Scan barcode
A review by sjgrodsky
Off the Cliff: How the Making of Thelma & Louise Drove Hollywood to the Edge by Becky Aikman
3.0
A good topic, well researched, and the author certainly knows how to write punchy prose.
One revelation was the routine crudeness of show biz moguls. Every woman is subjected to some level of inappropriate attention. But the pervasiveness and crudity seems extreme in show biz.
Another was that the director, Ridley Scott, was something of a lecher himself. I still can't quite get my head around that. He directed the movie about two women whose experiences with sexism finally drove them, literally, over the edge. And yet he engaged in that sexist behavior himself. Oh Hollywood, you master of fantasy and misdirection. It's true what they say: Nobody knows anything.
Although I praised the book as "well researched" I meant "as deeply researched as you can expect of a journalist". No, I'm not just being snarky. What I'm trying to say is that the author narrated events and interviewed as many of the people involved as she could find. But she didn't address any of the deeper questions that the film elicits. Such as:
We sympathize with Louise, yes we do. But: she's committed murder. Extenuating circumstances, yes. But still. What would a criminal lawyer say about Louise's case? What would a judge?
The movie didn't change much for women in show biz, as the author acknowledges. But why not? What will it take?
And how does she explain the Ridley Scott contradiction described above?
One revelation was the routine crudeness of show biz moguls. Every woman is subjected to some level of inappropriate attention. But the pervasiveness and crudity seems extreme in show biz.
Another was that the director, Ridley Scott, was something of a lecher himself. I still can't quite get my head around that. He directed the movie about two women whose experiences with sexism finally drove them, literally, over the edge. And yet he engaged in that sexist behavior himself. Oh Hollywood, you master of fantasy and misdirection. It's true what they say: Nobody knows anything.
Although I praised the book as "well researched" I meant "as deeply researched as you can expect of a journalist". No, I'm not just being snarky. What I'm trying to say is that the author narrated events and interviewed as many of the people involved as she could find. But she didn't address any of the deeper questions that the film elicits. Such as:
We sympathize with Louise, yes we do. But: she's committed murder. Extenuating circumstances, yes. But still. What would a criminal lawyer say about Louise's case? What would a judge?
The movie didn't change much for women in show biz, as the author acknowledges. But why not? What will it take?
And how does she explain the Ridley Scott contradiction described above?