Skip to main content

If you were my wife . . . : Talk on "Hurt Locker"

It's that I'm still coming to grips with how a woman could possibly have dreamed up this spartan American soldier in Iraq, who, while obsessively romancing death as a bomb-squad ace, outdoes the most extreme images of machismo ever produced by mainstream America. [. . .] Looks to me like she's masquerading as the baddest boy on the block to win the respect of an industry still so hobbled by gender-specific tunnel vision that it has trouble admiring anything but filmmaking soaked in a reduced notion of masculinity. (Martha Nochimson, “Kathryn Bigelow: Feminist pioneer or tough guy in drag?” 24 Feb. 2010)

First off, if you were my wife, I'd be happy to go back to bombs too.

Secondly, I didn't much like the teflon-soldier, either. Had me thinking at times of the worst part of “Gladiator,” when Maximus steps back from the scribe who wets himself. I understand the current appeal of narrowing your focus, though. Just get into a groove, do something over and over and over again, and maybe when you pull away, things will have changed. If not, back into the groove again. That is, there is a sense that Norah Ephron's latest is actually kinda like "Hurt Locker." A whole book of recipes, that drives her (the blogger) away from being a nothing. At the end, with whatever numerous potential recipe-bombs defused, with her now set to master whatever daily recipe before her, one suspects she'll be apt to go at it again, after her brief pause of no clear mission. No?

- - - - -

I'd like to once again chime in to make clear that it is unlikely to me that Bigelow is masquerading as a hyper-macho bad boy to gain someone else's approval, but that she is instead attracted to characters who can "keep their head" in stressful situations because she knows and is inspired by this character trait. And though I have voiced some criticism here of the teflon-soldier, you do see someone worth trying to emulate -- whatever your sex -- when Will throws off the headset, focuses on his task, and manages a successful defusing of the car-bomb. He keeps calm and inquisitive, in stressful situations, and will balk authority in order to do so -- and that's a trait the Clint Eastwoods AND the Norah Ephron's surely possess. His comrades are made to seem hyper hyper-alert, not just less narrowly-focused. And his patience is perhaps more calming than it is upsetting. He needs to be a better listener? Probably. But I think the movie suggests his ability to do what he has to to feel calm and in control, to be true to his own needs, actually is what affords him the ability to be generously receptive to the world around him -- he doesn't look at the porn-selling kid as just another potential hazard, something his companions would have a tougher time managing. He is more playful and human -- on the battlefield. Again, maybe a lot of directors are the same way, away from home (life).

Nochimson's point that Hollywood -- in motioning Bigelow to be the director of the year -- is up to something ultimately women-disparaging, requires a better engagement than we have thus far offered, because we all know, for instance, that something quite not so feminist was at work in promoting someone like Margaret Thatcher into office in Britain. If Britains bragged about having a female prime minister, about how it made them more evolved than Americans, I think many would think of how she was going to go at and eviscerate many of the social programs put in place to help women, try and argue that she is in fact best proof of the HOSTILITY of most Britains towards feminism, and have many Thatcher supporters successfully shut them down as having a narrow, circumscribed estimation of women's interests -- as being sexist themselves, that is. And yet "we" would still truly know that something other than what we mean by feminism was forwarded when the Iron Lady gained her "crown." Same thing here? I'm not sure. A better test would have been afforded if Ephron's latest had been all about Julia and her life -- the half of the movie that Nochimson evidently believes most worthy. If the movie had been that, and Ephron wasn't nominated, I'd be more pissed at the war-chick getting the accolades over the warmer display of joie de vivre. I'm not sure I'd be thinking sexism, though -- but surely that a culture has in mind to shape "their" psyches into bullet form (what happened to art deco in 30s and 40s).

Link: Kathryn Bigelow: Feminist pioneer or tough guy in drag?


Popular posts from this blog

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …