|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday January 03, @11:36AM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
If you read other reviews and articles (and even saw the movie). I think you would see it in a different light.
From Salon:
http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/review/2003/12/25/ monster/index.html
"It acknowledges Wuornos' victimization without simplistically treating it as the root of her psychopathology. In Jenkins' view, deranged or not -- and the evidence suggests that she was -- Wuornos is responsible for her own actions. At the end of the movie, when Aileen is convicted, she rails at the judge, asking him how he could do this to a "raped woman." But the scene isn't played to make us feel that Wuornos' acts were justified in any way. Rather, it's a desperately sad giveaway as to how she defines herself when the chips are down -- that is, when she's not wielding the false power of a gun"
The movie was quite good actually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it all spins from the initial rape, thus making it an absolute lie in total.
I saw the movie, and it seemed nothing more than "womam bad because man bad."
You're a troll, and a not very smart one at that.
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday January 03, @01:08PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Umm I didn't intend to troll. Again I couldn't disagree more.
The movie shows her descent beginning long before the "rape". Was she raped? Probably. Did this justify her later actions? No. The movie makes this clear.
Were the guys who picked her up all angels? No. Did they deserve to die. No again. Was she blameless NO. Again the movie makes this clear.
As for "womam bad because man bad."
I don't think you saw the same movie I did.
How would you have had the story told?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same way I would tell the story of Ted Bundy.
Who cares why she is evil. She's evil. That is sufficient to condemn her, and I hope her grave goes unmarked.
The sooner she is erased from the collective memory the better.
* Putting the SMACKDOWN on Feminazis since 1989! *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday January 03, @07:00PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
"Same way I would tell the story of Ted Bundy."
================================================
Poor, poor Ted and Aileen, they were both just misunderstood victims who didn't have a chance. They didn't get the help they needed, when they needed it. They weren't able to rise above the mountain of problems (psychological and otherwise) that were in their lives, etc., etc., etc. Except Hollywood doesn't tell the Ted Bundy story with nearly the empathy for motivational triggers that they tell the Aileen Wornus story with. That is just the reality of the misandrist hypocrisy that exists in Hollywood today.
Funny how a man has a higher expectation to "rise above," because he has "power and control," and a woman is often excused, because as we all know she is just the "victim of the patriarchy."
One thing that appears clear to me from this movie and others not even released yet is that Hollywood has an agenda to portray this message in subtle and not so subtle ways to America; the message, WOMAN IS JUST AN IRRESPONSIBLE EXCUSE (VICTIM) WAITING FOR A RESPONSIBLE MAN TO HAPPEN ON.
There is a new movie (not yet released) with Ed Harris and Nicole Kidman, where Kidman portrays a battered woman, and Harris her batterer, and the movie trailer says she went to a battered woman's shelter to understand the dynamics of that. I wonder if the same research and empathy went into researching and playing Harrises' character, or is he just the obligatory disposable male demon found in so much Hollywood trash that passes for entertainment and social enlightenment?
Hollywood today is a cesspool of propaganda and lies and little more. Hollywood's outright hatred and sexist exploitation of men is without parallel in the history of entertainment, and I for one am sick of it.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Hollywood today is a cesspool of propaganda and lies and little more. Hollywood's outright hatred and sexist exploitation of men is without parallel in the history of entertainment, and I for one am sick of it."--Ray
I agree, Ray. I'm sick of it too. But every now and then you get a decent father-positive movie. Like Evelyn or In America... or even House of Sand and Fog (in my humble opinion.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday January 04, @03:01AM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
"Like Evelyn"
Was Evelyn from an idenpendent producer? That was an excellent movie. I have the movie, but now that you've mentioned it, I'll have to check and see if it came form main stream Hollywood, or one of those independent producers. I'll have to take a 2nd look at the other two movies as well.
Of course their is a long list of stinkers. To name just a few:
Enough - Jennifer Lopez
a 2nd Jennifer Lopez movie also starring James Caravelle
Death to Smoochy - The movie was interesting overall, but the part where Smoochy sang about Stan the step father was insulting to men, and clearly prejudiced since most child abuse is commited by women. The main line was, "My stepdads not mean he's just adjusting."
I saw Cold Mountain yesterday, and their was the obligatory female beaten by man part by Renee Zelweiger, accussing the man playing her Father. Did I already mention that most child abuse is by the mother?
Tbey stick that crap in almost like public service announcements, but it's always the same old "female good, man bad" propaganda.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday January 19, @04:23AM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
"Hollywood today is a cesspool of propaganda and lies and little more."
DUH.
"Hollywood's outright hatred and sexist exploitation of men is without parallel in the history of entertainment, and I for one am sick of it. "
Hope you are sick of watching all of those James Bond women as well (especially the old school stuff 8-). I take it back if you don't prefer women, but here's hoping you'd understand the point anyway).
I have little sympathy for either Ted or Aileen, or whoever . But I do have some aspect of looking at such individuals with some compassion; that is, if their lives had been constructed so horribly. I know my life has been quite a bit more fortunate (though not easy nor without mental challenges). I guess as long as one is consistent in their synpathy, regardless of gender, which I believe, was the point of that statement about Ted.
Don't be hatin' now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Was she raped? Probably."
Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Aileen stated that her first 'known' victim raped her, so she killed him in self defense. This is the moment when she ‘snapped’, spiraled out of control and descended into a mental state of ‘all johns will hurt me.’ Yet, before she was executed, she admitted that her testimony, and all subsequent statements about being attacked and afraid of being hurt, was rife with lies. She admitted there was no initial attack, and that she killed out of plain spite and bloodlust.
Now, the director KNEW of this, so you tell me: what makes this movie worth anyone's time? Why show her being raped when you KNOW that it didn’t happen?
Um, do you understand propaganda when you see it?
Apparently not.
How would I have told the story? I would have interwoven her killing spree into her sexual relationship with her lesbian lover, utilizing quick flashback scenes as she approached climax, then shown the nozzle of the gun exploding into her victim(s) as she reached and enjoyed orgasm. That’s what I would have done. Movie would have been about 20 minutes long, and nothing but sex and guns and blood.
As for the rest of the story, who cares?
Actually, I take it all back. I wouldn’t have made this movie, a movie about a sick, disgusting creature. I wouldn’t have made it at all.
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday January 19, @04:12AM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Smith, you seem quite judgemental for someone using the signature quote that you do. If you don't really know all the details (you really know that she wasn't?), why judge the moviemakers for protraying the movie as "lies"? The movie was very clear in the opinion that _regardless_ of whether Wuornos was raped, the first time or anytime, before or after any "snap" or no "snap" in her psyche, she was ultimately responsible for her actions; it fact it deftly presented the notion that she could have had some good going for her but seemed to always ignore it (in the "thomas" character, especially at the end). Sure, it presented a person you may feel sad or pity for, but it NEVER tricks anyone into thinking that she was "only a victim of rape".
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
