Feminism is a social movement which has had an enormous impact on film theory and criticism. Cinema is taken by feminists to be a cultural practice representing myths about women and femininity, as well as about men and masculinity. Issues of representation and spectatorship are central to feminist film theory and criticism. Early feminist criticism was directed at stereotypes of women, mostly in Hollywood films. Such fixed and endlessly repeated images of women were considered to be objectionable distortions which would have a negative impact on the female spectator. Hence, the call for positive images of women in cinema.

The Characters Unconsciousness: 

Suckerpunch

The majority of the film is based upon the characters unconsciousness. In Suckerpunch there are three different “layers” or “worlds”.

The first layer is reality. The grim grey and blue toned institution. Babydoll has been framed for the murder of her sister and institutionalized by her Paedophile stepfather. The institution she has been placed in is run by an orderly who will fake the doctors signatures on lobotomy agreements for families with enough money who want to make a girl “disappear” as it were. This is the case for Babydoll, she is to be lobotomised when the lobotomy doctor next comes to the institution. This period of time is also the countdown that Babydoll takes with her into the other “layers”. Music is used in all three “layers” to some significance. In the reality layer, it issued as a form of therapy in the theatre, to help the girls relive and overcome their past experiences. Throughout this layer there are many suggestions of the girls being abused by the staff of the institution also, especially Blue, the main orderly. He makes a reference towards the rape at the end of the film. The end of this reality comes as Babydoll is about to be lobotomised. Due to the horror and unfairness Babydoll receives in reality, she retreats into her mind. 

“It’s like we talked about. You control this world. The world you control can be as real as any pain.”

The second layer is that of the institution as a brothel. In my opinion this is not so different from the “reality” level, except that here the girls do not class the sex as rape, like they are experiencing in reality. This layer picks up where reality left off, but instead of Babydoll sitting in the lobotomy chair, its Sweet Pea, another of the girls in the institution, and she’s performing in a theatre production of a girl being lobotomised, its not really happening. The theatre in this layer is different to the other. There is a plush carpet, the stark walls are lavishly papered, and it has more of an appearance of a real theatre. Also, the girls wear perfect hairstyles, flawless make up, sexy clothing. This highly sexualized version of reality is how Babydoll chooses to deal with the molestation and rape she has and continues to suffer. In this reality, she controls her sexuality, it is not just something she is abused for. She in fact stops Rocket from being raped by the cook at one point. The timeline Babydoll has in this layer is that a man named “The High Roller” is “coming for her” in 5 days. Things are much simpler in this layer. The girls are led to believe they have some kind of freedom. The man who brings Babydoll to the institution is a “priest” and she is there for her virginity to be sold to this “high roller”.The music in this layer is much heavier, more bass, more volume, it has been sexualized as much as the girls have. 

“Your fight for survival starts right now. You don’t think you’re strong enough? You are. You’re afraid. Don’t be. You have all the weapons you need. Now fight.”

The switch to the third layer comes when Babydoll dances. In the second layer each girl has a dance. Something to perform to the male clients. When Babydoll first practices her dance in the studio infront of all of the girls, Blue and some of his important “buisness connections” the room stops. Everyone is entraced by what Babydoll is doing, but we never see it. What she does is left entirely to our imaginations, because when Babydoll dances, we go with her the the third layer. The first time we enter the third layer, Babydoll meets an old man who tells her what things she’ll need to find in order to escape the institution. “The first”, he tells her, “is a map.” Then, fire, a knife and a key. “The fifth thing”, he tells her “is a mystery. It is the reason, it is the goal.” In this layer that Babydoll retreats into each time she dances, she is on a mission to find one of these items. It may be that she is in Nazi trenches hacking up robots to search for a map, or in a helicopter trying to escape a dragon in search of fire. The point is that each time she obtains one of the items in the third layer, she has it in the second layer. Babydoll is not obtaining these things consciously though, it is done through The Characters Unconsciousness. 

SS

The Unconsciousness Of Cinematic Disclosure: 

Suckerpunch

Dissociation: The disconnection or separation of something from something else or the state of being disconnected.

The main character in Suckerpunch is Babydoll. At the beginning of the film, her mother is killed by her abusive stepfather so that he may inherit her fortune. At hearing that Babydoll and her sister are the ones to inherit instead of him however, The stepfather kills Babydoll’s younger sister and frames her for the murder. 

Before Babydoll’s sister is killed however, is it very heavily implied that the stepfather is going to rape/molest her, and from Babydoll’s reaction to seeing her stepfather enter her sisters bedroom through the keyhole in her door, we assume that she has known the same experience. Though it is never confirmed that Babydoll was raped or molested by her stepfather, it makes her character a lot more believable. 

When she enters the asylum she is extremely unattached and “blank”. Though some may look at these characteristics and think she is not portraying the character well, I think these characteristics would be extremely apt of someone whose mother has been killed, and the person supposed to care for her has abused his role in her life, raped her, raped her sister and then killed her also.

The audience only assumes that Babydoll was molested by her stepfather however, there are heavier assumptions that once inside the institution she and the other girls are abused by the orderlies.

“You know what it feels like? Like Im this little boy, Sitting in the corner of the sandbox while everyone gets to play with my toys, but me. So Im going to take my toys and Im going to…”

The unconsciousness of cinematic disclosure is used so we aren’t sure of the facts, however when we add the molestation from her both her stepfather and the staff at the institution, Babydoll’s character becomes much more understandable.

SS

Psychoanalytical film theory is an approach that focuses on unmasking the ways in which the phenomenon of cinema in general, and the elements of specific films in particular, are both shaped by the unconscious. 

1. The Filmmaker’s Unconscious. In its earliest stages, psychoanalytic film theory compared films to such manifestations of the unconscious as dreams, slips of the tongue, and neurotic symptoms. Just as these are considered to be manifestations of a patient’s unconscious, films were considered to be manifestations of a filmmaker’s unconscious. This kind of psychoanalytic film theory is somewhat out of fashion today.

2. The Character’s Unconscious. Another application of psychoanalysis to cinema studies—one still occasionally seen today—focuses on the characters of a given film and analyzes their behavior and dialogue in an attempt to interpret traces of their unconscious. This approach, when it first appeared, was immediately attacked by skeptical film critics who pointed out that fictional characters, insofar as they are not real people, have neither a conscious nor an unconscious mind to speak of. However, the psychoanalysis of film characters quickly found new credibility with the next stage in the development of psychoanalytic film theory—the analysis of the audience’s unconscious as it is prompted and shaped during a film viewing.

3. The Audience’s Unconscious. The audience-focused approach will often focus on the way in which the behavior and dialogue of certain characters can be interpreted as manifestations of our unconscious, insofar as we come to identify ourselves with them when we visit the cinema. Thus, as we sit quietly in the dark and forge our psychic bonds with this or that character, we unconsciously project our own fantasies, phobias, and fixations onto these shimmering alter-egos. Whenever they inevitably say or do something that even tangentially touches upon one of these fantasies, phobias, or fixations, we derive unconscious satisfaction or dissatisfaction accordingly.

4. The Unconscious of Cinematic Discourse. Finally, the most recent version of psychoanalytic film theory more or less abandons the character-centered approach altogether, focusing instead on how the form of films replicates or mimics the formal model of the conscious/unconscious mind posited by psychoanalysis. Thus, for example, the psychoanalytic film theorist might focus on the way in which the formal procedure of editing will sometimes function similarly to the mechanism of repression by cutting out a crucial, emotionally charged moment which, though unseen, will continue to resonate throughout the film (as in the markedly absent moment of actual cannibalism in Mankiewicz’s Suddenly Last Summer). Here the unconscious that is unveiled belongs neither to the filmmaker, nor to a character, nor to an audience of viewers, but rather to the film’s own discourse. The unconscious is thus conceived as an organization of hints and traces of meaning residing within the audio-visual language of the cinema. (Of course this unconscious can always become appropriated by the film-viewer—apropos the third form of psychoanalytic film theory—to the extent that he or she internalizes this language during the film-viewing situation).

Psychoanalysis was founded by Sigmund Freud.  Freud believed that people could be cured by making conscious their unconscious thoughts and motivations, thus gaining “insight”.

Exploring possible reasons to explain why a second or third viewing of a film can actually increase the emotional response rather than lessen it. 

When we watch a film for a second or third time sometimes our emotional responses can be dulled, but there are films in which the emotional response in increased as we begin to notice more or certain elements foreshadow the ending we know is coming bringing out the response that much earlier.

“It enhances the viewing of the film - knowing how or why things are done.”

Fear:

The Exorcist:

We are more aware of the special effects rather than the story, such as the primitive animal sounds used as sound effects n the film (the barking dogs, the bees)

We are also more aware of certain aspects of the mise-en-scene: the foreboding red sky, the old lady with the deformed face in the carriage, the clock in the archive room ticking loud - signalling time running out. In the hospital scene Regan looks undressed with her shoulders exposed - she looks very vulnerable - especially to the male gaze and the needle used to sedate her is very phallic - she is objectified here - being abused by the doctors; a male dominated profession.

Sadness:

Titanic:

There are aspects of foreshadowing in the beginning of the film: the dolls head sunk beneath the sand under water.

We focus more on the minor characters with a second or third viewing, instead of just Jack and Rose. This makes us more aware that the film is based upon a factual event in which people lost their lives. It increases a sense of injustice and prejudice and still relevant class divisions. 

SS

How does the film work to generate emotion? The emphasis may be on a relatively straightforward issue like the use of mise-en-scene, staging, and music, or more complex issues of identification and spectator alignment with particular characters.

How far does the spectator feel consciously manipulated by the film? and, by contrast, how far does the emotional power of the film derive from a combination of elements which are difficult to pin down?

How far does the emotional effect of this film derive from contextual knowledge? -our ability to respond to the film in the gap between fictional representation and historical fact.

SS

Emotional Effect:

- Social ideology/values/beliefs

- Expectations

- Identify with situation/character

- Where you watch it

- Environment

- Who you’re with

- When you watch it (age)

- Personal Experience/recent circumstances

- Previous knowledge (director, genre)

Experimental and Expanded Film:

- Likely to take the spectator out of the familiar viewing situation and thus begin to pose questions about the variety of ways in which we can engage in audio-visual work. It is also likely that spectatorship will be challenged by non-narrative work, raising questions about what “story” and other matters might persuade us to sit in front of a piece of film.

Different kinds of film challenge conventional assumptions about the role of the spectator and the nature of cinematic pleasure.

SS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iGONDWCnsM

When looking at the film with a feminism approach, we can better understand Morverns character and actions. From a feminist point of view, the things that Morvern did in the film are more justified. She buries her boyfriends body and tells no one he’s dead, but she doesn’t do this cold heartedly, she does it so that she can keep his flat, the money for his funeral and eventually keep the money from selling his novel as her own.

If Morvern had gone to the police about her boyfriends death, she would have ended up with nothing, working in a supermarket all her life. Instead, she took the money and made her life better, saw places she might never have otherwise seen, and gave herself a brighter future. When looking at these events with a feminist approach we can understand what Morvern did. Why shouldn’t she of tried to make her life better than it was? The film is directed by a woman, Lynne Ramsay, so perhaps the feminist themes in the film are to be expected. We see these themes especially in the sex scene. Feminism is mostly about equality between men and women, which is what were shown in this scene. If anything, Morvern is seen to be more than the man in the scene, as he is naked first, and when they have sex, he covers her body so she isn’t seen naked by the audience, and therefore not objectified as the man is.

Morvern is seen a strong, she is not a passive female character and when looking at the film from a feminist point of view she can even be seen as a role model: she is working class, works in a supermarket, lives in a small Scottish town,  her boyfriend has left her alone, she has no education, no family and no prospects. Because of her actions, by the end of the film she is: £100,00 richer, a published novelist, holidaying in Spain, with a possible career in front of her. Looking at the film from a feminist point of view is very useful as it helps us to understand Morverns character more and makes us see the situation in a different and much more positive light. The Feminist approach can also be looked at in terms of how Morvern is seen by the audience.  

Laura Mulvey described the camera as being representative of the male gaze, and that women on film are there to be looked at. The approach does not work with Morvern Caller as she is not a sexual character. Even scenes where Morvern is naked, she is seen bathing herself and her nakedness is not the focal point of the scene, it is more of a plot point. Morvern is naked and washing allot as she is a “child of nature”. Nakedness seems natural for her and we don’t feel as if we are gazing at her body while she is naked, more as if we are trying to decipher her thoughts. Morvern is not seen as sexual as the film is not a blockbuster, it’s more of an art house film, so the plot is more important than the attractiveness of the characters. 

When looking at Morvern Caller in terms of the abjection approach, we again, can learn more about Morverns character. Abjection is described as being associated with nature or natural things like blood, death, corpses and bodily waste: things which we have a fascination with, but also find disgusting. From the first scene, Morvern is automatically associated with death, caressing and laying next to a dead body. She plays with bugs when she buries her boyfriends body, and lets ants crawl over her hands in Spain. She works in a fruit and veg section in the supermarket and touches the mould and maggots thoughtfully. When looking at how much Morverns character can be opposed by  abjection, we can see that she is very unlike female film stereotypes, Morvern is seen more as a child of nature. 

SS

Feminist film theory comes from feminism. Feminists have many approaches to cinema analysis, regarding the film elements analysed and their theoretical underpinnings.

Post Colonial Theory:

Examines the effects of imperialistic views in post colonial societies. 

Post colonial societies: a population subjected to the political domination of another population.

The theory deals with things done in previously colonized countries.

post-colonialism:

• Questions the effect of empire.
• Raises issues such as racism and exploitation.
• Asses the position of the post colonial subject.
• Offers a counter narrative to the long tradition of European imperial narratives.

SS

“Remember this,” Tyler said. “The people you’re trying to step on, we’re everyone you depend on. We’re the people who do your laundry and cook your food and serve your dinner. We make your bed. We guard you while you’re asleep. We drive the ambulances. We direct your call. We are cooks and taxi drivers and we know everything about you. We process your insurance claims and credit card charges. We control every part of your life” (Palahniuk 166).

Fight Club’s main character Tyler Durden’s dialogue is wrought with Marxist and communistic theory. His ideals in life are his hatred of consumerism and violence, which some say is representative of a “search for lost masculine authority”.

Man, I see in Fight Club the strongest and smartest men who’ve ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see it squandered. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables – slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need.  We’re the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our great war is a spiritual war. Our great depression is our lives. We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won’t. We’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off.

.

In Fight Club, Tyler plans a revolution, he’s going to make a change in the way the world works. It starts out in the basements of bars. Men come together to gain a few scars. Fighting makes them feel alive. 

Fight Club soon progresses into “Project Mayhem.”

The “Space Monkeys” first come together to warn off men high up with judges, police, government workers etc…. to stop making any reports on the “underground boxing clubs” they are trying to find. After that, Tyler begins giving the members of Project Mayhem assignments. Spray paint an office building. Roll a Boulder statue into a multi-million dollar coffee franchise. But as the story continues and “the narrator” grip on reality gets looser and looser, Tyler Durdens gets stronger.

His big plan is to blow up all of the high rise office buildings in the unnamed city where the story takes place. This is where his true Marxist ideals come through. Because the office buildings all belong to credit card companies, and in destroying them, Durden erases millions of debts from all around the country. Working class people will be given a lifeline, and the only ones loosing out will be the “fat cats” who own the companies.

As we see at the end of Fight Club, Tyler Durden never really existed as his own person. He was an alter ego that “the narrator” used to rid himself of his own bourgeois tendencies and to strengthen his proletarian beliefs. Before “the narrator” “met” Tyler, his world was driven by possessions. His lifestyle based on an Ikea catalogue. but “meeting” Tyler allowed his to rid himself of that. Tyler is seen as the proletariat because he fights oppression. It is the “Tyler” side of the character who blows up “the narrators” apartment, starts the first fight, forms project mayhem, gives the inspiring speeches etc….

.

This is your life, and it’s ending one minute at a time.
On a long enough time line, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

Everything’s far away. Everything’s a copy of a copy of a copy.

Self-improvement is masturbation. Now, self-destruction …

In the world I see – you’re stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You’ll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You’ll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you’ll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway.

Without pain, without sacrifice, we would have nothing.

It’s only after we’ve lost everything that we’re free to do anything.

You are not your job. You’re not how much money you have in the bank. You’re not the car you drive. You’re not the contents of your wallet. You’re not your fucking khakis. You’re the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world.

You have to consider the possibility that God does not like you, never wanted you, in all probability he hates you. It’s not the worst thing that could happen.

We’re consumers. We are by-products of a lifestyle obsession. Murder, crime, poverty, these things don’t concern me. What concerns me are celebrity magazines, television with 500 channels, some guy’s name on my underwear. Rogaine, Viagra, Olestra.

SS

“A theory in which class struggle is a central element in the analysis of social change in Western societies.” 

Bourgeoisie: Own the means of production.

Proletariat: Produce goods and services. Only own their capacity to work; they have the ability only to sell their own labour.

Capitalists: Sell the products the workers produce at a value related to the labour involved.

Surplus Value: The difference between what the worker is paid to produce the goods and the price the goods are sold for.  

SS