Although the film tries to permeate feminist elements throughout, the plot presents only the image of "woman" that is constantly enlarged and labelled, again drawing a strong dividing line between the two sexes to separate its duality. Looking back at the labels these women have been put on, you will find that most of them reflect negative connotations. After discussing with my neighbors, I still want to sort out my ideas and send them up. This episode looks boring, so I didn’t pay much attention to the details. If there is an error, please point it out and I’ll change it. But anyway, it will be uselessly sinking by the majority of fans. [About the murder case] What did the murdered man do in the case? He once promised women's status and status, but now he refuses to honor his promises. Therefore, the organization's purpose of killing is to retaliate against men who play with women and abandon her.
Although betraying feelings is not good, the crime does not lead to death by using personal vengeance. The use of violence to revenge itself is not pleasing. Whether the violence can be justified depends on how the plot explains the purpose of using violence.
[About the organization] The legitimacy of this crime involves the legitimacy of the feminist organization behind it. Many female characters in the play have appeared in this criminal organization, and they are seen as a wave of feminist promotion.
Inferring from the homicide reason in the homicide case, one of the purposes of this "feminist" organized crime is to protect women from demanding status from men and requiring them to abide by their promises. What is wrong with this? What about independence and freedom? This is not the same thing as fighting for voting rights and equal rights for men and women, and it is not the same thing as half the sky wanting to speak up. If the victim is a weighty politician who firmly opposes women's voting rights, it may be possible to make the script a little softer.
The criminal motive here cannot be justified, and it has nothing to do with the historical demands of women's rights. Organizing a mysterious group to pretend to kill a person who harms the interests of group members is called terrorism. As many viewers have noticed, their 3K Klan-like costumes and sense of religion speak for themselves. [About the characters] The maid and the landlord complained that their lack of drama is very eye-catching-because it is too obtrusive and unreasonable. Changing the landlord and maid into a male may not necessarily be the role of a writer. Their complaints are not on the point. Their lack of roles is not because of their gender, but because of their social status and the relevance of their profession to the story.
These complaints that they can't grasp the key points are not called feminist awareness, and called unreasonable harassment. At the end, the small dispute for a saying (who brought who home) was as eye-catching as it was nothing to look for. Finally, there is a respectable Ms. Jasmine who has worked hard to survive in the world of men, and is also a member of a criminal organization in the end. If the women in this film are all dead and arrogant, then one can imagine what feminist organizations and women are in the minds of the screenwriter?
From another perspective, why these positions are assumed by women by default? This is a social issue that may be worthy of reflection. [About "They are right, we are wrong"] First of all, to say that "they" is right through the mouth of a man is a manifestation of a power structure in itself.
Second, the affirmation of women's power should not be presented through gender opposition. It is the equality that is integrated into the process and into the society. There has never been a life or death where one side wins and one side fails.
Even if not from the perspective of women's rights, the screenwriter's position is very vague. The smart people (a symbol of England) in the play claim that they are right just because the organization has the attribute of protecting women's rights, without delving into the what and why, or the rationality and legality of crimes. Excessive political correctness has turned into an irony.
Let's make a summary. In fact, the screenwriters never thought of raising the secondary status of women to the same level as men. They are still servants, landlords, and wives who prepare food and handle housework. They demand benefits from the dominators of society, just as workers demand the owners of factories. Salary and treatment. If they are dissatisfied, they will complain at the lightest level and cause trouble to the male society by doing bad housework; at the worst, they will set up a terrorist organization and cause panic by killing and arson. The screenwriter stands on the commanding heights and thinks that we should give them some sweets, and you are right, and we will give you the rewards you deserve. Oh, go for your reward. Let’s talk about Shen Xia. I think the episode of the woman in the second season of that year also abused me, and I gave it five stars. Looking back now, the previous setting is still wonderful, but the male-centrism in the bones cannot be changed. Quoting a friend’s neighbor: "When you think about it, the female characters in the drama who are more involved in the play are Irene, who is not an ordinary woman. These two typical non-traditional non-ordinary women basically have both IQ and EQ performance. Counted as the third sex, but the persistent attitude towards male one male and two male idiots still makes the protagonist's halo sun dizzy. Among ordinary girls, it is not the bridesmaid who is chasing the volume to sleep, or the high-quality science student who wants to sleep in the volume. Jasmine. As for the landlady, although she is cute, she also focuses on maternal motherhood. I have to admit that the female character of the show is really a historical problem at the beginning. It has never been correct." Nor did it ask the screenwriter how politically it is. To be correct, I have to change all genders. I still like the episode of the woman very much. For the sake of political correctness, I also want the audience to change the gender of the characters. But this time it was over. What I saw was that the screenwriter wanted to use popular feminist elements but projected his own prejudice against feminism into every corner of the script. This kind of prejudice is now spread all over the world, and women's rights have long been misunderstood by many people as being unreasonable, making trouble, having nothing to do, and even verbal violence. The women's rights in the minds of the screenwriters are probably the women's rights that many people want to deny today: these unreasonable women are organized and premeditated with a big knife and slashed at us. Either you die or I die. This stigma of feminist rights should not be taken off. Even if the drama directly says "They are right" for the sake of political correctness, it can't be washed away. I don’t see the correctness of the KKK-style terrorist women’s organization, and I don’t know who "we" is and what is wrong with "us". The opposition between "us" and "them" is in this symbolic conclusion. I want to conceal it. The problem of women's value being ignored by the family and lack of voting rights still existed in that era. How to make criminal actions the true clarion call of the feminist movement? Finally, I quoted a paragraph from the neighbor: "The demand for righteousness and loyalty is regarded as the main theme of feminism, and violence and terror as the only countermeasure. So in fact, the equal rights understood by the cultural elites of developed countries on my planet are also the same.":)
View more about The Abominable Bride reviews
