don't miss NOTES ON A SCANDAL- Page 3

[Auggie27]

Posted: 5/12/07 at 8:41pm

And I think it's the most UNDERrated, (Mrs. Chadwick)!

I loved Lildogs' take, which makes great sense.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 5/12/07 at 9:22pm

It really stayed with me too. As has "Year of the Dog," which I finally saw last week and, lord help me and my lack of a search engine skill set, I was unable to find Auggie's thread to contribute.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 5/12/07 at 9:37pm

I saw Barbara as someone who misperceived an offer of friendship to be more than that, in no small part because she hungered for warmth from another human being; she, like all of us, had a need to be special to someone. Realistically, she knew it was an impossibility, but she indulged her fantasies. That she has to face reality by finding that the object of her affection is not only unavailable to her, but *has* indulged in a different sort of relationship she would never have deemed possible...one that not only dashes her hopes and fantasies, but also offends her both personally and professionally, fuels her rage.

I thought it was a fascinating character study of someone so used to keeping her feelings private, that when she risks them unwisely, her disappointment and anger knows no boundaries.

[Kringas]

Posted: 5/13/07 at 12:20am

I saw it as her first attempt to meet someone on her own terms, not as THE GREAT EDUCATOR or someone who uses power plays to meet her emotional needs. She simply met her as Barbara, not as someone who can help her in some way.

I didn't get that at all. With what we know about Barbara and Sheba (and Barbara and Jennifer before that), I don't see how we're suppose to see that as anything but more of the same.

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 5/13/07 at 4:51pm

I have two friends who have been afraid to talk to me about this film because they know I love it, but they're convinced it's homophobic.

As I watched it again yesterday, I tried searching for evidence that the director and screenwriter weren't villifying Barbara as a lesbian. Case in point: When Sheba and Steven meet in the playground, they both seem to acknowledge that Barbara is a lesbian and probably attracted to Sheba ("I don't know... she likes me?" "Are ya givin' her one and all?"). If they even postulated that she was gay that early in the story, then Barbara may have only been fooling herself. The film could have gone somewhere with that. However, during the confrontation in the study, Sheba seems genuinely surprised by the revelation that Barbara has "cost her her family" and wants to "roll around the floor like lovers." And after listening to director Eyre's commentary, in which he takes the high moral ground on all the characters, I'm not sure if the viewer is supposed to believe that Barbara's homosexuality is at issue, that her deception is somehow more responsible for Sheba's downfall than Sheba's own actions, or something else? Then there's that the final segment in which Sheba seems to take a chance at redemption while Barbara is up to her old antics again, thriller-style.

I was reminded yesterday that whereas the book presented Barbara as a deeply closeted bisexual - she goes out on a date with Brian and really enjoys it until he reveals that he's only using her to get closer to Sheba - the movie sensationalized the idea that she despised men and hunted pretty young women. So much so that while the study confrontation in the book was primarily about Barbara having told Brian about Sheba's relationship with Steven and possibly planning to publish the diary for commercial gain, in the film it's almost entirely about Barbara's obsession with tearing Sheba from her family so that she can have a lifelong sex partner. More than a watering down of themes, that's a fundamental departure.

So after seven viewings, I'm questioning the film's intentions more than ever. I still find it incredibly funny, well-acted and easy to watch repeatedly, but I don't know if I can say "I wouldn't recommend this to someone who was homophobic" and genuinely believe that only intelligent viewers will "get" that it isn't homophobic. I think it's open to multiple interpretations - indeed, the actors, director, screenwriter and composer admit to having different takes on the material - but I wonder if a better movie would be a little less ambiguous in its politics. Or would that just be the safe and less interesting route?




Updated On: 5/13/07 at 04:51 PM