When I first reflected on the experience that was this film, I felt that the shocking rape scenes and images of murdered women to be gratuitous and that the powers of suggestion could have maintained the films strength. However, after thinking more about the message the film was portraying I realised that the story didn't want its audience to hopefully imagine a woman's experience with the misogynistic and evil characters to be anything less than traumatic.
Besides, if poorly made teen horrors like 'Final Destination' can show an all-American cheerleader get empaled on a flying pole for the soul purpose of getting a universal "Ewwww" from the audience, then can't a skilled film maker explicitly represent the utter horror of rape in order to build and develop a highly disturbed and avenging heroine?
I didn't percieve any of the violence against women to eroticized by any stretch of the imagination, for me rape was portrayed as the ugliest thing in the world, which leaves characters broken and unfixable. For me also, Lisbeth was a definite feminist who was left without the ability to trust men. I think it would have been both unrealistic and unjustifiable if the ending saw her riding off into the sunset with her new hunky fella.
A review in the Guardian (by someone who hadn't seen the film I might add) stated that "In the novel Larsson spares us many graphic descriptions, leaving a lot of the worst to our imagination. It seems, then, that the film has betrayed not only some of the book's original subtlety but also its feminism" . This comment was a result of accusations that the film was a indulgent of misogynist fantasy. I agree with this eloquent comment left on the review which said:
"I can understand why someone would find the depictions of sexual violence in the film upsetting but can't imagine how anyone could see them as eroticized. They are simply truthful, and in my opinion, filmed in a manner that keeps the focus on the victim's experience. This is necessary to the narrative, because Salander (Lisbeth) will eventually behave in a ruthless and seemingly brutal manner as a result of the view of the world her experiences have given her."
This last sentence reveals an interesting moral dilemma which this film tackled, because Martin, who was eventually found to be responsible for an endless string of horrific crimes against women, was infact himself broken by his misogynist Father at a very young age. He made him into the brutal rapist that he turned out to be, so arguably his past experiences were responsible for his utter lack of conscience or human compassion. This is also the reason given for Lisbeth's violent and ruthless behaviour. When asked why she simpley left Martin to die an horrific death she says that he can't be excused, he is pure evil and everyone chooses who they want to be. There is definitely an intreguing connection between the two character's state of mind as the camera focuses in on the satisfaction in Lisbeth eyes as she watches Martin burn to death which Martin previously shows when he talks about the thrill of killing.
If what Lisbeth said is true, and that people do choose who they want to be, then I think thats exactly what she did, she truely felt that Martin desserved to burn, similarly to how the suffering she inflicted on her Guardian earlier in the film. It isn't just that simple though, Lisbeth doesn't choose to be left heart broken at the end without the ability to put faith in the man she loves.
I think the most important thing to remember in this discussion is outlined again by the eloquent commenter: "Drawing a curtain across rape and other forms of sexual abuse should not be the default feminist approach to these crimes. Obviously, it's not always appropriate to be rigorously truthful about violence, but relegating it to the status of the unspeakable can be just as traumatic for those who survive as ubiquitous depictions of violence"
This last sentence reveals an interesting moral dilemma which this film tackled, because Martin, who was eventually found to be responsible for an endless string of horrific crimes against women, was infact himself broken by his misogynist Father at a very young age. He made him into the brutal rapist that he turned out to be, so arguably his past experiences were responsible for his utter lack of conscience or human compassion. This is also the reason given for Lisbeth's violent and ruthless behaviour. When asked why she simpley left Martin to die an horrific death she says that he can't be excused, he is pure evil and everyone chooses who they want to be. There is definitely an intreguing connection between the two character's state of mind as the camera focuses in on the satisfaction in Lisbeth eyes as she watches Martin burn to death which Martin previously shows when he talks about the thrill of killing.
If what Lisbeth said is true, and that people do choose who they want to be, then I think thats exactly what she did, she truely felt that Martin desserved to burn, similarly to how the suffering she inflicted on her Guardian earlier in the film. It isn't just that simple though, Lisbeth doesn't choose to be left heart broken at the end without the ability to put faith in the man she loves.
I think the most important thing to remember in this discussion is outlined again by the eloquent commenter: "Drawing a curtain across rape and other forms of sexual abuse should not be the default feminist approach to these crimes. Obviously, it's not always appropriate to be rigorously truthful about violence, but relegating it to the status of the unspeakable can be just as traumatic for those who survive as ubiquitous depictions of violence"
No comments:
Post a Comment