Revisiting ‘Girl’

**the following article contains spoilers**

            Back in November, I watched and reviewed a Belgian film called Girl, which tells the story of a transgirl transitioning in the middle of high school, and her struggles as she grows increasingly frustrated with the slow pace of change she has to endure.  I gave the film 4 out of 4 stars in my review, lauding it as powerful, authentic, and deep.  And I was content to leave it at that.

            And then a month later I found out just how sharply controversial the film has been since it started making the festival rounds.  This was already simmering around the time I wrote my review- the film won numerous awards at Cannes- but really got kicked up a gear when Netflix picked the film up for distribution and it was nominated for a Golden Globe, with a potential Oscar nomination around the corner (although the film later failed to make the Academy shortlist). 

            Since the heated debate surrounding the film centers around the very end, I will be up front about the main spoiler; the film ends with Lara committing self-castration.  This is the scene I was referring to in my original review when I said this film was the first in years to force me to look away from the screen.  What I failed to consider in my review is that, just because a movie is cinematically effective, this is not inherently good; something can, after all, be effective in both positive and negative ways. 

            This was thrown into sharp relief for me when I was made aware of just how strong the backlash towards the film had gotten, with one writer going so far as to call it “trans trauma porn.”  The multitude of shots that center around Lara’s genitals, the fact that both the director and lead actor were cisgender men, and accusations that trans critics were being ignored in the film’s press screenings and marketing efforts were all part of major pushback against the film’s handling of subject matter and the larger backdrop of its release and awards-season attention. 

            Obviously, though, the concerns that hit the hardest are those from actual trans writers and critics.  Trans activist Cathy Brennan said she felt “sickened” and “horrified” watching the film, and trans journalist Oliver Whitney called it “the most dangerous movie about a trans character in years.”  Another trans critic, Samantha Allen, wrote a powerful piece placing the film within a larger context of Hollywood’s tradition of elevating trans stories that center around suffering, as opposed to telling stories that are more joyous or life-affirming. 

            This is really, really heavy stuff, and I soon found myself deeply regretting my support for the film, wondering if I’d made a huge mistake.  I was very close to deleting the review and disavowing the film entirely.  Then, though, I found out that the real-life transperson who inspired the film, Nora Monsecour, supports the film; she’s friends with the director and was actively involved in its production.  While the director, of course, has pushed back against the criticism, I find his defense far less convincing than the one offered by Monsecour herself, who published her own rebuttal to the backlash in the Hollywood Reporter.  She defends the film as being an accurate representation of her struggles with transitioning, and criticized attacks on the film as an effort to silence her identity and her story. 

            This makes things a bit less black-and-white than I’d first assumed; Monsecour’s is the one defense of the film that, I feel, cannot be so readily dismissed.  However, I also realize that one op-ed from a particular film's subject is not in and of itself absolution from criticism or condemnation, especially from others within a community said film purports to represent. 

            That said, I myself am in no position to say where there is "wrong" or "right" here; it just isn't my place to offer final judgement when one transperson says a film represents them and another, or many others, say it misrepresents or even harms them.  What I can do is to admit my own mistakes with a heartfelt “mea culpa,” since it simply did not occur to me to do background research on the film or transpeople’s tractions to it before writing my review.  I did not consider that, as “effective” as the film’s ending might be, it has potentially harmful real-world consequences regardless of what the filmmakers intended.  That was a dumb mistake, plain and simple, and that is on me.   

            I will not delete or alter my original review, since I feel that would be disingenuous, but after reading through the critiques from trans writers, I decided I could not be silent and certainly could no longer vocally support the film as I otherwise might have done.  So the review and my rating stand, but with this attached disclaimer saying that I will no longer actively promote it. 

            Should you decide to see it, though- regardless of your identity- then make sure to inform yourself afterwards on what the trans-community has to say about it.  It's the very least we can all do. 

-Noah Franc