly equates oysters to ladyparts and in one scene that is either comical, ridiculous, perverse or all three, Adele’s older girlfriend Emma (Léa Seydoux) teaches her how to eat them… in front of the parents!
Guess what? She likes it.
Blue is the Warmest Color is just as insatiable as a movie. You’ll never hear it saying “no thanks, I’m full” which turns out to be (mostly) a blessing even when it feels like a curse.
The movie is based on a graphic novel [You can see some NSFW pages here] by Julie Maroh which centers on Adele, a closeted high school senior. When we first meet her she's testing the boyfriend waters and feels like she's faking it. She falls for a blue-haired college girl Emma at first sight which further confuses her. Eventually the two women begin a torrid long term affair with all the sex, love, and relationship drama that that implies.
We've seen gay coming of age tales before but Blue is... is a considerable cut above since it has the patience and audacity to really wallow in its heroines confusions and lusts. Teenage feelings need weepy submersion for authenticity; in the living you're just drowning in them! (Adele's first trip to a gay bar, for example, is so patiently explored that a rush of feelings came back to me about mine that I'd mostly forgotten.)
Director Abdellatif Kechiche's camera relentlessly stares at the young actress in tight closeup whether she’s feeling, crying, eating, talking or thinking (and in roughly that order). The camera only gives Adele/Adele a little bit of space if she’s masturbating, sleeping, or f***ing and it wants a better view. It’s tough to tell sometimes if this erotic drama is a self-indulgent leering mess or a far more sobering work of art about first loves and sexual awakenings.
But this one can say for certain: it’s bold and the actresses are on fire… and not just sexually.
Adele Excharpoulos has the rare gift of complete naturalism onscreen. She merely is… which can be oddly disconcerting since the film’s French title The Life of Adele, Chapters 1 & 2, dares to suggest that we’re watching a biopic in progress… and the actress and her character have the same name. Léa Seydoux, a rising international star (You may have already seen her in the great Farewell My Queen or as the sexy assassin in Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol), gives a more traditionally acted performance but she's no less brilliant for it. She's barely recognizable having adjusted her whole body language and look to play this butch out and proud blue-haired painter.
If the film doesn’t live up to the “masterpiece” hype coming out of Cannes where Steven Spielberg’s jury went wild for it, it does justify the unprecedented decision to give the Palme D’Or which is only ever given to the film’s auteur (French for author, an important point) to the director AND the actresses. I'd have been tempted to go one further and give just the actresses the prize and leave the writer/director drooling from his seat. (For such an acclaimed film it is curiously short on visual ideas and weirdly unshaped in its storytelling).
Still and all, this map of surprising lust and first love is gripping for all three of its hours. Adele's journey doesn't have the thrill of self-actualization that can comfort gay audiences in simpler coming out movies. Adele's journey runs deeper moving past her sexual identity (that is what it is after all) and into her actual character, which is far more personal. The girl, and thus the movie, are troubled.
See, it’s not just the oysters, the chocolate, the pussy, or even the love. From teenager to adult, Adele remains a bottomless pit of need. What will she fill herself with next? Blue is the Warmest Color has the nerve or the audacity (take your pick) to not speculate despite zeroing in on every other thought or impulse she’s had for years. Instead the movie merely watches her walk further and further away, finally escaping the camera if not herself. I guess The Life of Adele Chapter 3 happens off screen. But she'll be hard to shake. Adele is so real and vulnerable by the end of the film that she's earned your sympathy, worry, and "infinite tenderness"
Grade: B+
Oscar Chances: Voters will almost certainly be curious but can a three long contemporary gay drama find enough ardent fans among the rubberneckers. It's best and only shots, I would guess, are in Actress, Supporting Actress and Adapted Screenplay.
Reader Comments (37)
Oh boy. This is playing at my theaters on the 15th but if the Frances Ha showings were any indication, I may have to reserve a seat because when a movie is hot in New York in addition to being this high-profile, there will be large crowds.
I need this in my life right now.
I think it's an essential film. That's how much I enjoyed it, so I really appreciate your humor here. Let's not get too intense ;) It's hard not to because the movie is pure intensity and pure life. Although the heart of the film is the relationship between the two girls, I must say that I loved the long scenes with food, literature and salsa music. I assume many will consider them uneven, but I think they totally work and they give you this sense of experience that you express so beautifully at the end.
PS I also had several flashbacks to my youth. That's always scary. God, I'm old.
I just saw this on Monday and I loved it! The three hours really zip by. My viewing companion didn't know anything about the Kechiche/Seydoux feud, and I as kind of envious of her. I didn't have the heart to tell her, since the movie's so lovely, why add a filter of behind-the-scenes drama.
One thing I'm still thinking about is what happens right before the camera watches her walk away. I think that moment is the only thing in the whole movie that the audience is privy to that Adele is not, and it's such an odd break from the perspective that we'd been presented for so long, especially given how minor and possibly irrelevant it is.
i need this movie like i need an asshole right here (points to anus).
I look at this predicted line-up and all I can think is that Best Actress needs Adele. You just xan't go with all winners. A line-up in which the youngest nominee is 39 (Adams) is just not gonna happen.
"(For such an acclaimed film it is curiously short on visual ideas and weirdly unshaped in its storytelling)".
What? - Its definitely not stylized, and a a tad self indulgent, but the clear choice of framing the whole movie in an "adele medium shot" with a slightly longer lens is so precise that makes almost every scene sensual and real- its like Polansky's absurd use of wides all throughout his masterpieces (for a different effect). The gay bar scenes is perfect for it. And to guide (or some would say "push") the actresses to such performances certainly is commendable, if also reprehensible as far as we hear. I agree the actor's work is as present as the director's but there is clearly an auteurish point of view, no?
I loved the film but my one complaint will be that this film could of very easily been Rated R film and it still would of achieved what it needed to as it does with a NC-17. The sex scenes were to me were at least unnecessary and exploitative at times.But still overall a worthwhile film to catch.
I really enjoyed this when I saw it, and the impression only gets stronger with time. I'd like to see Adele in Actress, but not at the expense of Adams. While it's wonderful to see Actress so competitive this year, it's also going to be really annoying when I have multiple favorites shut out. (Lea is decidedly supporting, and considering how weak that category looks right now, I hope she has a shot as well.)
I was wild about this movie. I really would have watched 3 more hours. I want to see Chapters 3 and 4. In my perfect world, this would become like a new Before ____ series where we check in on Adele's life every 10 years.
I do agree with Kai somewhat. I think the sex scenes do over stay there welcome in some cases. I do think that the first and most graphic of them is essential as the film has been building and building to that moment for half the running time. But I wished some of the time had been taken from those to make certain scenes of youthful abandon (i.e. the gay pride parade, Adele's birthday party) longer. Those were the most powerful scenes to me.
But wow was it refreshing to see how long some of the other scenes were. When she first meets Emma in the gay bar and they have a flirtation that goes on like 15 minutes, that's so good to see.
Splendid review, Nathan. I wasn't going to see this but your review makes me want to. But I'm confused by the movie's title. I thought blue was for boys lol.
If they were to reward it, I could see Lea making it all the way. She has that Marion Cotillard ambition to cross over and her English is amazing.
i think you're underestimating its shot at a directing nom... a crazy longshot yes, but if haneke can bump off Affleck and Bigelow you just never know.
I feel like I need a cigarette after reading that.
Henry --- ummm. thank you?
Jad -- ah, ok. maybe he wins votes for directors who wish they could've been in the room for that sex scene
Bia -- i dare not hope for a Léa nomination!
will h -- really? i felt tenderness but i'm not sure i could handle it if she stays THAT lost 10 years from now!
Raf -- i don't mean that he doesn't have a point of view. just that he only has one. "short on visual ideas"... i can't believe he had those actresses giving those performances and he only ever wanted to look at them in like two different ways.
"I loved the film but my one complaint will be that this film could of very easily been Rated R film and it still would of achieved what it needed to as it does with a NC-17. The sex scenes were to me were at least unnecessary and exploitative at times.But still overall a worthwhile film to catch."
As A.O. Scott noted, the rating certificate the movie got in France was a 12 rating. As in teens are allowed to see the movie in France without a problem. The historically homophobic and sex-negative US MPAA ratings board are far too arbitrary in how they handle movies with sexuality. Cut out all of the sex scenes in this movie with violence in this movie and it gets an R in the US. We can debate the 'gaze' and if the scenes were exploitative but let's realize this movie's problem is not the ratings board of another country that is often hypocritical in dealing with sex and violence in cinema.
CMG -- that's true but even i would argue that maybe their problem is not with sex but with violence... in that UBER VIOLENT movies should also be NC-17. I'd be okay with "no teenagers" admitted to super sexually explicit movies like this IF standards were stricter for other types of "adult" material... like say language or violence or adult themes.
But it's such a weird double standard... especially since everyone has sex and sex can actually be good for you and not everyone commits violence and violence is never good for you.
we have such terrible values in the US.
I'm not terribly upset that the movie got NC-17 (I agree that the hypocrisy is too much violence getting into R-rated films, not too little sex), but the further I get from it, the more I wish the sex scenes were scaled back. I don't know if it's exploitative necessarily, but it feels a little gimmicky and like a fabricated talking point, and the film only really needs the first one.
That being said, the story is told amazingly well, and both Seydoux and Excharpoulos are firmly in my Best Actress Top 5 as it stands right now. Personal, not Oscar predictions, because I frankly don't think a movie this long, this French, and this erotic has a real shot at anything outside of the more art-friendly critics' awards.
I love the movie, but I don't think it has the slightest chance with the Academy.
Oh I am so in love with this movie. There are times when it overplays its hand (the oyster thing is a good example, anytime we see paintings would be another, and a late scene of Adèle in the shower just annoyed)--but it just worked for me. I had a whole thing written out about all the things I loved in the movie--the symbiotic nature of the truly magnificent lead performances, the way that time moves subjectively with Adele, the generosity of spirit, the unexpected but gentle turns in tone and rhythm that kept the 3 hour runtime lively, and yes, even the closeups, but then I realized I had written a novel. So I'll just leave it at this: it's my favorite film of the year, and I think its a masterpiece. I'll be banging the gong for both Adèle Exarchopoulos and Léa Seydoux all season--they're a duet for the all time books. It almost feels unfair to put them in competition with other performances.
I do think it has a shot with the Academy in acting because of the #1 vote factor. Mathematically speaking, since Cate and Lupita are going to be hogging the lion's share of #1 votes, anyone who can amass a small but passionate coalition is at an advantage. I'd actually predict Adèle at this point. Léa is a harder get, but I think she's still in the race.
Nat, it was meant as a compliment. I enjoy your reviews because I never feel like you are phoning it in as I sometimes do with other film reviewers I read, most of whom I admire and respect (a great actor can phone it in and you still get a good performance, just not as great as you know they are capable of giving). I felt that this review told me everything I need to know about the film, set the tone but didn't make me feel as if I've heard everything and no longer need to see it. It actually makes me want to see it more. Whether or not I agree with you after seeing it is another matter.
Did some research: the last time a best actress line-up had no actress under 35 was 1978. Fonda, Clayburgh, Bergman, Burtsyn, Page.
It's a very very very unlikely scenario, specially today.
Right now, we have only three contender under 35: Brie Larson, Greta Gerwig and Adele Exarcopolous.
Adele being nominated makes a lot of sense to me.
Did the research to the end: 1978 was the only year that such a scenario happened.
Cal, wow, impressive statistic. But I imagine age statistics will begin creeping up now that actresses careers are lasting a decade longer than they use to (not enough progress but definitely some!) they don't seem to suddenly be abandoned by hollywood until the late 48/49 now instead of 40.
... if this weren't a 3 hour french movie i would say she was a clear threat but i'm not so sure. It won't happen at all without the critics and I do wonder if Cate is just going to sweep all the critics prizes.
So I think Nick kind of teased it in the comments, but will you all be talking about this movie on the podcast?
Well, Adele is almost assured of an LAFCA win, right? ;-)
But I think you're right. People tend to view each Oscar season through the lens of what happened the previous year. I think that Riva's nomination last year has people forgetting how difficult it is for foreign language performances to be nominated.
I love the performance myself (really, the entire movie) and would be thrilled for it to be nominated, but I'm not holding my breath.
TB -- yes. we will.
Lea Seydoux can still make it in supporting with that category being extremely thin but she will need Adele Exarchopoulos to make it in Lead at the very least. Lea Seydoux has a lot less to do compared to Exarchopoulos but she just nailed it in her big scene and made me want to cry. I think jut by virtue of the last hour of the film, Exarchopoulos should have a good shot at a surprise nominee although the chips are stacked behind her in that being a foreign language performance not being enough, it also is a performance in a 3.5 lesbian hour relationship study drama. Let's just hope when it is all said and done Miss Exarchopoulos will continue to go on to more projects because coming out of the film, the emotionalism of her range just really stuck with me.
Even without nominations this movie will last in our imagery.
I am a lesbian and seeing this film has given me a deep disgust and rejection of seeing a morbid bastard sadly reduces us to the same old thing: mere objects of male curiosity and porn. Here there is no depth, no brilliant script, no plot, no transcendent issue... nothing more than 15 minutes of ridiculous wild sex for men with the intention of selling the movie disguised as the biggest love history story ever told, but it's only pornography. If two men have been the protagonists (or a man and a woman), the director would never have recreated in a sex scene between them like this and the movie would not have been so brightfull for critics. This movie offers nothing more than the curiosity of female homosexuality and especially the explicit images to prove it. If the couple had been heterosexual and if realistic sex had been treated in a more subtle manner, this movie never had been so praised. But of course, heterosexual critics liked it a lot and for that reason this film won Cannes. It sucks. What a shame.
Paula -- but didn't you at least admire the acting? (or maybe not). Agreed that critics often go overwild for lesbian sex movies. Sometimes it's justified (Mulholland Dr) and other times they're overdoing it (this one, which is not masterpiece despite being gripping).
Sigh. When I saw there were new comments on this review, I knew it wouldn't be pretty. I feel silly defending it on a months old post that I've already commented on several times, but I deeply identified with this movie. Was it a perfect mirror of my life as a queer woman? No, of course not. I don't expect that when I go to the movies, and frankly I'm baffled at the lack of imagination and narrowness of vision some people have shown with regards to this film (and I suppose recent lesbian cinema in general).
What I do expect is for films treating women's sexuality to care about the lives of the women involved outside of the bedroom, and I have a hard time seeing how the remaining two hours and fifty minutes of this film could be interpreted as anything but deeply empathetic and thoughtful. All due respect to Nathaniel, I think this is the great masterpiece of last year, and I expect that it will go down in history as such. I also think it's silly and kind of offensive to say that "lesbian sex movies" (as if that was all there was to this movie) are always overpraised, especially in a year that saw such great notices for Stranger By The Lake and Nymphomaniac--neither of which are as rich cinematically as this film.
Sorry, Nathaniel, but I can't admire nothing in a film with a male director abusing actresses and putting his pornish fantasies all over the screen and calling it art.
The movie was the best of the year, and that's all there is to it.
I think the author of the graphic novel Julie Maroh says it best when she comments that the sex is a “brutal and surgical display” in the film and it is very different to what is portrayed in the original story. Maroh adds that “gay and queer people laughed” as they watched it. It’s filmed in a way to appeal to young men who are (often) used to conventional pornography. It’s not convincing. There are lots of films that portray making love and sexual relationships beautifully. Maroh portrayed it beautifully. Unfortunately, a male director has perverted the key messages of the actual story. For me, that’s very disappointing.
Julie Maroh wants to give visibility to the difficulties found by a teenager during the process of her sexual acceptance, and present a great love story. And of course, no one denies the need for the sex exists, but it is treated in a completely different way: aesthetically tasteful, respect and sensitivity. The problem is not with the explicit sex whenever it's justified and well presented. The problem is when it was decided to show THIS WAY, through a lengthy scene with the sole purpose of creating curiosity and controversy. Which is the need of that? To provide a catalog of sexual positions to the audience? Those who have true sensitivity deeply despise this movie, so absurd and offensive as having made Ingrid Bergman fucking during 15 minutes in "Casablanca" (I don't need to see it to understand their passion, so why with Adele and Emma we need to see seven orgasms to "understand" their desire? Does Kechiche believe we are idiots?)... "Blue is the warmest" is nothing more than commercial pornography disguised as hypocrite intensity. Many lesbians are very tired of hearing so many raves about this movie. If someone wants to shoot porn, well, do it, but don't lie pretending it's a different thing and don't dare to disguise it as something else. It is clear that men heterosexual love lesbian theme and they feel attracted by it very much, but it's so obvious to deny it later with such hypocrisy that we feel offended and outraged. The type who is excited watching sex between two women is as old as the world, and this movie feeds the same fantasy inside porn ones. This director has used lesbians through a film that is nothing more than a sexist and morbid appropriation.
The true talent of a director is his ability to show something without having to resort to the easiest resources but suggesting them. The film would have won in strength and universal message, not stay in a concessive and superficiality plane. Of course, without these very provocative scenes would not have caused so much excitement in the review.
We all know very well what has been the main attraction of this movie: the lesbian themes and sex scenes, without them nobody had talked about this film. Try to substitute one of the girls by a boy, the film would have passed completely unnoticed. Precisely people has talked so much about it for being two women, if we change one of them for a guy, what remains? A deep story or anything extraordinary? Here is no plot, no depth, no brilliant script, no powerful message... only sex. With excellent original story that he could have done, with a truly, wonderful and profound original work, Kechiche stayed in the easiest (why remove that scene, vital to the plot, expulsion from home by their parents? That scene itself that was necessary and not that other of the "scissors"), I find it very sad.
In short: this is a perfect example of how to reduce a fantastic original material into shit and hypocritically want to sell it as art. With an unbelievable story he had in his hands, and a great plot to develop, Kechiche wasted footage in scissors and cunnilingus to the delight of critics and straight wankers.
We, as lesbians, have struggled a lot to achieve respect from society since past years (and it still costs a lot) and suddenly we see exposed ourselves and visible only to promote male erotic myth. It's very frustrating, because we feel as if everybody yell us when we express our disappoint: "You complain when you should applaud because we are showing lesbian life in an artistic and realistic way, you hysterical!!". The same thing when women are "forced" to acknowledge receiving the compliment on the street they have not asked for. The day we see penises on screen with the same frequency that we see boobs we will be able to talk about equality... and until I don't see a movie of the same director in which he recreates for 15 minutes in two men practicing "super justified" and " super beautiful" anal sex, I will still continue thinking that he is nothing more a vulgar onanist who has just wanted to spead out his own fantasy and many men's.