Lianna (1983)
Lianna, directed by John Sayles, starring Linda Griffith as the titular Lianna and Jane Hallaren as her mistress/mentor marked a major turning point in the representation of lesbians and queer themes in Hollywood. The film follows Lianna, a mother and housewife to her unfaithful former professor who embarks on an affair of her own where she discovers and embraces her lesbian sexual identity. She falls in love with her child psychology professor Ruth, who she leaves her husband, Jerry, to be with. Eventually, she comes to terms with living on her own, understanding that she can’t be with Ruth.
36 years ago, the social climate was indescribably different when it came to LGBTQ issues. This was before gay marriage, before AIDS even really took off, so mere discussion of these issues was hard to come by, especially in mainstream film. Sayles mentions in an interview that actresses would say yes and then “had to say no because their agent said, ‘No, no, you don’t want to be in a low-budget movie playing a lesbian’”. That was the atmosphere at the time, and lesbians were viewed generally as a fringe minority, an abnormal, amoral subculture. John Sayles’ goal here was to bring light to the stigma and challenges queer, specifically lesbian, people face, and bring a human face to the lesbian community.
The first thing to note about this film is the extremely traditional cinematography. Though Sayles described the film as low budget, the camerawork is reminiscent of any mainline romance/drama flick, and cinematographer Austin De Besche weaves the camera effortlessly through the scene, to the point you never think twice about it. Shots with one actor are nearly always center frame, if there’s two actors in the shot they fall along the rule of thirds lines perfectly. Skip to any part of the clip below to see what I mean. This, in my view, must have been intentional; although it might seem like “boring” standard cinematography, the goal was to normalize alternative types of love on the big screen. What better way than shooting it like a completely “normal” romance film?
One interesting aspect of this movie was the reaction by radical queer activists to what I saw as an overwhelmingly positive portrayal of a lesbian relationship. Lisa DiCaprio, for Jump Cut, called the film “the essence of the liberal conception of lesbians which promotes tolerance but does not question the institution of compulsory heterosexuality itself”. She criticized Sayles for his use of stereotypes like an older lesbian seducing a younger one, and for not tackling the economic and political oppression of homosexuals. DiCaprio’s criticism was honestly riveting, and I think it speaks to the context of the film. Sayles was not attempting to redefine society’s sexual expectations. He is neither a lesbian nor an activist, he’s a storyteller, and he told this story at a time when even the word lesbian would repel a vast majority of the public. His mission was to promote tolerance and equality, and though some see this as an exploitation, I think for the director and most of the audience understood the sincere intentions of the film.
However, after reading this Vulture article I think I understand DiCaprio’s criticism a lot better. It’s a dissatisfaction with the idea that homosexuals are essentially the same as their heterosexual counterparts. The idea that you could make Titanic with two male leads and it would be functionally identical. Obviously this is not the case, to do so one would have to rewrite the centuries of oppression and stigma that queer people have faced. But this is essentially what Lianna does — it sells a garden variety airbrushed romance to a community that takes pride in being different. It’s nice to tell queer stories, but when packaged like this, “it’s just evidence that gay people can be commercially viable, too”. And the last thing a gay activist wants is to see their authentic subculture co-opted and marketed by global capitalism. However, as someone who grew up watching Glee, I have some bad news for the true revolutionaries out there.
