I just went and saw a matinee of Atonement--ugh! Next time I decide to see a film because all the critics love it, remind me that most of those critics have mainstream white heteropatriarchal values that are forsooth yucky unto mine eyes. I'm so stupid not to do my research on the story before seeing a film like this because more often than not they piss me off.

If I knew this was a "poor nice guy falsely accused of rape by those lying bitches" story I would never have gone to see it. Because, you know, that's such an important story to tell over and over and over--how rape is horrible for the menz because menz gets accused falsely of rape. I mean, who cares that one in three or four women (and a percentage of men and significant percentage of transfolk) are sexually assaulted by men, and ALL women live lives constrained by that fact. It's silly of me to think of women as important outside of how they affect men.

Yes, the film is very pretty with very pretty people and a concise narrative; it's just the same old story of how women are liars and ruin men's lives and it's about time those bitches atoned for it. And if those pathetic spinster girls are going to get published, by golly, that's what they should write about if they are to attain tragically sympathetic status.

Thumbs down on this one.

From: [identity profile] ithiliana.livejournal.com


I trust my flist a helluvalot more than the critics (who write for the Dallas paper!), and so far you're the second to confirm my intense desire to stay the hell far far far away from that film!

From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


I sadly had no warning from my flist. I just checked a wiki of the novel published in 2001, and the film is very faithful to the plot and some of the structural presentation. Just ew that it got so much acclaim and that there is no outcry of "oh, not this tired old misogynist shit again!" no matter how pretty the wrapper. So it's not just the film critics letting us down. If there's been any good feminist criticism of it, it hasn't filtered beyond the academy at all.

Who was your flistmate who posted about it? I'd love to go commiserate.

From: [identity profile] ithiliana.livejournal.com


I'm sorry, I don't remember the name (I am terrible with names in any case, and with the blur of the flist, even worse).

In defense of well the academy: academic time being what it is, I wouldn't expect to see much about the film yet from any academic types (it's just out).

In terms of the novel, well, I hadn't heard about it and a lot of feminist literary academics don't spend a lot of time pointing out the heterosexim (or racism) in all the books out there; instead, they focus on the work that's different. When I write about feminist sf, I write about the feminist sf and don't waste my time reading/writing about all the sexist/racist stuff by the guyz.

I'm afraid these days (old and cynical) I assume most acclaimed and/or wildly film is going to be heterosexist, racist, and uphold normative "family" values and don't bother unless I see something in the previews that grabs me or hear a good buzz.

Slightly connected, the daily paper had big headlines about how much money COUPLES and COUPLES WITH CHILDREN can expect to get back from the Bush stimulus.

Us single types apparently don't get stimulated.


From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


No, that wasn't an attack on the academy--just a note of despair on the disconnect between the academy and what's journalistically published. And yeah, I sure didn't spend my academic time on crap like this novel. I have no patience for male writers published after 1975 who aren't ardent feminists--meaning I don't read many. But I split my time between 17thC stuff, theory, and science fiction/fantasy.

And yeah--I don't know why my cynicism didn't kick in before I went to see it--hence my kicking myself in the head for being stupid. (-;

Geezus--I don't begrudge couples with children, but couples without children are way more economically privileged than us single folk--meh. And single folk with children--let's be real: WOMEN with children, the poorest of the poor, can just go hang themselves.

From: [identity profile] monkey5s.livejournal.com


*snerk* I had seen the book when it came out, it was nominated for the Booker Prize, and I have to admit I just... couldn't read it. I didn't even try that hard, since I knew the basic premise. And the book has some absolutely grand reviews, too.

No, I have no intention of seeing the movie, and I still grimace a bit at the endless ads for it. Sorry you wasted your time and money!

From: [identity profile] morgan-dhu.livejournal.com


I was already planning on giving this one a pass, and you've just confirmed my original decision.


From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


Snerk all you want Ms. Thing. But I count on my flist to warn me about these things, and you.let.me.down! ;-P

From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


We need an early warning system. Something like "this film gets 5 Pissed-off LavenderTooks."

5 Pissed-off LavenderTooks: Don't see this film unless you're planning on writing a letter to the editor of your newspaper complaining about the sexist bias of their film critics that endorse this bullshit.

From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


6 Pissed-off LavenderTooks: Start drawing up picket signs for the rally.
7 Pissed-off LavenderTooks: Get a lawyers number to carry with you and put on a few pairs of Depends under your regular underwear.

Have to think up what 1,2,3, and 4 are. (-:

From: [identity profile] morgan-dhu.livejournal.com


Let's see... How about these for 1 and 2?

1 Pissed-off LavenderTooks: Don't go unless you've got a solid feminist support group to listen to the post-mortem.

2 Pissed-off LavenderTooks: Be prepared for audience reactions, because you will find yourself involuntarily denouncing offending sexist and heterosexist tropes out loud.

From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


Heeeeeeee! Those are good. (-:

Hmm, now onto 3 and 4 . . .

From: [identity profile] ide-cyan.livejournal.com


I do hate it when male writers use female characters to Make A Point about Eternal Themes.

From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


It's always an excuse to ignore the material realities informing those women's situations and choices, thus side stepping discussing women's oppression.

From: [identity profile] ide-cyan.livejournal.com


You can't mix icky materialism with universal and/or eternal values. And women in books are just supposed to be allegories for something, anyhow. (And if they're not treated as such, that's because the men are brilliant geniuses and everybody needs to ask them what their secret is and worship at their altar.)

From: [identity profile] lavendertook.livejournal.com


Ahahaha! Yup--I figure there are plenty in that school of thought, or lack thereof, who would say, "But you're missing the point . . . it's about truth and lies and storytelling and you just analyze things too much!"
.

Profile

lavendertook: Cessy and Kimba (Default)
lavendertook

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags