![Title: THELMA AND LOUISE ¥ Pers: DAVIS, GEENA / SARANDON, SUSAN ¥ Year: 1991 ¥ Dir: SCOTT, RIDLEY ¥ Ref: THE079BE ¥ Credit: [ MGM/PATHE / THE KOBAL COLLECTION ]](https://www.sheilaomalley.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/thelma.jpeg)
Christy Lemire, Susan Wloszczyna and I are reunited a couple of years after our discussion of Abel Ferrara’s Ms. 45, to discuss Thelma and Louise, which turns 25 this year. My take is a bit different from Christy’s and Susan’s, not drastically, but slightly (I like it for its epic crime-spree tradition, rather than it’s message about sexism, etc., although that message is clearly present. I like the fact that the first murder is not at all justified, attempted rape or no. The event was over. Louise flipping out is indicative of deeper issues, and I like that moral ambiguity, presented with no excuses. I’m sick of women being presented as victims where whatever they do has to be “justified.” These women are released into selfhood by crime (“I think I’ve got a knack for this,” observes Thelma.) They are released into selfhood by crime … and good sex. That’s what I like. The outlaw-crime-spree part. Why should men corner the market in amoral ethically ambiguous outlaw stories? These differences make for a good discussion.
GREAT discussion — love the Brad Pitt sidebar. Reminds me to schedule this one for my next movie night with my 16yo cousins.
For me this movie is just about wind in your hair. I mean it’s about a ton, but mostly, tank tops and wind in your hair.
Oh Brad Pitt in this movie!! Didn’t he just arrive like a thunder-bolt? I swear every person in the movie theatre rustled around in their seats with alarm/attention when he showed up, like …”Good GOD. Who is THAT.”
// tank tops and wind in your hair. //
Oh, I love this.
Yes.
And that Thunderbird. The dust on their faces. Their sunglasses. Susan Sarandon’s head-scarf which she ditches later and ties around her neck in a kerchief. All of these sensorial details …
// I don’t need my Movie Ladies to be role models.// I love this too because it feels like there is this unstated extra burden put on women as actors that roles needs to represent something meaningful or be progressive in the discussion of feminism, as if they are letting down all of womenkind, god forbid.
// roles needs to represent something meaningful or be progressive in the discussion of feminism, as if they are letting down all of womenkind, god forbid. //
That’s exactly right. I know Christy and Susan feel differently than I do about this – and this is totally fine – but I want COMPLEXITY. I don’t care if women are “strong.” Who the hell is “strong” every second of every day? I understand that in, say, a comic book superhero movie – if every single woman is a damsel in distress or a sex kitten – well, okay, that’s annoying. And so that’s why there’s all this attention on bringing “strong” women into those movies.
I am not concerned with that because I try to pay as little attention to superhero movies as I can. I am glad women are included, and that there is progress.
But I want women to be just as complex as men are. Just as flawed. Weak. Petty. Beautifully strong. Sexy. Whorish. Celibate. Funny. Whatever.
This is where having more women writing films will be an asset – although some of the best women characters ever written were written by men.
I don’t agree with Christy that the movie doesn’t “shame” them for using guns – I think that’s besides the point. That assumes that we’re supposed to be saying, “Well, it’s okay they use guns” or “It’s not okay they use guns” – when that’s not what the movie is about at all. The guns are a means to an end for them. They have one, they use it. They are outlaws. It helps to have a gun when you are an outlaw. The film has no attitude about it one way or the other.
And that rapist DIDN’T “have it coming”. I think that’s one of the best elements of the story – the ethical issues with that murder. Yes, he was raping Thelma, but then the conflict was over and the two women were walking away. That’s it. Yes, it’s brutal, but you can’t just go shooting someone because they say, “Suck my cock.”
The film was so good in that the initial crime was understandable – but it wasn’t justified. GOOD.
What I want is something watch-able, complex, entertaining, and – yeah – ambiguous, murky, messy. A story that very well may implicate me in what it’s trying to say. (Hello, SPN!!)