MovieChat Forums > Play Misty for Me (1971) Discussion > One of the most misogynistic films ever

One of the most misogynistic films ever


Have a lot of respect for Eastwood and his long career. But when I saw this movie again last night on cable -- first time since I saw it as a kid 40 years ago -- I was surprised to realize how misogynistic it was. Evelyn comes off as just a psychotic nut: no backstory, no nuance, no character development, nothing but an over-the-top crazy lady stereotype. Even Glenn Close's character in "Fatal Attraction" fared better.

Didn't Clint have a reputation, in his younger days, of being a bit emotionally brutal with the ladies in his personal life? Hard to believe this film, in terms of its roles for women, came from the same guy who gave us "Million Dollar Baby."

reply

What about the other women? I'd say his girlfriend and his maid were positive, well-drawn, characters. If anything, it'd be pejorative against mental illness, but even that claim would be tenuous.

reply

So because there's no backstory on her character, that makes it misogynistic? Wow. I guess that must mean that any psycho serial killer slasher movie is discriminatory towards men. Moreover, the killer in slasher films are usually men, so that must be discriminatory right? I really wish people would start using their brain more often. Sometimes I wonder how these kind of people are even able to function in the world.

reply

Do you even know what misogyny? How could a lack of character development be misogynistic?

reply

I wouldn't say it's misogynistic, although I could see how someone would come to that conclusion. If anything, the movie is slightly condemning of David's attitude toward women: somewhat dismissive, only half-serious about treating them as equals. You see this in his relationship with his ex. The real point of this movie, and Fatal Attraction is pretty simple: Fool around with random women's emotions too often and prepare for it to bite you on the a.s.s. Put another way, if someone casts their line into the ocean enough, eventually they'll get a shark on the other end.

David might have been a misogynist, but the overall tone of the movie is basically that of a cautionary tale.

reply

[deleted]

Are movies where men are the stalkers offensive to men? I doubt it.

reply

[deleted]

If losing your cool with a jealous, violent, loud, attention-starved maniac lady that plays keep-away with a guy's car keys is misogynistic, then we're all Chris Brown.

reply

I just saw PMFM last night on Netflix, and the word misogyny popped into my mind as well, but then I realized the trouble with the film wasn't misogyny, but poor characterization.

We don't know a thing about Evelyn besides her name and that she listens to Dave's radio show. She has no job, no family, friends, acquaintances, no history at all. There's more backstory for the villain in a typical slasher film. Evelyn was just some crazy bitch Dave shacked up with and this didn't mesh well with with Eastwood's thoughtful direction.

There were other points in the script that needed to be fleshed out more: in particular, it failed to set up Tobie's and Dave's relationship before Tobie is introduced in the film, as this would have made me care about them. As it was, I thought she was kind of blah, and didn't see the great "love" betwen them.

Real hatred for women can bee seen in a movie like "Dr Jekyll & Ms. Hyde." Now that was one of the most misogynistic films ever.

reply

We don't know a thing about Evelyn because it makes the movie more frightening. If you sympathise too much with her, the whole crazy stalker fear would go out of the movie. In most stalking type movies it's better not to have a background story on the stalker. In the early Spielberg movie Duel the stalker is just a stupid Truck, but it really scares you, because there's no human factor behind it.

reply

We don't know much about Evelyn because this story isn't about her. It's about David. Big deal. Some women seem to think that if the entire world's attention doesn't center on them - or some female character in a movie in this instance - then necessarily misogyny is looming behind the scenes. I'd say this points to a psychotic self-absorption in the critic more than anything.

reply

....just saying, over-used term often used to emasculate whoever replies to the post

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Quite funny you say this. I hope you don't have hard time buying this but a portrait of a character in a creative work of art does not necessarily reflect its artiste's real life personality and values.

As for misogyny, pls realize there are much worse women in real world. Its only depicting such however rare incidences. besides, Clint's character never raised his arm against the woman until in the end. He even referred to her as 'needs treatment' - acknowledging her need, rather than accusing of her.

As for the character development, I thought it was a clever creative device to 'jump' to her psychotic behaviour than the usual, gradual and mysterious character development which was quite over-used even then (and still used even today!)

It was a very well made movie. Must credit Eastwood for a fantastic effort!

reply

Yeah have a flashback and show she's crazy because a man was mean to her, then her actions would be ok, right?

ffs, she's the psycho villain. 99% of the time the psycho villain is a man. This time it's a woman and I only came here because I knew some idiots would be crying misogyny.

reply

I'm sure Clint Eastwood is actually misogynistic so presumably that's why the character of Evelyn is so one-sided. I read ages ago that when he decided a relationship was over it was over, no discussion, and that he would have all the locks on his home(s) changed so that the woman was not able to get back into the house. Also, when Sondra Locke, who he had of course been in a long-term relationship with, developed breast cancer, I think not long after they'd broken up, he was trying to 'blacken' her name in Hollywood and dragged her through the courts, and I think that was even when she was undergoing treatment. Seriously, what kind of real (and decent) man would do such a terrible thing? I think he must be a real a**hole with zero respect for women. I'm assuming also that he has a massive ego, despite not being that fantastic an actor even. He's an OK actor, and watchable, but not amazing by a long shot.

reply