I hate having to assign meaning to art (I subscribe to the belief that art is simply just art; just like life is just life. Its very existence is meaningful), but even then I really have to know: what was the point of Léon?
Honestly, halfway through the film, when the perversion of the love story began sinking in, that’s when I started to really question the purpose of this film as a story. I can understand the aesthetic pleasure of this film. It is a beautifully shot film, whether that is the color scheme or the use of wide-shots, and the film itself is undoubtedly a work of art, from its backing track to the visuals.
I just don’t understand the purpose, however, of creating a story about an assassin’s love for a little girl?
Sure, there could be deeper societal meanings behind this story. Maybe it’s a story about being outsiders, and how Leon has never grown up and how Mathilda has never been young. Maybe it’s a story about the ludicrousness of society, how the purest love a young girl has ever felt is not from the father who beat her or the mother who neglected her, but instead from a killer. But even those themes I think I am reaching. I could support them if push came to shove, but should the deeper emotions of a film be based on something that is inherently bad?
I don’t care if he didn’t have sex with her, just as I don’t care that she fell in love with him first. She is a child, and though the line we draw between children and adults can be blurry once you reach your teens, there is a huge difference between being a child in love with an adult and an adult being in love with a child. She has not seen enough to know the dangers that Leon could pose to her. She has not had enough experiences to realize why loving an assassin and an adult is dangerous. She literally thinks of cleaning as a game. Leon, on the other hand, is a full-blown adult who should know better than to encourage the teenage crushes of a girl. I’m not saying kids can’t have deeply emotional feelings. I am saying that he should know better than to encourage her now, because no matter what the purity of their relationship, I think of this relationship akin to Lolita, with very, very slight differences (that being that the pedophile in Lolita actually had sex with Lolita).
I can acknowledge the artistic value of this film. I simply don’t like the story, and think that the less stories like this there are, the better. Why make more justifications for pedophiles? Why provide young children with more examples of a “happy” child-adult romantic relationship?
Anyway. I’m rather disappointed that this film is so popular. I can’t help but remember this one line from The Right to Sex when the author says something to the effect of, what we look down upon most in society is what is most popular in porn. That is what this feels like. It feels like it is straddling the lines of morality for a bit more exposure, for a bit more attention.
I will say, though, that all of the actors in this film, especially Jean Reno (who looks so innocent that you honestly do believe that he really could be on the same mental level as Mathilda) and Gary Oldman (who is giving heavy Joker vibes that I am so here for) and Natalie Portman (the final scene she has with Jean Reno??? I can't believe this is her film debut. The girl acts like she was born to do it), are all amazing, and I was truly immersed in the story because of their portrayals.
Happy Wednesday (Wednesday is coming out today and I’m so excited!!)!!
Comments