Extracts from an interview with Georgina Willis, Director of WATERMARK

	In making Watermark, I really wanted to take a few risks and make a story that takes you on some type of strange roller coaster ride. Part of this is in the unraveling, the switches between the 1970s and now, and part of it is the story itself. And then there is the deceptively gentle beginning that builds to something that, well, really takes you to the edge, and this centres around the women, and what comes from Catherineís actions. In WATERMARK we really go places that film hasn't gone before. I know some people are shocked. Watermark begins with a sense of foreboding, a warning to the audience. Itís like the chorus of a Greek tragedy. When Jim and Catherine set out across the water, theyíve no sense of what the future will bring. I'm playing with the idea of fate, challenging the notion that people can create their own destiny. I've drawn on the ideas in Greek tragedies, fate and family as the epicentre of extreme emotions and events, playing on the unquestionable inevitability of what was going to happen.
	Everyone looks down the camera at some point, challenging the audience, confronting them with their isolation. I wanted to show these windows into the inner reaches of the character's feelings, into what it is that they really fear. I think that Louise's monologue Ö the way she confides in you, but at same time seems so ready to leap over the emotional edge, is a great example of this. I was looking at the impact of things, of what remains, of some remnants of love maybe. And how this can all get caught up in duty and guilt. Another thing I did with the film was to move away using close-ups and went for a wider-angle look instead. I like the idea of seeing people in their environment; seeing how their entire body expresses emotion, not just their face.
	The 1970s were carefree and Jim really wants to be a part of this, but essentially he's conservative. He loves Catherine's energy, her exuberance, but when things go wrong, he gradually retreats into conventionality, which is embodied in Louise. She's the antithesis of Catherine, imposing order. Not at all like Catherine. Sheís the agitator, energized, stirring, trying to get a reaction. When you think about it, Watermark is about all the things that people don't or can't say. That's one of the reasons that we built the film around the idea of the moods of the sea. Jim, our central character, likes the ocean because it speaks for him. Just like the ocean, the undercurrents of his life are hidden and dangerous.
	I went into the film with an open minded approach to cinematic language, but wanted to build on the visual style Iíd developed in my earlier short films. Watermark is very much in this vein, relying on imagery rather than dialogue to tell the story. I wanted the key scene in Watermark to be poignant yet confronting. The taboo is broken. The bond between mother and child shattered. Yet the tragedy plays out, not as a crime, but as a human event, a reflection on emotion, not a drama about guilt and innocence. And even though only Jim and Catherine know what happened, every other relationship in the film is in a way determined by Catherine's actions. Jim still loves Catherine regardless of what happened, but his focused his affection for her on the first part of their life together. His feelings for Louise, and hers for him are clouded by his continued care for Catherine. Watermark captures the idea of fragments, the bits that we remember. It's really an observation of people, of Jim in particular, but then you get to go with them as well. The film in some ways feels like a series of portraits, with each person searching for an outlet for their stifled communication.

home map about directorsí words images behind the scenes

trailer press kit credits cinemas contact