Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

39/100

Didn't believe for one moment that any of these women—with the exception of Frances McDormand's hard-liner, who promptly disappears—had spent her entire life isolated in a community that views female subordination as divinely ordained. Every word they speak is pitched directly at a secular, staunchly feminist viewership, with even Jessie Buckley's Mariche, ostensibly the most traditionalist (or at least the most frightened), basically conceding that what they've been taught since birth is of no consequence compared to protecting themselves and their daughters. In theory, that should please me, since I wholeheartedly, almost violently concur; indeed, my initial concern, once the basic scenario became clear (knew nothing going in), was that I might struggle to empathize with self-destructive decisions deeply rooted in faith, as was the case in Scorsese's Silence. To my astonishment, "But we'll go to Hell" doesn't even land on the right-hand column of the actual pros/cons list that they make, as they're too busy agreeing that their situation is insupportable. Which it is! But creating three potential courses of action, each endorsed by one of the young name stars, is just ludicrously tidy, especially given how hollow the dissension proves to be: Nobody who remains in the hayloft really supports just forgiving the rapists and moving on, while Salome's furious call to stay put and fight conveniently declines to explore exactly what said fighting might entail. Mostly, though, I simply did not buy that a lifelong Mennonite woman would ever say something like "If I were married, I wouldn't be myself, so the person you love would be gone." Or that Mariche—who, please recall, has been instructed in deference to men from the cradle—would bore a hole right through Ben Whishaw's #NotAllMen, telling him "You have been invited here to listen to what we have to say. And write it down. Nothing more. Just listen." It all sounds like what it is: an outsider's post #MeToo wish-fulfillment exercise. (Everyone accepting the trans boy, who climactically thanks Judith Ivey's elder for not deadnaming him, likewise feels highly implausible for 2010, when the film is set. And for today as well, I suspect, in that community, but maybe I'm wrong.) Anyway, heart's certainly in the right place, but nothing whatsoever rang true.

Files

Comments

William Evans

My thoughts 100%. “It would be kind of a self-defeating premise if this was intellectually honest about religion in the slightest then again I am doubtful this would be the go-to feminist front runner for Best Picture if it centered MAGA women/women in the KKK instead of the Most Open Minded And Liberal Evangelical Christian Women Who Have Ever Lived.”

Anonymous

This of course would be a much more fascinating and frustrating film. Especially if/when the solution came down to a pleading assertion that God implicitly commands that the Weaker Sex be cherished, not despoiled. Illiberal, but most likely effective.

Orrin Konheim

1. "But creating three potential courses of action, each endorsed by one of the young name stars, is just ludicrously tidy, especially given how hollow the dissension proves to be:" I'm sorry I can't remember what the three courses are. 2. I don't like overly pedantic #Metoo or #BLM movies but I thought it was clearly a very literary work that was translates well cinematically. 3. My main problem was being a little confused by the size of the ensemble. Which character was feeling what. I'm going to have a hell of a time trying tto remember which of the three leads during awards season are worthy, because it was just hard to differentiate everyone. I watched this 2 months ago and don't even remember a transgender character 4. Or that Mariche—who, please recall, has been instructed in deference to men from the cradle—would bore a hole right through Ben Whishaw's #NotAllMen, telling him "You have been invited here to listen to what we have to say. And write it down. Nothing more. Just listen." To me, it wasn't that pedantic. Whishaw's character was kind of meek and subserviant. So they'd take advantage of it

gemko

Huh. I find it very odd, even given that a couple of months have elapsed, that you don’t recall the trans character (who refuses to speak except to children; that ring a bell?) or the three courses of action (do nothing, stay and fight, or leave), which are explicitly stated it’s gotta be at least half a dozen times. And my general beef isn’t that the film is pedantic. I simply don’t believe that these women, in these circumstances, would say these things in this manner. Not one of them sounds like she’s spent her life loving in an isolated colony that teaches female subservience. If you found it credible, fair enough.

Orrin Konheim

Yeah, as I said I did have the handicap of being a little confused by who was who. So I might not have the right to comment as deeply. I thought it was one of my favorite films of the year (but I've only seen about 40 as I am a TV critic and you've probably seen way more) and it's based a lot on how I ffelt immediately after when more details would have been fresher. Like I think The Big Sleep is one of my favorite films, but there's no way I'd be able to give an adequate plot summary other than "a detective gets entangled with two rich daughters and some bad guys on a very long-winding mystery" but I could give those details within a day or two of having seen the film. I sent you a message on Twitter today with an invite to guest panel on one of my YouTube videos. I'd even up my contribution if you appered as a guest panelists. Please check the message