Gone Girl and When Good Movies Happen to Bad People

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Gone Girl and When Good Movies Happen to Bad People

Gone Girl is really good... but a lot of people are going to love it for all the wrong reasons.

Read Full Article

While I will state that Bob is a bit harsh on the accusations against men (there could very well be some favoritism in courts on the woman's side but most academia piles on misconduct and I severely doubt people can inflate stats that much. ), I do see this type of thing happening.

The only thing I say we can do is simply remain critical of those who take the wrong interpretation or those with ulterior motives and inform the public. It is best we keep on persevering

The instant I heard about the twist, I groaned and thought, "Oh, the #gg assholes are going to be circlejerking over this movie for eons."

I'm glad to hear that the film has some element of moral complexity, but of course that's going to fly right over the heads of the morons who latch onto this supposed message.

I think people read whatever they want to read into it, regardless of the authorial intent.

Like Frozen. People keep pairing Elsa and Anna together as a romantic couple even though they're both, you know, sisters. Now, does that mean the creators of Frozen support incest or lesbian relationships? No. Is it wrong to interpret as such? Depends on who you ask.

People will consume and digest it however they wish. Just put forward your opinion and things will get sorted out.

Movies like Fight Club are not alone in this. Black culture tends to worship Scarface for all the wrong reasons, propping Tony Montana up as an iconic gangsta model they wish to become and not the amoral sociopath who should be hated if not pitied.

Makes me wonder if schools should have mandatory courses where students can learn to fully understand the concept of filmmaking and its deeper meanings. And I'm not talking about a college course, I mean a class in middle and high school. Cause if we're ever going to end the shit film careers of Adam Sandler and Michael Bay, young men and women need to understand that some garbage movies are just that.

Also, we might want to put in a mandatory debate/discussion course since that's another thing our culture needs to be educated on.

Sort of figured this would be the case as soon as the trailers came out. I expect the same thing as Bob here does. Its going to be the go to for victim blaming crazypants. I remember I decided to go back to University, a move that has benefited me not just financially, but also gave me some needed exposure to international students and different ways of thinking. A friend of a friend then gave me a rant quoting some Fight Club ideology telling me about how I was falling into a trap etc., etc. I remembered seeing the flick and the twist being novel, but this guy sounded like it was going to inspire him to move into the woods with some rifles and go off the grid.

Unfortunately because of all this, I can't imagine actually being able to sit though the movie now. Coupling that with the fact that, I personally, am a little exhausted by the current "if you bought a house and are married you're just a backward dipshit living in 1950's fantasy land". Look, I'm not criticizing anyone who does not see that as a life for them, and nobody should feel compelled to live a certain life style just cause, but my wife and I enjoy our life of gardening, and animal husbandry in our house. I'm getting tired of turning around every 15 minutes to, marriage is a joke, the home ownership American dream is a lie you won't actually be satisfied with, so I'll just take a pass.

Peace Out.

Taking Fight Club at face value? Reminds me of its video game adaptation.

From a Guardian interview with Gillian Flynn:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/may/01/gillian-flynn-bestseller-gone-girl-misogyny

"To me, that puts a very, very small window on what feminism is," she responds. "Is it really only girl power, and you-go-girl, and empower yourself, and be the best you can be? For me, it's also the ability to have women who are bad characters ... the one thing that really frustrates me is this idea that women are innately good, innately nurturing. In literature, they can be dismissably bad - trampy, vampy, bitchy types - but there's still a big pushback against the idea that women can be just pragmatically evil, bad and selfish ... I don't write psycho bitches. The psycho bitch is just crazy - she has no motive, and so she's a dismissible person because of her psycho-bitchiness." Writing on her website, she concedes that hers is "not a particularly flattering portrait of women, but that's fine by me. Isn't it time to acknowledge the ugly side? I've grown quite weary of the spunky heroines, brave rape victims, soul-searching fashionistas that stock so many books. I particularly mourn the lack of female villains." It should probably be added that her lurid plots make no claim to social realism: to interpret her evil female characters as somehow representative of their real-life gender, you must willfully overlook hundreds of pages of other people and events that you'd almost certainly never encounter in reality, either.

Basically, evil women are the fleshing out of the entire human experience in the way men get to be both heroes and villains indiscriminately. Fair enough; hell, makes the children's book thing, starring a flawless female lead, make a lot more sense in context.

Still, I too went to that place the second I heard the twist and in some way it's still trading on the dynamic that the woman is usually smarter and far more put together (good or evil) while the man is a lunk-head. I mentioned this before in another thread in that I feel the pendulum seems to swing too far in one direction or the other to fulfill some societal need to empower either sex at the supposed cost of the other and I don't know of a lot of films or stories that involve two people of opposite sexes being on equal footing, though maybe I just don't know about them. I get that there's a lot more to it than this surface reading - modern society is practiced insanity seems to be the main hook - but it seems to me at least that the "battle of the sexes" is just something that's going to be more immediate in focus.

Wait wait wait wait....

So the author of the book admits that she wanted to put a small window on what feminism is, and show women as something other than perfect beings and perpetual victims, and yet you chastise the "average moron" for taking exactly that message out of the movie?

johnnybleu:
Wait wait wait wait....

So the author of the book admits that she wanted to put a small window on what feminism is, and show women as something other than perfect beings and perpetual victims, and yet you chastise the "average moron" for taking exactly that message out of the movie?

No, I don't think that's what he's saying. What he is saying is that there will be some assholes out there, no matter what evidence is presented, no matter how the story plays out will engage in victim blaming and when challenged cite this movie as evidence that all women are conniving evil creatures hiding behind pretty masks. The author is saying anyone can be evil, the morons will say is prof that all women are evil.

So...the same people that think Starship Troopers is Pro-Militarism?

...As badly as Bob mis-projects the "ha, traditional relationships are nothing but artifice and in inevitable decline" stamp on the work of an apparently happily married mother of two?

Okay, catty. But if there is one general legitimate complaint against feminist critique, its the (sometimes underlying, sometimes overt) implication that society and/or men have to be protected from the media by its self-appointed, clearly more "enlightened", members.

No dumb or shallow interpretation doesn't stick to a certain number of people. If some of Fight Club's audience failed to notice that Jack/Tyler is quite literally insane, a casual "stick it to 'em" analysis fails to note that there's also a very real understanding in the movie that breaking out of societal expectations may be the only way to make an impact on a drowsy, apathetic culture. Fincher clearly doesn't condemn that idea- indeed, given his work, it would by hypocritical to do so.

In short, keep talking, keep critiquing, just don't assume that there's some end-point where you get an A+ on the quiz because you've come up with the "real" message.

Oh yeah because there's TOTALLY only one way to interpret a piece of art.

Give me a fucking break.

Burnouts3s3:
Like Frozen. People keep pairing Elsa and Anna together as a romantic couple...

What?

How in the fuck?!

WHAT?!

OT: Truly compelling villains like Tyler Durden, among others, are a thin line to walk, because a lot of the time, part of their appeal lies in a certain grudging respect or admiration. Yes, they may be bastards/bitches of the highest order, but they're just so God-damn good at it that they can't help but captivate you. Either because of their intelligence, or charisma, or simply their liberating disregard for any moral line society wants to put in the way of what they want. You watch with rapt attention because a small, dark part of you, that balanced people at least keep well restrained during everyday life, can't help but want to be like them; and that will, regrettably, always cause people who aren't too good at separating reality from fantasy to feel affirmed in their beliefs because X interesting character in Y celebrated movie 'says what we're all thinking'.

I find it interesting, the different things different individuals can read into the same material. It seems to me that people are far to quick to assume that their own interpretations of things are the 'right' one... but hey. To each their own.

Damn, I meant to skip around the spoilers, but that was impossible. Oh well.

Good article. I'm not even really a movie buff, but I really hate it when people miss the point by a mile. Fight Club was definitely one of those for me in high school. Whereas I saw it as criticizing many men's insecurity of their own masculinity because they haven't wrestled a bear or saved the world, I was largely surrounded by people who saw it as a call to go back to the "good ol' days, when men were men" and other bullshit like that. Funnily enough, most of the people who had that interpretation of the film reacted violently when I challenged it, which only goes further to highlight their insecurity.

Mr. Q:
Movies like Fight Club are not alone in this. Black culture tends to worship Scarface for all the wrong reasons, propping Tony Montana up as an iconic gangsta model they wish to become and not the amoral sociopath who should be hated if not pitied.

If I'm not mistaken, Coppola thought that audiences would end up hating Michael Corleone in The Godfather, despite his positive traits, because, well, he's kind of doing evil stuff. That was later used to make Michael an irredeemable bastard at the end of Godfather II by tearing apart the "he's a family man" facade from his actions and making Michael's grotesqueness center stage, well contrasted by De Niro playing a young Vito.

NinjaDeathSlap:

Burnouts3s3:
Like Frozen. People keep pairing Elsa and Anna together as a romantic couple...

What?

How in the fuck?!

WHAT?!

Well many people interpreted it as a story of coming out of the closet, particularly making note of "true love" being love between two people of the same gender, even if it was, on the surface, about familial love. While probably not the intention, it makes the coming out allegory stand out a bit more, and some people, well, they they felt the need to do cross a few lines further after connecting those dots...

NinjaDeathSlap:

Burnouts3s3:
Like Frozen. People keep pairing Elsa and Anna together as a romantic couple...

What?

How in the fuck?!

WHAT?!

OT: Truly compelling villains like Tyler Durden, among others, are a thin line to walk, because a lot of the time, part of their appeal lies in a certain grudging respect or admiration. Yes, they may be bastards/bitches of the highest order, but they're just so God-damn good at it that they can't help but captivate you. Either because of their intelligence, or charisma, or simply their liberating disregard for any moral line society wants to put in the way of what they want. You watch with rapt attention because a small, dark part of you, that balanced people at least keep well restrained during everyday life, can't help but want to be like them; and that will, regrettably, always cause people who aren't too good at separating reality from fantasy to feel affirmed in their beliefs because X interesting character in Y celebrated movie 'says what we're all thinking'.

Rule 34, son. If it exists, there's porn of it.
OT: I'm not worried about the kind of guys Bob described in his article getting the wrong message from Gone Girl; what's really scary is the thought of someone thinking Amy is a role model to follow, like Tyler Durden was by the douchebags of yore.

Hunter Grant:

johnnybleu:
Wait wait wait wait....

So the author of the book admits that she wanted to put a small window on what feminism is, and show women as something other than perfect beings and perpetual victims, and yet you chastise the "average moron" for taking exactly that message out of the movie?

No, I don't think that's what he's saying. What he is saying is that there will be some assholes out there, no matter what evidence is presented, no matter how the story plays out will engage in victim blaming and when challenged cite this movie as evidence that all women are conniving evil creatures hiding behind pretty masks. The author is saying anyone can be evil, the morons will say is prof that all women are evil.

Well, while I don't know Bob on any real level, nor can I know what his intentions are in writing the article, I can say that to me it feels like a preemptive attack. I recently learned that Bob has some pretty heavy feminist leanings, and may even identify as a SJW. With that in mind, you can actually taste the disdain for men in the article-- it's dripping with resentment for "masculinity".

Call me paranoid, but all I see in this article is a line drawn in the sand. It's basically setting up the framework that anyone who might (rightly) draw a few parallels between the movie and real-world feminism is an ignorant woman-hater who missed the point. Exactly what you said; "assholes" who will "engage in victim blaming" and claim that "all women are conniving evil creatures". The sad reality is that in the real world, a woman doesn't have to fake her own murder to land her husband in hot water-- she only needs to call the cops and say she feels "threatened". But of course, me pointing out the fact that the movie might shed some light on the less desirable fruits of modern feminism means I couldn't possibly "get" it.

Bob can you please just write one review or article without attacking one group of people. The author wanted to show that women can be just as evil as men and had something to say about modern media and modern feminism. You seem to also not realize that some feminists will completely misinterpret the meaning of the film, claiming it promotes victim blaming and demonizes all women.

Also on another note, what the fuck do you have against masculinity. Are you still pissed off that some douche-bag in high school bullied you? Or are just trying to make yourself seem more "progressive"?

This week's intermission is a nice discussion of what the folks at TVTropes refer to as ''Misaimed Fandom''. Oh, and it was nice to see that Bob was savy enough to discuss the potential implications of the movie's first big twist, I actually wondered if he did when I saw his review.

EDIT:

On a side note, it's not exactly uncommon. Plenty of gangster-movies are loved by people who fantasize about that life-style, or even (supposedly) by actual gangsters.

NinjaDeathSlap:

Burnouts3s3:
Like Frozen. People keep pairing Elsa and Anna together as a romantic couple...

What?

How in the fuck?!

WHAT?!

http://www.reddit.com/r/Elsanna/

You're welcome.

Also, NSFW.

It's pretty self-evident, really, they had a lot of chemistry in the movie, even without the whole True Love twist (which on it's own still makes sense as an explicit there-is-more-to-love-than-romance message), there was also an awful lot of flirting, and blushing, and comingout, and skinship. So, yeah. Even if the executives certainly wouldn't have wanted even any lesbians in a Disney feature, let alone incest, it's almost certain that the animators and the screenwriters played with the idea intentionally.

NinjaDeathSlap:

Burnouts3s3:
Like Frozen. People keep pairing Elsa and Anna together as a romantic couple...

What?

How in the fuck?!

WHAT?!

In short, incest is a fetish, especially between siblings of the same gender, as that at least avoids the interbreeding angle (but still plows right into all the other icky stuff associated with it)

Zykmiester:
Bob can you please just write one review or article without attacking one group of people. The author wanted to show that women can be just as evil as men and had something to say about modern media and modern feminism. You seem to also not realize that some feminists will completely misinterpret the meaning of the film, claiming it promotes victim blaming and demonizes all women.

Also on another note, what the fuck do you have against masculinity. Are you still pissed off that some douche-bag in high school bullied you? Or are just trying to make yourself seem more "progressive"?

After last weeks featured review, and now this, I am beginning to wonder as well. Why so much bile?

Zykmiester:
Bob can you please just write one review or article without attacking one group of people. The author wanted to show that women can be just as evil as men and had something to say about modern media and modern feminism. You seem to also not realize that some feminists will completely misinterpret the meaning of the film, claiming it promotes victim blaming and demonizes all women.

Also on another note, what the fuck do you have against masculinity. Are you still pissed off that some douche-bag in high school bullied you? Or are just trying to make yourself seem more "progressive"?

Because the precise thing he is calling out here, people who will use this movie as an example of how all women who complain about abuse or rape are just lying about it and are simply crazy psycho bitches, is both in line with what the author intended (who, as has been quoted above, wrote this to say that women can be pragmatically evil, just like men, not that all women who complain about stuff are terrible liars), and is an actually defensible behavior. The people Bob is calling out here are scum. If your first reaction to any claim of abuse or harassment is that it is a total lie, then you are a broken person. If you are the type of persona aching for the masculine virtues and society of old, crying for a simpler world where men were men and women were unimportant, you are worthy of this kind of dismissal. If you look at the world and can only see how unfair it is for men, never seeing the constricting roles and expectations that make it so, and instead just blame the horrible womenfolk for your pains, you are being purposefully ignorant.

Bob is not calling out the idea that women can be as evil as men. Bob is calling out the idea that all women are inherently evil. That is the likely terrible lesson that some people will take from this movie, and that is a shame.

Burnouts3s3:
I think people read whatever they want to read into it, regardless of the authorial intent.

Like Frozen. People keep pairing Elsa and Anna together as a romantic couple even though they're both, you know, sisters. Now, does that mean the creators of Frozen support incest or lesbian relationships? No. Is it wrong to interpret as such? Depends on who you ask.

People will consume and digest it however they wish. Just put forward your opinion and things will get sorted out.

Entitled:

It's pretty self-evident, really, they had a lot of chemistry in the movie, even without the whole True Love twist (which on it's own still makes sense as an explicit there-is-more-to-love-than-romance message), there was also an awful lot of flirting, and blushing, and comingout, and skinship. So, yeah. Even if the executives certainly wouldn't have wanted even any lesbians in a Disney feature, let alone incest, it's almost certain that the animators and the screenwriters played with the idea intentionally.

There's a difference between Frozen and Gone Girl:

In Frozen these extremely creepy interpretations are subtext.
In Gone Girl the sociopathy is part of the text. At least according to Bob.

The people Bob is calling out here are scum

Scum which by the way has been polluting his blogs and the comment sections/forums of online venues associated with him for a very long time.

Regarding the movie twist itself, the most important part of the "she-devil" type of character is the devil part: that is, to be even remotely believable, this particular bogeyman must be so hyper-competent that she cannot be presented as anything else than a one-in-ten-million-chance, rolled-18s-in-every-stats-at-birth, freak of nature whose very harmfulness walks hand in hand with her rarity. Which underlines even more the dishonesty: the very existence, to quote sylocat, of "circlejerking #gg assholes" would be an impossibility: they'd be at best a dying breed too busy hiding to stay alive to be able to complain about anything on the internet.

johnnybleu:
(...) I recently learned that Bob has some pretty heavy feminist leanings, and may even identify as a SJW.

Seriously? Did you just use the term SJW with a straight face? Please tell me you're being facetious.

johnnybleu:
With that in mind, you can actually taste the disdain for men in the article-- it's dripping with resentment for "masculinity". (...)

No. No, it's not. There's no disdain for men per se in the article. However, there is a certain disdain for men with a specific attitude in this article. It is also not dripping with resentment for masculinity. It doesn't even mention masculinity.

The article is about people who are disregarding the subtext in favour of the text itself.

good article and something I have thourght myself

another interesting note is a while ago a read an article on slate that the famous "cool girl" speech and the imagery used in that scene could somewhat confuse its intended meaning

This article tries to have a point, but uses its examples so badly it misses it entirely.

It says that liking Tyler Durden (the more directly negative character in the film) for all the wrong reasons is a bad thing and that he's worried that there will be the same reaction with people hating Amy again, for the wrong reasons. If both of these can exist, why not the other side? People who hate Tyler Durden because he espouses an attitude towards masculinity that people dislike and people who will like Amy because they see her as an empowerment figure and a woman who controls her own life. Would they be just as bad?

Nixou:
Regarding the movie twist itself, the most important part of the "she-devil" type of character is the devil part: that is, to be even remotely believable, this particular bogeyman must be so hyper-competent that she cannot be presented as anything else than a one-in-ten-million-chance, rolled-18s-in-every-stats-at-birth, freak of nature whose very harmfulness walks hand in hand with her rarity.

Sort of like what Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian would need to pull off half the stuff they get accused of.

Mr. Q:

Makes me wonder if schools should have mandatory courses where students can learn to fully understand the concept of filmmaking and its deeper meanings. And I'm not talking about a college course, I mean a class in middle and high school. Cause if we're ever going to end the shit film careers of Adam Sandler and Michael Bay, young men and women need to understand that some garbage movies are just that.

Also, we might want to put in a mandatory debate/discussion course since that's another thing our culture needs to be educated on.

but even if the intent of a movie (or how an issue is framed) sails over peoples heads people can still have their personal interpretations, knowing the Author of Fight Club doesn't exactly endorse Tyler Durden doesn't mean somone still won't think he's the best thing ever....or to a lesser extent think that Miranda Preistly in The Devil Wears Prada can do whatever she wants and andi is just being entitled and whiney

Sylocat:

Sort of like what Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian would need to pull off half the stuff they get accused of.

but the moonbase is real

Darth_Payn:

Rule 34, son. If it exists, there's porn of it.
OT: I'm not worried about the kind of guys Bob described in his article getting the wrong message from Gone Girl; what's really scary is the thought of someone thinking Amy is a role model to follow, like Tyler Durden was by the douchebags of yore.

I can't see that happening....at least not in a tyler durden way, his schtick was essentially being compelling and having revolutionary "ideas"

of coarse there's always that element of admiration even if you know theyre still terrible people, for an obscure example classic liturature "Dangerous Liaisons" one of the main charachter's is a upper class socialite who knows the world she lives in is bullshit (18th century) so she puts all her effort into fucking with people (and fucking people) and there's something cathartic about her being such an evil genius

Sylocat:

Nixou:
Regarding the movie twist itself, the most important part of the "she-devil" type of character is the devil part: that is, to be even remotely believable, this particular bogeyman must be so hyper-competent that she cannot be presented as anything else than a one-in-ten-million-chance, rolled-18s-in-every-stats-at-birth, freak of nature whose very harmfulness walks hand in hand with her rarity.

Sort of like what Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian would need to pull off half the stuff they get accused of.

Which is relavent to the discussion... how?

Sort of as an aside, I totally get why people got the "wrong" message from Fight Club. I mean, if the point of the movie is to ultimately grow up and reject your inner Tyler Durden, why the fuck does it spend two hours making youthful nihilism as seductive and profound as possible? Obviously, I get that this is part of the point. Show how shiny the new thing is but then show why we shouldn't have it... but the movie seriously glossed over the latter.

I mean, as a counterexample, take the Great Gatsby. First third of the story, we see Gatsby get built up as a man of wealth and mystery. But we meet him in the second act, and we see his back story. He becomes relateable, but human. And by the last part, you see the fundamental weakness in his character and he becomes a character to be pitied, not admired.

Fight Club got rid of the second part and crammed the third part of this journey into about 20 minutes. Is it any surprise we end up, rather than happy to have moved beyond Tyler, disappointed that he had lost?

the December King:

Zykmiester:
Bob can you please just write one review or article without attacking one group of people. The author wanted to show that women can be just as evil as men and had something to say about modern media and modern feminism. You seem to also not realize that some feminists will completely misinterpret the meaning of the film, claiming it promotes victim blaming and demonizes all women.

Also on another note, what the fuck do you have against masculinity. Are you still pissed off that some douche-bag in high school bullied you? Or are just trying to make yourself seem more "progressive"?

After last weeks featured review, and now this, I am beginning to wonder as well. Why so much bile?

Most likely it's simply a way for him to strike back at what he perceives #GamerGate to be, but by doing it in this way he can entirely negate any actual criticism that he's insulting the supporters of #GamerGate. There are too many #GamerGate supporters who are entirely reasonable, thoughtful and intelligent people of all genders, ethnicities, sexualities and political leanings for him to keep making blanket anti-#GamerGate statements without major blowback, but the Venn diagram between #GamerGate supporters and "People Who Love Fight Club Wrong" is metaphorically a large circle with a small zit out one side.

So he can spout all sorts of bile at them - much of it likely simmering for years as he watches the audience enjoy something for all the "wrong" reasons, something his cultured, educated and intelligent mind simply can't comprehend. And I would be very surprised if he had not spent literally hours of his life typing up attacks on those fans in various online forums (possibly even IMDB) and found that he's run into the solid granite wall that is "Authorial intent is not the same as Audience Interpretation", didn't bring a single person to watching Fight Club in the "right" way and it's festered in him for years - and kill two birds with one stone. And the best part is that it's likely impossible to actually prove this is the case, so Bob can simply point back at me and say "Hey, I'm just talking about Fight Club. You're the one bringing #GamerGate into this." and smugly sit back knowing that even if I'm right, I'll never be able to prove it. It's a win-win situation for him.

Regarding fans liking something for the "Wrong Reasons", that argument has noodles for bones. Why someone likes or dislikes something is subjective, and it's extremely possible for one person to love something and another to hate something for the exact same reason, or for one person to take something entirely differently than the author/creator intended up to and including the exact opposite of how they intended it. And none of those are "wrong" - they're just opposed to your own viewpoint. The only place it starts to even potentially move into an authentic discussion about "right" and "wrong" is in how fans express their liking and even more importantly, what actions they take based on that influence. Posting on Facebook "Durr... Amasing Amy is totes evil girl, all grls are Amasing Amy!" is not a "wrong" way to like this movie; it's an expression of free speech. Whether we agree with it or not is barely relevant and for the most part, completely subjective. If we agree with it than it's the "right" way. If we disagree with it it's the "wrong" way.

Regarding Fight Club, it's also possible to see Tyler Durden for what he is... but at the same time see that he has some points with merit. Dismissing those points because the messenger is objectionable is a form of the ad hominem fallacy and should be no more welcomed than accepting them simply because someone accepts the "authority" of Tyler Durden. (Which, amusingly, Bob did with extreme prejudice by Godwinning that part in the actual article. So now if anyone actually tries to debate those points, they may have to prove they aren't a nazi. Good job, Bob. Good job.)

Ironically what may come out of this is an understanding that women are actually complex beings; we pigeonhole them into the Sinner or Saint, Mother or Prostitute, Pure or Sullied dichotomies all the time. And we rarely actually give them control over their own actions; why is Woman X "Evil"? She was abused (generally raped) by a man in her past. Why is Woman Y so saintly in the face of so much adversity? Because she's a Strong Woman. But from the sounds of it, the woman in this movie (Amazing Amy) is just straight up evil. There isn't a flashback scene to where 10yr old Amy backs into her bedroom in fear as a shadowy (male) figure approaches, or a flashback to where she was a happy and nice girl who got victimized by a jerk. She's just straight up evil and as such, she's responsible for her actions. She has Agency. No one chose her path for her.

Getting people to actually internalize the idea that women can have agency over their lives, that they aren't simply victims of the agency of men, that could be a very good thing that might come out of liking Gone Girl for the "Wrong" reasons.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.