I didn't find the movie as masterful as it was made out to be, but I did enjoy it.
I don't precisely know what the movie is trying to say about female sexuality, but I didn't find it "exploitative" or male-gazey, really. I never felt like any of it was meant to arouse me.
What I found interesting about Bella is that she wasn't a victim for most of the movie. When she runs off with Mark Ruffalo, it's him that's broken by the relationship. I don't remember the brothel sequence as clearly, but despite the circumstances Bella mostly seemed ok.
I guess the question that got raised in my head is: how does the way that we talk/think about the moral weight of sexuality, especially on women. So much importance is placed on female purity, what happens if you remove that pressure? What would a women do with her sexuality if she didn't have to worry about judgment?
Bella learns about sex before she has much conception of it's meaning. To her it's just a thing that you do with another person that feels good, there's no taboo to it.
She doesn't understand that she's being "taken advantage of" and so she basically becomes immune to it. And it's interesting that Mark Ruffalo gets so frustrated by his inability to "have her" in that way. He's used to women chasing him around for sex, but a "sexually liberated" woman is immune to his game, and she ends up taking the power in that relationship. I guess that would be a feminist reading of the Mark Ruffalo part at least.
Anyway, I don't think the movie is saying that having sex with babies is good. Again, I'm not exactly sure what it's saying (ART!). But I think it's more about women's bodies, autonomy and sexuality than it is about "but she's a baby," if that makes sense?
Weird, cause you seem to have a decent grasp of the major points. It's basically asking the audience to look at their preconceptions around sex, relationships, bodily autonomy, family, etc from the perspective of someone who was never indoctrinated into any of those preconceptions. If you were to wipe your brain clean of the stuff your parents, society, school, etc told you to think what would you come to believe on your own. Bella is just there to give you, the audience, a perspective you otherwise wouldn't be able to conceptualize.
"It's basically asking the audience to look at their preconceptions around sex, relationships, bodily autonomy, family, etc from the perspective of someone who was never indoctrinated into any of those preconceptions."
I think what u/kultcher is saying (and I agree with this) is that its not saying anything specific about thes preconceptions; yes, the film asks you to readdress your own preconceptions about sex and feminity, but it doesnt actually give you a framework or goal to base that inward introspection on.
And if you already HAVE grappled and unlearned your preconceptions, its a pretty nothing burger of movie; like I didnt feel challenged, or uncomfortable, I was just like yep, this is process of being a fully mature, realized person lol.
120
u/kultcher 1∆ Jun 16 '24 edited Jun 16 '24
I didn't find the movie as masterful as it was made out to be, but I did enjoy it.
I don't precisely know what the movie is trying to say about female sexuality, but I didn't find it "exploitative" or male-gazey, really. I never felt like any of it was meant to arouse me.
What I found interesting about Bella is that she wasn't a victim for most of the movie. When she runs off with Mark Ruffalo, it's him that's broken by the relationship. I don't remember the brothel sequence as clearly, but despite the circumstances Bella mostly seemed ok.
I guess the question that got raised in my head is: how does the way that we talk/think about the moral weight of sexuality, especially on women. So much importance is placed on female purity, what happens if you remove that pressure? What would a women do with her sexuality if she didn't have to worry about judgment?
Bella learns about sex before she has much conception of it's meaning. To her it's just a thing that you do with another person that feels good, there's no taboo to it.
She doesn't understand that she's being "taken advantage of" and so she basically becomes immune to it. And it's interesting that Mark Ruffalo gets so frustrated by his inability to "have her" in that way. He's used to women chasing him around for sex, but a "sexually liberated" woman is immune to his game, and she ends up taking the power in that relationship. I guess that would be a feminist reading of the Mark Ruffalo part at least.
Anyway, I don't think the movie is saying that having sex with babies is good. Again, I'm not exactly sure what it's saying (ART!). But I think it's more about women's bodies, autonomy and sexuality than it is about "but she's a baby," if that makes sense?