Deal Breakers
No question. I cannot be friends with someone who pays money to see Black Snake Moan.

From Feministing:
The creepiest thing about the movie, or at least its marketing, is that it's not only about selling Ricci's body. It's about selling the idea of sex with a girl who's been abused and who's clearly got a lot of problems. There's even an interactive feature (if you click on "experience" in the upper left corner -- click here for a screenshot) that allows you to drag two pills across the screen and then watch a video of Ricci collapsing. Now she's yours for the violating! Plus, the "page loading" graphics that appear every time you click feature her silhouette struggling against the chain. A recurring image in the film as well, I'd imagine.
I've seen the trailer a few times - the one where Ricci, wearing a tank and white undies, runs chained outdoors until Jackson forcefully tugs her back inside. I was really hoping that the movie was pulp or satire or something but no. And even if it's some sort of "social commentary on the South" as one IMDB discussion board poster wrote, is it acceptable to be clearly advertising the near naked enslaved Ricci? Is there ever an acceptable situation to mass market sexual abuse as entertainment? And how about that racism in the poster? The gruff African-American man holding a feeble white woman in chains...African-American as monster, one who should be feared by all whites. The whole concept of this film makes me sick.
No wonder its from the Hustle and Flow guys - that movie was shit on fire on a front porch.
Labels: feminism

5 Comments:
Ok, I'll bite:
No question. I cannot be friends with someone who pays money to see Black Snake Moan.
That's some pretty righteous indignation from someone who hasn't seen this film. The commentary you point to at Feministing is purely speculative since they admittedly "review" the website and trailer, and, well, the people who frequent the IMDB boards are not exactly Pauline Kaels.
That's not to say yr assessment of "Black Snake Moan" isn't true, however, what's to say that this film has fallen victim to bad marketing, rather than just being a bad film? Is satire out of this filmmaker's vocabulary? (I honestly don't know).
I guess I prefer to read reviews from people who have actually seen the movie, instead of knee-jerk reactions to marketing campaigns that could very well possibly be out of the filmmaker's control.
I was kind of wondering about that myself...if perhaps the trailer/markerting engine behind this film was misrepresenting...I couldn't imagine that anyone in their right mind would produce a film like that, and was sort of hoping that the filmmaker's intention was much deeper than it seems. For sure, though, that trailer did really bother me...
your money still goes into those marketers pockets
Then you better put your money (or not put yr money) where your mouth is and boycott all films distributed by Paramount.
Also, not buying anything is a must since basically every company in this country is massively misogynistic. At least this inspires a dialogue.
Post a Comment
<< Home