Kate Waites in his article "Babes in boots: Hollywood's oxymoronic warrior woman", in Suzanne Ferriss and Mallory Young (eds.), Chick flicks. Contemporary Women at the movies , New York / London: Routledge, 2008, pp 204-220, argues that despite appearances the heroine of Kill Bill shares features with other women warriors of the film: they are constructions of culture reflect patriarchal male fantasies about femininity. This is his argument:
At first glance Kill Bill Vol I (2003) and Vol II (2004) is presented as an attempt to subvert gender charades we have discussed previously. Presents a woman warrior Beatrix Kiddo (Umma Thurman) - who seems to be a strong example of real action movie heroine - no nudity or superfluous free romantic subplots. [21]
Beatrix is \u200b\u200bcontextualized by the presence of other colleagues warrior of strength and skill comparable. Even in the opening scene of the second part, which she presents her story looking at the camera and voice-overs during the flashback, we suggest that she has the authority and control over their own representation, in clear opposition to use was given at the beginning of Charlie's Angels. [22].
Although the description of the woman warrior in the film seem to sabotage the genre conventions, the film rests with them surreptitiously. The film and its unnamed character in the first part tells a story old and tiresome. [23]
The opening scene shows how shot in the head and given up for dead. Then he jumps into his recovery and escape from the hospital-the author does not refer to anything in the rape scene. Enters the domestic space of Vernita Green, one of her attackers. [24] The hand to hand combat is paralyzed when the two-in deference to motherhood-are school bus down the daughter of Vernita. In a clear gesture that mock traditional femininity, receive and send the girl to his room. During the following conversation Vernita tries to kill her with a gun and is killed by the dagger of Beatrix, in the eyes of the girl in the door [25].
This scene, and similar in both films, reinforcing the problematic nature of the fabric and frame the disputed place of construction of the woman warrior. For one thing the character has the characteristics of their male counterparts: it is hard, not afraid of anything, is aggressive and fearless in battle. But simultaneously although not overtly sexualized, Kiddo name is a diminutive of his identity. In Volume I of that identity is reduced to "bride" who seeks revenge for the death of her future husband, her family and her unborn child. Volume II is identified as a "mother" role takes precedence over that of war. These characteristics pigeonhole femininity and motherhood, which is detrimental to their warrior status. Besides being staged as a bride-mother, Beatrix Kiddo is not an autonomous agent (such as Lara or angels). It has also been created in his image by Bill, a male authority figure almost supernatural characteristics, as shown in the second part of the film. [26]
The first part makes a series of questions that are resolved only in the second, but it does so very conventional. Elle is ranked in the affair with Bill Beatrix previously covered, and fulfills its orders, such as fixed at the beginning of Volume I. But this characteristic is relevant to interpret the duel between Elle and Beatrix on the end of Volume II, as highlighted feminine aspects of jealousy and competition for men, reducing their status as warriors. Their battle is reduced to a stereotypical "catfight." [27]
In another revealing flashback Volume II, Bill was presented in the chapel before the slaughter and says it only wants to participate on the side of the bride, and she presents him as his father. "The Oedipal reference here Becomes clear when to, of course, the" Father "remove / kills the husband-substitute of Whom I decidely does not approved." (217). But in the end Bill Beatrix recognizes a domestic scene in which he acts as father your daughter recovered from five years as the prospect of motherhood was the magically altered and brought it to leave the squad murderers to find an environment in which to offer a better life for her child. [28]
The decision to abandon her career and focus on motherhood is the one that initiates the plot, setting in motion the initial slaughter. But at the same time resolving the questions left I raised the volume, the second part is also successful in the fierce warrior back to where it belongs. It does not punishing or killing, as was the black cinema, "but shows like capitulation to the traditional paradigm of a mother who stays at home to care for their children. This transformation is most evident in the two final scenes. Note 4: a post-feminist interpretation would emphasize that the film-to show that Beatrix must reject the role of mother-killer to be put in evidence the difficulties of resolving the conflict between family and career, show how difficult it is in fact trying "have it all." But Waites these readings fail because they realize the reasons anti-feminist and backward operating in the film. [29]
reductionist The films are shown, because the character has two options-warrior or mother that are not just clichés, but extremist and exclusionary. "Moreover, action-like her sisters, Directed by Kiddo is ultimately, if not create by, Bill, a male, godlike figure, and she is showered in regressive feminine conventions Transgressive That overtake her heroic role. "(218) Note 5: recent films such as Catwoman (2004), Elektra (2005) and Mr & Mrs Smith (2005) also are signs of poverty of the woman warrior on the big screen. Women of Hollywood war is a figure reminiscent of Pygmalion, the projection of male fantasy. "Hollywood's prototypical warrior woman is a strange amalgamation of the hypermasculine and Emphasizer feminine, implying That Even Our twenty-first-century myth-makers continue to Be Steeped in the lore-as well as the law-of the father." (218) [30].
But here the story ends. In the next entry will discuss a rating very different film.
0 comments:
Post a Comment