Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2017 18:10:57 GMT
I propose a section for archiving IMDB discussions (less than three days left to do this, unfortunately).
Because IMDB will be taking down years of history and they said that they will be giving people a chance to archive threads that they want, I think it is probably okay to do this. Unfortunately, there is very little time left now, but I recently saw Fatal Attraction again and started to archive some of the discussions as an example.
Is there a way to provide attachments here? Right now I am just copying and pasting one page from a thread that I saved, it pasted as one
big block but I added in some spaces to hopefully make it more readable. If there would be a way to add an attachment to this message, I could have attached it more easily and more readably with the look that it has on IMDB.
Anyhow, here's just one page of one discussion of one movie, as an example:
See more
Fatal Attraction (1987) :
An awful representation of women. View: thread | flat | inline | nest
An awful representation of women.
by RyanCShowers » Wed Dec 17 2014 09:49:29 IMDb member since April 2008
feelthefilms.wordpress.com/2014/12/17/analytical-essay-fatal-a ttraction/
Flag
▼ | Reply |
Knowing the reputation and cultural buzz for Fatal Attraction when I saw it in high school, I bought into the fun of it. But recently I analyzed the film and wrote an essay on it. It's not subtle in attempts to undermine feminism and support the conservative family dynamic. It's kind of awful, and as my feminist sensibility grows the more I dislike the film. The directing holds the picture together and the acting from the three leads is very strong, but I can't stand it and its popularity. It's interesting that I was asked to write this over the past two weeks of award season because Gone Girl, the movie I'm most prominently supporting this year, is the antithesis to Fatal Attraction. While Fatal Attraction said the problem is maintaining a traditional family is outside the marriage, Gone Girl says the problems lie inside the marriage (which is so correct). Fatal Attraction is very iconic, but it's iconic for the wrong reasons. I'm sure I'll get a dozen replies from people outraged by my allegations of the film based on my liberal agenda, but I don't care. Glenn Close and the competency of the directing only take this movie so far after looking it with modern, progressive glasses.
Feel the Films: A Blog by RyanCShowers - feelthefilms.wordpress.com/ Re: An awful representation of women.
by rmoriarty97 » Wed Dec 17 2014 19:20:57 IMDb member since November 2014
Post Edited: Wed Dec 17 2014 19:22:26
Flag
▼ | Reply |
I think this outlook is pretty simplistic - it was very clear that in this film the biggest problem WAS outside the marriage - not to say there weren't problems within the marriage (which is likely, to make someone want to cheat) but that wasn't the focus of the film so of course we didn't see that. Gone Girl obviously had a different focus but I don't think either film was consciously trying to send a message about women and marriage and their places in society.
It's a Hollywood blockbuster, purely for entertainment. Hardly likely to hold up under feminist or any other ideological critique. Is there more to this film? The answer is no - there's less.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by cathy-creswell » Mon Jan 26 2015 20:30:57 Flag
| Reply | IMDb member since October 2009
Not every film or book has to take feminism into account. Both films characters have mental issues and revenge fantasies they act out. It doesn't take one film to undermine the entire feminist history. If every film tried to make it's characters satisfy feminists, it would get pretty boring quickly.

www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 1 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
Re: An awful representation of women.
by ck1-5 » Mon Feb 2 2015 09:03:50 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since June 2005
This film undermines feminism how? By portraying Close's character as mentally unstable? Women like her DO exist. By Dan's wife taking him back?
Re: An awful representation of women.
by cathy-creswell » Mon Feb 2 2015 15:11:38 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since October 2009
Agreed. Some people defend feminism so hard they see anti feminist intents everywhere. There are real world issues to improve, but ignoring the fact that not all women are stable or moral is living in a fantasy. It's as bad as Disney.
Post deleted
This message has been deleted by an administrator
Re: An awful representation of women.
by homogenik » Sat Feb 7 2015 14:55:29 IMDb member since January 2001
Flag
▼ | Reply |
You're right, the film is mostly iconic of the anti-women backlash of the 80s conservative ideology. It displaces the responsibility from the man to the woman by making her a monster. The two women are set up against each other. Even the places they live in are meant to signify this opposition. The Gallagers live in a cozy apartment packed with family pictures (every telephone has a bunch of family portraits next to it), the lighting is soft light, the colors are warm. Alex lives in a kind of industrial, almost empty flat with white bricks, dirty windows and pipes garnishing the ceilings. That space is mostly lit in harder lighting, more dramatic (more shadows and contrast). To get there, you must first go through the "alley", dark and brooding with workers transporting big pieces of dead animals and big metal cans burning. The interior of the building is dilapidated and dark. Yet she's supposedly an important editor (with money). The character is set up as a working, single woman (a figure vilified in the 80s), yet we never see her actually working, she has no social life or friends. Even the producers and the writer admitted the changes that were imposed upon them from the studio meant sacrificing the nuances that could have made the film less misogynistic. But alas people wanted to see the "bitch" get killed (suicide wasn't a sufficient punishment apparently). So they made it a monster-character basically, akin to other monster movies. There's even a shot at the end (in the bathtub) where Close is wearing strange eye lenses that made her look like a demon.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by marigoldchurchill » Sun Feb 8 2015 02:44:04 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since February 2014
The notion that women cannot do bad things is both stupid and dangerous.
Remember Melissa Huckaby who kidnapped a 5 year old girl, raped the little girl with a rolling pin and then killed her?
The notions of "sisterhood" and "solidarity" are not good.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by Boricanator » Sun Mar 15 2015 04:01:38 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since February 2007
I am a guy and I never had the impression that Dan is a good guy and a hero. He cheated on a good wife and almost got her killed.
If anything, this is a cautionary tale for men not to jump at every sexy girl that shows interest. It encourages men to be monogamous and respect their family.
As for Alex, she is just a person with mental issues. She is not meant to be a representation of single working women. If anything, she represents people that are lonely and want human connection but can't have it.
Re: An awful representation of women.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 2 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
by highpriestess32 » Mon Mar 23 2015 05:00:27 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since March 2005
I agree with you here, Boricanator.
Far too much focus is directed at the females in this movie. This is chiefly a film about a man with no morals. He claims to love his wife and daughter yet he was happy to risk it all for a fling with Alex Forest. Upon its first release the focus was all on character Dan and a warning to men who cheat. There is no feministic slant because we see two women in perfectly acceptable roles. One, Beth, is a homemaker and Alex is supposedly a career woman when she is not obsessing over a married man. Yet Beth was the stronger of the two women without a doubt.
In fact it is quite strange that they made Alex's character a career woman because one could argue that as a strong, independent woman, she was represented as a desperate, clingy and insecure one. Beth was far stronger, emotionally.
Has anyone seen my wife? - Columbo
Re: An awful representation of women.
by rmoriarty97 » Wed Aug 26 2015 22:28:55 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since November 2014
I don't think it was that strange, actually. There are people out there (sociopaths are a good example) who can hold it together very well on the surface but have a lot more going on underneath. She did seem to go on a downward spiral over the course of the movie though, if she hadn't been killed she probably would at least have had to give up her job and be institutionalised lol
Re: An awful representation of women.
by highpriestess32 » Thu Aug 27 2015 01:26:33 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since March 2005
Indeed! I sometimes wonder about her past. Maybe she was the one doing the dumping prior to Dan. She may even have killed her lovers if they in fact spurned her which may explain her being new to her job (and possibly the area) Only the year before she had a miscarriage she claimed so we know of at least one relationship. I can't be;ieve as an editor how she found the time to stalk Dan lol.
"These days you have to boil someone before you can sleep with them"
Re: An awful representation of women.
by GiaJake » Mon Apr 27 2015 13:49:20 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since February 2010
I agree completely with your post. In fact, I distinctly remember when this movie first came out. I was at the hairdresser with my young daughter. Another customer had seen the movie, but the rest of us had not. Her first comment, "This is a movie that shows men what can happen when they cheat ".
Re: An awful representation of women.
by travischar » Mon Mar 23 2015 04:42:11 Flag ▼ | Reply | IMDb member since December 2010
It's not subtle in attempts to undermine feminism
How the hell does it "undermine feminism" to point out that women can also be awful human beings? Feminism should never be about claiming that women are all perfect.
Hannibal Lecter doesn't reflect badly on men, he reflects badly on psychopaths. Alex Forrest doesn't reflect badly on feminism, she reflects badly on psychopaths who happen to be women.
I find it very interesting that you conflate the two.
Post deleted
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 3 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
This message has been deleted by an administrator
Re: An awful representation of women.
by ck1-5 » Mon Nov 2 2015 12:52:36 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since June 2005
...so, I guess that "The Silence of the Lambs" is anti-psychiatrist, since the one in the film is quite a twisted individual.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by crypticanomaly73 » Fri Nov 6 2015 16:20:59 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since October 2014
Firstly films and movies exist to explore an idea, in the case of Fatal Attraction it is nothing more than a twist on the slasher movie theme, the Slasher/Villain is Glenn Close the woman who is unbalanced and doesn't quite get that she was never intended to be a permanent fixture in the life of Michael Douglas' character even if he was single.
So you get a very serious male fear right there, the woman who can't handle rejection. You may not like hearing that but women suck at handling rejection.
So we get this cat and mouse game where Douglas is trying to keep his marriage and family intact and alive while trying to keep Close at bay. He has made a huge mistake and now it is coming back 10 fold.
You mention Gone Girl as the movie you are backing for 2014. Interesting choice, may I ask what the difference is? In GG you still have a very unbalanced and evil female character, she manipulates and is rather calculating. If that is the idea of what a woman should be then I think we are in serious trouble.
At least with Fatal Attraction no one was seeing any character in the film as a role model!
I also find it amusing you are threatened by the traditional family dynamic. Perhaps you wrote your essay with a pre-concieved outcome in mind.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by millsyooksy » Sun Jan 3 2016 14:13:52 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since December 2014
I'm a feminist too, I love how crazy Glenn Close is right now though and I've known men and women who've been this nuts with people of the opposite sex so it kinda makes me LOL.
I like your analysis though
Post deleted
This message has been deleted by an administrator
Re: An awful representation of women.
by NebulousGirl » Sun Sep 4 2016 18:45:17 IMDb member since February 2012
Flag
▼ | Reply |
Whilst you may view it as a horrible portrayal of women, it's a very accurate portrayal of the Borderline mind.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by the_holy_ferret-126-91027 » Sat Sep 17 2016 10:20:34 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since August 2011
Which school of feminism did you have in mind? Different branches start off from differing positions. They all share a conception that society is one in which men dominate women, but they each explore it in different ways and it's unlikely that one film will satisfy all of them. Similarly, a movie described as 'socialist' is not going to satisfy authoritarians and anarchists alike, even though they both fall under that same 's' shaped umbrella. Authoritarian socialists and anarchist socialists, for the most part, detest each other even more than they detest capitalism.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 4 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
Let's take an anarcha-feminist interpretation of the movie. Presumably we would start from a position that the relationship between men and women is defined by coercive hierarchy without free association. Dan's crude attempt to 'free association' is a one night stand which doesn't end so good. Most of the film presents Alex's attempts to define their relationship along fairly male terms - coercion, intimidation, and, by the end, violence. This ends disastrously and is shown to be quite unsuccessful. The film is fairly explicit in showing that relationships defined by coercion and violence are disastrous, whether men or women hold the monopoly on violence. There's a fair amount then, which, even though it isn't explored in any real depth, supports the anarchist position and, by extension, anarcho-feminism. Now, were one to look at it through a Marxist-feminist perspective I suspect you'd have less luck. Yes class is present in the film, yes the world in which the film is set is materialistic, but the conflict in the just film doesn't seem to be about class. The film just doesn't lend itself as well to that kind of feminism.
In summary, I think there are types of feminism that gel well with the film. But I don't know which type you had in mind?
▲ Top

Because IMDB will be taking down years of history and they said that they will be giving people a chance to archive threads that they want, I think it is probably okay to do this. Unfortunately, there is very little time left now, but I recently saw Fatal Attraction again and started to archive some of the discussions as an example.
Is there a way to provide attachments here? Right now I am just copying and pasting one page from a thread that I saved, it pasted as one
big block but I added in some spaces to hopefully make it more readable. If there would be a way to add an attachment to this message, I could have attached it more easily and more readably with the look that it has on IMDB.
Anyhow, here's just one page of one discussion of one movie, as an example:
See more
Fatal Attraction (1987) :
An awful representation of women. View: thread | flat | inline | nest
An awful representation of women.
by RyanCShowers » Wed Dec 17 2014 09:49:29 IMDb member since April 2008
feelthefilms.wordpress.com/2014/12/17/analytical-essay-fatal-a ttraction/
Flag
▼ | Reply |
Knowing the reputation and cultural buzz for Fatal Attraction when I saw it in high school, I bought into the fun of it. But recently I analyzed the film and wrote an essay on it. It's not subtle in attempts to undermine feminism and support the conservative family dynamic. It's kind of awful, and as my feminist sensibility grows the more I dislike the film. The directing holds the picture together and the acting from the three leads is very strong, but I can't stand it and its popularity. It's interesting that I was asked to write this over the past two weeks of award season because Gone Girl, the movie I'm most prominently supporting this year, is the antithesis to Fatal Attraction. While Fatal Attraction said the problem is maintaining a traditional family is outside the marriage, Gone Girl says the problems lie inside the marriage (which is so correct). Fatal Attraction is very iconic, but it's iconic for the wrong reasons. I'm sure I'll get a dozen replies from people outraged by my allegations of the film based on my liberal agenda, but I don't care. Glenn Close and the competency of the directing only take this movie so far after looking it with modern, progressive glasses.
Feel the Films: A Blog by RyanCShowers - feelthefilms.wordpress.com/ Re: An awful representation of women.
by rmoriarty97 » Wed Dec 17 2014 19:20:57 IMDb member since November 2014
Post Edited: Wed Dec 17 2014 19:22:26
Flag
▼ | Reply |
I think this outlook is pretty simplistic - it was very clear that in this film the biggest problem WAS outside the marriage - not to say there weren't problems within the marriage (which is likely, to make someone want to cheat) but that wasn't the focus of the film so of course we didn't see that. Gone Girl obviously had a different focus but I don't think either film was consciously trying to send a message about women and marriage and their places in society.
It's a Hollywood blockbuster, purely for entertainment. Hardly likely to hold up under feminist or any other ideological critique. Is there more to this film? The answer is no - there's less.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by cathy-creswell » Mon Jan 26 2015 20:30:57 Flag
| Reply | IMDb member since October 2009
Not every film or book has to take feminism into account. Both films characters have mental issues and revenge fantasies they act out. It doesn't take one film to undermine the entire feminist history. If every film tried to make it's characters satisfy feminists, it would get pretty boring quickly.

www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 1 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
Re: An awful representation of women.
by ck1-5 » Mon Feb 2 2015 09:03:50 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since June 2005
This film undermines feminism how? By portraying Close's character as mentally unstable? Women like her DO exist. By Dan's wife taking him back?
Re: An awful representation of women.
by cathy-creswell » Mon Feb 2 2015 15:11:38 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since October 2009
Agreed. Some people defend feminism so hard they see anti feminist intents everywhere. There are real world issues to improve, but ignoring the fact that not all women are stable or moral is living in a fantasy. It's as bad as Disney.
Post deleted
This message has been deleted by an administrator
Re: An awful representation of women.
by homogenik » Sat Feb 7 2015 14:55:29 IMDb member since January 2001
Flag
▼ | Reply |
You're right, the film is mostly iconic of the anti-women backlash of the 80s conservative ideology. It displaces the responsibility from the man to the woman by making her a monster. The two women are set up against each other. Even the places they live in are meant to signify this opposition. The Gallagers live in a cozy apartment packed with family pictures (every telephone has a bunch of family portraits next to it), the lighting is soft light, the colors are warm. Alex lives in a kind of industrial, almost empty flat with white bricks, dirty windows and pipes garnishing the ceilings. That space is mostly lit in harder lighting, more dramatic (more shadows and contrast). To get there, you must first go through the "alley", dark and brooding with workers transporting big pieces of dead animals and big metal cans burning. The interior of the building is dilapidated and dark. Yet she's supposedly an important editor (with money). The character is set up as a working, single woman (a figure vilified in the 80s), yet we never see her actually working, she has no social life or friends. Even the producers and the writer admitted the changes that were imposed upon them from the studio meant sacrificing the nuances that could have made the film less misogynistic. But alas people wanted to see the "bitch" get killed (suicide wasn't a sufficient punishment apparently). So they made it a monster-character basically, akin to other monster movies. There's even a shot at the end (in the bathtub) where Close is wearing strange eye lenses that made her look like a demon.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by marigoldchurchill » Sun Feb 8 2015 02:44:04 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since February 2014
The notion that women cannot do bad things is both stupid and dangerous.
Remember Melissa Huckaby who kidnapped a 5 year old girl, raped the little girl with a rolling pin and then killed her?
The notions of "sisterhood" and "solidarity" are not good.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by Boricanator » Sun Mar 15 2015 04:01:38 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since February 2007
I am a guy and I never had the impression that Dan is a good guy and a hero. He cheated on a good wife and almost got her killed.
If anything, this is a cautionary tale for men not to jump at every sexy girl that shows interest. It encourages men to be monogamous and respect their family.
As for Alex, she is just a person with mental issues. She is not meant to be a representation of single working women. If anything, she represents people that are lonely and want human connection but can't have it.
Re: An awful representation of women.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 2 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
by highpriestess32 » Mon Mar 23 2015 05:00:27 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since March 2005
I agree with you here, Boricanator.
Far too much focus is directed at the females in this movie. This is chiefly a film about a man with no morals. He claims to love his wife and daughter yet he was happy to risk it all for a fling with Alex Forest. Upon its first release the focus was all on character Dan and a warning to men who cheat. There is no feministic slant because we see two women in perfectly acceptable roles. One, Beth, is a homemaker and Alex is supposedly a career woman when she is not obsessing over a married man. Yet Beth was the stronger of the two women without a doubt.
In fact it is quite strange that they made Alex's character a career woman because one could argue that as a strong, independent woman, she was represented as a desperate, clingy and insecure one. Beth was far stronger, emotionally.
Has anyone seen my wife? - Columbo
Re: An awful representation of women.
by rmoriarty97 » Wed Aug 26 2015 22:28:55 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since November 2014
I don't think it was that strange, actually. There are people out there (sociopaths are a good example) who can hold it together very well on the surface but have a lot more going on underneath. She did seem to go on a downward spiral over the course of the movie though, if she hadn't been killed she probably would at least have had to give up her job and be institutionalised lol
Re: An awful representation of women.
by highpriestess32 » Thu Aug 27 2015 01:26:33 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since March 2005
Indeed! I sometimes wonder about her past. Maybe she was the one doing the dumping prior to Dan. She may even have killed her lovers if they in fact spurned her which may explain her being new to her job (and possibly the area) Only the year before she had a miscarriage she claimed so we know of at least one relationship. I can't be;ieve as an editor how she found the time to stalk Dan lol.
"These days you have to boil someone before you can sleep with them"
Re: An awful representation of women.
by GiaJake » Mon Apr 27 2015 13:49:20 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since February 2010
I agree completely with your post. In fact, I distinctly remember when this movie first came out. I was at the hairdresser with my young daughter. Another customer had seen the movie, but the rest of us had not. Her first comment, "This is a movie that shows men what can happen when they cheat ".
Re: An awful representation of women.
by travischar » Mon Mar 23 2015 04:42:11 Flag ▼ | Reply | IMDb member since December 2010
It's not subtle in attempts to undermine feminism
How the hell does it "undermine feminism" to point out that women can also be awful human beings? Feminism should never be about claiming that women are all perfect.
Hannibal Lecter doesn't reflect badly on men, he reflects badly on psychopaths. Alex Forrest doesn't reflect badly on feminism, she reflects badly on psychopaths who happen to be women.
I find it very interesting that you conflate the two.
Post deleted
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 3 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
This message has been deleted by an administrator
Re: An awful representation of women.
by ck1-5 » Mon Nov 2 2015 12:52:36 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since June 2005
...so, I guess that "The Silence of the Lambs" is anti-psychiatrist, since the one in the film is quite a twisted individual.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by crypticanomaly73 » Fri Nov 6 2015 16:20:59 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since October 2014
Firstly films and movies exist to explore an idea, in the case of Fatal Attraction it is nothing more than a twist on the slasher movie theme, the Slasher/Villain is Glenn Close the woman who is unbalanced and doesn't quite get that she was never intended to be a permanent fixture in the life of Michael Douglas' character even if he was single.
So you get a very serious male fear right there, the woman who can't handle rejection. You may not like hearing that but women suck at handling rejection.
So we get this cat and mouse game where Douglas is trying to keep his marriage and family intact and alive while trying to keep Close at bay. He has made a huge mistake and now it is coming back 10 fold.
You mention Gone Girl as the movie you are backing for 2014. Interesting choice, may I ask what the difference is? In GG you still have a very unbalanced and evil female character, she manipulates and is rather calculating. If that is the idea of what a woman should be then I think we are in serious trouble.
At least with Fatal Attraction no one was seeing any character in the film as a role model!
I also find it amusing you are threatened by the traditional family dynamic. Perhaps you wrote your essay with a pre-concieved outcome in mind.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by millsyooksy » Sun Jan 3 2016 14:13:52 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since December 2014
I'm a feminist too, I love how crazy Glenn Close is right now though and I've known men and women who've been this nuts with people of the opposite sex so it kinda makes me LOL.
I like your analysis though
Post deleted
This message has been deleted by an administrator
Re: An awful representation of women.
by NebulousGirl » Sun Sep 4 2016 18:45:17 IMDb member since February 2012
Flag
▼ | Reply |
Whilst you may view it as a horrible portrayal of women, it's a very accurate portrayal of the Borderline mind.
Re: An awful representation of women.
by the_holy_ferret-126-91027 » Sat Sep 17 2016 10:20:34 Flag
▼ | Reply | IMDb member since August 2011
Which school of feminism did you have in mind? Different branches start off from differing positions. They all share a conception that society is one in which men dominate women, but they each explore it in different ways and it's unlikely that one film will satisfy all of them. Similarly, a movie described as 'socialist' is not going to satisfy authoritarians and anarchists alike, even though they both fall under that same 's' shaped umbrella. Authoritarian socialists and anarchist socialists, for the most part, detest each other even more than they detest capitalism.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093010/board/thread/238123781 Page 4 of 5
An awful representation of women. - IMDb 2/17/17, 1:06 AM
Let's take an anarcha-feminist interpretation of the movie. Presumably we would start from a position that the relationship between men and women is defined by coercive hierarchy without free association. Dan's crude attempt to 'free association' is a one night stand which doesn't end so good. Most of the film presents Alex's attempts to define their relationship along fairly male terms - coercion, intimidation, and, by the end, violence. This ends disastrously and is shown to be quite unsuccessful. The film is fairly explicit in showing that relationships defined by coercion and violence are disastrous, whether men or women hold the monopoly on violence. There's a fair amount then, which, even though it isn't explored in any real depth, supports the anarchist position and, by extension, anarcho-feminism. Now, were one to look at it through a Marxist-feminist perspective I suspect you'd have less luck. Yes class is present in the film, yes the world in which the film is set is materialistic, but the conflict in the just film doesn't seem to be about class. The film just doesn't lend itself as well to that kind of feminism.
In summary, I think there are types of feminism that gel well with the film. But I don't know which type you had in mind?
▲ Top

