Marina de Van is a gap toothed French beauty that you would never suspect of making a movie so disturbing that I was nearly ill while watching it.
De Van wrote, directed and starred in the French film, In My Skin. It's the story of a young woman who after suffering some deep gashes to her leg from an accidental fall, becomes preoccupied with her body and skin, especially her wounds. It isn't long before she is incising wounds directly and aggressively into her own body.
In 1993 Marina de Van became a student at the French school for cinematic studies. There she directed and wrote short movies as well as working as an actress and a writer with fellow FEMIS student director Franois Ozon. She has worked with Ozon on 6 projects as both writer and actress including See the Sea and 8 Women.
Many have compared In My Skin to the work of David Cronenberg or the French film The Piano Teacher but In My Skin is different. While de Van claims her character is not representative of female sexuality it is impossible to ignore that this is a woman is claiming her body as her own. She won't let a doctor look at her wounds but wants to find out what her body can feel. She cannot feel like a normal person anymore and is very curious. She wants to open her body, taste it and feast on it because it belongs to her and no one can tell her otherwise. She becomes so obsessed with cutting herself she even does it under the table at an important business dinner.
We all have our obsessions; the nature of SuicideGirls almost guarantees that we all have first hand experience with the people who cut themselves. But de Van claims that isn't what In My Skin is about. It's a very feminist movie about taking control of the one thing we actually own, our bodies. In My Skin opens November 7th. If people wonder about the strange cadence of de Van's answers it is because we were communicating through a translator.
Check out the website for
In My Skin.
Daniel Robert Epstein: I liked the movie very much. It's very intense. I think it was Woody Allen who said that he likes to act in his movies because its one less person he has to talk to. Why did you put yourself in the lead role?
Marina de Van: What Woody Allen said could very well be the case and maybe it is one less person to speak to. But it's very difficult as a director to direct yourself. It was something that was a question for me. The theme of this film is very close to me so it seemed very logical that I would be the person to play the role.
Also because the film deals with this whole question of yourself and looking at your body that this is the way for me to deal with the extension of that idea. I've been thinking about it for a long time.
What she does with her knife is what I do with my camera.
DRE: I did get a chance to speak with David Cronenberg and his films are also very personal. I always thought that he liked to tweak his audience and play with them. When I asked him about that he said for him to play with his audience would be to play with his own thoughts and ideas which he does not want to do. How would you respond to something like that?
MDV: It really depends on what you interpret as playing with the audience. If it is an interpretation to attack or titillate them then no. If you look at playing with the audience as every work of art has to do and cinema especially then because you want the film to engage the audience to get their attention, to have them have an experience themselves by watching the film. In that sense I do that and if I wasn't interested in doing that then I might as well be drawing on a piece of paper.
Also when you are the director of the film you are the first spectator as well and you are in fact playing with your own self.
DRE: We don't see a reason why the character starts to cut. It almost feels like her background could be anyone's background. Could anyone fall into what she starts doing?
MDV: It's actually not really correct to say that there is no explanation as to why she starts doing what she does. There's not a specific analysis of why but there is a very specific event which triggers what happens to her. It's the accident she has where she is confronted in a brutal way of her cutting her leg and not feeling it. So she is confronted with the idea of herself and her body so that puts the cutting into a context. This is a triggering event. But to say this could be common to everyone, in a sense this may be true, but every person would not experience this because not everyone will have this triggering event.
DRE: In America at least female sexuality has been so commercialized. It may seem with this film, while it is very personal, but also you may be saying lets see what the commercial world can do with something like this.
MDV: Actually my film is not about female sexuality at all. It's not something that I am considering. My film also does not address the broader issue of female sexuality in society. The idea of making a film that is intentionally provocative to large corporations is something that was not my intention. The film is really something that was very personal and was done on that level. I understand now that it's very common to include this element of female sexuality in a lot of films but in this film it is not a question of her gender and it's not a question of her sexuality.
DRE: JG Ballard wrote the very autobiographical book Empire of the Sun but he has always said that Crash is his true inner biography. Is that how In my Skin is autobiographical?
MDV: Well yeah probably. It's possible to speak of my films as autobiographical but I've made only one feature length film, maybe my next film will be even more autobiographical. It's autobiographical in the sense that it's something that's most basic in myself at that moment. But for the next film who knows?
DRE: I read that this started as a short script then you expanded it. What made you do that?
MDV: Yes that's true. It was the self mutilation scene with the divided screen that was to be the short. But when I saw the scene I thought it needed to be made rich and put into a context. The character needed to be developed to be made more rich and so the sensational aspect of it wouldn't be the focus. I developed a character and more situations so that sensational once scene wouldn't surpass what I wanted to do with the film.
DRE: The phenomenon of mostly young women cutting themselves is very prevalent in America. I don't know about France. Is this film related to that?
MDV: You are very correct in asking this question. When I make a film I am not really interested in the broader questions of society. I don't even know if cutting is a phenomenon. What I am interested in is a personal story. The term self mutilation encompasses a great deal. When the teenage girls cut themselves and see the blood flow there is some sort of release. But if you were to look around do you see other people that are eating themselves or cutting pieces of their skin and having it tanned? That is not classified as a phenomenon. In a way this term self mutilation is being used to cover too many things not all of which are connected with my story. Also my character is not the same age as these young women who cut themselves. I am in my 30's.
DRE: What was it like on set? You must have trusted your crew a great deal.
MDV: Yes I had to establish real relationships with my crew because I depended on them. I do a lot of preparation. Everything is very detailed and nothing is improvised. In order to do that I really had to rely on my cinematographer. I was able to establish a very intense working relationship with him so that my every intention of mine would be clear.
DRE: Is this first feature what all your work has been leading up to or just what you did at the time?
MDV: Each time I make a film it's the culmination of the work that's gone before. Perhaps each time I make a film it will be the culmination of everything from before it. But also its something that does exist in that moment. Probably the best time to ask this question will be ten years from now.
DRE: Correct me if I'm wrong but I read that a student film of yours involved with a family orgy with your real life father.
MDV: It's not a family orgy. But its parents who interrupt their daughter in the act of fellatio with one of her friends. When they see what she is doing they begin to instruct her how to do it in a way that's more elegant and refined. Then the parents treat it as giving her a lesson in how to do this much in the same way we would teach our children to have good table manners.
DRE: What were you like growing up?
MDV: Very neurotic.
DRE: Has doing your art helped you get over some of your neuroses?
MDV: Can't you see how relaxed I am? [laughs]
DRE: Have you always been an artist?
MDV: Yes. Although its very pretentious to say I was an artist. Maybe just someone who engaged in artistic activities. But even when I was a child I was always writing and painting. It seemed very obvious to me that this would be the trajectory my life would follow.
DRE: How did you first meet Franois Ozon?
MDV: At school. He was just graduating when I first entered.
DRE: What do you do when you're not working?
MDV: Sports. I take group aerobics classes. Some dance classes but what I do mainly is Ashtanga yoga which is a very energetic yoga. Its kind of like a power yoga where you don't stay in the poses. I do it everyday. For me physical activity is very important. I also read.
DRE: Anything interesting lately?
MDV: Noam Chomsky lately.
DRE: Any tattoos?
MDV: No tattoos. I don't have anything against them. It's not the way I see to beautify my body.
DRE: I heard some people have been walking out of screenings. Is it good to have that reaction or do you wish they would see the whole thing?
MDV: When I make a film I try to make it the best way possible and for people to see it the best way possible. Once they start to view it whether they stay to the end or not its their way of living and its not something I can be concerned with. It's not up to me for how these people will react.
by Daniel Robert Epstein
De Van wrote, directed and starred in the French film, In My Skin. It's the story of a young woman who after suffering some deep gashes to her leg from an accidental fall, becomes preoccupied with her body and skin, especially her wounds. It isn't long before she is incising wounds directly and aggressively into her own body.
In 1993 Marina de Van became a student at the French school for cinematic studies. There she directed and wrote short movies as well as working as an actress and a writer with fellow FEMIS student director Franois Ozon. She has worked with Ozon on 6 projects as both writer and actress including See the Sea and 8 Women.
Many have compared In My Skin to the work of David Cronenberg or the French film The Piano Teacher but In My Skin is different. While de Van claims her character is not representative of female sexuality it is impossible to ignore that this is a woman is claiming her body as her own. She won't let a doctor look at her wounds but wants to find out what her body can feel. She cannot feel like a normal person anymore and is very curious. She wants to open her body, taste it and feast on it because it belongs to her and no one can tell her otherwise. She becomes so obsessed with cutting herself she even does it under the table at an important business dinner.
We all have our obsessions; the nature of SuicideGirls almost guarantees that we all have first hand experience with the people who cut themselves. But de Van claims that isn't what In My Skin is about. It's a very feminist movie about taking control of the one thing we actually own, our bodies. In My Skin opens November 7th. If people wonder about the strange cadence of de Van's answers it is because we were communicating through a translator.
Check out the website for
In My Skin.
Daniel Robert Epstein: I liked the movie very much. It's very intense. I think it was Woody Allen who said that he likes to act in his movies because its one less person he has to talk to. Why did you put yourself in the lead role?
Marina de Van: What Woody Allen said could very well be the case and maybe it is one less person to speak to. But it's very difficult as a director to direct yourself. It was something that was a question for me. The theme of this film is very close to me so it seemed very logical that I would be the person to play the role.
Also because the film deals with this whole question of yourself and looking at your body that this is the way for me to deal with the extension of that idea. I've been thinking about it for a long time.
What she does with her knife is what I do with my camera.
DRE: I did get a chance to speak with David Cronenberg and his films are also very personal. I always thought that he liked to tweak his audience and play with them. When I asked him about that he said for him to play with his audience would be to play with his own thoughts and ideas which he does not want to do. How would you respond to something like that?
MDV: It really depends on what you interpret as playing with the audience. If it is an interpretation to attack or titillate them then no. If you look at playing with the audience as every work of art has to do and cinema especially then because you want the film to engage the audience to get their attention, to have them have an experience themselves by watching the film. In that sense I do that and if I wasn't interested in doing that then I might as well be drawing on a piece of paper.
Also when you are the director of the film you are the first spectator as well and you are in fact playing with your own self.
DRE: We don't see a reason why the character starts to cut. It almost feels like her background could be anyone's background. Could anyone fall into what she starts doing?
MDV: It's actually not really correct to say that there is no explanation as to why she starts doing what she does. There's not a specific analysis of why but there is a very specific event which triggers what happens to her. It's the accident she has where she is confronted in a brutal way of her cutting her leg and not feeling it. So she is confronted with the idea of herself and her body so that puts the cutting into a context. This is a triggering event. But to say this could be common to everyone, in a sense this may be true, but every person would not experience this because not everyone will have this triggering event.
DRE: In America at least female sexuality has been so commercialized. It may seem with this film, while it is very personal, but also you may be saying lets see what the commercial world can do with something like this.
MDV: Actually my film is not about female sexuality at all. It's not something that I am considering. My film also does not address the broader issue of female sexuality in society. The idea of making a film that is intentionally provocative to large corporations is something that was not my intention. The film is really something that was very personal and was done on that level. I understand now that it's very common to include this element of female sexuality in a lot of films but in this film it is not a question of her gender and it's not a question of her sexuality.
DRE: JG Ballard wrote the very autobiographical book Empire of the Sun but he has always said that Crash is his true inner biography. Is that how In my Skin is autobiographical?
MDV: Well yeah probably. It's possible to speak of my films as autobiographical but I've made only one feature length film, maybe my next film will be even more autobiographical. It's autobiographical in the sense that it's something that's most basic in myself at that moment. But for the next film who knows?
DRE: I read that this started as a short script then you expanded it. What made you do that?
MDV: Yes that's true. It was the self mutilation scene with the divided screen that was to be the short. But when I saw the scene I thought it needed to be made rich and put into a context. The character needed to be developed to be made more rich and so the sensational aspect of it wouldn't be the focus. I developed a character and more situations so that sensational once scene wouldn't surpass what I wanted to do with the film.
DRE: The phenomenon of mostly young women cutting themselves is very prevalent in America. I don't know about France. Is this film related to that?
MDV: You are very correct in asking this question. When I make a film I am not really interested in the broader questions of society. I don't even know if cutting is a phenomenon. What I am interested in is a personal story. The term self mutilation encompasses a great deal. When the teenage girls cut themselves and see the blood flow there is some sort of release. But if you were to look around do you see other people that are eating themselves or cutting pieces of their skin and having it tanned? That is not classified as a phenomenon. In a way this term self mutilation is being used to cover too many things not all of which are connected with my story. Also my character is not the same age as these young women who cut themselves. I am in my 30's.
DRE: What was it like on set? You must have trusted your crew a great deal.
MDV: Yes I had to establish real relationships with my crew because I depended on them. I do a lot of preparation. Everything is very detailed and nothing is improvised. In order to do that I really had to rely on my cinematographer. I was able to establish a very intense working relationship with him so that my every intention of mine would be clear.
DRE: Is this first feature what all your work has been leading up to or just what you did at the time?
MDV: Each time I make a film it's the culmination of the work that's gone before. Perhaps each time I make a film it will be the culmination of everything from before it. But also its something that does exist in that moment. Probably the best time to ask this question will be ten years from now.
DRE: Correct me if I'm wrong but I read that a student film of yours involved with a family orgy with your real life father.
MDV: It's not a family orgy. But its parents who interrupt their daughter in the act of fellatio with one of her friends. When they see what she is doing they begin to instruct her how to do it in a way that's more elegant and refined. Then the parents treat it as giving her a lesson in how to do this much in the same way we would teach our children to have good table manners.
DRE: What were you like growing up?
MDV: Very neurotic.
DRE: Has doing your art helped you get over some of your neuroses?
MDV: Can't you see how relaxed I am? [laughs]
DRE: Have you always been an artist?
MDV: Yes. Although its very pretentious to say I was an artist. Maybe just someone who engaged in artistic activities. But even when I was a child I was always writing and painting. It seemed very obvious to me that this would be the trajectory my life would follow.
DRE: How did you first meet Franois Ozon?
MDV: At school. He was just graduating when I first entered.
DRE: What do you do when you're not working?
MDV: Sports. I take group aerobics classes. Some dance classes but what I do mainly is Ashtanga yoga which is a very energetic yoga. Its kind of like a power yoga where you don't stay in the poses. I do it everyday. For me physical activity is very important. I also read.
DRE: Anything interesting lately?
MDV: Noam Chomsky lately.
DRE: Any tattoos?
MDV: No tattoos. I don't have anything against them. It's not the way I see to beautify my body.
DRE: I heard some people have been walking out of screenings. Is it good to have that reaction or do you wish they would see the whole thing?
MDV: When I make a film I try to make it the best way possible and for people to see it the best way possible. Once they start to view it whether they stay to the end or not its their way of living and its not something I can be concerned with. It's not up to me for how these people will react.
by Daniel Robert Epstein
I really like In My Skin and can't to see more from de Van.