Laurie the Virgin
Isn't it weird how upset critics get about the fact that Laurie is presented as "virginal"? Like, is it important to them that EVERY teenage girl has already had sex?
shareWere critics upset about it?
share
MovieChat Forums > Halloween (1978) Discussion > Laurie the Virgin
I read that Laurie was able to survive because she wasn't preoccupied with having sex so she was focused on her surroundings. It was never meant to demonize sex or sending a message that they must die because they were having premarital sex.
It was just a simple premise of Laurie being focused on her surroundings and everyone else was focused on other things and not paying attention to the world around them. A lot of people just ran with it and made it a trope that virgins are supposed to live because they are pure and other such nonsense.
I also had the feeling Michael targeted the other two girls because saw them nude but he doesn't sexualize Laurie so he doesn't attack her the same way and she has more opportunities to escape.
shareNobody was upset about the fact that Laurie is presented as virginal.
shareYou're either a liar or uninformed. Read early criticism of this movie by Carol Clover and Vera Dyka (s.p.?).
shareI don't know Vera Whoever but I read Men, Women and Chainsaws and I don't recall the attitude being that all teen girls should have had sex, but rather noting the very familiar notion that the virgin is superior... The problem being that the old standard or purity was presented as what distinguished and preserved the "final girl".
I think your confusing the inference some people have made that Laurie survives, or is rewarded/spared/pardoned, because she is less permissive than her friends. But that's not the same thing.
Nobody was ever upset at Laurie's "virginial" characterisation. She doesn't act virginial. She just happens to not have a boyfriend to distract her at that time.
Other than these two reviewers how many others complained?
shareWho was upset? What did they say was the reason being "virginal" was a problem?
In any case, it was the era of clichés, and one of them was that the last survivor, the "final girl", "scream queen", or whatever you want to call her, is typically a white virgin.
To be honest, who are these critics you speak of that are upset that Jamie Lee Curtis is presented as "Virginal" in a movie as old as HALLOWEEN??
shareCarol Clover and Very Dyka (s.p.?) for starters. Also the famous guy who wrote about horror movies without having even watched them (he wrote extensively about a beheading scene in TCM that doesn't exist).
shareOne, two or three critics opinions (and that's what they are - OPINIONS) does not make a majority vote against something in a movie. (Unless those that read such reviews cannot think for themselves and are thusly sheep)
And a famous guy who wrote about horror movies WITHOUT having watched them? Well, he's a moron! How can anyone write about something they know nothing about first hand?
Robin Wood is the guy I was thinking of. Siskel and Ebert often discussed horror movies they clearly hadn't seen. I think a lot of critics hated the idea of having to watch a horror movie.
shareStill ... his opinion.
I am not sure about Siskel and Ebert not watching horror movies. I know that there are critics that won't watch superhero movies. They think it is beneath them. So, I guess the same could go for horror movies. But, as someone who has read some of Ebert's books on movies, I clearly believe that he tries to watch every movie he critiques. He is an avid movie lover as evidenced by his books "The Great Movies" Volumes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. They are great reads.
It was Wes Craven's Scream that set the rules for horror movies that the girl who is not a virgin must die. Scream pays a lot of homage to Halloween.
shareThat's not what they were upset by. They pointed out that it seemed the victims are permissive and the survivor is repressed.
share