There are three scenes where the man climaxes, and the woman is left disappointed. I understand this often times is a fact of life, but I believe the film puts forth these scenes to demonstrate males' needs dominating those of females. April definitely had emotional issues outside of the rational norm. However, I think this film looks to capture the possible devastating effects of materialism and sexism. Any thoughts?
shareI think mostly it was a representation of the times, where men's needs were in fact dominant over women's. It's scary to think that things were once that way.
shareDitto.
But most of the world is still like that. And judging from the incidents of rape in the country, some men don't like it one bit that women expect to have rights, too.
I think that Frank hides his fears and limitation behind his male privileges. For a moment, he thinks they can switch roles, and that April can provide for the family but, in the end, peer pressure, conservatism, his upbringing, etc., make that impossible, but he still can do what he wants while April can't be free.
shareI agree. Frank unilaterally decides what is best for "his" family. And tries to force those decisions down April's throat. He doesn't care what she wants and he gets mad (and threatens violence) whenever she dares to disagree.
In the end after April's death, we see him sitting in the park watching his children, still angry over April not falling in line with what he wanted.
In the end after April's death, we see him sitting in the park watching his children, still angry over April not falling in line with what he wanted.
Frank unilaterally decides what is best for "his" family.
I think you misinterpret the scene.
Right or wrong, this was the social norm in suburban America in the 1950s. So, I'm not sure that its productive to judge by today's standards.
The modern feminist would say April was a victim of sexism, but I think its more complex than that.
April was a mother of two, so should she have sacrificed her own personal wants for the sake of the children? These are the sacrifices mature adults (men and women) make for the sake of their progeny.
Yes, the 1950s were a time of dominant patriarchy in America, but it was also a time when the family unit was strong.
Then how would you interpret that scene?
April had no desire to breakup the family. She supported her husband and children throughout the film. The movie showed no instance of her not being a good mother or wife. She had every right to be angry with the treatment she got from Jack. Although I don't agree with her reactionary actions. But, my point was, the reason this family fell apart was Jack. He was selfish, unfaithful, childish and dishonest. That is why April reacted the way she did..
He was saddened by the death of his wife
So, April has gets no blame for the way things played out? She is miserable in her life because she never became a famous actress and now wants to pick up and move her family to Paris.
That's seems pretty delusional to me. You seem to blame all her 'reactions' on Jack. She's an adult, and as such she has accountability.
Materialism and sexism were definitely themes from the novel the movie is based upon.
share