I don't know what is more depressing: that the great John Sayles crafted this piece of cartoon character lesbian propaganda or that people today who have the tremendous increase in psychological knowledge available to them and should know better still can't see that Sayles was glorifying a narcissist.
The "hero" of our film, Liannna, is attracted to emotionally unavailable people of either sex. Yet she takes no responsibility for her sick actions. She has no problem with unethical behavior, whether it be having sexual relationships with authority figures or a meaningless one-night stand of loveless sex with a stranger. Are we to stand up and cheer because she learns to act like her sexual predator husband in the bar? Lianna trades a loveless marriage with Dick for a loveless lesbian affair with Ruth. She abandons her two young children for a life of hedonism and doesn't give her devastating actions a second thought. All that matters is her being a naughty and daring pioneer for the sexual revolution. By the end of the film Lianna finds out everyone else is just as self-centered as she is.
The sad conclusion drawn from watching Lianna is that John Sayles betrayed his audience. He used our moral outrage at Dick's unconscionable behavior to justify Lianna's initial actions, but she turns into another Dick. But now I know why he had to resort to such a cheap cinematic trick to engage the audience: throughout the rest of the film Sayles fails to make the case that this life is worth examining or this character is worth caring about.
The "hero" of our film, Liannna, is attracted to emotionally unavailable people of either sex. Yet she takes no responsibility for her sick actions. She has no problem with unethical behavior, whether it be having sexual relationships with authority figures or a meaningless one-night stand of loveless sex with a stranger. Are we to stand up and cheer because she learns to act like her sexual predator husband in the bar? Lianna trades a loveless marriage with Dick for a loveless lesbian affair with Ruth. She abandons her two young children for a life of hedonism and doesn't give her devastating actions a second thought. All that matters is her being a naughty and daring pioneer for the sexual revolution. By the end of the film Lianna finds out everyone else is just as self-centered as she is.
The sad conclusion drawn from watching Lianna is that John Sayles betrayed his audience. He used our moral outrage at Dick's unconscionable behavior to justify Lianna's initial actions, but she turns into another Dick. But now I know why he had to resort to such a cheap cinematic trick to engage the audience: throughout the rest of the film Sayles fails to make the case that this life is worth examining or this character is worth caring about.