MovieChat Forums > The Last Seduction (1994) Discussion > Urban vs. Rural

Urban vs. Rural

posted 12 years ago by David_Blue
3 replies | jump to latest

I notice a lot of people interpret this movie in male versus female terms, such as the "femme fatale" trope. That makes sense, because all the sway through Bridget relies on the extra protection that women get, on her credibility as a victim because she is a woman, and on male sexual gullibility and this vulnerability.

But I think urban versus (relatively) rural is a better framework for interpreting The Last Seduction.

Bridget lives in New York, she lives by New York rules, she yearns to return to New York, she becomes Wendy Kroy (neW yorK), she comes into the bar at little Beston and asks for a Manhattan, and she really is New York. Her manners, her aesthetics, her values are big city urban, and her strengths, especially deception and shamelessness, are New York specialties. If she couldn't live in New York, she'd visit a friend in Chicago, if she dared. And her effect on small town Mike Swale is pretty much New York's effect on small town America.

Mike Swale and his friends are hicks, and Mike pays the penalty of being a dummy who's easily led astray. He's hung like a horse and dumb as a mule, but unfortunately for him, not as stubborn. Other than clumsily attempting to get laid, at no point does Mike take the initiative, which is appropriate because small town America is in constant retreat before the aggression of the big city smarties.

[–] nutsberryfarm 12 years ago

that is a cool way to see.

We're not soldiers and he's not the enemy. He's a pizza man.

[–] alioth4 10 years ago

Sorry, but that's a bunch of "culture war" hogwash.

her values are big city urban, and her strengths, especially deception and shamelessness, are New York specialties.

I've lived in big cities and small towns both, and I've met deceptive, conniving people, as well as friendly and honest people (some quite gullible too) in both. In fact, the one sociopath* I was heavily involved with in my life (almost married her, dodged a big bullet) was from a small town, and met me when we were both living in another (nearby) small town. She never lived in a city either, said she hated them.

which is appropriate because small town America is in constant retreat before the aggression of the big city smarties.

Trends toward urbanization have been occuring since at least the turn of the past century--inevitably, with the ever-increasing automation, efficiencies, and subsequent consolidation of agriculture; and the rise of first the industrial age and now the information and service age. Population density brings about certain efficiencies that are advantageous in such economies. People have been migrating to the cities for a reason, in that they largely see it as advantageous for them. It's not "aggression", it's a demographic inevitability spurred on by huge economic driving forces beyond anyone's real control (although there are a few on top who do understand and ride these forces well, they're not "making it happen"; and I'd say increased urbanization would be inevitable regardless, short of, say, a Pol Pot-type dictator forcing masses of people "back to the land" at gunpoint).

Are rural areas being oppressed though (relative to other areas anyway), somehow? If so, how? And if you're talking economic terms, plenty of people are hurting in the cities, too. What image comes to mind when you hear of "the inner cities" or "Rust Belt cities"? There's plenty of suffering everywhere--and "urban" versus "rural" is just another needless cultural conflict that those on top can use as a wedge to divide and conquer the rest of us and keep us all distracted and under their heel--don't play into their game.

If you're commenting that this "urban vs. rural" theme, being as it is a cultural thing, is being depicted in very stereotypical fashion by Hollywood in this movie, then yes, I'd say you're right about that, and it's one way to analyze the film. But you seem to actually be promoting the "city folk are slick and teh evulz, while small town folk are innocent" myth that, in my life experience living in many different kinds of places, I know to be totally false.

*About that "sociopath" in my personal life--I am not a trained and licensed psychiatrist so I'm not qualified to make an actual diagnosis, but from my readings about sociopathy, she exhibited most of the signs. And she screwed me over quite well without any sort of remorse I could see whatsoever. And others as well, whom I've talked to.

"No more half-measures."

[–] filmklassik 7 years ago

Actually, the stereotype promoted by the media is that people in rural communities -- particularly in the south -- are racist, clueless, gun toting, bible banging, Trump voting fools, many of whom are addicted to opiates.

These people, the stereotype goes, are basically children, and need the help of more enlightened urban sophisticates (like us!) to see the light and ultimately do what is in their own best interest.