The Big Picture: You Are Wrong About Sucker Punch, Part One

[Ashley Blalock]

The movie is bad on so many levels of film making that it's really hard to get immersed in the movie. Instead of being able to enjoy the movie it feels like you endure the movie in the vain hope there will be some pay off for all the bad parts and the disconnect.

I think the message is just way too heavy handed. Instead of making us question the movie wants to just hammer you that if you find women sexy then you must be some horrible, horrible, evil, scum of the Earth person. That you should be dragged out into the street and shot for saying hey she's really attractive with that outfit and that sword. Without sexual attraction our species would have died out long ago.

It's a bit like a conversation I've had a few times at sci fi conventions. Sometimes people just want to feel sexy. They don't want to have sex with you, but a part of us feels better knowing that other people might find us desirable. Nerd culture is actually pretty good when it comes to telling guys who don't get it to back off she's not interested. I've had plenty of conversations with women in sexy outfits that had noting to do with sex.

 

[Lilani]

Amazing how many people in this thread still don't get it even after watching this video.

I think it's funny, too.

Yes, the "real" meaning of the film is subversive, isn't clearly spelled out for you, and can be easily missed if you aren't looking for it. But that's the point. You don't make a point about your audience by telling them the point you're trying to make. If the film reveals its own punch line, then it doesn't have as much impact. It just comes across as preachy, and the grain of truth within is lost on the audience because they're too irate about having been sat down and blatantly scolded by a movie. The real impact comes from the people who do get it taking that mindset with them the next time they see this sort of gratuitous stuff happening in media.

I don't feel like Sucker Punch was trying to "change the world." I feel like it was simply pointing out the way things are, and when an oogling geek watches the movie and don't get the joke, they come to serve as a living example of the film's lesson. Sure they may not realize they're being mocked, but that is the most successful kind of trolling--when the person is being utterly and completely trolled, but doesn't realize it.

Yes it can be considered poor filmmaking if the audience doesn't "get" the point the film is trying to make, but in this case whether or not the audience "gets" it and specifically who does and doesn't get it is a huge part of the point. It's a fourth-wall sort of thing.

In the 1980s, the US Federal Government commissioned to have a sculpture built in the Federal Plaza in New York City. They requested a man named Richard Serra, and what he gave them was the Tilted Arc. [http://voidmanufacturing.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/serra_tilted_arc_1981-9.jpg] Basically, a long black steel wall that cut across the plaza in a very inconvenient way for pedestrians. It was right in the way of where people wanted to go, and they had to navigate around it. It wasn't even aesthetically pleasing--it went against the natural curvature of the plaza, and it was just an enormous black wall.

People hated it, said it got in their way. But that was the point Serra was trying to make. It makes the viewer aware of their relationship with the sculpture, and aware of their movement in the plaza. It's not a sculpture that can just be ignored, the viewer develops a relationship with it that is reaffirmed on a daily basis. Also, the viewer's changed path gets them to see it at different angles, to observe the change in its form as their perspective changes.

Was it in the way? Yes. Was it remarkable as far as construction or execution? Not really. Was it some kind of triumph of architecture? No. But it did get people to think, and that piece of art brought a lot of emotions out of people. While not all of them "got" that their being irate and having to take longer to walk around it, their relationship with the piece was there and their change in movement was also there, whether or not they realized it. And the people who did "get" it were also forced to have some relationship with it. Most of the time when a commemorative sculpture gets put up somewhere, people look at it for a while then just start ignoring it. But Serra made a sculpture that couldn't be ignored, and people would have to change something about what they were doing in order to deal with it. Whether or not they realized it didn't matter, as long as some relationship and communication occurred.

 

[Spearmaster]

IMO the "sucker punch" of the film comes when the credits roll and you realized you paid money to see it.

Ohh I got all the not so subtle and not so hidden metaphor, that by enjoying the sexualization of the women we were no better that the men in the film but a film this does not make. Plus weren't the oversexualized parts supposed to be the girls idealized view of them selves while they were carrying out their plan? Why would they view their empowered selves as exactly the thing they did not want to be and escape from? Because skin sells tickets, no matter how many layers of metaphor you dig into that's all this film was really about. You pay to see a sexy girl action movie...suckerpunch...its not. You pay to see a good movie with a thought provoking story...suckerpunch...its not. You pay to see a CG b-movie with oversexualized action girls that uses the mental institute angle story with a metaphor about sexism to try and cover up its own overt sexism than you probably got your moneys worth.

IMO anyway

 

[gardian06]

...snip...

My main problem with this movie is that the action scenes aren't integrated well into the movie. The movie makes its artistic statement reasonably well, but the action scenes feel completely pointless and tacked on because there is no reason for them to be there in the plot of the movie. The action scenes cut away from the characters and plot to essentially go 'whee explosions' for a few minutes so that it can make its artistic statement.

Really. go look up Schizophrenia (not on Wikipedia, but in DSM).

Spoiler

Schizophrenia boiled down means not being able to separate one reality from another that the person perceives to be happening around them, and at times these shifts can happen without warning, and within fractions of seconds.

usually these switches in perception occur as a result of a traumatic event (rape, abuse, etc...) as a safer place to be then where the person actually is.

so by them inter-splicing the action scenes as tacked-on they are simply depicting a schizophrenic episode, and it actually serves the point of seeing the events through the eyes of a schizophrenic, and with that being the plot those inter-splices are the point. then that is used to prove the sucker punch aspect. So yah that actually makes it work on a higher level.

You're thinking of PTSD, not schizophrenia. There's nothing about schizophrenia in this. There are no delusions or hallucinations any character gets. Not at any point of the movie does Babydoll confuse which reality she's in. You can't have a hallucination when you've closed your eyes, which she does for every dance. She doesn't have delusions that there's some mad conspiracy against her or other irrational beliefs.

If you want a movie about schizophrenia, go watch Take Shelter (the best movie of last year).

really that's your argument for it not being one disorder or another. PTSD has little to nothing to directly do with schizophrenia other then a cause, and effect system. PTSD: extreme anxiety of specific types of situations, and typically culminates with the person obtaining another disorder based on the events that caused the PTSD (eg. military tank operator might obtain claustrophobia, or a rape victim might obtain agoraphobia, or aversion to the opposite gender), and in some situations even things like schizophrenia (which is usually dubbed a copping mechanism when in relation to a traumatic event. and your last point is straight up paranoia not schizophrenia (they can exist in the same person, but then it is also possible for schizophrenia to exist independently in a person though schizophrenia is usually talked about as the effect in a cause effect chain where some other disorder is the cause)

and thank you for bringing up such an example. these two movies do share parallels, and direct example. the movie Take Shelter is a person who recognizes that they are having the delusional episodes (at least in the beginning). while Sucker Punch is a person who simply uses reality replacement, and does not realize it. both are schizophrenic just different flavors. the whole thing that she closes her eyes to shift reality two things here first its simply her "trigger" for the reality transition (some people it happens when they blink, or when there mind goes blank, or bored), and two it's a visual cue to the audience that a transition is happening so it's not so jarring to watch especially considering the high amounts of difference in the realities.

 

[Verrenxnon]

Metacommentary might've been Suckerpunch's intent, but it's terrible characterization prevented it from realizing that goal or adequately critiquing the genres. The lack of agency didn't help.

 

[YodaUnleashed]

But I don't know what I'm supposed to be right about......

 

[Ledan]

I just didn't enjoy the story. Stories that handle this sort of heavy stuff(rape and other things) need to handle it well for me to enjoy the movie. This one didn't. It just made me feel disgusted watching it. That may have been the point, but that doesn't make it a good movie.

 

[Nomanslander]

I fucking hated this movie because it was way too misandristic (man-hating)for me. The type of Xena Warrior Princess battle cry for "all men must die because they're perverted and evil" crap that makes me want to vomit in my own mouth just thinking about it.

It's one thing when you have a story showing women's struggle with chauvinism, but when EVERY male is portrayed as some perverted cigar-sucking fiend... just gtfo!

>>

 

[Kataskopo]

I completely agree that calling Sucker Punch misogynist is basically saying, "Women can never wear skimpy outfits or be protrayed as being victimized," so it's not misgynist.

I disagree with everything else you said. Remember that film "The Room" by Tommy Wiseau? After it premiered and absolutely tanked, he came out and said it was a black comedic farce intended to suck to make you laugh. I simply don't grant that. I have no room in my head or my moviegoing experience for a director to come out after, or even before, the fact and say, "You're watching it wrongly." If the film itself can't prove to me that that is "what it's about" then the film failed and not my inquisitive moviegoing brain. Seriously, just how does a striptease parallel to shooting Nazi zombies? Furthermore, why am I supposed to believe it's a good plot device that a pubescent dancer is so great at sexy dancing that it literally stuns the men who see it? Then you've got the pretty aritrary death of two of the main five female characters, which has nothing to with subtext and is just a lazy way to whittle down the protagonists because this is the kind of story where only one person is allowed to survive. Besides, what does it mean for a person to lambast sleazy moviegoing audiences while delivering to them a sleazy movie? that's like a vegan serving hamburgers to his guests and then retreat back to the kitchen to scorn them. No thanks to that kind of self-unaware pretention.

It's not just that Sucker Punch doesn't get to say, "No, we're LAMBASTING that stupid stuff instead of glorifying it," it's that it doesn't serve up a good movie on any basis. The plot is like something out of an 8-bit video game, the characters are as deep as their monikers, and the events do pretty much nothing to make you care about anyone except by saying, "Hey, they're in a crappy asylum and people are abusing and killing them. Be invested." Sucker Punch just didn't work, on any level.

But yeah, it's not misogynist.

Exactly this. I don't really think you can go "you are watching it wrong guys!" in itself can not make those statements.
And what the hell is the movie supposing that you are going to watch it just because of the sexy babes? That's just the point, here, have some sexy babes but remember it's wrong to fawn over them!

Ehm, no.

 

[Jobbie]

People who missed this movie are really doing themselves a great dishonor. It's one awesome gem that I initially didn't give the time of day. Now having only seen it once, I am waiting on the BluRay to go on sale so I can pick it up. Plus who really criticize an awesome sequence to Bjork's Army of Me.

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Seen the movie.
Got the "message"
Still didn't like the movie.
That ok with you folks?

 

[Zydrate]

I completely agree that calling Sucker Punch misogynist is basically saying, "Women can never wear skimpy outfits or be protrayed as being victimized," so it's not misgynist.

I disagree with everything else you said. Remember that film "The Room" by Tommy Wiseau? After it premiered and absolutely tanked, he came out and said it was a black comedic farce intended to suck to make you laugh. I simply don't grant that. I have no room in my head or my moviegoing experience for a director to come out after, or even before, the fact and say, "You're watching it wrongly." If the film itself can't prove to me that that is "what it's about" then the film failed and not my inquisitive moviegoing brain. Seriously, just how does a striptease parallel to shooting Nazi zombies? Furthermore, why am I supposed to believe it's a good plot device that a pubescent dancer is so great at sexy dancing that it literally stuns the men who see it? Then you've got the pretty aritrary death of two of the main five female characters, which has nothing to with subtext and is just a lazy way to whittle down the protagonists because this is the kind of story where only one person is allowed to survive. Besides, what does it mean for a person to lambast sleazy moviegoing audiences while delivering to them a sleazy movie? that's like a vegan serving hamburgers to his guests and then retreat back to the kitchen to scorn them. No thanks to that kind of self-unaware pretention.

It's not just that Sucker Punch doesn't get to say, "No, we're LAMBASTING that stupid stuff instead of glorifying it," it's that it doesn't serve up a good movie on any basis. The plot is like something out of an 8-bit video game, the characters are as deep as their monikers, and the events do pretty much nothing to make you care about anyone except by saying, "Hey, they're in a crappy asylum and people are abusing and killing them. Be invested." Sucker Punch just didn't work, on any level.

But yeah, it's not misogynist.

I bet this got quoted a lot.
For good reason, because it sums up my thoughts.

I'll first say that I enjoyed the fantasy aspects. But much like I did with Mass Effect 3, I retconned, edited, replaced things in my own personal "headcanon". Because I have imagination.

But I did not like the film's "reality". I don't like how, as this quote and many posts after it said, the movie tells me later that I saw it incorrectly. If the movie didn't portray its message properly the first time... It's not because we're dumb, it's because the message wasn't done right.

 

[Skaven252]

I get irritated when people try to sell me stuff by juxtaposing the stuff with sexy females. Booth babes, all that, just puts the thought "quit shoving your shit down my throat" way ahead of "oo, a babe".

Not to mention what their definition of sexy is, and how they always assume I'm just "supposed" to find that sexy. No thank you, schoolgirl outfits and pretentious strutting do not turn me on. Stop assuming things.

I get irritated in any movie scenes where men get "distracted by the sexy" and then get disproportionally get what's coming to them. It feels like those characters were just too bloody stupid.

So Sucker Punch? Its message was clear to me from the very beginning. I never watched it, but I've been exposed to the discourse. All the male characters in it, save for that one mystic, were absolutely vile. Why thank you very much. By the time the movie came out, I had heard and seen that point made about 4985720958437598475 times already.

 

[Acton Hank]

The opposite word of misogynist is misandrist, a word that seems so unknown that even the spell check on this thing is giving the red flag.

Anyone beginning to think the sexist tables are turning to opposite way?

By the way, all I saw when I first saw this movie was just a silly action flick with an overabundance of CG; maybe I didn't get the message because I'm not in the target audience

 

[ElPatron]

snip

That's a pretty bold statement considering you know NOTHING about me. In both of the situations I was in I had very little choice over whether to stay in there or not.

This film had an effect on me more so than any other I have watched because it reminded me of bad situations I have been in. How you can call me out on that and say I'm 'wrong' for feeling that is just astonishing.

I said it would be rough. But no matter the parallelisms, the characters in the asylum are physically locked up and possibly kept under control trough the use of drugs. Escapism is good, but not if it's used to hide the fact that you're a victim.

I get irritated when people try to sell me stuff by juxtaposing the stuff with sexy females. Booth babes, all that, just puts the thought "quit shoving your shit down my throat" way ahead of "oo, a babe".

That's because you're not the target audience of that marketing ploy.

It's funny that you aimed your torpedoes at "assumptions" but you're making them too. You assume that you're "supposed" to like schoolgirl outfits, you assume that booth babes are trying to sell *you* a product... No, these things appeal to those who actually like them.

So instead of getting offended by everything in this world you could just ignore a few, because you have the right to do so.

 

[Rotating Bread]

Thanks to Markunator in post 21 for putting up the Mark Kermode review, he says everything that needs to be said about this film.

'It is the most boring, ploddingly put together, infantile, crass, adolescent, stupid, chauvanistic twoddle that I have sat through in a very, very long time'

The 'Half in the Bag' guys over at redlettermedia also have an excellent review of Suckerpunch.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

That's a pretty bold statement considering you know NOTHING about me. In both of the situations I was in I had very little choice over whether to stay in there or not.

This film had an effect on me more so than any other I have watched because it reminded me of bad situations I have been in. How you can call me out on that and say I'm 'wrong' for feeling that is just astonishing.

I said it would be rough. But no matter the parallelisms, the characters in the asylum are physically locked up and possibly kept under control trough the use of drugs. Escapism is good, but not if it's used to hide the fact that you're a victim.

I didn't say it was good but it's all I had at the time. It wasn't like I could do anything else.

 

[Gympants]

We got it, Bob. You do not get that we want movies that are entertaining or clever. If you want to push a message and want audience to pay for it, you better deliver it in good package.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

This film made me cry, I'm not sure how many people it had that effect on.

I wasn't far off, right near the end. From a man's perspective, the film is a humongous guilt trip. It throws things at you that you can't help but enjoy, a bit, but is sure to point out how incredibly fucked up it is that you're enjoying it at the same time. And then the ending, when it stomps on you properly...
It's enough to scare me, because I don't ever want to end up being one of those men and it points out how easy it would be to end up like that either by not thinking or not caring about what you're doing.

This movie could have easily criticised the flaws with women in fantasy combat by sending a normal woman into one of these fantasy worlds and have her point out all the flaws, such as wearing armour that barely covers you. This way the director could still have all their fantasy nonsense while making a clear point.

How fucking weak would that be though?

Oh hey audience, I'm just going to explain everything because the message that 'men are arseholes' didn't come through clearly enough, somehow?