Posts Tagged ‘Noel Murray

02
Dec
10

Why Pepi, Luci, Bom, and Pedro give me pause



Poster to Pepi, Luci, Bom y otras chicas del monton; image courtesy of wikimedia.org

At present, I’m having a ball putting together The Bechdel Test Canon, my film blog for Bitch. It’s giving me a chance to revisit and catch up on so many titles and discuss what makes them important, exciting, interesting, and vexing. However, as a result of the parameters of the exercise, there are some movies that don’t make the cut. I always knew I was going to include a movie by Spanish director Pedro Almodóvar. I’ll bracket off a paragraph or two discussing our conflicting gender politics when I write about the movie I’ve selected to represent his body of work and briefly state that I have lots of opinions about how he represents women and girls in his gynocentric ensembles.

One thing I’ll bring up here and elaborate upon later is that I came to his filmography late and worked backwards, which no doubt influences my preference toward his “respectable” output in the 1990s and 2000s over his mischievous first decade (excluding the shorts he started making in the mid-70s, which I haven’t yet seen). I’ll use his 1980 feature debut Pepi, Luci, Bom y otras chicas del monton to expound upon why I’m of this opinion. I screened it for the Bitch series and determined that it didn’t pass the Bechdel Test, though it included a lesbian punk musician as one of the principal characters, which means it aces the Feminist Music Geek test.

Okay, so I have measured enjoyment of this period and only really like Law of Desire and Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown of what I’ve seen. My primary reason for this is that Almodóvar’s career-long preoccupations with employing melodrama to investigate intimacy, sexuality, heartache, identity crises, abuse, and addiction seem better-served when given a sensitive touch. His earlier work is interested in this too, but exaggerates it through camp and screwball. While I should theoretically appreciate a lighter, more subversive approach to such heavy material, I’m often nonplussed and unsettled by treating such issues as punchlines.

There’s also the sensitive matter of gay male identification with heterosexual women. Some feminist detractors in my acquaintance view Almodóvar’s representation of women less as complex characters and more as cartoonish drag performers who ultimately have little to do with women with whom they can identify. As many of these characters also survive rape, incest, and partner violence, this potentially implicates the director as misogynistic. I don’t think this is a fair charge against him, but these are relevant points that inform my criticism of his work.

Which brings us to Pepi, Luci, and Bom, a movie concerned with a party girl heiress, the masochistic wife of the man who raped her, and a musician who is friends with one and beds the other. There’s plenty of things I liked about this movie. It stars Almodóvar mainstay Carmen Maura as madcap Pepi for a start, whose angular features and detached cool suggest her to be the older sister of Anjelica Houston and Kim Gordon, which can devastate when employed in surprising ways. Pepi orchestrates much of her social group’s actions. She ultimately jump starts her life from flibbertigibbet to career woman by lucking into a gig in advertising, making her name with a series of amazingly strange TV spots. She wants to parlay her success to make a documentary about her friends’ lives, which never comes to fruition. She also wants to create a doll that menstruates, which I think is genius. She argues that the market is saturated with baby figurines that cry, piss, and shit and intends to pitch it as an educational tool. If she were a real person, I would’ve applied to intern at her office in college.

If any of you read the paragraph above and had pause for concern over how cavalierly I brought rape into the discussion, I gave it deeper consideration than the characters do. Pepi’s rape occurs at the very beginning of the movie and Luci’s husband’s predilection for sexual violence is treated as something of a running gag throughout. I can’t get down with that. Furthermore, I have serious problems with how Luci’s need to be dominated is represented. Part of this has to do with Eva Siva’s limited acting capabilities. Even a more-established actress like Maggie Gyllenhaal faces a hurdle in representing a masochistic character as a triumphant, autonomous, empowered being, as she almost accomplishes in Secretary.  But most of the fumbled execution here rests on the script and my inability to digest Almodóvar’s employment of slapstick in framing her desire and an unforgivable ending. At first Luci is represented as a cuckolded shut-in, but becomes invigorated after she meets Bom. It’s love from the moment Bom pisses in her mouth. Before long, Luci is taking orders to give gay men blow jobs at parties, which I read as the director’s way of shocking the bourgeoisie. She’s also briefly committed to her much-younger punk girlfriend, played by Spanish musician and queer icon Alaska. For some, I’m sure it’s hard to resist a girl who calls you a pig in song.

While this scene gets me all excited and confused, I hasten to point out that it’s not my favorite musical moment in Almodóvar movie. Acknowledging the use of La Lupe’s “Puro Teatro” in Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, that distinction is shared by Brazilian insurrectionist Caetano Veloso and Costa Rican diva Chavela Vargas. They have respective cameos in Talk to Her and The Flower of My Secret. Noel Murray reminded me of the former in his delightful Popless column for The A.V. Club, which also makes me wanna grab that Veloso autobiography I swiped from Half-Price off my shelf. NPR included the latter in their 50 Great Voices series. Both appearances are pretty fucking sublime, both apart from and within the movies they’re nestled in.

. . . I’m going to have to devote a future “Scene It” post to Vargas’ cameo, aren’t I?

But this movie kinda bums me out.  Luci’s husband Juan wins her back by beating the shit out of her, rebuffing her girlfriend’s ovations from her hospital bed. Pepi and Bom (who are clearly the movie’s real couple) leave their former friend and plot their next adventure while the credits roll, while I’m left unsure of what I saw. My inability to process it makes me wonder if I missed something or if I’m right in my belief that Almodóvar is at his most exciting when he brings the superficial thrills of cinematic artifice to bear on women and girls almost tangible enough to encounter off-screen. The ladies who run off into the sunset together are so close to seeming real, even if all their interactions are ultimately about men. However, they left behind a woman Almodóvar would develop from an agenda item to a person in subsequent efforts.

04
Sep
09

Joan Holloway’s “magnificent” parlor game

Note: Today’s post on Mad Men absolutely contains spoilers. In order to set up the particular scene that will take focus, I had to contextualize other key developments in a character’s life at this point in the series. If you’re not there yet, perhaps you’ll get to it. Keep this post in mind when you do.

Joan Holloways parlor games; image courtesy of filmschoolrejects.com

Joan Holloway's parlor games; image courtesy of filmschoolrejects.com

Two musical moments for women in as many weeks? Oh, Mad Men. You are the gift that keeps on giving. Last week, I wrote about a scene involving Peggy Olson. Today, I will consider a key scene for office manager Joan Holloway (note: as she married Dr. Greg Harris, she’s now Joan Harris; however, I will refer to her as “Holloway”). And both involve music! Delightful.

Last Sunday, at her husband’s urging, Holloway broke out an accordian and sang  “C’est Magnifique” from Cole Porter’s Can-Can to entertain guests for a dinner party they were holding at home. This scene is in sharp juxtaposition with Holloway’s current situation which, as with everything in Mad Men, is hardly magnificent.

That this scene happens at a dinner party is crucial. Older than Olson by a few years, Holloway is in her early 30s and potentially informed by what Noel Murray might call hostess feminism, where wives define themselves as masters of the art of entertaining — cooking, entertainment, hospitality, charming conversation – in order to impress the work associates of their professional, commanding husbands. If we recall from season two, Holloway is transfixed by Jacqueline Kennedy giving a televised tour of the White House. Her preoccupation with being the great and immaculately turned-out woman behind the great man may also speak to her status as the office sex symbol and why she seems the most shaken when Marilyn Monroe dies.

Hostess feminism seems the most applicable term for Holloway in last week’s episode, wherein she holds a dinner party for her husband’s boss. In our current iteration of feminism (or, ugh, post-feminism), some may argue that playing hostess has been reclaimed as progressive, being fluent in Emily Post as a formidable skill-set, and women throw homefront soirées because they want to, not because society has ordained that they be relegated to the domestic. I get this logic, but don’t think it’s that simple here.

Of course, women opting out of the workforce to be wives and mothers is not inherently bad. Feminism is about choice (though, it must also be noted, opting out of the workforce is also about means). Mothers are key players in our society, in that they keep the species alive and, if they do a good job, contribute kind, well-adjusted, and productive people.

It just seems that being a wife and mother wouldn’t be fulfilling to a professional woman like Holloway. Even when conforming to traditional office gender politics, it’s always under the guise of professional decorum (witness how she handles the humiliating run-in with nemesis Jane, Don Draper’s twentysomething former assistant and the new Mrs. Roger Sterling, who Holloway counts as an ex). She clearly possesses more institutional knowledge of Sterling Cooper than almost anyone. We even got an all-too-brief sense for Joan’s knack for television advertising in a season two episode, a knack the boys unfortunately overlooked. They couldn’t get past the cheesecake to see the burgeoning mad woman.

So, Joan’s decision to throw all of her interests into the domestic – strongly implied by her “maturing” age and that may be running out of time – is a little disconcerting, as she herself seems to realize. It doesn’t seem like she wants this life so much as she’s internalized that this is what’s she’s supposed to want. It’s what’s expected — and if you ever need a dark mirror image of how unfulfilling these roles can be to the women who occupy but don’t connect with them, look no further than Mrs. Mommy’s Time Out herself, Betty Draper.

An additional layer to Joan’s domestic unrest is with whom she’s chosen to make her life. Her husband,  a doctor at St. Luke’s, has proven himself to be far from the great man any woman can stand behind. Last season, we witnessed him raping his intended in Don Draper’s office — an act of violence he probably dismisses as kinky rough play. In this ugly moment, we see Joan’s eye glaze over the legs of a chair as she’s ground further and further into the floor. It doesn’t get much lower on the corporate rung for this office manager than this. In addition to his brutish behavior, he may have scarce professional resources, as indicated by a botched operation he kept from his wife mentioned in passing by one of his colleagues that may result in him getting passed over her residency. In short, this horrible guy she committed her life to might be more of an albatross than she anticipated.

Which brings us to her impromptu performance of “C’est Magnifique.” Though coming from a musical written by an American, after having read Kelley Conway’s piece on the chanteuse réaliste and Phil Powrie’s piece on the role the accordian has played in French cinema in cultivating a national identity, it’s hard for me not to look for links between Holloway’s and Fréhel’s sexualized, economically marginal position. The big difference, however, is in delivery. Where Fréhel celebrates being raunchy, Holloway’s performance is professional, efficient, and unflappable.

It’s also what might be called pointedly empty. Part of this can be attributed to Holloway’s disembodied vocal performance. While it sounds like the voice pushing through actress Christina Hendricks’s mouth is her own, she is also clearly dubbed, her vocal take recorded in some unseen studio some time ago. Thus, there’s a clear break between singer and actor, even if the speaking voice and singing voice seem to match up.

This disembodiedness has an edge to it. Holloway recognizes the cruel irony of the seemingly lovely-dovey lyrics. She may also see a bit of herself in La Môme Pistache, Can-Can‘s protagonist. Both women now just how tragic love can be when it turns out to be a lie. My hope is that the character who is working through these issues on AMC this season is proactive in trying to find a viable solution. I’d hate for her to become as hollow as her maiden name implies.





 

February 2012
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829  

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 65 other followers