Carol: Kiss of Fire

Warning: Spoilers.

Carol is an adaptation of the book The Price of Salt by Patricia Highsmith, starring the adorable Rooney Mara and stunning Cate Blanchett. It was adapted by Phyllis Nagy, who first wrote the script in 1996 and who won an award for adapting the book at the Alliance of Women Film Journalists awards amongst others, and it is directed by Todd Haynes. It is set in the early 1950s and it follows Mara's character Therese as she works in a department store, admiring their toy trains and it follows her as she instantly falls in love with the eponymous Carol, played by Blanchett. It is a stunning film, with a beautiful score, and brilliantly touching acting. It is a joy to watch but most importantly it's a, sadly rare, treat to watch a film about two women falling in love in a way that is respected, equal to other love stories, and that has a bloody happy ending.

The book was inspired by two things in Highsmith's life, a chance meeting she had similar to the one in the film with a woman when she worked in a department store and a relationship she had with an older woman who, just like Carol, had trouble with her divorce and child custody due to taped hotel room meetings and her sexuality as a lesbian. Highsmith wrote the outline for the book in a couple of hours, driven unbeknownst to her by a chicken pox fever. It's amazing to think that there is now an Oscar nominated film that exists because a beautiful woman inspired a young lesbian author into writing a great book, albeit one that her time was not ready for; it was published under a pseudonym, and it took her 38 years after it was published for her to admit it was her novel. I'm glad that we live in a time that is better for lesbians, though there is still a long way to go. I really hope many young lesbians went to see Carol, on first dates or date nights, and enjoyed getting to see a love like theirs on the big screen – one as respected as any other.

However, before I discuss Carol and Therese I want to discuss the men in the film as their presence is repeatedly one that many women experience: a nuisance. There's Therese's boyfriend, someone who thinks people of the same sex can't fall in love, who thinks the things he does for both of them are done because she demands them when she doesn't, and who acts like his feelings for her should outweigh whatever she feels about anything. Then there's the friend who kisses Therese, the man who investigates them – lies to them and helps shatter Carol's life – and it creates an atmopshere where anytime a man comes on screen you're just waiting for them to ruin things for our two female leads; so true to so many women's lives, so brilliant and infuriating. There's Carol's husband, the man who takes her daughter away from her over his anger at the fact she has feelings for people who aren't him, and that those people are women.

It's his possession of Carol that drives that plot in this film, her need to get away from him and the control he holds over their daughter, the control he tries to exercise over her. His jealousy comes out in anger and luckily for us as viewers it doesn't end in violence; though sadly this is not always true in real life, as lesbians are often killed by entitled men who think it is their right to have any woman and that any woman who not only doesn't want him but any man is a criminal who should be punished, who should be killed. It's understandable that a film set in the 50s would be about this conflict, the punishment lesbians faced due to their sexuality; we haven't come as far as perhaps we like to tell ourselves, with women who love women still being discriminated against simply for that very fact. But with time I hope that films, ones that exist in Hollywood, continue recognising the beauty of lesbian love, but that they show that lesbians lives aren't all about tragedy and male violence and anger but that they are as varied and complicated as the films we have been watching for decades.

Carol is a character that in lesser hands would become a two dimensional object, a beautiful enigmatic woman; she'd become a killer or as we saw in BBC's Sherlock a dominatrix, as happened to Irene Adler – The Woman because she was written in a time where no woman was expected to be capable of anything other than being a wife or a mother. But as she was written by someone with a deep love for women, driven by an infatuation with a passing stranger, and adapted by someone who loved this book so much she wrote the screenplay in 1996 she is a fully realised character who is flawed and human, something that is a lot to ask for in a world that thinks this is a lot to ask for. Carol is a great example too of the effort it takes to look effortless; the stress and emotional strain that it takes to appear to others as though you step out of bed stunning, glide through the streets without a care, and take lovers to bed in a swirl of magic and seduction. Instead she is wrapped in the love she has for her daughter, its cost casts a shadow over her new relationships, and almost ends up driving away a woman who makes her feel like she can truly be herself – something that is often the price of women who love men.

As that's what Therese let's Carol be, utterly herself: she lets her cry, lets her love her, lets her have her space when her world is crashing around her. She tells herself it's because she has no substance, because she lets people walk all over her and she doesn't stand up for herself; she might feel like that's true with her boyfriend but for her and Carol I don't see it that way at all. I think she becomes someone that Carol truly needs, someone who can hold her when she needs it and encourage her to be a human, to be a lesbian, and, when she finally gets the courage to be herself. If this film were about Carol and her husband it would have been a film about a broken women, alone in her own marriage, torn between being true to herself and being a mother and it would have tried to force what other films have: that she should swallow her identity, put her husband's wants first and sacrificed everything for a chance to see her daughter. It almost ends that way, it almost ends with her losing it all but Therese's love for her gives this film a happy ending, or as happy as it could get for two lesbian women in the 1950s.

It's a film you could walk away from hoping that that happy ending lasted, that those women found a way to live happily in a house somewhere, raising her daughter whilst Carol finds her calling in life; whilst Therese becomes a renowned photographer, where her favourite photographs are of Carol and Rindy opening their presents at Christmas. But as is always the bittersweet way with feminism it's worth remembering how cruel history has been to lesbians; how they were only really allowed to be close in public because society has little problem with women being friends in an intimate, non-sexual setting more so than men. It's something that needs to be remembered in feminism as we read texts like The Feminine Mystique – an important text for feminism but one that is marred by a woman believing the society she lived in at that time and putting lesbians and women of colour last. I believe it's so important to acknowledge the struggles our lesbian sisters have, that they bring so much to the world, and that they have problems unique to them and that we can help by being allies to them.

Though I am glad to say that Carol is another brick on the road to a better life for lesbians, a world where film understands women, and those who love them. With more room made for women in films - on the screen and behind the scenes - then we can keeping making more and more great films like Carol, more Hollywood films that are open about women's sexuality, and films that treat women like the people they are. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to read The Price of Salt.

Spotlight: It Takes a Village

Warning: Spoilers.

Spotlight is a film that follows the Boston Globe as they uncover the systematic abuse and cover up of young children by Catholic priests. It is a brilliant film that understands its topic well and the impact of the abuse and its cover up, rather than simply sensationalising it. It has a good cast and is well acted by all. The reason I’m writing about it for my feminist blog is because it understands abuse very well and what it does to people; but also it displays the systematic nature of abuse brilliantly which is something films can struggle with. Often when we talk about abuse people have a certain idea of it in their head, they think that it happens and you go to the police and they believe you, investigate, and if they can arrest the person and then that’s it. But unfortunately if anything that is the exception to the rule. As is shown in Spotlight it is more like you’re abused, continuously, you try to get help but those who should listen don’t, your friends tell you to stop talking about it, the very people who should be there for you are the ones who turn their backs on you because they’re people and they believe rape myths, or want to keep their power, or are simply so arrogant and entitled that they think you deserved it and that they have the right to abuse and get away with it.

The film covers the topic from many angles as it wasn’t simply about the abuse from priests, or about the Boston Globe’s Spotlight team investigating it, but about them uncovering a large cover up, first in Boston and then stretching all through the system of the Catholic Church, of this same abuse. It looks at how it was done, how it affected the victims, and how individual men time and again tried hard to brush it under the rug. As it was men, by and large, that this film focused on; when we talk about systems its important remembering we live in a patriarchal world and this means that almost all, if not all, institutions are run by men. That’s not a value judgement or a myth or conspiracy but simple fact. Men run everything, they’re in the top positions of power almost everywhere and even where they’re not they still make up the majority of the rest of the powerful positions and even non-powerful positions. It’s worth remembering this because men on a patriarchal level feel entitled to most everything and this translates to their desire to control, abuse, and not even question it or the cover up.

In the film there was one priest in particular who Rachel McAdam’s character spoke to who simply, with no shame clarified that yes he’d molested young boys but that the focus of his actions should not be on what he did but that he isn’t gay. It was important to him, as a Catholic man, that his sexuality not be questioned as being homosexual was a much worse crime than the systematic abuse of children. But this also brings up a very important point that the film also slightly touched upon, that this abuse isn’t about sexuality or sexual desire but about control and power.

Though there was a part where one person who had studied these men somewhat blamed priest’s forced celibacy on their abuse it is, in my opinion, a misplaced blame. Celibacy was brought about for priests simply to stop the nepotism that was happening within the church. It is a very big lie that men have told themselves, and the rest of us, that men need sex; water, air, warmth, shelter and food are the things humans need but notice how sex isn’t one of them? Women account for 1% of rapes, a small percent of paedophiles, and a small, small amount of those who pay for sex and that is because all of those things are nothing to do with sex but to do with power and control. There are many women not having sex and they aren’t abusing because humans don’t need sex and men are not some special case they’re just kidding themselves.

It is clearer then that the abuse of young boys and girls is about a desire to manipulate, ruin lives, exercise control and power over vulnerable – often the most vulnerable – children as you follow the cover up. These men in the Catholic Church, the news, and other institutions such as law, spent a lot of time, effort and no doubt money to hide what these men did because they had the power to do so and they didn’t want to lose that power and face the consequences of their actions. This desire for power, the abuse that stems from having this power, and the evading of the consequences is a very common theme in films it’s just often not named, pointed out or used as the focus point of the film.

In Spotlight it has its Bad Guys who have clearly done wrong time and again but also it makes clear how the people you thought were Nice Guys were horrible all along. For instance, there is a character who is in the church who is friends with one of the reporters, Michael Keaton’s character, and we watch them do simple things like play golf, attend an event, have a beer and all the while this man knows the=at what his friend is investigating is real, widespread, and he too has been complicit in the cover up. This is another thing that often gets caught up in the myth that systematic abuse is some strange, unique scandal, these men are ordinary men not monsters, they have friends and wives and eat toast and brush their teeth during the times they’re not covering up abuse or committing it. It is important to remember these are ordinary men because it means they can be stopped, they can be caught by the police and brought to justice – but only if the other ordinary people help.

This is where it’s important to note that systematic abuse relies on many things but most importantly it relies on others believing that abuse isn’t really that bad, that the victims brought it upon themselves, and that the problem is someone else’s to deal with. Often when a victim comes forward with an accusation of abuse large amount of the public can be very quick to accuse them of lying, to make them the villain, and to choose to live in a world where women and children are horrible liars rather than a world where a portion of men are horrible abusers. The reality is the second world but it won’t go away if we pretend we live in the first, it’s that simple. People responded to this scandal, as is shown in the film, with shock that all of this happened and that it got covered up time and again but when you see how victims are treated it’s not that shocking; it’s actually pretty standard, even when its children coming forward, and it just helps things like this happen again.

The film is set in 2001 and there have been jokes about it being a historical piece, with technology so out of date and something so established and acknowledged being new and shocking but in terms of how people respond to victims it may as well be set today. As a public, as the institutions of law, and of newspapers many still respond to victims with the automatic response that they are liars, out of money and fame – as though any of these things are what meet victims, instead of hatred, death threats, and ruined lives. We still have so far to go in believing survivors, listening to their stories and trying everything we can to get them help, justice and men being held accountable for their choices and actions. Until we do we are helping nourish a system that can abuse freely and hide it for decades. We need to be more like Spotlight, thinking critically and reaching out with empathy and listening to those who have important stories to tell.

Room: My Strong

Warning: Spoilers (For the film, and the book)

Room is a film based on the book of the same name, both written by Emma Donoghue, and directed by Lenny Abrahamson who was so passionate about directing the film that he wrote a letter to Donoghue herself to ask to make it. The start of the film is an almost perfect adaptation of the book that it was a total joy to watch; to see these things I'd read about come to life, with the perfectly cast Jacob Tremblay playing Jack and Brie Larson playing Ma, or Joy Newsome as we learn in the film. It's brilliantly acted, directed and though I was slightly distracted in the second act by the differences in plot and themes it was still brilliant to watch. So instead of just discussing the film I will talk about the things it missed out too, not as a value judgement of the film – any book adaptation with so much to cover is almost certainly going to lose a large portion of its plot – but as a need to discuss the book and how it relates to feminism.

I would obviously not read this if you haven't watched the film but especially if you want to read the book I'd come back afterwards, and then we can have a lovely little chat about how great it is. I read Room in two days so I could watch the film and it was extremely easy to do that because it reads so well. I admire Donoghue in how she adapted her work to the screen, the second half changes setting dramatically due to the fact that there is a lot of time spent in places, and with a lot of characters, and it simply wouldn't have worked. It changed a lot about the motivations for one of the key things in the film/book – seriously, spoilers: Ma's suicide attempt; for instance in the book it is the TV interview that causes her to question herself to the point of attempting to take her own life, the suggestion that she didn't do what was best for Jack whereas in the film it's a lot of things – from her fighting with her Mum, to a shortened interview, and to problems adjusting to her old life.

However, Room is an utterly brilliant adaptation as it captures the same themes that the book does: from Jack in all his glory, to Ma in all of hers, and to all the complexities of male violence and the damage it causes. I will say now however that my only problem with the film – aside from it removing characters of colour in one area for no apparent reason – is that it ever so slightly tries once to humanise Old Nick; it's only a brief moment, as Jack is pretending to be dead, but he stops in his garden and looks bad, looks sad for Joy and what's she's lost and to me that was unncessary. Film's understandably have a harder job than books do at getting certain themes and emotions across but this is one thing that should never, even slightly be in Room. Old Nick is not a redeemable character, and as much as it's is hard to hear there are men like him in the world who are just not redeemable either.

Old Nick is not based off nothing, he's based off quite a few men in the history of this world who have committed similar atrocities: abducting a woman, or fathering a woman and keeping her locked up in a room for a very, very long time – and often when that woman is in that room raping her repeatedly and, often, impregnating them as is our opening for Room. There are men who day in day out, second to second, happily keep a woman locked up, as though she is literally not human and use her as a plaything. It happens in a world that, yes, is patriachal and it happens because men are told each day, every day since birth that they are entitled to the half of the population that are weaker than them, and who are routinely dehumanised for times such as that. It's not rocket science, it's not complicated, there is no great humanity flaw that causes men to keep commiting violence – it's patriachy.

But what I would rather talk about when it comes to Room though is the brilliant Jack and Ma, those who are hurt the most by male violence but that, as Room shows, can still say fuck you and bloom all the same. Jack is five as we start the film, his fifth birthday even, and whilst he has spent his entire life in Room it is no problem for him; after all how can you miss what you never knew existed? As we see it is actually Jack coming into the world, his mind bursting at trying to understand an entire universe that he never knew was real that is Room's focus. Again, there are sadly humans in this world who have lived lives like Jack, who have been hidden from humanity and have had to learn to adjust – though not all were as lucky to have Ma. In the book Joy was adbucted when she was 19 though in the film, presumably to adjust for Brie Larson, it was when she was 17. Both of which are insanely admirable, as we get a teenager, thrown into an impossible situation and yet when her world is changed again she adapats and survives as women are wont to do. She uses what she learnt in school – bringing Track and Phys Ed into their world – and she teaches it to Jack.

It's this amazing mothering, this strength of mothers to do all they can in their power – no matter their lack of it – to raise their children that is a testemant to women. Ma teaches Jack how to talk, using the TV to help and increase his vocabulary, she teaches him maths, how to write and draw, and even teaches him how to sew and other things. It is this start in life that saves him, that helps him grow into an adorable narrator, if not one that still had the moods and tantrums that all children – and adults – have. As Ma grows up in that room she too learns new skills of survival, such as how to ask Old Nick for things that he will actually bring them, how to eat just enough to stay alive so Jack can eat more, and how to make do and mend in the most extreme of cases – Egg Snake anyone.

In a world where women are routinely and daily killed, abused, degraded, objectified in the most extreme and small sense it is important to recognise the strength that women have simply to survive; their ability to be human, and to keep what makes them human, in the face of male monsters. Women live in a world where acid is thrown on their faces and they still say fuck you you can't stop me. They're incredible, but they also shouldn't have to be as men shouldn't have created this world where they can abuse and get away with it, legally and socially in many senses. However, it's the times that women can't quite handle all of this that other women become so important, that feminism itself becomes a lifeline to help. In the book/film it's Jack that keeps her grounded, that keeps her going and in her darkest hour in the film it's what saves her, he's her strong.

Donoghue also understands the very real, physical and visceral aspect of being a mother, as is shown throughout the book. From the physical toil that her body takes from being abused by Old Nick just so Jack isn't touched, to the malnourishment she suffers to keep Jack as healthy as possible, and in a continuing theme in the book to the breastfeeding she does until not long after they've escaped. It's this last point that is only mentioned a few times in the film: her breastfeeding in Room, her mother being surprised that she still breastfeeds him – with Joy finding it ironic that out of all the things that she finds disturbing about what happened in Room it's that – and when she tells Jack that it's over. In the book Jack refers to it simply as 'some', it's never really mentioned as something that's different, and in fact the moment Jack is told that he can't have any again he simply kisses her breasts and says bye. Her body kept producing milk for years because Jack needed it, because there wasn't enough food for Jack to keep him going, and it's fitting with the rest of the book/film as Ma's literal being is what keeps Jack alive.

In the film rather than the book when they escape Jack and Ma go and live with her mother and her partner Leo; her father is briefly there though he doesn't stay as he selfishly puts his feelings at being weirded out by Jack's existence over being there for his daughter who has returned from, what he thought was, the grave. Whereas in the book Jack and Ma spend a couple of weeks in a rehab clinic – with Noreen and Dr Clay and all the rest- and then after the TV interview – done to get money for Jack's college fund – that causes Ma to attempt suicide Jack goes on his own to stay with Grandma and Leo. This changes the second act of the film dramatically, it causes us to see a different side of all characters; though it does mean Jack finally gets to hang out with a dog, make friends, and see his mother's room – unchanged since she was taken (though in the book it's a fitness suite as Joy's mother assumed she was dead).

In the book I enjoyed their time at the clinic is an as much as it was interesting to see Ma attempt to rediscover the world, who she was and how she fit into it – like when she tries to e-mail her old friends only to realise that they, and technology, moved on without her. But also the little things about what it does to a person to never go outside for the first five years of their life; Jack needs to wear special sunglasses, have vaccines, wear a mask. He suffers a cold for the first time, he is petrified of rain, and the wind freaks him out. It's as Dr Clay says in the book, he's like a baby but one who can add up and articulate his emotions. It's an extremely compelling read and as someone who has a degree in Childhood Studies it really reminds me why I love teaching, the sheer joy children can be and how amazing it is to show a big, often weird and wonderful world to them.

There are also lots of funny little things in the book that happen when Jack leaves Room and one of those is how often he's mistaken for a girl. It's understandable when one of our shortcuts for what sex a stranger is is long hair but it's one that Donoghue understands can be funny and arbitrary – though as I've mentioned sex is important as it is Ma's female sex that brought him into this world and thusly kept him alive. There is a moment in the book when Jack, whilst Ma is recovering away from him, that he goes to the shops with his Uncle Paul, his wife Deanna and their daughter Bronwyn – characters not in the film for time purposes I assume – and it's another moment that made me laugh, if not a little bitterly. Jack has his long hair as per and whilst they're shopping he sees a Dora backpack and it is the most amazing thing he has ever seen, he loves Dora the Explorer; he watched it a lot in Room, he loves that she knows his name, he hates naughty Swiper, and he sees any language that isn't English as being Spanish as a result. So he just has to have it, and there's a moment where Paul doesn't want him to have it because Dora is For Girls, he tries to wave a Spider-man bag at Jack but Jack is having none of it. It was amusing to think that gender is so arbitarily encoded into their adult brains that they thought a kid who'd grown up in one room would care that Dora is For Girls and that spider-man is For Boys. Jack is Jack, a boy because his body says so and that means nothing more than that.

Room is a brilliant film, so touching and entertaining despite it's horrific subject matter. Its a great display of how strong women and children are in the face of male violence, of how precious life can be, and of the bond between mother and child. If you haven't already I seriously suggest you read the book, it's a joy to see the world through Jack's unique eyes and it only betters the already amazing film. It's great to have a real, complicated woman on film – one who struggles, who survives, and who is thoroughly human. We don't get to see women be human on screen as much as we should, instead they're often see as disposable as Old Nick see's women, simply there for sex and not for talking or anything else. I look forward to see more from Larson and Tremblay and I hope that this film helps us get that little bit closer to getting rid of the Old Nick's of this world and creating it that little bit more in Jack's image.

Alternate Valentine's Day Films

Valentine’s Day can be a perfect time to sit and watch romantic films with your boyfriend but for those of us who have been with their other half for a long time, or who just don’t have the stomach for romance films there are still plenty of films to watch. Below is a list of films that have a romantic element but that are a bit different from the likes of Valentine’s Day. There is also a list of romantic films that don’t involve pretending stalking is romantic (or cromantic as the disturbing This Means War calls it) or that don’t romanticise abuse like the awful Fifty Shades of Grey, see here). Either way I hope you enjoy these films as much as I did.

Super Alternate Valentine’s Day Films

1)      SuperBob

SuperBob is a mockumentary style film about a man called Bob who gets hit by a meteor and gets super powers. But unlike Superman Bob is just a very ordinary, awkward man and the film perfectly shows what would actually happen if ordinary people suddenly got powers. It’s painfully funny as we follow Bob’s constant faux pas. It’s a charming film that really explores the power of saying no, finding love that’s been staring you in the face, and I highly recommend it. Plus how often does a film mention House of Leaves!

2)      Night of the Living Deb

This film is a zom-rom-com and it takes places just after a one night stand as a man tries to get rid of Deb on a morning only to find that a zombie apocalypse has happened overnight. It’s a very funny film that really gets how great of a lead it has in Deb, a very awkward and weird woman. It has its problems in certain characters but ultimately it has its humour, its romance and plenty of zombies. Definitely one for those who love their zombie films a bit different like me.

3)      The One I Love

This is a film for those couples who have been together a long time as it follows a couple trying to fix their marriage after one cheated. We see them taking their couples therapist’s advice to go and spend a long weekend in a cabin. I can’t give away much of the plot but let’s just say that it getting put in the supernatural category on Netflix was what finally made me watch it. It’s a surprisingly funny, romantic depending on who you are, and interesting film. Definitely one to watch if you’re tired of couples overcoming every obstacle with a big gesture or an adrenaline fuelled adventure, or a night of murdering if you’re in Purge Anarchy.

4)      Grabbers

Grabbers is an Irish monster film that I watched on Netflix, and I fell in love immediately. It’s so ridiculous, funny, and yes kinda romantic in its own weird way. It follows the locals of a small town after a weird monster emerges from the sea and starts causing havoc… especially if you happen to be drunk. It’s definitely not a film for everyone but I think you should give it a watch to see if you love it like I do. I don’t want to give much away because I can’t do justice to how ridiculous but great this film is. Seriously, go watch it and if you loved it you can just thank me later.

Alternate Romance Films

1)      Romantics Anonymous

Romantic Anonymous is a French film that is on the UK Netflix at the moment and it is about a woman who makes chocolates. She is so nervous and awkward and she falls for a guy who is probably more nervous than she is. It’s very cute, charming, and endearing. It was a huge joy to watch, and I would recommend it to anyone who loves romance and can happily read subtitles.

2)      In Your Eyes

In Your Eyes is another film I found on UK Netflix that I absolutely fell for, it is about a couple, miles apart, who find one day that they can see through each other’s eyes. It’s unique and really understands what it would be like to actually be in the mind of someone else and how that might cause a bond unlike any other. It stars the brilliant Zoe Kazan, who is perfect in The Pretty One, and That Hot Guy From Cloverfield. It’s a great film for romantics but just like The One I Love it’s great for those who want a bit of brain and difference in their films.

3)      Remember Sunday

Remember Sunday stars Zac Levi and Alexis Bledel and is about a woman who falls in love with a man who has amnesia. It’s not the most original concept but it doesn’t feel like you’re watching the same film as others. It handles it with all the emotion you’d expect and it was quite heart breaking as you’d also expect. It looks at what it would be like to try to remember falling in love every day and what the struggle to stay in love can be. It’s not as creepy as 50 First Dates where *spoilers* we’re left with a woman waking up every day to see she’s pregnant with a baby she has no memory of.

4)      Timer

Timer is another film I found on Netflix (so I have a lot of free time on my hands) and another that I found to be unique and weirdly lovely in its own way. It takes place in a world where every person has the option of getting a watch installed on, well in, their wrist that will count down to them meeting their one true love. It asks would this be a good thing or a bad thing, what would it be like dating someone knowing you’re not each other’s true love, and would it actually matter if you felt that you loved them anyway? Or what if you weren’t ready to fall in love again but that your time was up?

An Anti-Valentine Film: The Loved Ones.

This is a horror film for those who are a bit pissed, whether it’s because your boyfriend is being a jerk, because men are just jerks, or you just want to watch a decent horror film. It’s about Lola who wants the best prom that takes place in her own home where the other guests are your Dad and a woman who can’t talk… It’s brutal, unforgiving at times, and while I definitely wouldn’t call it feminist I will say that it shows what happens when an unhinged woman is a bit sick of never getting the man that she wants…

If you can think of anymore films that would fit, or that you love and want me to check out feel free to let me know in the comments or on Twitter @feministfilms.

The Gift: Bygones Are Not Bygones.

The Gift is a horror/thriller film that is written and directed by Joel Edgerton. He also stars in it with odd auburn hair and eyes that in certain lights look almost black. It also stars Jason Bateman as Simon and a great Rebecca Hall as Robyn. It’s about a couple who move into a new house & whilst out buying new furniture they run into a man from Simon’s old high school. His name is Gordo, or as Simon used to call him ‘Weirdo’. The film follows the couple as they have Gordo’s friendship ‘forced’ on them. It was a pretty enjoyable film, for the most part.

The film is more about suspense, the general feeling of unease around Gordo and ultimately about how much of an arsehole Simon is. As his wife tells him, he was a bully when he knew Gordo at school and he still is now. It’s this bullying aspect of his personality that led Gordo to stalk the couple, to force himself into their lives with presents and social awkwardness. This is the part of the review where I spoil the film for you so I can review it so if you haven’t already watched it but were planning to then I’d come back when you’re done. When Simon and Gordo were at school Simon, being the bullying nightmare that he is, decided one day to spread a rumour that Gordo is gay, thus ruining his life.

Seems as them being kids was a few decades ago having a rumour that you’re gay was even worse then than it is now – and it can still be pretty terrible now, which is an understatement. So he was mercilessly bullied and in the end Gordo’s father tried to kill him. Simon really didn’t seem too bothered by this fact, happy to shrug it off as having nothing to do with him. Apparently in his world everyone is responsible for their own actions, apart from him of course. Now all of this is revealed slowly, in a great way and with a stunning performance given from Rebecca Hall. Her character Robyn tries hard to give Gordo the benefit of the doubt, she tries to defend him & really be his friend. This is why the ending is so fucking annoying.

As the film goes on Robyn is pregnant and in the end she gives birth, she had had a pregnancy before but it hadn’t worked out. Sadly she has realised that her husband is a totally nasty piece of work by the time she gives birth so it’s all a bit of a mess. So we’ve spent the film getting to know Robyn as she works from home, we learn that she’s a woman who is caring and smart and oh how the film then decides that she is worth nothing. Less than nothing, she’s now firmly Simon’s Wife and that’s that. You see after Simon has beat the crap out of Gordo & told him to stay out of their lives forever that is when Gordo puts his final plan into place to truly fuck Simon over.

It goes a little something like this: Gordo has been breaking into their home and filming him watching Robyn, earlier in the film we see Robyn struggle with a pill addiction and one day she randomly collapses, nothing really happens and she wakes up a bit confused; but we find out that that’s not at all what happened as actually Gordo drugged her, and while she was knocked out he, whilst wearing a monkey mask – Simon has a phobia of monkeys – films himself touching Robyn and moving her onto a bed, then the recording stops. So Simon, furious and petrified that Gordo has raped his wife, he runs to her to see if she’s okay and tells her all about it and see’s if she’s scarred for life. Oh wait, that’s not at all what happened is it. No because if it was I wouldn’t be writing this.

So after the recording stops Simon, furious, goes to the hospital where his new-born son and wife are and Gordo calls him up after Simon fails to catch him. Gordo explains that this is his revenge against Simon – because this has nothing to do with Robyn. His revenge is Simon not being sure, even if it’s just for a split second before he can look his child in the eyes, or in the time before getting a DNA test but just for a moment of not knowing whether his kid is actually his or whether it’s Gordo’s. So from Edgerton’s point of view that’s just awful for Simon right? It’s kind of implied that in the end, especially in the alternate end, everything’s fine and Gordo got his revenge by making Simon feel just darn awful. But despite showing Robyn as a full human being the whole film through the film doesn’t seem to care much for her at the end. We simply get a relieved looking Simon as Robyn is giving him a withering look.

Let’s just take a quick second to do something that Edgerton apparently didn’t: look at this from her point of view. Should Simon tell her, or should she find the DVD with the footage Gordo filmed this is what she has to experience: the knowledge that she was drugged on purpose, the knowledge that she was touched while she was knocked out, that she may have been raped, that the man who did that to her did it to get back at her husband, that it all had nothing to do with her, that the man who did it was one who she had been nice to the entire time, that she has had a man’s hands on her and she has no recollection of it, that he could have done anything to her when the camera was off and she was unconscious, that she, even for a second, thinks that the child she carried for months doesn’t have the father she thought, that anyone would torture her, even for a second, like this just to get back at her arsehole husband. I would never see rape as a punishment, I’d never see it as a punishment to a woman’s husband, and even if it was raping her for spreading a rumour as a teenager I’d still say you’ve gone way too far.

I have made this point a hundred times before and I’ll say it again: Women are not things, owned by men, that can be used as things to be hurt, killed, or ‘broken’ to upset those men. We’re just not, despite what shitty male writers would like to think. There’s this thing that happens when the majority of films are written by men, directed by men, and about men: they usually have a wife/daughter/mother etc. and they usually get killed. When you don’t have an equal amount of films about women then we don’t really see male husbands etc. getting killed for being husbands, or husbands getting raped for being husbands to a female protagonist and so on. Now I happen to think that watching women get killed, raped, abused and so on for the sins of their male family members over and over and over can fuck a girl, or guy, up. But that’s just me.

P.S.

Here’s an ending that doesn’t do this, that fits with the rest of the film, and doesn’t leave the female viewers with a feeling that they don’t matter, that no matter how human they are at the end of the day they’re still less human than their male partner:

Simon gets home, he opens another gift that has been left for him on his porch. He takes it inside and he opens it, it’s a carrier for his new-born son. As he’s unwrapping it he sees something inside it and he takes out three separate gifts. Each gift has a number on it, from 1 to 3. He opens the first one, in it is a key and he realises that it’s the key to his house. Horrified he opens the next package and it’s a CD, he plays it and he hears a recording of some awful things he said about Gordo when he thought he couldn’t hear. Then he opens the third, and the final, gift and it’s a DVD that has play me written on it. So he puts it in the DVD player and sits terrified and furious as the footage shows someone, Gordo, breaking into his house; he watches as the person filming goes into his whole house, as they sit filming his wife at the window, as they film him when he doesn’t realise it. Then it goes to a shot of his drink from a night when he randomly collapsed, a night he has no recollection of. He looks completely shocked and he recoils from the screen in horror as the camera is turned around to reveal Gordo wearing a monkey mask, it’s like something out of his nightmares.

Then the camera pans down and it shows Simon, totally unconscious and lying on his bedroom floor. Gordo sits on top of Simon and strokes his face, his chest and then his hand moves out of shot and Gordo turns the camera back around to himself and he laughs. Simon, utterly terrified, starts pulling at his clothes, trying to tear his own skin off. Then the TV screen goes to black as the DVD finishes, we see Simon’s terrified face in the reflection. Simon screams and punches the TV, it shatters and falls to the floor. Simon runs to the shower and scrubs and scrubs but nothing works. He gets dressed and gets in the car, he drives to the hospital where his wife is. He’s worried that Gordo will go hurt her next. As he gets there he finds his wife’s room is empty, as he goes to look for her he sees Gordo but can’t quite catch him; he runs out of the hospital where he thinks he went, his hair is still wet and he’s freaking out. It’s clear Simon can’t collect his thoughts and is screaming on the inside. Then his phone rings.

We see Gordo stood inside a hospital corridor, watching Simon stand outside and he smiles. He explains to Simon that he isn’t gay, that the rumour ruined his entire life, that it set in motion events that he could never recover from. That he barely survived his Dad trying to kill him, that there is no coming back from knowing your own father wants you dead, and that he hasn’t been able to trust anyone since. He thought that he could turn his life around when he met Simon again, that if he could befriend him – the man who ruined his life - then he could be liked, hell maybe he could even be loved. It was even better when Robyn was nice to him, that she stood up for him, and then he heard Simon insult him, call him a freak, say he was obsessed with Robyn. Then he knew that there was no coming back, no changing who he was, what he was.

So he decided to get his revenge. The rumour that he was gay had always burned in his brain, even as time had been kinder to gay men it hadn’t mattered – that one story that Simon had refused to take back had been the end for him. So he used it against Simon, now he hadn’t actually done anything – or had he? There was no knowing what Gordo had done to him, what he had or hadn’t touched, and he was never going to tell him. He wanted him to feel as violated, as humiliated as he had done when Simon had abused him, insulted him and tortured him for years. He asks if Simon wants to tear his skin off, that if he wants he could ask his Dad to set him alight because he knows how that can really give you a new body. That he was lucky the flames had spared his face, that Simon’s face, his body is perfect, that he was jealous.

Simon screams at him and has no idea what to say, what to do. He shouts down the phone at Gordo to tell him what he did, that he’ll go to the police. Gordo explains that he will too, he knows Simon, and that if he was a bully once then he’s probably ruined other lives too. That he could have fun finding those people and seeing how they feel about Simon. Gordo tells Simon that he never wants to hear from him again, that he should try to be a better man, a better human being for his son. Simon runs back to his wife, embraces her and apologises, promises he’ll be better and he kisses his son on the forehead. Robyn has a look that shows she’s not quite sure if he can be better, but she hides it from him. Gordo walks down the hospital hallway, throwing away the phone and then the credits roll.

My 5 Favourite Feminist Films of 2015

2015 has been an odd year for films, it feels like for every step forward we take some male director say something sexist and stupid and we take ten steps back. There have been article after article about how there is a serious drought in women helming films, and it's a serious problem – it is no secret that when it comes to films directors are often seen as the geniuses behind them, so when all we see are men being those geniuses it sends a bad message about what women are capable of & it tells young girls who want to direct that there is no room for them. I hope that in 2016 we see a lot more films written and directed for women and that this continues as time goes on. It's a hard battle but women deserve to live in a world where we can see ourselves on screen in all our beautiful glory, with women bringing those stories to live. So in light of that here are my top 5, in no particular order, feminist films of 2015.

Ex Machina

Ex Machina was the first film on this blog for a reason, it was so brilliant in a genre that was drenched in sexism to find one that actually realised what would happen when female robots grew tired of being abused. As a result I started this blog simply to talk about how much I enjoyed it and it has grown and grown since then; you can read the post here. As a film it has some very beautiful shots, brilliantly thought out characters, and the microcosm that it exists in is one crafted perfectly. Vikander plays her role brilliantly, managing to potray the clinical side of a robot whilst simultaneously being softer when needed. It is a film that is aware of the darker, more twisted sexually & violently side of men, but instead of presenting it as uncommented upon fact it shows the consequences of it; it shows what would happen when that violence & entitlement was forced upon a being that had been brought into this world by that which was now causing her harm.

Rating: 5/5 Director: Alex Garland Starring: Alicia Vikander, Domhnall Gleeson, Oscar Isaac. Available on: DVD, or to buy on services such as Blink Box or Amazon Video.

Mad Max: Fury Road

Any film that prompts a boycott from 'Men's Rights Activists' is probably one that I'd love. You can read my original post on this here. It was one that again understood the harm that male violence can cause and instead of using it for entertainment instead used women fighting back as its plot. It was a very thrilling joy ride – quite literally – of female, and I hate this word, empowerment. It gave us indivdiual characters that were seperated by more than just their hair colour. The film quite happily focused on the tragic story that Max had come across rather than trying to sideline the amazing Imperator Furiosa simply to keep him as the protagonist. It showed raw female strength & the power of sisterhood and I utterly loved it.

Rating: 5/5 Director: George Miller Starring: Tom Hardy, and Charlize Theron. Available on: DVD, or to buy on services such as Amazon Video.

Inside Out

Whilst little girls often get given tales of Disney Princesses, and much feminist writing has been done about those, they don't often get stories about them simply being little girls. But here was Inside Out a Pixar film exploring, rather than dismissing, a little girl's emotions. It was, again quite literally, a joy to watch. The film explored what happens when big, stressful things happen in our lives – such as moving house – and shows what might happen to a person's emotions during that time. I hope it helped children understand their own feelings, to have them validated, and made human and hilarious. It made me laugh and it definitely made me cry; it was beautiful to have a film with such a great female lead be such a natural, normal, and popular thing. I wrote about it briefly in a post (here) where I talked about Jurassic World & Pitch Perfect 2, two films that seemed to be angry about the fact that women existed & dared to take up space in a world made for men.

Rating: 5/5 Director: Pete Docter and Ronnie Del Carmen Starring: Amy Poehler, Bill Hader. Available on: DVD, or to buy on services such as Amazon Video.

Spy

Spy was a hilarious film, and as a big fan of Melissa McCarthy & Miranda Hart I was extremely excited to see them both in a film. I never quite got around to writing up a post for it on my blog but I enjoyed it thoroughly when I watched it. It feels so ridiculous that I have to praise a film for treating Melissa McCarthy like a whole person rather than as a joke or a backdrop as there are more than enough films about men of all shapes and sizes being treated like people in comparison. But I shall because it feels like it is worth saying, and oh is she ever one hell of a person. Constantly put down upon in the film and underestimated McCarthy's character proves that she is badass. With a hilarious, amazing side kick in the ever great Miranda Hart (you can tell I'm a big fan, can't you) McCarthy kicks arse after Jude Law's character gets killed; yes, a film opened by killing off the beautiful male lead so a female lead could feel sad and take action – when does that ever happen? It's an awesome film, that is so great to watch and I really do recommend it. I won't say more as I wouldn't want to spoil it but what I will say is I never knew the world has such a great comic actor in Jason Statham.

Rating: 5/5 Director: Paul Feig Starring: Melissa McCarthy, Rose Byrne, Miranda Hart.
Available on: DVD, or to buy on services such as Amazon Video.

Girlhood
As I have not seen this film yet but that I know it is worthy of being this list I have asked Sam Calvert, here and who's own review of Ex Machina you can read here, to write this section for me. Enjoy.

Much like Céline Sciamma’s two previous works, Girlhood is a film which places the focus on issues less portrayed within the medium of cinema. Whereas Water Lilies (2007) explores the sexual awakenings and confusion of three teenage girls and Tomboy (2011) follows the distressing experiences of a transgendered ten-year old child Girlhood shines a light upon the young black girls that call Paris’ rough and tumble banlieues their home. It is on the surface a coming-of-age drama, however themes of race, gender, class and the politics of those subjects are explored and in the tradition of other banlieue films such as Karim Dridi’s Bye Bye (1995) and Matthieu Kassovitz’s La Haine (1995) offers a refreshing counter to standard nostalgia-soaked coming-of-age narratives as well as the ubiquitous cinematic images normally associated with white, middle-class sophisticated Paris. However unlike those films, the cast of Girlhood is almost entirely female.

It is a film that is brutally honest with its female characters, they are as flawed as they are empowered and are never once cast under a judgemental eye by the filmmaker. They do what they want, succeed and fail on their own merits, all in the name of empowering themselves for themselves and not for anyone else – a notion played to perfection in the much talked about ‘Diamonds’ scene. In fact the gender relations at play between the males and females in the banlieue would be worthy of a whole article in themselves. Ultimately writer/director Sciamma sums it up perfectly herself when she states that “French young women today are this girl”. A sure-fire modern classic, a slightly dragging final act is the only thing stopping Girlhood from achieving perfection.

Rating: 4.5/5 Director: Céline Sciamma Starring: Karidja Touré, Assa Sylla, Lindsay Karamoh, Marietou Toure   Available on: DVD, Netflix US, or to buy on services such as Amazon Video.

Very Honourable Mentions: Crimson Peak, Carol, Room, Star Wars: The Force Awakens.


Join me in the New Year where I will be starting a 10-part series exploring female sexuality, and how men find it scary, in films; starting from the teenage years and going all through a woman's life. I'll be looking at great films such as Pariah, Waterlillies, and Under the Skin.

Jessica Jones: AKA Hero

Warning: Spoilers. Also, Trigger Warnings (For the show also): Rape, Abusive Relationships.

Jessica Jones is Marvel's second Netflix television show following Daredevil. The best way I can put it is that whilst Daredevil is the epitome of male violence then Jessica Jones is the consequences of that same violence. It was an exercise in how to take a typically sexist genre – neo/noir – and use it to tell the story of how women live day to day in a world suffering under male violence. In the pilot we are given the typical noir protagonist: an insomniac who drinks, has no friends and a past that won't leave them alone. It was even complete with narration but it's Ritter's female voice that breathes freshness into a genre that typically sees women as dames who are there to seduce and kill the poor male protagonist.

It is set in Hell’s Kitchen, a place depicted as full of violence and poverty so rife that people have no choice but to live there and suffer. We follow Jessica Jones, a character who shares my name (an experience I'll tell you), who we meet as she is putting a man through her door window, because he oddly blamed her for his wife having an affair. She is established straight away as being similar to many a fictional detective before her, one who has abrasive, illegal methods but who, damn it, gets the job done, and yes she does get called Sherlock at one point. Just like Sherlock using his talents to trick others into telling him things Jess is no different, using a Barbie style voice to get information from a woman over the phone.

Yet Jess brings more to the table than those mere human detectives before her for she is a superhero too. Though the word superhero is perhaps not accurate here, for Jess isn't out fighting crime with her powers – at least not anymore. The show drifts around various words to describe her, though it is not shy in calling her a hero, but it mostly settles on gifted – though even that is argued over by one character, instead calling her a freak. Either way she has superior strength, she can kind of fly, or as Jess describes it 'guided falling', and she can't half take a punch. These skills are often held up as evidence as to how a woman can do a job that comes with the threat of someone deciding to kick your arse. On quite a few occasions did Jess, and her friend Trish, find ways to shrug off and defend Jess' considerable strength, from a cleanse to pilates.

The show explores similar themes to shows like it such as Marvel's Agents of SHIELD which has introduced Inhumans to its current season; it looks at the threat that people with superhuman powers would be, people who can rip people apart with their bare hands if they want to. Jessica Jones adds a dimension that I have always argued: but what if they didn't? What if they were like the many, many people that weren't violent? Like the fact that the violence in this world is pretty much committed by men, the statistics are staggering.

So what is it about women that makes us so much less inclined to commit violence? And what if we got powers? Would we turn around and wreak havoc for the thousands of years of violence and oppression done against us? Or would we be like Jess, who does good and mostly uses her strength to defend herself? As Jess says to someone who accuses her of being 'one of them', “It's people like you that give people like you a bad name”; it's not that she is or isn't the problem but it's like many scared, paranoid, fear mongering people who assume and accuse others of being a threat. That's not even getting into the fact that humans are enough of a threat on their own & that weapons can bridge that gap between human and inhumans, I mean seriously three members of the Avengers are human.

In the pilot she gets a case that starts off the whole season: someone's daughter, Hope, has gone missing. Even in this exchange alone we are treated to one way that gender stereotypes can crop up as the father starts trying to fix Jess' apartment door – the one that she threw a man through. At one point he asks her if she has a spirit level & we get a little moment where noir crosses with sexism as she doesn't have one but instead she hands him some glue, noir protagonists are not the most prepared characters. It's sexism is topped off by him saying he doesn't want to leave a woman alone in the city with a door that won't lock, the irony of this of course being that Jess can more than handle herself.

The theme of strength is a core one of the show however; from dealing with literal, physical strength to a more abstract, mental and emotional strength. This happens because despite Jess' immense strength she was once powerless to use it as her enemy was a man by the name of Kilgrave, played by David Tennant, who instead controlled her mind. It's this helplessness, this losing control over your mind and body that is the key fascination that Jessica Jones explores. Many a time do Trish and Jess point out that being mind controlled by Kilgrave does not make you weak, and that in fact you could be the strongest person in both mind and body and it doesn't matter against Kilgrave's powers.

This is where I say that I'm going to spoil the entire season so I hope you've watched it all before you read on. This lack of strength & weakness becomes especially clear when we find out that his powers are a virus & that the only way to be free of him is by being with him for long enough that your body can create antibodies against it, as happens with Jess. It's also this anti-body resistance that serves as one of many great metaphors in the show for what happens when you leave an abusive relationship. Women who've left abusive partners can still feel trapped, and often live under the very real threat of their ex returning to hurt them – leaving is the most dangerous time for women in these relationships. These women over time would hopefully learn how to be free, as it were, from their partners' spell; whilst Kilgrave has fictional mind control powers he is representative of men who use simple manipulation to exercise that same control of their female partners.

It is through this threat that the show expertly portrays the realities of living in and out of an abusive relationship. Often when we hear about these relationships there are cries of why didn't she leave as though women happily choose to stay with men who hurt them, as though there could be no other side to it. When often in reality women's choices are more complex, as reality often is, and it’s this lack of choice that the show handles brilliantly. Women in abusive relationships are emotionally abused to feel as though they are worthless, that they bring the abuse on themselves and that they deserve it; abusive men also isolate women from their friends, their family, the people who would be able to warn and help them. They make them financially dependent on them so even if they wanted to leave they would have no money to get away. They keep track of everything that they do on the internet, or outside of home – if they even allow them to go out alone that is – so even women finding out that there are options to escape is pretty slim. Considering many people don't understand the signs of abuse, and that much of the abuse isn't physical, it is not really a mystery why people don't get out of abusive relationships. Again, that's not even considering just how dangerous, as I've said, it is when women do finally leave – that is often when they are killed. I am sure there are people out there who have even stopped watching this show, or have had their abusive partners turn it off in front of them after realising Kilgrave is portrayed as the evil villain.

A big part of liberal feminism that I often see is this idea of choice, in particular women's choices. There's a lot of discussion about the idea that women should have the freedom to make whatever choices they want, regardless of the impact those choices have on other women even. For instance, when some feminists talk about how harmful things like objectification can be, how patriarchal ideas of women's worth are tied to how sexually attractive to men they are and when it comes to  women who are objectified – such as those in the modelling and sex industries – liberal feminists are quick to point out that if a woman chooses to be objectified then that's her business. I'm hardly the first feminist then to point out that this is a rather narrow way to look at the world and that it is all but useless for feminism seems as feminism deals with oppressive structures and systems rather than solely individual choices.

Jessica Jones then as a show has much to say on choices and how free women really are to make certain choices. It understands that abusive men and oppressive structures can take away a woman's choice, can remove her chance to say no, and then will turn around and blame her for doing something she had no real choice but to do. As much as Kilgrave uses his powers there's also many times when he simply manipulates Jess with his words, with the threat of making others take their own lives, and with the threat of doing despicable things to those that she cares about. Where is the choice when it’s between your best friend being killed or raped and stopping the man who has ruined yours and many others lives? Many women have argued that in a patriarchy women's free will is twisted and marked by the oppression that she lives under, it's no different for Jess.

On the other hand however, it is very aware of the choices that men make, that men have the power to make for they are the ones in a patriarchy with the most power. Kilgrave is a perfect example of what an abusive, entitled man would do if he was given the power to control minds. He uses women like puppets, there to be raped for his pleasure, to be pretty things on his arms. He even uses a woman, Hope, simply to annoy and lure Jess as he goes through the same steps he did with her - dinner, hotels and such. He gets whatever he wants and it is the simple fact that Jess leaves him and is the one person who disobeys him that makes him so furious he sets out to ruin her life, in the name of loving her.

That again is another corner stone of abuse, and sadly one many believe if newspaper headlines and stories are to be believed. We paint men who kill their partners and their families as loving men whose love was simply so much that they had no choice but to kill them; that by taking their life they were showing some true act of love. Kilgrave made it very clear that he thought that he loved Jess, that he was controlling her because he loved her more than anyone did and that only he could love her in the Right Way. The truth is, of course, that he doesn't love her but instead he is obsessed with her. That he feels like she is his possession and that any time she is a real person, exercising her right to say no to him, that this illusion shatters and he reacts with anger and more and more control.

In the final episode, in the climax of Jess finally standing off and up to Kilgrave in what ends with his death at her hands, is a line that shows how he wants her to see herself; he says to her that she isn't capable of loving, that she could never truly love him because she couldn't love any man. This is again another common abuse tactic as it turns him into the victim and her into the villain; of course he has to hurt her because it’s the only way he can make her see how great he is, of course he has to force her to be with him so he can teach her how to love, and ultimately she ends up feeling like the person in the wrong when it’s his own issues and insecurities that mean she doesn't love him, not hers. It is one of many patriarchal reversals that men often pull to convince themselves that women are the cause of all problems and not men, for example a simple one would be men saying that women are bad drivers when in fact it is men who cause the most road accidents, and especially the most fatal ones.

Even then there are other things throughout the show that hint at the reality of women living in a patriarchal world that abuses women but then hates any attempt they make at dealing with it. For instance, in this final fight Jess tells her best friend Trish, stood nearby after being threatened by Kilgrave with a future of rape and death, that she loves her, and she does so because she knows she's about to murder Kilgrave; she does this simply because she knows that she will be sent to jail – though, luckily perhaps, that does not happen – and this is because killing your abuser is seen as an unacceptable choice women make. There are many, many women in prison for this exact reason and whilst I'm not advocating they should all be free I think that there is a lack of understanding of how little choice these women had in doing what they did.

That so many of these women were faced with their own deaths, or the death of their children, and that the only way to stop them was killing them. Yet women's sentences, like with most other crimes, are harsher for this than men's would be. It is seen as a much greater crime for a woman to kill a man than for a man to kill a woman, just look at the sentences men get for killing a stranger compared to their partners. There is even a plot in the show of Trish getting a gun after she learns to defend herself and almost fails; but even this in the real world has consequences that women suffer worst, as is evidenced by a case where a woman went to jail for decades purely for firing warning shots at her abusive partner. A woman threatening a man was deemed worse than many men's very real violence against women, and children.

Male violence is a constant in the world of Hell's Kitchen, as was made painstakingly clear in Daredevil, and seen in obvious and subtle ways in Jessica Jones. Take the character of Simpson, or G.I. Joe as I took to calling him in my notes, he is very violent, time and time again; he complains that when Kilgrave made him try to kill Trish that that wasn't him, that he isn't like that. Yet as the series goes on his character is marked by the violence he commits, in many situations and against many different people. He even commits the abuse staple of immediately apologising for his violence against Trish as she tries to stop his violence, saying it will never happen again.

But then there is also the aftermaths of male violence scattered throughout; we see this in Jess' PTSD, in the male cliché remnants of Carrie Ann Moss' gender swapped character, in Pam & Wendy paying for male violence, in Hope's abortion, and in a patriarchy so obsessed with women being beautiful that a mother tries to force her own daughter to be sick so she will be skinnier. Male violence is plain and obvious to see once you start noticing it, which can be difficult as it is so hidden, so normalised and mystified by men who would rather you believe that violence just is, it just happens, and that its done by no one in particular. Take for instance Kilgrave's anger at being called evil, calling it reductive because he sees himself as so much greater, so much more complicated than a simple Evil Villain. Yet I'd argue that even the concept of evilness is one used to add a shine to what is otherwise your standard, pathetic entitled man throwing tantrums and trying to manipulate people when he doesn't get his own way.

Kilgrave sees himself not as a villain either, but as a loving partner. He describes recreating her childhood home, one Jess had to leave after a car crash she was in killed her family, and forcing her with the deaths of others to live there as a 'grand romantic gesture'; he gets angry and says that he 'gave and gave' and that 'she took and took', again he is the carer and provider and she the ungrateful leech who doesn't appreciate anything he does for her. People echo abusive sentiments like this when they believe that a woman owes a man sex after a date, that men's kindness should always be repaid as it comes at a cost – whilst women's kindness is one that is severely punished if its lacking. Kilgrave even goes so far as to say that she is crueler than his parents, who accidentally gave him his powers after trying to cure an illness he had in childhood, as to him she committed the worst possible act against him: saying no.

The only criticism perhaps that I would say this show has is that it does try to find reasons for Kilgrave's violence, for his entitlement. It first looks to his childhood, hoping that his shitty parents would be a good reason why a man would use his powers for so much evil; yet when Jess finds that his parents were loving, that they were trying to help and that he turned on them so much that they had to flee she instead argues that if their parenting didn't make him that way then the lack of it did instead. But again that doesn't account for those men who had loving families, that had amazing childhoods and it certainly doesn't explain why women with the worst childhoods don't become mass murderers or terrorists. When you see that on a basic, biological and mental level the differences between men and women are slim to none then it becomes clear that male socialisation is what is most likely to blame for men's violence.

Society, parents, family, friends, adverts, TV, film and all the things that men do and who they talk to and all the bits in between are what cause men to be entitled to the point of violence. It's a patriarchal society that praises men for being aggressive, for being harsh and violent, and that tells them women are sexy rewards for that violence (see most of film) that causes men to seek out violence in the hope of reward, glory, and fame – one that they sadly get, you just have to look at the title of the 2015 Kray’s biopic Legend to see that. But even then Jessica Jones as a show makes it clear that killing is, almost, never the answer, that there are other options than violence, and that being a hero requires making the right, if not difficult, choices. Men's violence is a choice, their entitlement is a choice, and the show makes it very clear how bad the consequences can be when men happily make certain choices.

There is so much more to talk about with this show and I hope that people do as they watch it and that it makes abusive relationships that much clearer so that they can one day avoid them; from Kilgrave underplaying his abuse to make himself the victim, to him taking a beating to make Jess look like the villain, to the idea of trying to fix abusive men and how Jess realises that she isn't the one to do that. Jessica Jones is an amazing show that shows the cost of male violence on women but more importantly it shows the strength, in every way, of women. It shows how female friendship can help mend the damage done by men, how it takes a village to fix the havoc of men's choices, and that in the face of no real choice women still try to make the right one.