Sneaky Feminist Flick

Really?

Answer me this.

Does the film portray most of the men in the movie in a puerile light?

Does the film portray most of the female figures as being more mature and financially powerful?

Is this not a feminist broadside against sports culture and men in general?

However, I would say that Slap Shot is more Camille Paglia than Gloria Steinheim, as evidenced by the final game where Ned's wife is transformed from a butch tomboy, to a fur wearing trophy, courtesy of Francine.

But she didn't dump him, that was the point. She kept showing up and in the final conversation with him in the car during the pagent, the implication was that the on/off relationship would ultimately continue unabated. He is Paul newman after all!

I don't think so. I've lined up plenty of examples in the film and all you've done is serve up generalizations.

Go back to my original two posts and dispute each one of my examples.

No, in fact, I'll list them again for you;

1) Reg as slick talking puer who is willing to sell other men out.

2) Ned Braden as the reluctant goon--the new male celebrated by Dowd for not just his refusal to participate in macho athletic rituals, but his out and out mockery of them by parading around the ice as a preening stripper on blades, snatching the cup (grail/idealized vulva) from Reg.

3) Dave "Killer" Carson as faux male, aping Reg, looking for approval from him, the older male.

4) The utter lasciviousness of Mo, who treats women as objects.

5) The arrested development of "The Hansons."

6) Hanrahan, Reg's rival, who has his wife sleep with a woman and she likes it. Reg uses this against Hanrahan.

7) Joe McGrath (Strother Martin) who is a closet homosexual.

Real great portrayal of men there.

Now let's look at the female characters.

1) Francine, who obviously has her *beep* together more than Reg and looks upon him with pity and condescension for most of the film, on to a better way of life.

2) Anita Mc Cambridge (team owner). Again a woman in a position of power, who could sell or save the team but chooses not to. Another woman with power over Reg. Reg's only and pathetic attempt at saving his dignity is to slight her son as being a "queer."

3) Hanrahan's Wife. Already mentioned. The cheating bi-sexual wife.

4) Lili Braden. Pathetic at first, but magically transformed by Francine, initiated into the ranks of pretty and powerful women in the film.

Most man laugh at this movie and think its a hoot. Dowd is laughing as well. At them.

Now take your virtual popcorn and stick it up your virtual arse. With hot butter flavor of course.

lambiepie-2 wrote:
"What you wrote is utterly ridiculous as you are nit-picking this film because a female was involved."
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Nonsense. While I don't agree with the OP's disparaging tone toward Dowd, as I think the script is absolutely brilliant, he's correct that there is a very strong undercurrent highlighting the idiocy of men, their condescending treatment of the women in their lives, and how for many women having men in their lives at all is destructive. If you can't see that in the hair salon scene, where Francine basically advocates that women leave their husbands, then you weren't paying attention.

Agreed completely. Sure it has some feminist undertones, but great, what's the harm in that? Is it really so terrible to see a sports movie with strong female characters?

Anyway, those elements are definitely not as pervasive or "anti-men" as others have tried to make them out to be. Some of the "evidence" of her "men-hating agenda" used earlier in this topic is pretty hypocritical. One of the posters above claims that the female owner of the team is supposed to be evidence of this pro-women agenda. But the only thing "pro-woman" about her character is the fact that she has power and money, and if a male character were the owner of a sports team with power and money, nobody would blink twice, or call it "pro-men". If anything, this just highlights the biases that audience members have (and thus the need for feminist writing like this), where a female character with power is thought to exist because of a hidden agenda, while a male character with power is just expected.

And if the team owner was truly meant to be used for this purpose, why was she written to be such an unsympathetic character, one who doesn't care about causing the hockey team to all lose their jobs?

Likewise, a male character who is gay, and a female character who is gay, are both evidence of this feminist agenda? That doesn't make sense.

Oh c'mon rpm, didja at least laugh? Even a little? Nice job, sucking the fun out of funny.

Ok, let's try to take a couple of your points seriously...

1. You say Ned was shown in an emasculating light due to his performance in the championship final - false! You must be that guy with the token participation ribbon who never actually played a team sport. There's no feminist undercurrent here. If anything, Lily's change is the complete opposite of the feminist cliche. When she's a tomboy earlier on in the film, angry at scapegoat Ned as well as all men (ie, following the feminist doctrine), she and Ned can't stand each other and seem destined for breakup and misery. As soon as she gets herself all dolled up and pretty - truly embracing her womanhood, if you must put it in terms (gagonacock) a women's studies student would understand - he's transformed and lightens up finally (to great comedic effect), and thereafter harmony ensues between them.

2. So you think Francine's really over and done with pathetic ole' Reg? Kicked him to the curb and moved on up to the big time in a shining halo of glowing feminine might? Buddy, for your own sake detach yourself from Mother's primly supported teat and go have a real live relationship with a real live (non-brainwashed) girl. For the entire history of human existence, women have bitched about their men (and vice versa) just like Francine did about Reg in this movie. The only thing that's new is that in recent history, so-called academics decreed that we must all take 'em seriously, and the utter travesty known as Feminism was henceforth born.
You know what's really gonna happen with Francine? She'll likely go to Long Island. She'll circulate. She'll get with a guy who seems really together, civilized and driven, on his way up the corporate ladder... let's call him douchebag #1. Sooner or later she'll figure out the reality of the situation and sever ties, smart girl that she is. On to another relationship with someone she hopes is different, but it's only a matter of time before she realizes she's found douchebag #2... What happens next, who knows? Maybe she'll come back to Reg, maybe she'll end up with some other guy kinda like him, or maybe she'll decide to hold her nose and stick it out with douchebag #5. One thing's for sure though - she'll realize she was chasing a fantasy crafted by the so-called female empowerment movement. Good thing it's just a movie eh?

The owner is not portrayed in a positive light. She *beep* over the well being of the team members for her own selfish reasons. *beep* rich scum

Characters do not exist as inert entities. They are defined against one another in space and as such, I have one word for you; "Francine." Reg is defined as sophmoric, delayed and even to some extent, delusional.

Francine has her life together and looks at Reg almost with pity and it is Francine, not Reg who gets out of the podunk town and it's charming, yet unrefined provincialism.

It's Francine who is ultimately the hero, not Reg. And while you might be dismissive when it comes to the upgrade that Lily gets (since of course most current feminists would recoil at such a representation of empowerment--it was the 70's) it puts her on a more equal playing surface with her rebellious, 70's, sensitive male.

The owner of the hockey team is, "The Ice Queen" both literally, since she owns a team that plays on ice and metaphorically. But, at the end of the day, she still owns Reg and has power over him. And if you think she's horrible, I'd be willing to bet my considerable reputation as a writer here on IMDB (just kidding) that she's no more despicable than women like Hilary Clinton or Carly Fiorina, who have to be as tough and mercenary as any man in positions of power. Like her or not, she's a representation of a particular type.

Lastly, of course you would like the Ned Braden scene. "Sensitive" men are rewarded, not for their striptease on blades, but for the entire package and rejection of traditional male portrayals and thus in true, 17th century fashion ala Sheridan, the other characters are caricatures in contrast to him.

I'm not alone in my view. Reviewer Frank Stricker mostly echos my take; "It appears that what brought this film to life was the following: through her brother, a minor league hockey player, Nancy Dowd found out that athletes talk dirty. Fascinated, she taped their every word, and, with a vaguely feminist impulse, she concocted a script that would at once play to the sports crowd while making a statement about male violence and sexism." And as a result, feminism, in my perception.

I didn't see anywhere that I hated women. Just made some observations and the best that you can do is go all ad hominem up in my grizzle.

Funny how we NEVER EVER see men like the OP complaining that male oriented films directed by men or written by men that objectify women or show women in a bad light. They only come on IMDB and whine about how certain films make THEM look bad. What a riot this guy is. I guess other men are supposed to join in on his circle jerk fantasy. The net has become a cess pool of incessant misogynistic whinging by males despite the fact it's a man's world.

That was all rather thrilling. Anything more cinematographic could scarcely be imagined.