Another “pearl from the Czech New Wave,” as Criterion calls it. Daisies is a vibrantly avant-garde movie that shows a free and hedonistic lifestyle that flies in the face of the stuffy and sexist society in which it has grown. It is very much reflective of the time in which it was made (and what I would assume was the sort of Czech equivalent to the “free love” movement), but like many good satires or commentaries, it is still rather relevant many years later, at least in certain core ideas. Plus, the film employs many fun and interesting visual tricks and techniques that makes the experience more distinct and would definitely be appreciated by cinema lovers. I found it to be a very good film overall, but before I get into my thoughts, I’ll give you a brief idea of what the film is like story-wise.
What we have here is basically a series of vignettes featuring two young women, both named Marie, going on several wild, impulsive, and prankish escapades. These include the likes of engorging themselves on various foods, bathing in a tub of milk, disrupting a 20’s style performance with their drunken antics, and going on dates with older men only to mess with them the whole time and then send them off on a train to get rid of them. They enjoy these various hedonistic excursions, though they do start to notice that folks are beginning to ignore them, which ends up leading into their final fates. This summary is rather short, I know, but that’s mostly because the film doesn’t really have a typical story and I think it would be better served to discuss the segments in the next section, since I can go more into detail about my thoughts on the film and how the segments tie-in to my interpretation. So, without further ado, let’s get into the meat of things.
So, clearly the film is very reflective of the more loose and free youth cultures of the 1960’s. While there have almost always been youth movements that go against what society wants the young participants to be, the 60’s was definitely one of the major time periods for a sort of “down with the system via free and wild living” sort of behavior. In America, the hippie movement was probably the most well-known version of this idea, and while the Maries are definitely not hippies, nor are they attempting to make any sort of organized statement against the government, per se, they still embody a want to mess with authority and not cow-tow to society’s rules. In fact, if anything, they seem to be using the expectations that were placed upon women, those being a want by men for them to be brainless and childlike, to their advantage, as they clearly like to take older men out on dates, only to act completely immature and “embarrass them,” and then dump them off on a train to get rid of them. They’re basically playing into these guys’ fantasies, only to shatter them and make them see how shitty they are (though I’m not sure if the guys actually realize this or not, as most of the time, they still leave on the train thinking that it’s a heartfelt goodbye for all parties when it’s obviously not). There’s a rather telling scene where the Maries are in their apartment and receive a call from a passionate butterfly collector who one of them had met earlier. During her meeting with him in his apartment, he declared how much she inspired him and all sorts of arty, flowery things, though she showed no real interest. During the phone call, he again goes into these sorts of flatteries and even declares his love for her, all while the two Maries slice up various…*ahem*…manhood-shaped foods (e.g., bananas, pickles, etc.), before accidentally hitting the receiver button and disconnecting. This definitely gives you an idea of their thoughts on the other sex and, on another front, shows a side of their indulgence. They are often shown eating throughout the film or using/wasting food in some way. In addition to the slicing scene and the scene where they’re bathing in milk, the finale of the film essentially becomes the culmination of this wasteful and hedonistic binge, though it’s sort of hard to talk about without giving it away. What I do want to say about this, though, is that I find it interesting that this sort of behavior is exhibited by characters who want to buck authority, as, in some ways, one could easily see those higher up on the class ladder acting very similarly sometimes. You know, the type of people who are too big to fail, have way too much money and resources, and can get away with being wasteful and stupid, maybe even wasteful with human lives. After all, there are several points in the film where the Maries’ actions are underscored by military-esque marching drums, and there’s repeated war footage shown throughout the film. What does this say? Is it saying that the youths who fight against the higher-ups are often no better than them? Is it saying that the Maries are only reflecting what our nations and society already act like (which is backed up by their declaration in the film that “the world is spoiled and rotten, so let’s be spoiled and rotten”)? I think this makes the film very interesting. It almost seems like it can be read in different ways, depending on how you want to take it. Is the film denigrating the society that these youths have to deal with, or is it denigrating the youths themselves? The Maries’ ultimately find that, after all that they’ve done, people have started to ignore them, and they are left on their own. Is this saying that the consequences of their actions have come back to bite them or is this a veiled placation of the state censors (this was the Iron Curtain era, after all) while actually being a condemnation of society for shunning them when they’re really no better than many leaders or upper-class folks, or even just people (and especially men, I’d assume) in general sometimes? Given that this was the ‘60s, it figures that it’s more likely on the latter end, as the authorities-that-be were definitely not ones to be followed so unquestioningly, but it is also very possible that the filmmakers were going for a nuanced approach, where society isn’t in the right, but neither are our main characters, entirely. This is why I think it’s important to look into films that aren’t so straight-forward with their presentations. They can often challenge the audience to think about things differently, and even reconsider notions that they’ve always held because “that’s just how things are.” Speaking of presentation, I do want to give praise to this film’s artistic cinematic qualities as well. There was certainly a want to try different techniques and tricks throughout this film, whether they be the use of different color filters (sometimes several shifts within one scene), a sort of stutter-cutting that acts like a dissociative version of fast-forwarding, quick-cut transitions featuring various still images and art pieces, actual fast-forwarding with trippy neon-motion lights filmed from the back of a train, and even some sort of compositing or blue-screening effect that’s used for a bit where one of the Maries “cuts off her head” and the head and body are shown separated in the same shot. I have to applaud the filmmakers for utilizing all these little tricks in a fun and interesting way, and I think that those that appreciate cinematic construction would get a kick out of it. I will say, though, that I do think these elements can work for more than just this crowd, as they do help to accentuate the frenetic vibe that the Maries give off. Before I wrap up, I just want to note one scene that I thought was neat. So, as I mentioned before, at one point, the Maries end up going to a 20s style jazz club. At that club, there’s a dance show involving a woman dressed up like a flapper. For those that don’t know, the flapper look was fashion subculture that many young women partook in during the 20s, which was seen as wrong and inappropriate by many older folks and authority figures. Basically, the flappers were the Maries of their time (in a sense, at least), but in the scene, the Maries end up getting drunk and acting disruptive, which completely upstages the dancer. Move over, beatniks, the hippies are where its at, and so on and so forth. I just thought that was a clever little scene, but anyway, onto my conclusion.
Overall, I think Daisies is an interesting film that, while reflective of its time, is still rather relevant to today too, which is kind of sad when you think about it (it’s been fifty-five years and we’re still dealing with some of these issues). Plus, its rather nuanced approach can allow for different interpretations by different people, and those interpretations might shed light on said people, depending on what they are. After this and Valerie, I am interested in seeing more of the Czech New Wave movement, so keep an eye out for more entries in that world, potentially (I have the Criterion Collection’s Pearls of the Czech New Wave compilation, so we should have plenty to work with when the time comes). So, spend some time appreciating the Daisies, but don’t get overly familiar or possessive. After all, they’re their own flowers.