This is a comedy ??


I felt the same way about Woman of the Year as Craig felt about his 'marriage'. Except - I didn't love it in the end.

What a long, disappointing movie. Hope their other pairings prove better.

Also... just curious... does Hepburn play a woman in ANY movie?
(I was wondering this myself before Craig's onscreen accusation that Harding wasn't one.)

6/10




Last seen:
Seven Brides for Seven Brothers - 9/10

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

You said it, First Toke!

Besides, Tess's problem was not that she was not a traditional housewife; her problem was that she did not know how to make room in her life for a long-term full-time partner. She had spent her life fierecely independent, and Sam was unrealistic if he expected her to quickly adjust to having to share her life with someone.

Personally, I think the problem with this marriage started because Sam and Tess ran into it too quickly. They never actually discussed what they were looking for in a life partner or a spouse, or what they expected out of marriage. Sam felt that Tess "should know" what was bothering him and that if she didn't, something was wrong. So instead of being a mature adult and talking openly with his wife about feeling neglected, he pouted, grumbled, and walked out on Tess.

In fact, my one issue with this movie is that while Tess admits her mistake, Sam doesn't actually admit his. He appears to recognize it by telling Tess that he doesn't want her to be a typical housewife (he finally is able to articulate what his issue is) and when he punches Gerald (he realizes that Tess might need some help from him in order to clear up her life a bit). But I still would have loved to hear him openly offer a mea culpa.


reply

[deleted]

From Dr. Strangelove:

"Wow... LOL... dunno how I missed this post way back then. Hilariously off base.

You sure like to put words in people's mouths, don'tcha? Tell me where and when I ever said a "strong, independent woman with a high class job is not a woman" or even implied anything like it. You can't, because it didn't happen. You just went off on an emotional rant which had nothing to do with my post, didn'tcha? Yes you did. You have issues, don'tcha? Yes you do.

If you really really think that one post of mine - a single opinion about a single character in a single movie - shows me to be a "disgusting chauvinist"... I guess that would prove you are a militant, man-hating feminist. [Can you take what you dish out?] Either way, your reading skills are certainly colored by your own prejudice, and objective thought has been replaced with puerile namecalling. Good luck with that."


If you don't mean that a strong independent woman with a high class job is not a woman, then what exactly did you mean when you said that you wondered if Hepburn's character (or any Hepburn character) was a woman? It's all very well to criticize someone for making assumptions about what you meant, but you've offered no explanation for your attack on Hepburn. You merely attacked one poster's supposed prejudice with prejudical comments your own.

reply

You should read this thread. All you need to know is contained within, grasshopper.



Last seen:
Amazing Grace - 9/10
- MUST SEE!

reply

I read the thread. I get that you don't like Hepburn's character, but I haven't heard specifics from you about what makes you think her characters aren't women. The other posters actually elaborate on their reasons for the way they think about Hepburn's character, but you do not.

reply

Of the 4 Hepburn Tracy movies I have seen i.e. Woman of the Year, Pat and Mike Guess Who's Coming To Dinner and Adam's Rib, this is by far the weakest.

reply

I agree. Besides, I would hardly call this a comedy, it is a drama.
As for the whole "woman or not" discussion: It is a bad sign if somebody doesn't even get a point that was made in 1942... Not surprising though, since a lot of people currently seem to be trying to reduce women to housewifes and mothers again.

reply

This film certainly isn't as funny as the screwball comedies that were made in the late 30s and early 40s, like Bringing Up Baby and His Girl Friday, but the film definitely tries to present itself as funny, whether it's making fun of Tess's ignorance of baseball or Pinkie's constantly recounting his glory days as a boxer. It even asks us to be amused by Sam clubbing Gerald with a champagne bottle.

Regarding your "woman or not" reply, ricardagruener, who are you suggesting "doesn't even get a point that was made in 1942"? I get why the _film_ thinks, at least in certain moments, that Tess is not a woman; I wanted to hear from the original poster by what criteria he determines whether Hepburn has ever played a woman.

reply

[deleted]

I didn't mean to suggest that it claims to be a screwball comedy, just that I find those comedies funnier than Woman of the Year. This isn't to suggest that I don't "have the capacity" for sophisticated comedy. I have a hard time with this film because it's so committed to putting Hepburn in her place. I like thirties Hepburn so much for her bold characters, and Woman of the Year and The Philadelphia Story punish her for it. I know that Hepburn was behind these choices as part of her image rehabilitation (movie theater owners had declared her "box office poison" in the late 30s, so she wanted to present the uppity New England dame get humbled), but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Firsttoke, your earlier post suggests that you're invested in the importance of women defining themselves on their own terms. Does it bother you that this film takes Tracy's side in the couple's fight? I know that the early 40s weren't the _most_ progressive time in American history, but other Hepburn films aren't so harsh toward her characters. I'm interested in these Hepburn-Tracy films because I really like Hepburn, but seeing her humbled by Tracy is disappointing.

reply

[deleted]

Being a wife and mother is not demeaning.

reply

"Being a wife and mother is not demeaning."

Wise words. One of the most villainous plots concocted by the brigade of Western Civ destroyers is the idea that a woman who devotes herself to the upbringing of a family and the management of her home is in some way inferior, or involved with an occupation that is lesser or demeaning to the female sex. This ludicrosity is not at all the truth of things. A woman who makes such a sacrifice and engages so much of her effort into the establishment of a flourishing household, with properly raised children and all, is worthy to be commended in the utmost, being a paragon of what a woman can possibly be. I dare a person to criticize such a woman who has contributed so much not only to the household which is her own, but to the nation at large, for a consortium of women involved in similar work on a grand scale leads to a successful nation, whereas women neglecting this duty, berating it, condescending towards it, and maintaining an attitude of outright hostility towards it thwarts a nation's progress and causes it to dwindle into a decrepit state of lowness and despair. That I view to be the causes of the modern dilemmas we have here, with the symptoms being legion to indicate such as the state of things.

reply

Wow. Tough crowd. lol!

I agree in that I felt she was too selfish and overbearing. However I think that was the point. She had to learn how to give and take. She had to learn that a relationship isn't only what YOU want out of it, but that what he wants matters too.

That said, I guess we need to look at the definition of a woman is. I get the feeling that it's a wife with an apron who has dinner ready when her man gets home and wears silky negligees when going to bed and is ready for sex whenever he is. lol! I'm not saying that's bad. I'm actually anti-feminist so I don't really care. It's just that what you feel a woman should be is not necessarily what the next person's feelings of what a woman should be are.

I thought, simply by reading your subject, that you were going to say that it had drama in it too, which I came to agree with you on. I actually cried and was a little annoyed that he wasn't very appreciative of what she was trying to do, but also annoyed that she was not more supportive and empathetic to his needs.

Either way, I predict this marriage ended up a total fail because as my husband put it about his ex-wife:

To make her happy, if felt like I had to jog all the time. That was fine for awhile, but you can only jog for so long before you get tired of it. You slack off, things get bad, then the whole thing starts all over again.
That is a perfect description of marriages that require too much change to make it work. If you can't be yourself, then it will never work. Marriages such as that should never make it to the altar in the first place.


Random Thoughts: http://goo.gl/eXk3O

reply