The fact Linda Henry (Theresa Russell) wears this color exclusively through-out the film is why Im bumping this up to an 8. (her acting is really great in many scenes, then in some where a wonky southern accent is implemented, shes still decent.)
Also, the fact most of the reviewers didnt seem to figure out what was going on in this film is reason enough. To be fair, if I had seen this movie 20, or even 10 years ago I would have most likely been confused as well.
However, this movie gives us enough clues, like her talking like a child to her husband, or being pouty and agnry, along w/ her obsession with wearing lavender, as well as her husbands (Christopher Lloyd) train hobby obsession, his job, and his sexual fetish w/ a mistress, lets us know where its going, but it wont be a boring ride. Not to mention Gary Oldman and what happens when his character becomes a figment of her decreasing mental state, yet.
The complaint this is a movie we've seen before but just done differently, doesnt seem fair. Yes, we've seen this movie before, a woman, a victim of rape as a teen which ends in a pregnancy. The child is torn from her arms at birth, never to be seen from again. Yup, sounds EXACTLY like an early Lifetime movie, but thanks to Potters script and Roeg's direction it is much more than that.
After a chance encounter with her friend (Collen Camp) at a restaurant with a hitchhiker (the only time anyone who knows Linda sees Oldmans character w/ her before her fragmenting mental state begins) who reminds her of the man who knocked her up, which is originally portrayed as consensual sex act, but she starts to mentally crack, a full on hemorrhage occurs after her husband leaves to go to work the next morning after they have what we are told, another failed argument, as she wants a child of her own and he does not. The moment he leaves the house she has a complete nervous breakdown, the rest of the movie is her imaging having a relationship w/ said hitchhiker character who also reminds her of her rapist.
In my opinion, this is where the sexually charged scenes come from (she IS a neglected wife and Oldmans character reminds her of someone she had a child with) The scenes of Oldmans character acting like a child seems to be when she breaks from being sexual, as she is more tired and confused, as a mother would be, in those scenes. (Freud would have a field day with these scenes)
In one of the final scenes she is getting dressed but ignores one of the lavender dresses she had crumpled up on the bed, and instead wore a WHITE DRESS instead. If anyone reading this grew up in a Christian church, you know the symbolism of that color in that faith, as being "born again" acts as purge against former sins, making you "cleansed and without spot" as the Bible says.
So as Linda drives away from her past life the metaphor being shown us is she has cleansed herself of that unhappy life, and is ready to be born again with a new life.
Also, the fact most of the reviewers didnt seem to figure out what was going on in this film is reason enough. To be fair, if I had seen this movie 20, or even 10 years ago I would have most likely been confused as well.
However, this movie gives us enough clues, like her talking like a child to her husband, or being pouty and agnry, along w/ her obsession with wearing lavender, as well as her husbands (Christopher Lloyd) train hobby obsession, his job, and his sexual fetish w/ a mistress, lets us know where its going, but it wont be a boring ride. Not to mention Gary Oldman and what happens when his character becomes a figment of her decreasing mental state, yet.
The complaint this is a movie we've seen before but just done differently, doesnt seem fair. Yes, we've seen this movie before, a woman, a victim of rape as a teen which ends in a pregnancy. The child is torn from her arms at birth, never to be seen from again. Yup, sounds EXACTLY like an early Lifetime movie, but thanks to Potters script and Roeg's direction it is much more than that.
After a chance encounter with her friend (Collen Camp) at a restaurant with a hitchhiker (the only time anyone who knows Linda sees Oldmans character w/ her before her fragmenting mental state begins) who reminds her of the man who knocked her up, which is originally portrayed as consensual sex act, but she starts to mentally crack, a full on hemorrhage occurs after her husband leaves to go to work the next morning after they have what we are told, another failed argument, as she wants a child of her own and he does not. The moment he leaves the house she has a complete nervous breakdown, the rest of the movie is her imaging having a relationship w/ said hitchhiker character who also reminds her of her rapist.
In my opinion, this is where the sexually charged scenes come from (she IS a neglected wife and Oldmans character reminds her of someone she had a child with) The scenes of Oldmans character acting like a child seems to be when she breaks from being sexual, as she is more tired and confused, as a mother would be, in those scenes. (Freud would have a field day with these scenes)
In one of the final scenes she is getting dressed but ignores one of the lavender dresses she had crumpled up on the bed, and instead wore a WHITE DRESS instead. If anyone reading this grew up in a Christian church, you know the symbolism of that color in that faith, as being "born again" acts as purge against former sins, making you "cleansed and without spot" as the Bible says.
So as Linda drives away from her past life the metaphor being shown us is she has cleansed herself of that unhappy life, and is ready to be born again with a new life.