![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sechan19I realize that in the 1930s and 40s criminals could not be shown to get away with it in the movies. However, in this case I really wish they'd made an exception. Of course, that's the brilliant thing about The Postman Always Rings Twice - that you want them to make an exception.
You see, the murdered man is a selfish, apathetic fool, and the law of the land would have left his wife destitute if she'd tried to leave him honestly. There was no other way. We might even say that society itself had signed his death warrant.
The following zeal of the prosecution to convict can consequently be seen as a reflection of the social misogyny that brought things to such a sorry pass.
And that brings me to my chief irritation: the persistence of film historians in casting the so-called femme fatale as an evil, conniving character who lures the otherwise straight-arrow Joe to his doom.
Such a characterization is particularly improper for Cora Smith, the erstwhile heroine of this piece. In all respects she behaves contrary to how such characters are proclaimed to act. She resists, rather invites, the persistent attention of her "prey," only giving in ultimately out of a kind of desperation that is clearly driven by the realization that her own husband doesn't really want or care for her. She truly comes to love her lover, rather than merely to seek ways of using him for her own ends. And her drive to kill her husband is practically justified by his determination to retire to a good life that involves her waiting on him and his paralyzed sister for the rest of their days - in spite of her obvious dismay at such a prospect.
Seriously, would-be suitors take note: Don't ever make the mistake of thinking I'll be your fucking maid. I'm not saying I'd kill you for it, but you wouldn't want to face that kind of wrath just the same.
In spite of all this, the description of the femme fatale never evolves. She's always evil, always conniving, always a user. And her male counterpart is always caught up, always hoodwinked, always good-at-heart. It's almost as if film historians are still seeking a conviction on the grounds of the same social misogyny that proliferated sixty-five years ago.
And people dare to say we've come a long way.
In a pig's eye.
You see, the murdered man is a selfish, apathetic fool, and the law of the land would have left his wife destitute if she'd tried to leave him honestly. There was no other way. We might even say that society itself had signed his death warrant.
The following zeal of the prosecution to convict can consequently be seen as a reflection of the social misogyny that brought things to such a sorry pass.
And that brings me to my chief irritation: the persistence of film historians in casting the so-called femme fatale as an evil, conniving character who lures the otherwise straight-arrow Joe to his doom.
Such a characterization is particularly improper for Cora Smith, the erstwhile heroine of this piece. In all respects she behaves contrary to how such characters are proclaimed to act. She resists, rather invites, the persistent attention of her "prey," only giving in ultimately out of a kind of desperation that is clearly driven by the realization that her own husband doesn't really want or care for her. She truly comes to love her lover, rather than merely to seek ways of using him for her own ends. And her drive to kill her husband is practically justified by his determination to retire to a good life that involves her waiting on him and his paralyzed sister for the rest of their days - in spite of her obvious dismay at such a prospect.
Seriously, would-be suitors take note: Don't ever make the mistake of thinking I'll be your fucking maid. I'm not saying I'd kill you for it, but you wouldn't want to face that kind of wrath just the same.
In spite of all this, the description of the femme fatale never evolves. She's always evil, always conniving, always a user. And her male counterpart is always caught up, always hoodwinked, always good-at-heart. It's almost as if film historians are still seeking a conviction on the grounds of the same social misogyny that proliferated sixty-five years ago.
And people dare to say we've come a long way.
In a pig's eye.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-10-21 11:28 pm (UTC)cheap engagement rings
Date: 2010-10-22 07:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-10-22 08:27 am (UTC)I prefer character-driven.