Choose one scene and look at it through a feminist lens. How are women depicted cinematically? Be sure to use solid cinematic evidence from the film as well as quotes from the Mulvey essay. Also, mention the scene's relationship to the film as a whole and why you chose the scene.
Minimum: 2 paragraphs.
The scene I chose starts when Mr. Dietrichson’s body is left on the train tracks and ends when Walter arrives home. I chose this because it is a perfect example of how Double Indemnity handles women and gender roles cinematically.
ReplyDeleteThe cinematography of this scene establishes a difference between Walter and Phyllis, and in turn establishes a difference between men and women in the film and in Hollywood as a whole. First, when they both get in the car, Phyllis is backlit unlike Walter, and there are also hardly any shadows on her face. This is meant to make her look soft and beautiful. The first thing she does is fail to start the car. With this action paired with the cinematography, her beauty is placed over her brains. This serves a purpose, at least to those in Hollywood who adhered to things like the Hays Code to enforce gender roles in their films. She is beautiful and useless, and her “visual presence … work[s] against the development of [the] story” (Mulvey). Walter is able to start the car because, of course, only men can start cars. As they start to drive away there is a shot from behind the two of them, and the movement also establishes a difference. Phyllis is staying completely still and silent while Walter is talking constantly and moving around. Walter is actually doing something (anything) unlike Phyllis who is completely submissive and passive in this shot and even the whole scene. He is the one calling all the shots and bossing her around. There is a clear “active/passive heterosexual division of labour” (Mulvey), a result of the standards of Hollywood at the time, and the aggressive heteronormativity present in all of American society. Even the voiceover here is just him talking about his instructions to her. When Phyllis drops Walter off, she says, “Aren’t you going to kiss me?” and suddenly the shot of her in the driver’s seat is pitch black except for a sliver of light. The high contrast and jagged shapes make her look sinister. This is because, remember, Phyllis is supposed to be the bad one that tempts Walter even though we just listened to him talk on and on about how he planned it all out. Essentially Walter is the only one who ever succeeds in doing anything useful, and whenever Phyllis does something it’s portrayed as evil or suspicious.
Something notable in this scene that is also present in the entire film is how Walter addresses Phyllis directly. He does this twice in the scene, and never uses her actual name. He always says “baby.” He does this so much throughout the whole film that one might just assume that her name is Baby. Phyllis, on the other hand, calls him Walter instead of a pet name because he is clearly a respectable, strong man and can’t be emasculated like that. Throughout all of Double Indemnity Phyllis is often called “baby” or “Mrs. Dietrichson.” Just as the “baby” nickname belittles Phyllis as an individual and instead associates her romantically with a man (Walter), “Mrs. Dietrichson” clearly shows her attachment to a man yet again, this time her husband. Phyllis can’t do anything for herself, like start a car or plan a murder, and she can’t even be herself because she’s always associated with a man.
I chose the scene where Walter goes to the Dietrichson’s house for the first time, meets Phyllis, and talks with her. This is Phyllis’ introduction, and introductions are always vital. First of all, Phyllis is not the only woman in this scene so it is important mentioning Nettie, the Dietrichson’s maid. When Walter comes to the door, Nettie tries to stop him from coming in by saying Mr. Dietrichson is not home. The fact that their first exchange is about a man supports an idea that shows up in this whole scene and even the movie- the women are only there to allow for a man to have a cool “manly” line or action. Walter interrupts Nettie telling him to leave while closing the door by pushing it open with his briefcase and shoving past her. Nettie’s sole purpose in this scene is to be displayed as being overpowered by a man.
ReplyDeleteWhen Phyllis shows up, she is wearing nothing but a towel. She is lit softly, and shown in mostly full-body shots to showcase her figure. Walter is not framed this way, but instead in medium shots showing his face so we know he’s looking at Phyllis. “The cinema satisfies a primordial wish for pleasurable looking… the conventions of mainstream film focus attention on the human form” (Mulvey). She appears in this scene to be looked at. The audience at the time, identifying with the male protagonist, wants to look at her and admire her, so she is framed and lit to support that desire. When Phyllis gets dressed, she wears a white dress. The white paired with her light hair brings attention to her in an innocent, inviting way. She is still lit softly, and full body shots remain used to show her body and movements, even when she’s sitting down. Every time she is shown in the entire scene it is either an eyeline match cut from Walter looking at her, or she is framed with the man also in the shot. “In a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female…. In their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness” (Mulvey). Their conversation revolves around a man, so Phyllis is like Nettie in the sense that she is there only as a device to keep the main narrative attention on the men in the movie.
The scene I have chosen begins with Walter Neff walking into the home of Phyllis Dietrichson and ends with him storming out after he believes Phyllis is planning to murder her husband and get away with accident insurance money. Neff plays the role of the victim, being manipulated by the femme fatale, Phyllis. Phyllis, instead of being a side character or simply the love interest, plays the role of a femme fatale. A femme fatale is a stock character of a mysterious and seductive woman whose charms ensnare her lovers, often leading them into compromising, dangerous, and deadly situations. Despite the tendency of a femme fatale to be oversexualized, Phyllis is dressed in moderately conservative clothing, and she rarely shows much skin. Even though she doesn’t appear to use clothing and her body to ensnare Neff, her personality, tone of voice, and dialogue work just as well.
ReplyDeleteLooking back on the scene, one can see just how carefully planned the setting was. The maid and her husband were both out of the house and she makes a show of forgetting that that day was the maid’s day off. By calling to the maid and acting surprised when she doesn’t answer, she can easily avoid any accusation that she didn’t anyone knowing about the accident insurance, and by telling Neff that she had expected her husband to be home, she easily brushes off the question that the audience may be wondering: Why change the day if her husband wasn’t going to be there to sign the paperwork for the automobile insurance renewal? Although at first glance these small details appear insignificant, but after being exposed to how meticulous Phyllis can be and her previous murder of the late Mrs.Dietrichson, one can easily see how she careful she is to not get caught. Before mentioning her worry and her want to get an insurance plan for her husband without his knowing, she builds a rapport with Neff. She gives him tea, begins speaking with him on her background and his work, focusing on how much he would gain by allowing her to deceive her husband. She attempts to make it appear as though her deceit would be for his benefit, by offering to “throw a little more business [his] way”. Despite how careful she was to hide her intent, Neff’s tone of voice and body language allows the audience to assume that he doesn’t believe her and suspects her ill intent from the beginning. His responses sounds sarcastic, almost as if he had been in a similar position before: a wife home alone attempting to get a secret accident insurance claim for her husband.
The lighting of the scene is not consistent, however Phyllis always appears lighter than Neff, until she begins to ask about the accident insurance for her husband. The shadows then begin to slowly work their way up her face. By the time Neff openly accuses her of wanting to murder her husband she is completely covered by shadow. Throughout the scene the shadows disappear when she appears vulnerable or when the audience is expected to feel pity for her, however as the audience’s dislike for her or their suspicion grows, the shadows come over again. WHen she is covered in light, her face appears soft, however when the shadows are on her face, it appears harder and more defined. “The cinema satisfies a primordial wish for pleasurable looking (Mulvey) as the lighting makes the audience like Phyllis more when she appears softer, more feminine, and what could be considered more submissive and childlike, and become wary when her true face is shown, defined as would nay adult or person in power. This film was not really given the chance to pass the bechdel test, as there were only two female characters, Phyllis and Lola Dietrichson, and their dislike for one another caused them to stay distanced. Because of the actions between the only two female roles in the film, disregarding the maid who only appears for a short time, it can considered that even though the film may not have been given a chance to pass, it pits the two female roles against one another. However it does pass what is often dubbed as the sexy lamp test. This test highlights the importance placed on the female main character, by determining if the plotline would change if they had been replaced with a sexy lamp. Phyllis’s plotting and execution of the murder was key to the plot of the film, meaning that the film does pass this. She is the one who convinces Neff to murder her husband and most likely the one who convinced her husband to go to his reunion despite his leg. However because she is able to execute the plan only after she uses her sexuality to convince Neff to trick him into signing the paperwork, its passing can be called into question.
DeleteThe scene I chose for this brief feminist analysis is perhaps the climax of the film in which Walter and Phyllis discuss their futures in her house before they shoot each other, only ending in Phyliss’ death. This scene is crucial to the plot in terms of defining the fate of the antagonist in the narrative, and is also the final depiction of a woman in the film.
ReplyDeleteThe cinematography depicted in this scene is used to show the fluctuating relationship between Walter and Phyllis, displaying their dynamic through mise en scene, lighting, and more. For starters, the body language and placement of these two characters communicates meaning alongside their dialogue. Phyllis is placed heavily reclined in an armchair in the center of the room, whereas Walter remains standing for the entirety of the scene. Throughout their conversation, Phyllis remains sitting in a way that hints at seduction while blending in with the other furniture in the room, almost as if she is an object free from movement. Walter is always standing over her suggesting he is the dominant, and she the submissive, while walking circles around her. Laura Mulvey reflects, “In their traditional exhibitonist role women are simutaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness.” It is clear through Stanwyck's acting that Phyllis starts to lose her composure in relation to the increasing threat of Walter’s movements which is what perhaps makes her act the way she does for her last breaths of life. She abruptly changes her coy, alluring demeanor to weepy and clingy movements suggesting she is powerless and weak at her core.
The lighting in this scene is not inherently dramatic, but subtly accompanies the motive of the narrative. One of the main points of action in this scene is when Walter closes the large windows to ensure their privacy, as a result reshaping the lighting of the room. The room becomes much darker with the entrance of dark action, allowing the two characters to appear with stronger chiaroscuro. Phyllis, in hand, becomes filtered with an even stronger holy, white appearance as the result of backlighting. This indicates Phyllis has been “saved,” alongside her actions and dialogue, as if her admittance of love and devotion for Walter redeems her into being an acceptable woman in society. The classic window pane shadows of film noir are apparent to add to the tone of mystique and suspense of the scene. The dialogue in this scene communicates, literally, the misogyny of the relationship. The pet name “baby,” belittles and demeans Phyllis’s character; Walter is always talking down to Phyllis even though they are equals throughout this journey, if anything, she is in control. When Phyllis proposes her idea of how she can escape danger Walter says, “...that’s cute...” in the ultimate dismissal of her intelligence. Overall, Walter completely blames this entire incident on Phyllis and plays her victim so he can maintain a clean conscience without blaming himself, perpetuating the idea that everything is the woman’s fault.
I chose the scene from the film in which Walter confronts Phyllis in her house, eventually shooting and killing her. I chose this scene because it is the climax of the films narrative and at the same time it reveals a great deal about both characters and the ethical lines they are willing to cross in the interest of self preservation and self gain.
ReplyDeleteIn this scene, Phyllis reveals to Walter that she has been lying to him the whole time; only pretending to love him in order to get his help in killing her husband and collecting the life insurance. When looked at through a feminist lense, one can see that in this scene, women are portrayed as being lying and manipulative. In the films narrative, Phyllis was able to seduce Walter into agreeing to help kill her husband. Phyllis is portrayed as a very seductive figure in this scene especially thorough the use of costume design, hair and makeup, lighting and screen direction. She wears a very long, thin nightgown that highlights her curves and long legs. For as long as film has been around, women have typically been portrayed as sexual objects, as supported by this quote from Mulvey's essay, "In their traditional exhibitionist role woman are simultaneously looed at and displayed." The way in which Phyllis's character is portrayed in the film can be interpreted to mean that women utilize their sexuality as a tool to manipulate men.
In the same scene, Walter turns to close the blinds. As he does so, Phyllis pulls out a pistol and when he turns back around, shoots him in the shoulder. The shot is framed so that we do not see Phyllis shoot him, all we hear in the gunshot and see Walter stumble back. Through this use of framing the message that can be implied is that women, when not closely watched, will go behind your back(in the case of this movie quite literally)and betray you.
As Phyllis sits in her chair, talking to Walter, she is lit in a very traditional noir film style in which half of her face is visible and the other half is shrouded in darkness and shadow. when seen through a feminist lense, the implied meaning could be that women are very mysterious and difficult to read and predict, as Phyllis's character is in this film.
The scene I chose is the scene when Walter goes to Phyllis' to talk to her, and it ends up with Phyllis getting killed by him. This scene amplifies many of the stereotypes put on women, as Phyllis reveals she never loved him and was only pretending for money and to become single it makes it clear the director was trying to show that women are stereo-typically liars and deceive. This scene also ends up making Phyllis more of a Femme fatale then she was portrayed as before. A femme fatale for starters is an attractive woman who ends up being the downfall of a man. She is very much a femme fatale because she uses her good looks to woo Walter into killing her husband and ends up getting him arrested.
ReplyDeleteAnother reason Phyllis at the end of the film is seen as such a threat is because she is a woman that is being demonized and because of "castration anxiety" a woman that is taking charge would pose a huge threat to men, so to deal with this becoming an issue she is killed off so she can no longer pose a threat.
The scene I am choosing for my analysis through a feminist lens is the scene in which the main character, Walter Neff, meets the other main character, Phyllis Dietrichson. In this scene, the idea of Phyllis as a femme fatale is first introduced through cinematic elements and the reversal of some commonalities of gender relation present in most other cinema. As Mulvey states “In a world of sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female”. With this quote in mind, let’s think about how the idea of a femme fatale relates to it. A femme fatale lures the gaze of a man, but is far from “passive”. The entire idea behind a femme fatale, at least in “Double Indemnity”, is that she is the dominant force controlling the extremely passive Walter Neff.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of cinematography, the scene I chose displays how in a noir film, the roles of a female, although portrayed physically stereotypically, are cinematically displayed as against the norm. The first shot is a an extreme long shot shot that tracks Walter as he pulls up in his car. The way the shot is framed/ distance of camera from subject, makes it seem as though the camera is looking out of a houses window to film him. If we think about the events that are about to unfold, we can understand that Phyllis is probably looking out her window the same way we see the camera doing, tracking Walter’s every movement. As we find out later in the film, this isn’t the first time she has done this, and this is all very much planned out, so it would make sense for her to watch him. This is the exact opposite of the male gaze. We have the female as the dominant force, watching and thinking of what she will do to and with this passive male figure.
In the sequence after this, however, we go back to the idea of male dominance as Walter comes up to the door and the maid answers the doorbell. He towers over her, forces himself into the house even though she protests, and proceeds to demand to speak to another man. Even though in a noir or neo-noir film, the separation between male and female characters are more blurred or mixed up, we have to also realize that this film was made in 1940s hollywood and is far from progressive. Directly after Walter’s encounter with the maid, Phyllis comes out of a room, dressed in only a towel, with dappled light sprinkling her full face of makeup with Walter in the middle of the frame. Then we see Walter looking at her, the male gaze for sure, at least partially so. We have a woman, who seems to be innocent and passive, she isn't wearing clothing, she is acting stupid when he introduces himself, and then the “dominant” male, who is controlling the conversation. Phyllis then steps fully into the light, and by light I mean the most soft artificial lighting EVER, used to highlight her face to make it look wondrous. We then see Walter’s reaction, he smiles a quite great amount, then makes a comment about how she isn’t wearing clothes. This type of eye-rolling banter is present throughout the entire film, but in this scene, the dialogue enforces the idea that the man in looking upon the woman and sexualizing her (as Phyllis flirts back quite often later in the film, but in this scene, she remains “docile”).
In terms of lighting, the quintessential noir style blinds lighting is present during this scene as Walter moves into the living room. The following events are the perfect representation of the gender relations in a noir film. Walter, who just spoke with Phyllis, was told by Phyllis to go into the living room. When he does, he finds himself with horizontal, separated, bar like light over him, meaning that he is trapped. This lightning in juxtaposition with the fact that Phyllis made him go into this let’s us know that her words will trap him, further pushing the idea that she is a femme fatale and that she has power over him. However, when he is in the room, he looks upon a picture of her teenage daughter, and then proceeds to look at Phyllis, not even fully buttoned up, coming down the stairs, beautifully lit, again the male gaze.
DeleteA noir film and it’s archetype of a femme fatale do an interesting job of presenting the way that a man and a woman interact in a film, and “Double Indemnity” is no different. Through use of dialogue, cinematography, lightning, and direction, the scene in which Walter first meets Phyllis definitely represents this interesting way of portraying the relationship. On the surface, the man is in power, he looks at the vulnerable woman and starts flirting, but, through cinematic analysis, and of course through just the narrative, we see that this is far from the actual case, and the woman is far more dominant.
The scene I chose to look at is the scene where Phyllis and Walter have their final confrontation. Walter has arranged a meeting with Phyllis, planning to set her up for arrest, and it is revealed that Phyllis was faking her love for Walter in order to manipulate him. She threatens to shoot him, but then is overcome with emotions - it turns out she really did love him after all. Walter uses this weakness in emotion to take control of the situation.
ReplyDeleteThroughout this scene, even though there are moments where Phyllis seems to have the upper hand, she is never presented as more powerful through cinematic language. For example, when the scene starts, Walter takes up a larger portion of the frame than Phyllis does, and is towering over her. Even after Phyllis pulls out the gun, Walter dominates the frame, conveying to the audience that he is still the more powerful and important character in the scene. Additionally, for the entire scene, Phyllis is lit with softer lighting that dulls her features and makes her seem less hostile or intimidating. Phyllis is never presented as a serious threat to Walter, and her femininity is emphasized as being a weakness. Woman being supposedly weaker than men is a recurring theme throughout the film - Phyllis had to ask Walter for help in order to kill her husband, playing up her helplessness in the situation. Phyllis panics after the murder, and is unable to start the getaway car, having to rely on Walter to do that. Lola, Phyllis’ stepdaughter, is too emotionally distraught to function after her father’s death, and she only begins feeling better once she starts speaking with Walter.
It could be argued that the above examples of “weakness” in women are manipulation tactics employed by the women in those situations. For Phyllis, this is definteitly partially true, as her reveal of having no feelings for Walter in the confrontation scene shows. However, the confrontation scene then enforcing that Phyllis actually does care for Walter casts doubt on the idea that she was using manipulation tactics at all, suggesting that she subconsciously cared for Walter the whole time. As a result, Phyllis’ threat of shooting Walter is not recognized as a threat at all; rather, her emotions, and by extension, femininity, make her weak and unimportant to Walter, even though the true consequences of the situation should be recognized as dire. She is completely stripped of her power, while Walter, in comparison, seems more powerful than ever. Films rely on appealing to a male viewer’s visual desires, and “in a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female” (Mulvay), something that is drastically shown in this film. Woman are presented as incapable and easily overwhelmed, while men are shown as less emotional, more powerful, and more concise and efficient in their actions.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe scene where the Protagonist Neff meets Phyllis at her own house is a very good scene to portray the women in film during that time period. Phyllis is very sexualized as she is scene as the pretty wife who wants her husband to get life insurance so she could plan to murder him. Cinematically Phyllis is just a trap the Neff fell into by getting seduced by her and this scene displays this to perfection. She slowly makes her point across that she is very interested in Neff and that she is also disinterested in her own husband. This is made clear by the costume design beause Phyllis is wearing a towel when she first sees Neff and she is standing on the balcony above him, showing that she will be the dominating female. As she comes down from the balcony and becomes level with him, she is scene glowing with a white dress and softly lit face that displays her beauty. After Phyllis' husband exits the frame and it is just her and Neff, she closes in on him and makes a very intimate proximity between the two. She then follows Neff around the house where ever he moves as a sign of her wanting to be with him and even when she is not directly in the frame, she is still wandering her way around Neff the way a predator surrounds its prey. The way Neff sees this is as if she wants him to be her world and he will help her to make this true at any cost.
ReplyDeleteThis scenes relationship to the film as a whole is a display on how easily a woman can seduce a man by acting like she is in love. She easily gets him to go all out to the fullest extent to kill her own husband and if that wasn't crazy enough, she wants him to keep the lie going even after the are being investigated. Neff of course does go through with this because of her seducing him at her house and he is now in a huge trap that will alter the film completely. Cinematically, Phyllis represents the femme fatale in the female almost perfectly, from the overly sexualization of her to the villain like manipulation of her.
The scene I chose to analyze under a feminist lens was that of the climactic scene of “Double Indemnity” by Billy Wilder. This scene perfectly summarizes the role of women within the film, and especially that of Phyllis and her relationship to Walter. The scene features a confrontation between the aforementioned characters, as they both attempt to rid themselves of the blame for a murder they orchestrated. The conflict culminates in the death of Phyllis, as Walter realizes that there is no way to avoid being caught as long as his partner in crime is still alive. The sequence is extremely important to the overall narrative, as it provides a conclusion to the fate of the antagonist of the film, as well as summarizes the fluctuating role women play within the film’s narrative. As Mulvey states, “In a world of sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female”. Cinematically, Phyllis is depicted in a different way than the archetype Mulvey describes, as Wilder attempts to depict her as a femme fatale. A femme fatale is a woman who utilizes her sexuality as a tool to manipulate and destroy the men who become involved with her. This is no different for the relationship between Phyllis and Walter, which ultimately results in the death of both characters. To develop Phyllis into this powerful female model, Wilder utilizes a combination of mise en scene and lighting. These cinematic elements are able to flesh out the dynamic between the two main characters, with their placement in relation to one another illustrating the intricacies of their relationship. To begin, Phyllis is seated in an armchair, somewhat hidden and reclined from the current confrontation, in an almost seductive and secretive way. This is to create an illusion of power, with Phyllis attempting to utilize her seductive nature to gain a dominant position within the conversation with Walter. However, Walter’s increasingly aggressive movement begins to unnerve Phyllis, as she begins to realize her grasp over him is slipping. Walter begins to circle her, suggesting all the while that he is the one truly in the dominant position. This causes Phyllis to lose her composure, switching her tactics to one of deliberate weakness to attempt to save herself, while in turn portraying herself as the simple female character which Mulvey described previously.
ReplyDeleteThe lighting within this scene is another important piece in characterizing Phyllis as a femme fatale, as it begins with Walter closing the blinds, shrouding the room in darkness. This dramatic darkness surrounds Phyllis, shrouding and covering her face. This adds to her mystery, with the contrasting “halo” of backlighting creating a seductive glow to her figure. This combination of mystery and seductiveness shows that Phyllis is still attempting to manipulate Walter, as to weaken him and allow her to throw him under the bus. The lighting shifts however once Walter gains control of the situation, as Phyllis steps into the light and is illuminated as to parallel her transition into a submissive and weak role. While Phyllis is illuminated, Walter’s back is covered in shadow, slowly becoming illuminated as he approaches Phyllis. The most powerful use of lighting to reflect Phyllis’ change in character during this scene comes in the following close up, as Phyllis’ face becomes completely highlighted with a veil of light, which accentuates the idea that she has been “redeemed” after admitting her true love for Walter.
In the scene in which Walter reveals that he has uncovered Phyllis’s intentions, Phyllis is shown to be more of a character than a simple housewife without intelligence. As Walter explains his plan to leave Phyllis alone with the consequences of killing her husband, she becomes violent and confirms what has been hinted at throughout the film: that she was a vindictive, manipulative, and above all, intelligent. The angling shown in this scene changes significantly, as the camera is shown to look down on her before she becomes violent, and changes to look up at her after she has drawn her gun.
ReplyDeleteThis scene is the climax of the entire film, as the underlying mystery is exposed to the audience, and the final confrontation is shown.
For the scene I have chosen, I have chosen the scene where Phyllis shoots Walter. In this scene. In this scene Phyllis is portrayed as an emotionally manipulative character, who plays Walter along with other men as well. First off, it is important to note that throughout the entire movie, Phyllis has little to no depth. Rather, she is written as a borderline sociopath who manipulates men emotionally in order to achieve financial stability. She is the film’s primary antagonist, and at best a very unsympathetic one. In this scene, Phyllis lives up to her status as a manipulator, and tries to weasel her way through Walter. Her very final act is one of self preservation, by shooting Walter. Any sympathy or reasoning for Phyllis’ actions is stripped away when she admits to manipulating Walter the entire time, and then continues to act like she loves him just to save her skin. This results in a character that lacks depth and is very one dimensional from a writing standpoint. From the very opening shot of this scene when Walter enters the house, Phyllis is positioned sitting in a chair in a sexualy suggestive manner. The cinematography of this scene uses soft lighting to make actress Barbara Stanwyck appear as sexually appealing. Even the way her dialogue is spoken is in a manner that is seductive in order to fit the role of a femme fatale. From the perspective of feminist film theory, Phyllis fits in with the idea that female characters in film only serve the purpose of acting as damsels in distress, or as some sort of villain that the dark and handsome protagonist needs to overcome.
ReplyDelete