MovieChat Forums > Nóz w wodzie (1963) Discussion > A thriller about gender and sexuality

A thriller about gender and sexuality


In my reading, this film was an outright thriller about gender, sexuality and gender roles - especially about masculinity. There is almost a seduction element in the way Andrzej manages to convince the boy to go on the boat trip, which he does only to show off - to the boy, to himself and to his wife.

Everything seems to be framed by their quarell in the car (which we don't hear) and Andrzej's story about the sailor who hurt his feet on glass shards after forgetting his feet had gotten soft. The film is then set around the men's struggle to prove which one is stronger. But little did they know that the REAL answer to the great dilemma of masculinity (how to remain powerful when you're poor, or old, or married, etc.) is what Krystyna did in the beginning - by allowing Andrzej to drive so he wouldn't keep bugging her, she relinquished control, knowing full well that control is limited, and an illusion - and that she could have a limited control EVEN if she is not driving. By the end of the film we can clearly see that although she has kept to her background function for most of the film, she is clearly the one in control.

Basically a film about the pitfalls that masculinity throws in men's directions that women can see so well and evade.

Could fit perfectly in any list of queer or gay cinema.

reply

Very Interesting ,radek. Those are definitely part of his trademarks. I also find some similarities between KITW and Bitter Moon.


------- __@
----- _`\<,_
---- (*)/ (*)------- ----__@
--------------------- _`\<,_
---- -----------------(*)/ (*)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:*•.. ¤°.¸¸.•´¯`»nec spe,nec metu :*•.. ¤°.¸¸.•´¯`»

reply

[deleted]

Well, this interpretation is a possibility but I don't know if this subjective view can be proven unless the director said it was what he meant. I can see that such interpretation can be applied to many films.

reply

It's more than a little Oedipal as well. The boy doesn't even have a name, because the adults didn't give him one.

reply

Oh, okay, whatever. I think you're reaching; reading more into the movie than is actually there. Even if Polanski said this himself I would take issue with it. If this is what he was trying to say with this movie, I think he failed miserably.

It's like abstract artists who slap a title on their art. Maybe they had a concept in mind but all I see is whatever they put on the canvas. I get to interpret that in any way I choose.

Naturally, everyone has that same right so if you watch this movie and what you describe is really what you see, more power to you. I think it's absurd but if that helps you enjoy the movie, great.

I always try my best to appreciate every movie I see or at least get something out of it. I would have loved to have been able to do that with this movie but it just wasn't possible. As a viewer, I can only do so much.


Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]

reply