by jellydonut25 » Tue Apr 21, 2015 5:11 pm
I think you are over-simplifying the movie characterizing it that way. I think if that were ALL it were, it wouldn't be so blastedly OBVIOUS about it.
I don't want to over-read into it, because it's a mess, and it's defintely got moments of SUPREME stupidity (sometimes at the exact same time as its moments of brilliance), and none of you seem very willing to go on the ride with me but consider:
-Bland characters who are just stereotypes/archetypes? Maybe, but at the same time, we're viewing this movie essentially inside Baby Doll's deranged fantasy universe. If each character is an archetype then it's an archetype that gives us insight into the overall character of babydoll.
-style over substance? I won't doubt that exists at times, but I think there's some substance here. There's some really clever foreshadowing, parallelism, and a level to the dances that I think most people don't think about: that when you pull it all the way back to where it's "supposed" to be (a mental asylum) these aren't "dances": they are her role-playing therapy sessions and thus the action going on within the action scenes is actually indicative of Baby Doll's personality itself...and actually we're aren't really TECHNICALLY inside Babydoll's head. This isn't her story. We're inside Sweet Pea's head because this is her story and Babydoll is her "angel" as the film's opening suggest. So really, we're seeing things as Sweet Pea thinks Babydoll sees them, because Babydoll is such an important catalyst for Sweet Pea's eventual escape.
-Masturbatory fanservice? I mean, yeah, the girls are hot and wear skimpy clothes, but they aren't just objects over which we drool. They're women with initiative, struggling to fight against a corrupt system that doesn't acknowledge them as real people. They're owning their sexuality, but at the same time, Snyder's trying to say that maybe just doing an "F me" dance isn't enough, and maybe that's where Snyder just trips up because he fumbles a bit when it comes to getting that point across eloquently and/or interestingly through his visual cues similar to those used throughout the film prior to the third act. The movie gets much more straight-narrative and can't quite manage to keep its delicate "Sexuality is empowering, but there's a double-edge sword to it" message in tact.
And if I look at Snyder's body of work, the only movie that I feel is just PURE style with no substance is 300. Of course, I've never seen Owls of Gaouheool, but 300 is the only movie of his that impressed me on a first viewing and then in subsequent viewings felt increasingly vapid and without teeth. I actually thought some of what he did improved upon Watchmen, which I personally thought was a really overrated read (which isn't to say not good; just not AS good as I feel I'd been led to believe)