MovieChat Forums > The Other Woman (2008) Discussion > Typical 'Lifetime' claptrap

Typical 'Lifetime' claptrap

posted 16 years ago by pmiano100
21 replies | jump to latest

In every movie on Lifetime, the men are always one of several stereotypes:

1. Egotistical and unfaithful.

2. Brutal and abusive, but good at hiding it.

3. Emotionally wounded and unable to let go of a tragic past without the help of a good and loving woman.

4. Weak, stupid (even when they're rich and have brilliant careers), and utterly useless against an evil femme fatale he stupidly defends despite all evidence to the contrary and the advice of his daughter/wife/ex/platonic female friend, etc. who really loves him and winds up saving him.

This one was fairly predictable as usual. Her husband was stereotype #1, and of course she found her "woman's strength" to leave and go out on her own, because "a strong woman doesn't need a man."

Having started this, I want to say in advance that I intend to totally ignore the abuse that I know will follow this.

[–] ColumnatedRuinsDomino 16 years ago

I agree with all of those stereotypes for these movies.

"We know how to behave! We've had lessons."
-John Lennon

[–] pmiano100 16 years ago

Thank you. You realize of course that we will both eventually be raked over the coals, figuratively speaking, for daring to say this?

[–] rheald 16 years ago

Who cares about the guys. That Lisa Marie Caruk sure was alittle nasty wouldn't you say. And picking on "Jane" just was not nice. You would think from all her years on Melrose she could have been alittle meaner.

[–] pmiano100 16 years ago

I do. If women shouldn't be stereotyped negatively, neither should men.

As for Ms. Caruk, she and the husband deserved each other. No doubt her character will cheat on him after they get married.

Ms. Bisset played the typical Lifetime "heroine-victim." Too good for the unworthy man she married.

[–] Sklanskyjr 16 years ago

When watching a lifetime movie about 98% of the time the man is a horrible person, in one fashion or another. I would suggest you just not watch this channel unless you are prepared for "Why Men Suck 101."

I figured that out when I was 9. I am a woman and this channel is all about why women don't need men. I find very little empowering going on. Usually I find that these stories could be a lot better if the women picked more wisely before they married.

Usually I just end up thinking, haven't we already seen this movie 100 times? And there is rarely, none come to mind, that seem to go above and beyond the last one of its kind.

Have low expectations when watching and you will always be pleased.

Laura

[–] pmiano100 16 years ago

I agree. I only watch it because my wife and daughter watch it and I'm too spineless to object and too lazy to get up and leave. Actually, they agree with me most of the time and watch the movies for laughs. My daughter points out if the women are so great, why did they choose such obvious losers for husbands and boyfriends in the first place.

My wife's response? "I married your father, didn't I?"

The institution of marriage is a commitment. That's why I always say that since I got married I feel like I've been committed to an institution. Still, as wives go, mine is one of the best. I'm actually quite lucky.

[–] smilealways3 15 years ago

IM not sure why i expected more out of this movie. Naive or ignorant or both. I was really offended how most of the women in this movie used their sexual power to seduce men but once the husband was sexually attracted to his student he became a bad person who was rude to his daughter and uncaring.
" Truth never damages a cause that is just."

[–] pmiano100 15 years ago

What I objected to was how easily seduced the men were. Basically Lifetime operates on the premise that a woman can literally get with murder if she's beautiful enough. Of course, they also perpetuate the stereotype that vulnerable women are easily fooled by suave and manipulative men.

I reluctantly admit that many adulterous men become so obsessed with their young mistresses who "make them feel young," that they lose all interest in anything or anyone who's part of their "old life." Some men think that if they hold on to their money, they won't die. Some men think if they act like kids and take younger lovers, they won't die. They're all fools.

Sadly, most men do tend to be more looks oriented than most women. To women, handsomeness in a man is icing on the cake. To most men, beauty in a woman is at least the whole cake, and to many it's the entire 5-course meal. Lifetime just makes us out to be dumber than we really are.

[–] CeeCeeCooper 15 years ago

Men are only good for fixing things, killing spiders, and having sex with.

http://chismetime.com/

[–] pmiano100 15 years ago

That's two things more than women are good for.

[–] pmiano100 13 years ago

And even then, most of us can't do the last one long enough to satisfy you. Women were only good for two things, but now you can't even cook anymore. And you still need us to parallel park.

[–] dawnm5 15 years ago

I agree. But, honestly most men are a lot of these things :), as much as I love my husband and my sons.

I mean not to this degree of course and there are some who are some of these characteristics, but not the others.

Men are wonderful, but as Lauren said, "They are the weaker sex." :)

This movie was stupid, though.

[–] pmiano100 15 years ago

1. You can't truly love your husband and sons if you believe most men are "a lot of these things." True love includes respect.

2. Men's greatest weaknesses are their vanity and pride, and most of all their weakness for women.

3. Women are not without their flaws, as individuals and as a gender. Many women have a weakness for powerful men and "bad boys." It is as destructive as the weakness many men have for beautiful women, which is pandered to constantly by Hollywood and advertisers.

4. If men are "the weaker sex," it is because we let women make us that way. I don't blame beautiful women for using the advantages nature gave them. I blame men for letting them get away with it. Even then, they are not satisfied. They complain no one takes them seriously because they're beautiful. Men can't win.

[–] Altho73 15 years ago

That reminds me of a woman that I know - she is 100 per cent anti-men, she said that she had no need for a husband/partner as all of the male species were totally useless and didn't deserve one second of her time.

Strangely enough she got pregnant (one man had more than a second of her time) and gave birth to a son who she devotes a lot of her time to, yet she still repeats the above phrase!!!!!!!

[–] pmiano100 15 years ago

If I was that kid, I'd be very worried if she ever suggested they go on a trip to Denmark, if you get my drift.

[–] dawnm5 15 years ago

I do love my husband and I AM NOT anti men!! I'm just sayin' (I meant to be funny...I have a terrible sense of humor I guess)

Of course we all have our faults. My poor husband puts up with a lot of crap from me (mood swings, etc) I think men and women are just so different that we are not always on the same page.

You ladies need to lighten up a little bit.

[–] pmiano100 15 years ago

I'm a man. I've been married to the same great woman for almost 33 years. I have a single daughter, 26, and a married son, 31, who has a very nice wife, a 4 year-old son, and a 5 month-old daughter. Believe me, I know both sides of the argument.

[–] el_diablo2003 15 years ago

What stereotype does the Pete character fit into? How about Tyler? Or Cole? None of them were perfect (nor any of the women), but on the whole I'd say they were pretty positive portrayals that provided something of a counterbalance to the idiot husbands. I agree this movie panders to stereotypes, but almost all mainstream movies do. I think the OP conveniently ignored many aspects of the movie.
Also, does it bother you as much that in many mainstream Hollywood movies women characters are flat girlfriend/wife/daughter/mother types, usually there to be kidnapped and/or tortured? If women have any agency at all, it's usually as a mother trying to save her child.
If you want interesting, nuanced characters and stories, they're out there. Don't go looking for them on Lifetime.
All that said, this movie was not half bad if you take it for what it is. Except the woman who played Nicole. Her acting was embarrassing.

[–] pmiano100 15 years ago

The stereotype of women you describe has been fading out for twenty years. These days women rescue themselves, or even the guy. Yes, I do object strenuously to women being objects of torture. As for "the idiot husbands" they are exactly the stereotypes that bug me the most. Women complain about female stereotypes with some male support and men complain about male stereotypes with some female support. That is the natural order of things. You're right - the movie isn't half-bad. It's three-quarters bad.

[–] el_diablo2003 15 years ago

"You're right - the movie isn't half-bad. It's three-quarters bad."

Well played, sir.

The stereotype of women that I describe has not been fading out for twenty years. It's true, people have been talking about it for what seems like forever, but the stereotype remains very much represented. And torture porn has come back with a vengeance, though, in fairness, it seems men are being tortured now, too. It's truly pathetic, but most movies that are marketed to men portray two-dimensional women and most movies marketed to women treat male characters the same way.

Don't misunderstand me, I have little use for stereotypes regardless of gender, race, orientation and all the rest.

[–] pmiano100 15 years ago

I believe we may be talking about two very different types of pictures. If you're talking about garbage like "Friday the 13th" and the excreable "Last House on the Left," I certainly agree with you. Grindhouse/horror films haven't changed much, other than including men as torture victims. I hate them.

However, I do believe that things have changed a great deal in "A" list films. It depends on whose story the movie is, the male lead or the female lead. If the male is the hero and he doesn't save the woman, he is no longer the hero. If the woman is the hero, then a far different ending is required. There is room for both.

"Don't misunderstand me, I have little use for stereotypes regardless of gender, race, orientation and all the rest."

I believe you. You argue too intelligently for me to think otherwise. I hope you will believe me in turn when I say I have absolutely no more use for any stereotypes than you do.