The Rage Inherent in The Handmaid's Tale

For the last three weeks I've been rewatching the first three seasons of The Handmaid's Tale in order to prepare for the premiere of the fourth. I thought my anger would have died down a little after a year's hiatus. I was wrong. So I decided to make a list of what's been bothering me just to calm down a little. Also I need to give myself a break from Joseph Fienne's face for a while because damn he makes me want to break something. 

Trigger warning: rape, harassment, abuse, imprisonment 

Rage Item #1: Ritualized Rape whitewashed as "The Ceremony" 

Maybe the Commander/Wife pairs who have thus far been unable to conceive en masse should read the room: God doesn't want any of you having children, so why not just focus on your knitting or your gardening and leave the handmaids out of it? Despite the fact that a very small percentage of the handmaids actually signed up for their positions, NONE OF THEM enjoys the rape ceremony, having the babies they carried stolen from them, or being harassed and leered at by their respective commanders. No, Fred, she's not hot for you, she's scared, she wants her kid back, and she wants to GTFO. I'd go so far as to request a personal message on the ridiculousness of it all delivered by God, Jesus, and Mary themselves stating "Hey, you've got this 100% wrong," but clearly they'd ignore it, anyway. And do they think it's working? The majority of these situations end in negative outcomes and the people in charge don't seem to be learning any lessons or adapting the setup at all. 

Rage Item #2: PTSD

Moira, Emily, and countless others (as well as the young children), despite having escaped, will have lasting effects from their time in Gilead. Were Canada not a free healthcare nation with solid refugee resources I'd say the entire bill should be directed right back to Gilead, specific to whichever Commander/Wife pairs were responsible. Aunts, too. They cannot just be allowed to DAMAGE A HUMAN RACE. True there cannot really be a dollar amount attached to the psycho-emotional damage that has been done but there should still be accountability. The commanders are war criminals; treat them as such.

Rage Item #3: Gilead being allowed

Watching the episode that described the insurrection dismantling the former United States is definitely a different experience, post 1/6/21, but the question in both cases is the same: WHO LET THIS HAPPEN? WHO STOOD TO THE SIDE AND ALLOWED IT? I can't believe anyone, any country would take this seriously or acknowledge the Gilead experiment in any way, shape, or form.

There are mentions in various episodes of how other countries view Gilead (Mexico continues trade and considers handmaids for their own society; Canada accepts refugees and refuses to extradite but is wary of Gilead's military), but where was the UN? Where was the resistance? We've heard about the wars in Chicago and the map shows Texas in rebellion, what's happening there? Can people escape southward?

Rage Item #4: Women as Things

They rape the women, take their children, enslave them, and beat them. The handmaid's bodies' worth is judged solely on the ability to provide healthy children. Their eyes are expendable. Their hands and feet are expendable. In Washington, the handmaid's mouths are clamped shut with wires. Serena Joy has the misguided idea that as a prominent wife of a commander, her thoughts and feelings count just as much as her husband's, but she soon learns that her position is also limited; she is to be controlled and governed over, too.

Rage Item #5: No reading

Females--- children, handmaids, Marthas, and wives --- are not allowed to read. Again, Serena Joy thinks her past experiences as spokeswoman for the religious cause and former book author exempts her but she's wrong. In Canada she seems embarrassed when given an illustrated no-word itinerary sheet (as would be the norm in Gilead); after requesting permission for Gilead's girl children to be allowed to learn to read the Bible, she loses a finger for her efforts at the command of her own husband.

Where will it all go in season 4? I have hopes and dreams for Janine, June, Emily, Moira, and Hannah. Don't let the bastards grind you down, ladies! You get your shit together and you FIGHT! 

(season 4 premiere recap forthcoming!)

From my Netflix Queue: 4 Films, Quickly

1. Notes on a Scandal (2006)
directed by Richard Eyre, starring Cate Blanchett and Judi Dench

Blanchett is a hot MILF art teacher having an affair with a student; Dench, a fellow teacher and grade A stalker, decides she wants some of that. Worth seeing for two amazing actors at the top of their respective games but story is disturbing. As in, extremely disturbing.

2. Elizabeth (1998)
directed by Shekhar Kapur, starring Cate Blanchett, Geoffrey Rush, Christopher Eccleston, Joseph Fiennes

So being queen is a lot more difficult than one would imagine, but isn't everyone so pretty? Wonderfully sad story, well acted and aesthetic.

3. The Count of Monte Cristo (2002)
directed by Kevin Reynolds, starring Jim Caviezel, Guy Pearce, Richard Harris

Condensed adaptation of the novel, screenplay a little clunky but still impressive and adventurous. Revenge stories to end all revenge stories in which Dumbledore (Harris) teaches Jesus (Caviezel) everything he knows!

4. The Queen (2006)
directed by Stephen Frears, starring Helen Mirren, Michael Sheen

My favorite of this royal collection! Queen Elizabeth gets berated for refusing to have a public mental breakdown over the death of Princess Diana, whom she couldn't stand. So many rules! So many dogs!

Coriolanus

Have you seen this? It never made it to Minneapolis on its first run but I see now that it's at the Lagoon. There's not much that I like better than Ralph Fiennes . . . except maybe his little brother Joseph, of course.

Wow.

HOLD. THE. PHONE.

What's this? JOSEPH FIENNES IS IN CAMELOT? Did I say I had absolutely no interest in this show? Strike that. See you there, Very-Fine-Juices. You're nearly as hot as your Voldemort-y brother.
Damn.

 

Normally I don't really like periods. . .

But for some reason I watched three inside the last month or so: Wuthering Heights, Marie Antoinette, and Shakespeare in Love. I had seen Shakespeare in Love (in the theater) back in the day, but the others were new. I finished reading Wuthering Heights after about an entire year of effort and was displeased by it but thought I'd still try the film. Since there are at least three film adaptations of Wuthering Heights, I did what any film scholar would do (ha ha) and picked the one with the hottest male lead, which happened to be Ralph Fiennes in one of his first major roles.



I wish I could say it was a good film but it was quite boring. I can't even imagine what it was like for Matt who had absolutely no idea what was going on having not read the book; I had to explain things as if I were a Bronte authority or something. . . not even close. I didn't even finish it. What I will say is that having a hot male lead (Fiennes) did WONDERS for keeping me interested; in the novel I hated Heathcliffe from the word go, in the film I found myself at least mildly interested in Fiennes as Heathcliffe, only because I find him wonderfully attractive, even if he plays a jerk (which he'd do much worse a few films down the line in Schindler's List. . . AMON GOETH?) yikes. Still hot though, even as Lord Voldemort. Perhaps especially as Lord Voldemort. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: That scene, at the end of Order of the Phoenix where he flails his arms back and makes everything explode and shatter? If they gave him a nose instead of those snake nostrils, I would totally hit that. Yes, I'm twisted.



Next we have Marie Antoinette. I'll say this: it was a beautiful piece of cinematography. It was a typical period piece, too long, boring dialogue, uninteresting women who other women think are super-interesting, etc., etc. It seemed a bit like The Virgin Suicides in France to me. Then, when she got pissed that her husband wouldn't screw her and the cake, shoes, and hair business started we had (cinematic) Sex and the City in France. The one part I liked a lot was when the Dauphin finally got busy and nailed her; he climbed on top of her and then there was a fade to black (and a excited *gasp* by Marie), nice. The whole affair with the Swedish soldier turned me off completely, I don't care if it was historically accurate or not, it was annoying. Overall, it was probably the most skillfully done period piece I've seen, and quite a bit shorter than Barry Lyndon, so good work, I guess.



And last but not least, Shakespeare in Love. I know there is a lot of flack out there about this one, Weinstein Bros commercializing Shakespeare with Ben Affleck of all people, upsetting the Oscars over Saving Private Ryan, etc. But I really, REALLY like this. Mostly I like it because I like Joseph Fiennes, but I like it also because it's about a writer. I just figured that out this time around! It's a well done film, well written, and honest, I think, if you consider that most writers write best about what they know, and who do they know better than themselves? Wonderful. If I had to watch one period film for the rest of my life, it would definitely be this one.

"Gentlemen upstage, Ladies downstage, ARE YOU A LADY MR. KENT?"