Was the movie "Basic Instinct" misogynistic/homophobic?

[desibabe2705]

But lately they don't seem interested in the audience that gives them their buck back, but trying to push other things.

Yep, they’ve lost the plot.

 

[AwkwardMD]

To the OP, dunno. Never seen it. I'd be inclined to give Verhoven the benefit of the doubt.

 

[cw5523729]

I've never seen Basic Instinct but I know that every teen-angst John Hughes flick released in the 80s gets looked at in a whole different light these days so it wouldn't surprise me if BI got the same treatment.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

If you really want a misogynistic movie from the early 1990s, watch Thelma and Louise.

 

[Nynah]

Uhoh, nobody ask who Robin thinks the "global minority" is, their dog whistle is going to break

You'll all just have to trust that Tilan writes and creates, and isn't being a huge hypocrite here, because he  definitely does write and its super good.

"...because wherever I sat—on the deck of a ship or at a street café in Paris or Bangkok—I would be sitting under the same glass bell jar, stewing in my own sour air."

 

[alohadave]

I've never seen Basic Instinct but I know that every teen-angst John Hughes flick released in the 80s gets looked at in a whole different light these days so it wouldn't surprise me if BI got the same treatment.

16 candles has some problems now. The whole trading off the girlfriend because she's annoying and the main guy has a new interest is not great.

But there are tons of 80s movies that don't really work now. Revenge of the Nerds is another big one.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Things exist in a context. The context of the time was that by the 1990s queer people were very angry about rather a lot of things that happened in the 1980s, many of which were exacerbated by homophobia. There weren't a lot of queer major characters in film at the time, and of the ones who were queer/queer coded, an awful lot were villains. At the lower-budget end of things, stuff like the Sleepover Camp series (trans girl serial killer); at the higher-budget end, Silence of the Lambs, where the villain Buffalo Bill was a man who wanted to be a woman.

That one got protested hard and the director, Jonathan Demme, eventually acknowledged that the protesters had a point, as discussed here. Quoting Demme:

Juan Botas, who was one of the inspirations for "Philadelphia" said, "You can't imagine what it's like to be a 12-year-old gay kid, and you go to the movies all the time and whenever you see a gay character, they're either a ridiculous comic-relief caricature, or a demented killer. It's very hard growing up gay and being exposed to all these stereotypes." That registered with me in a big way." It's now become a part of the dialogue on stereotypical portrayals of gays in movies.

And quoting Jen Richards:

I was about to go through transition, and I worked up the courage to tell one of my colleagues. And she's a very, very smart woman, very, very talented musician, very well-educated, very worldly, and she looked at me and goes, "You mean like Buffalo Bill?" Her only point of reference was this disgusting, psychotic serial killer who hunts women in order to kill them and skin them...

One of the big secrets of writing minority rep is that once you break away from the "exactly one of each" notion of diversity, you can put more than one gay (etc.) person in your story and as long as you don't make all of them serial killers, people aren't going to watch your film/read your story and think "does this dude believe all gay people are serial killers?"

 

[AwkwardlySet]

There's an element of misogyny inherent in the "femme fatale" character type. It goes back to the Garden of Eden. The woman corrupting the man. It's a very basic archetype, and Verhoeven plays with it in this movie.

I'm sorry, but you're just being silly now.

Portraying a female character as morally grey or even dark isn't misogyny. It's just a freakin' character.
Women can't be evil? What, are they all lobotomized or maybe vaccinated against evil and thus incapable of it? I can't believe we are even talking about this.

You know, if the writer made that female character a good, empathic person who gets pushed and pulled around, the same people who were outraged by her portrayal would have cried out: "Misogyny! She's so helpless and has no agency!"

I wholeheartedly agree that misogyny is a huge issue in the real world. Much of what's being done about it is just smoke and mirrors. But there are also people who are just looking for things to be outraged about and finding them everywhere. It's ridiculous to even discuss Basic Instincts in this sense rather than real issues.

You mentioned Garden of Eden, but the truth is that this movie shouldn't ever be compared to the true misogynistic evil that most religions are, including all Abrahamic religions. Now THAT's one of the major sources of misogyny, one that many see as mandated by the god.

Sharon Stone in Basic Instincts is a somewhat incomplete character. We don't know her motivations. And while she may be morally problematic, she's full of agency. She's a strong, tough, smart woman who just about manipulated, outsmarted, and outplayed every man in the movie, and all of that in a way that's not cringe or ridiculous - the way we often see in modern TV shows.

 

[Bramblethorn]

You'll all just have to trust that Tilan writes and creates, and isn't being a huge hypocrite here, because he  definitely does write and its super good.

His stories go to a different school. In Canada.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I think it must be somewhere in his terms, for Tom Cruise to consider signing on for a film there has to be a scene where he full-on sprints.

Counterpoint: Tropic Thunder. Dancing yes, angry yes, running no.

 

[crookedletter]

Counterpoint: Tropic Thunder. Dancing yes, angry yes, running no.

Fair. But that role is a departure for Cruise in a whole host of ways. The exception that proves the rule.

 

[PennyThompson]

Silence of the Lambs, where the villain Buffalo Bill was a man who wanted to be a woman.

I mostly like the Hannibal Lecter movies, but they (and I assume the books) are weirdly reactionary in general. The Hannibal movie starts with Clarice Starling going after a black female gang leader with Super AIDS

 

[SimonDoom]

I'm sorry, but you're just being silly now.

Portraying a female character as morally grey or even dark isn't misogyny. It's just a freakin' character.
Women can't be evil? What, are they all lobotomized or maybe vaccinated against evil and thus incapable of it? I can't believe we are even talking about this.

If you read my posts carefully, you'll see that I'm not saying the movie is misogynistic, because I don't think it is. And I definitely do not believe that portraying a female character as evil is misogynistic.

But the movie obviously plays with the femme fatale archetype, and that archetype is at some level misogynistic, because it traffics in the idea that women are a corrupting influence on men. That's baked into the Garden of Eden story. We see it over and over in stories, including noir crime fiction where the woman is portrayed as the deceiver. I think Basic Instinct plays with this idea. But I see it as playing with the idea rather than advocating it. It's a big part of what gives the movie its erotic zest.

 

[nice90sguy]

Yeah, I have to admit that femme fatales and Eve are both personification of the (fact?) notion that women use their power to tempt men sexually with juicy apples and whatnot, for their own ends.

So, yeah, it is misogynistic in a way, unless you're like me, a weirdo who finds female power erotic. In fact that's the only kind of female domination that gets me hot -- the "femme-fatale" vibe.

Are femme-fatales evil? Well, red and black are the "evil" colours, the colour of choice for dominatrices and for sexy underwear.

So, yes, they are, because evil == sexy, for most of us.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

If you read my posts carefully, you'll see that I'm not saying the movie is misogynistic, because I don't think it is. And I definitely do not believe that portraying a female character as evil is misogynistic.

But the movie obviously plays with the femme fatale archetype, and that archetype is at some level misogynistic, because it traffics in the idea that women are a corrupting influence on men. That's baked into the Garden of Eden story. We see it over and over in stories, including noir crime fiction where the woman is portrayed as the deceiver. I think Basic Instinct plays with this idea. But I see it as playing with the idea rather than advocating it. It's a big part of what gives the movie its erotic zest.

The movie is just an example, of course. I disagree that the femme fatale archetype is misogynistic, per se. It's all about how you portray it.

Sure, we'll easily agree that you'll find plenty of misogyny in the Bible. Eve "corrupted" the "good" Adam for no reason but because she's a silly, weak woman. Dalilah betrayed the mighty and virtuous Samson for the same reason, more or less. None of them had agency.

But a femme fatale can also be a developed character. She can have agency, she can have a motive, and she can be strong and not just an instrument of some other man. Such characters can't be misogynistic just because they are morally grey.
You'll find far more misogyny in female characters that don't have agency and wit, the puppets who are good, but weak and easily ruled by men, than in female characters who are evil but evil for a reason, and who act out of their own will and agency.

 

[Baztrachian]

What's wrong with a film pandering to a male fantasy?

Nothing. Especially if you want to sell a lot of movie tickets.

The massive flops coming out of Hollywood lately that don't pander to male fantasies are inevitably going to lead to Hollywood corporate bosses and investors looking at flicks like Basic Instinct and ordering films that serve a targeted audience instead of a sociopolitical narrative.

That or they can embrace bankruptcy and fade away when the fanbois start making their own films with AI in the very near future.

Billie Eilish and her brother created a hit album in their bedroom without the involvement of the Hollywood elites and it is only a matter of time before someone does the same thing with a movie and a budget of less than $100.00

 

[Kumquatqueen]

If you really want a misogynistic movie from the early 1990s, watch Thelma and Louise.

Is it, though? Especially given at the time it was marketed as feminist - after all, two women ditch their crappy/violent husbands, go on a road trip in a cool car, and shag a young Brad Pitt.

OK, sure, it goes downhill and then they commit suicide rather than go to jail, but I reckon that's more because they wanted dramatic chase scenes, and that shot of a car going into the Grand Canyon.

What people remember is the soaring car and lots of topless Brad Pitt and women bonding.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Billie Eilish and her brother created a hit album in their bedroom without the involvement of the Hollywood elites

I was gonna respond to this, but sometimes it's better to let these things stand on their own.

 

[nice90sguy]

Is it, though? Especially given at the time it was marketed as feminist - after all, two women ditch their crappy/violent husbands, go on a road trip in a cool car, and shag a young Brad Pitt.

OK, sure, it goes downhill and then they commit suicide rather than go to jail, but I reckon that's more because they wanted dramatic chase scenes, and that shot of a car going into the Grand Canyon.

What people remember is the soaring car and lots of topless Brad Pitt and women bonding.

Having not seen the film, I didnt want to comment, but that was how I understood it to be. A female buddy-movie with a "they both die" ending like Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid.

 

[Robin_Starveling]

I read an interview with her when she said she did not consent to the visibility in the 'leg-crossing' shot. So that was abusive and crossing the line by the film makers.

So why didn’t she wear underwear?

 

[nice90sguy]

So why didn’t she wear underwear?

Yeah, really, c'mon

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I strongly reject this generalization. In Islam, women have been treated like livestock, and in the Christian world, women were not allowed to vote until just a century ago.

In Judaism, every couple signs a ketubah, a marriage contract that outlines the groom’s responsibilities to the bride and even specifies the compensation she is entitled to in case of divorce. In effect, it's the first feminist document, thousands of years ahead of its time.

While classical Greece ran brutal labor camps where foreign slaves were treated inhumanely, the Jews brought the world the story of the Exodus and the very idea of freedom and liberation. So, with all due respect, do not lump Judaism together with its derivatives.

I'd love to have this religious debate with you, because, as little as I think of Islam and Christianity, I find Judaism worse. But this isn't the place for it. There's a no politics or religion policy in force here, and for a good reason. Most people aren't able to discuss those things academically and in good faith. So we'd better focus on our beloved femme fatale.

 

[Robin_Starveling]

I'd love to have this religious debate with you, because, as little as I think of Islam and Christianity, I find Judaism worse. But this isn't the place for it. There's a no politics or religion policy in force here, and for a good reason. Most people aren't able to discuss those things academically and in good faith. So we'd better focus on our beloved femme fatale.

You throw mud and then claim it must not be discussed - a clever tactic.

Since the story of the Garden of Eden was mentioned, it is appropriate to consider the historical and religious roots of misogyny, but that’s fine; I get why you’re running away.

 

[Nightaelf]

I think Basic Instinct was one of the best films of its time, because it actually helped shape my own emerging sense of sexuality. And of course, Sharon Stone is stunning, and Jeanne Tripplehorn is incredibly attractive too. Beyond that, it was a tense and captivating story with a character, Catherine Tramell, who isn’t a victim at all, but a brilliant manipulator who plays both men and women, and basically kills everyone.

Back then, in 1992, I don’t think it had anything to do with some male or female fantasy. It was simply a well-written story where, for once, a woman is strong instead of weak. I rewatched it recently, and honestly, it feels quite tame compared to today’s movies.

What I especially like about it, and what the film really shows, is that it’s all about desire. Lust. And that men fall for it. In this case, the roles are reversed, and the woman is the stronger one.

It was also made in a time when there was still plenty of homophobia and a certain kind of sexism, though maybe a different kind than what we see now. I think everyone’s free to see the film however they want.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

So why didn’t she wear underwear?

"The only way to avoid a visible pantie line is not to wear panties."

Michael Douglas's character needed to be intrigued by the possibility. The audience needed to think about it. What actually existed and got filmed should have been agreed between actress and director.

Not that you could see anything, on our TV with VHS.