Sept 17 2007 Tarantino Broken Society 3
Strong reaction from commenters attacking me for the Echo's decision to offer tickets to Tarantino's new film as a competiton prize.
This follows on from a posting last week when I questioned whether filmakers like Quentin were helping to 'break' society (to paraphrase David Cameron).
Go to comments Sept 12 to see what they say.
I'm not convinced. Tarantino makes films about strong women, women who decry, defy and ultimately defeat violence against them.
The Rapist No 1 doll is sick and unneccesary, though. That I concede.
Were women any safer before moving pictures? At least now there's an awareness and a rejection. Are we simply trying to shoot the messenger instead of insisting on zero tolerance against the pigs who hurt women?
Emma Wood wrote...
Tarantino makes films in which women pursue vigilante justice. In Kill Bill, the main character, played by Uma Thurman kills a number of innocent people in her quest for revenge. It's a fallacy that this represents female empowerment. This a depiction of a violent murderer, not a strong woman. And to suggest this is a solution for women who experience real life violence is laughable. Women such as Kiranjit Ahluwahlia who killed her violent husband in self defence after years of abuse are sent to prison.
In 'Death Proof' a group of women pursue violent revenge against, humiliate and eventually kill Stuntman Mike. This is however after Tarantino has depicted the sexually motivated murder of a group of women. The second group of women's revenge doesn't justify the eroticised violence. Tarantino himself was clearly threatened by the protests, particularly those in Glasgow and lied outright when the Echo asked him about the rapist doll. He promoted the doll on several US TV shows ( you can see a clip of him doing this on the Jimmy Kimmel show on You Tube)but told the Echo he didn't know the box said 'Rapist No 1'.
The problem with both films is not that those viewing them will automatically commit rape or murder, but that they contribute to a climate in which violence against women, and violence generally is trivialised and normalised. Would FACT have shown a film in the style of death proof in which a white ku klux klan member stalked and killed black men? Even if a group of 'tough,sexy and smart' black men turned the tables and gained revenge? Of course not. Because violence against women and rape are seen as suitable subjects for light entertainment. Racially motivated violence (quite rightly in my view) is not.
Posted by: Emma Wood | September 18, 2007 8:46 PM