Jay
Movie Review (a 2019 old school review)
The Watermelon Woman
The Watermelon Woman is a film that really advocated for the unspoken, unacknowledged Black women in film and even included Black queer women. This film caused people to think about things they had not thought about in terms of what they see in films and what they knew about people within those films. The stylistic choices, the ability to make something so important but not told in such a boring/informational way, and the uniqueness really brought out the meanings behind the film which leads viewers to question what they have been ignoring. The way that everything centers around one question: Who were the people who should be acknowledged that have not been, and how do we accept information so readily without doing our own research? Films have a great way of changing our thought processes and causing us to consider things we never would have before viewing it.
To begin, the film was set in Philadelphia in the 90s. It has such a 90s vibe to it. The clothing was old school, the warm color grading and naturalistic approach to lighting really set the scene. It allows the audience to disconnect from the present for a little while until they get into what the story is about. Although the film was made back then, it explored the 1930s too.
When the “documentary” would go back into the 1930s and pretend as though we were viewing the women the black protagonist (Cheryl) was trying to find out about, it would switch to black and white because the films were in black and white back then. It was also to show that when one thinks of that time, one would think of black and white. It was quite interesting/confusing how they would include little clips of acting. The question would be if Cheryl found actual clips of The Watermelon Woman (Richards), or if she hired other women to portray the characters for her documentary. The dressing would go back to their time period too (long black sparkly gowns when the white woman was with Richards). There were the old timey, fabulous hats too.
The main character was a Black woman who was also queer. That is something that is rarely seen even today. It is typically one or the other, if either. Putting both minority groups onto one person, was something that really helped everything in this film connect, not to mention the fact that the supporting casts were mainly Black and queer (the two white women were in the LGBTQ+ group too). The idea of having black women who are out of the closet seen in the 90s, is something that is not typically seen. Then, they took it even further. The film explored an out and Black woman who was a film director. She was opening up the life of a semi closeted black actress/singer in a time period that saw being gay was even more of a taboo idea/subject. Her sexuality was incredibly important in the film, but so was her color. The only reason she found out the other woman was gay, was because she found a fim of her that she was not even credited for.
That goes into the next topic to discuss. Back then it was very common to see black women play the role as “mamy/mammy/mamie.” That was Black womens’ major roles because Black people were not seen as the targeted audience and were not seen as people who should have leading roles. For a movie to discuss this in a way that was not like pointing fingers or in dead tones, made the subject easier to take in. It still is sad that a lot of people really did not get the credit they deserve for working on the films, and were treated worst. The film allowed a “documentary” type of filming for this matter because it is more serious in a way. Yet, the actresses, the choice of having the main character step away from the character to dance and hangout with friends, and chat like she was not on the brink of something incredibly deep, made it more lighthearted so it drew the audience in more (if they are not into full on deep documentaries).It is quite unique to have a documentary that was not really a documentary. Throughout the film it kind of gives clues that this “documentary” is not even real per se because by the end (if the person did not realize this beforehand) Cheryl had a message that pretty much pointed out that it was a fiction. It was just to get one to realize there are so many actresses/actors who did not get recognition for their roles/did not get big roles. There are people whose lives go without mention due to their color or if they are homosexual. Cheryl created her project to better understand Richards, and came to understand herself more throughout it too. Cheryl’s finding out about the woman, came at the right time for her in her life.
The people who viewed this film for the first real screening, were confused as to if it was a real documentary or not/felt fooled. She then included the short message at the end that still could lead one to second guess if it is real or not/ but was pretty good at saying it was fiction and was just getting the person to view things differently. This bothered many viewers, but the choice to form the movie as a documentary instead of a outwardly telling the audience the problem they should be looking at, highlighted another problem. How do you so readily accept information without doing research for yourself?
To speak personally: this film came at the right time for me too. It is something I really needed to see as a black film person who is in the LGBTQ+ community too. It made me question how I get my information, what I so readily accept, who I must have looked over, and I am sure it did the same for others too. I have seen queer women in shows and movies but never a Black one till this year with a show, and then to see a Black queer woman who was also portrayed (and was a one in real life) as a cineamotographer/ director/writer. So, seeing someone like myself was great. But, it caused me to realize I never seeked out more information on Black actresses from the past, or questioned why many names were not in credits because I rarely looked for them, yet I knew the main character’s name.
In conclusion, The Watermelon Woman was a film that brought awareness to those who were in film that went unappreciated. People still do today. There are more films with minorities in it, but there should be more and they should be talked about more. It allows one to think about something important that holds weight without feeling so bored or like they are being talked at. It just challenges a person to get information, and do their own research while pointing a flashlight at them in a less harsh way. Who are those people and why were they not able to get the attention they deserved? How does film change the way you process information, and are you accepting of it without question? Everything we view and take in, has potential to shape what we think.
Comments