|Index||3 reviews in total|
Lynda Carter proves to be a better actress than people conceive her as in
her portrayal of a Wife and Mother that poses for Playboy. Another great
character is the "slutty" twin sister played by Josie Bissett of Melrose
Place. Josie's acting in this movie is much better than in the cheesy
Overall, this movie is credible, but might be a disappointment for people who want to see skin.
This movie was thought provoking in a sense because it shows how men separate the women that they love from the women they see in girlie magazines! In this flick the women needed to affirm their physical beauty by going to a girlie magazine photographer! Where are the husbands and the fathers? It also makes this decision to pose seem self-centered (not that the characters were self-centered; they were well acted). The women that make an emotionally charged decision to pose rarely think about the loved ones that they will hurt once the pictures are made public! It also serves to turn an otherwise complex, multi-faceted character into an object!This movie also should warn all the husbands and fathers out there to not neglect their wives and daughters; so that they won't resort to drastic measures to feel attractive!
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Posing inspired by three real stories. A housewife, a Yalestudent, a
Chicagobroker: an interview. Of course: never, ever is something free
and has to be payed. The stockbroker (her answer to her colleagues: "I
pose for Playboy when you've posed for Playgirl") loses her job and is
for ever on the black list. The same for the housewife: punished that
she dared. The family business will never be 'after' what it was
'before'. The Yalestudent, against Playboy what it stands for and does,
is banned by her professor-father, forbidding the publication His
'perfect' daughter answers: "It's too late". When she confronts him,
why he doesn't answer her calls: "I don't take calls from strangers
("I'm your daughter, not a stranger") "
Not anymore. You are not a
daughter anymore of mine." The stockbroker (behind her success-career
is ' the fat schoolgirl') loses her work and wins love. The same for
the housewife. For one single day she is not looked at. But seen and
special: "I was flattered, who would't be" not taken for granted as a
furniture in her house, by neighbors and dear friends. Why did these
three women do what they did? Beside their very own reason, being
neglected of what they are, want to be and are not: they where pushed
by society to do what the did. "But", as Janets mother asks, "there
must be another way" and Janet: "Maybe, but it didn't come along." They
saw suddenly a way out of their one-way-street: and made the deal with
Playboy's devil. Society saw it as a joke, never believing they would
do it. At stake was their image, their family, the career at work. The
three turned the limelights beam on the veil. And the veil became
transparent, everybody not looking but suddenly seeing behind. The
settled every-day-housewife knew: with the birth of her children she
was not special anymore, but 'a furniture' of the household. The
success-money-broker, burdened by her image of the fat schoolgirl. And
the Yale student remembers the five minutes that transformed her into
the 'shining-perfect-example'. The moment at summer camp when her twin
sister helped her stage frightened sister as a stand in: "It's amazing
how five minutes can change a whole life." When, still against
Playboy's values, she accepts their offered bait, she pretends the
first moments to be her sister. The perfect Abigail, reconnects with
her twin sister, sees herself on the same level, being suddenly
imperfect. The housewife discovers that her husband subscribes Playboy.
"For gods sake. I subscribe to a new magazine. What's the big deal.
It's only a magazine". And to her friend: "Jimmy looks rather at a
Playboy magazine than at me". As the other two, she knew that she
crossed the line and had to pay - would she do it again? Without
family: she would. Society's values, the values of the white, the
normal, the values of men the boy's club. The housewife to her boyish
husband: "You look at me and do not see me. Where is the promise for
better and worse?" Her best friend, believing all is a joke, that she
never would do it, asks what choice they have as married women: if you
choose this you must sacrifice that.
The message: when the stockbroker tells her mother what her daughter has done. "Why didn't you ask for the 500 dollars?" "Five hundred dollars I make at work in five minutes. I did it for me. Just for me." Her mothers values are questioned: "What do you want of me, my approval? Well, I can't give you that." And when her daughter asks for her just-once-understanding her mother, she herself an exploited piece of furniture, answers: "Alright. Help me understand." Her boss at work: "I'm not firing you; even if I want. I do not need a lawsuit. I don't think you are very happy working here from now on." Easy are other instruments that she quits of free will. Janet admits that she has today a better sense as a woman, that she had the courage to tell Michael what she wanted.
And that she knows: "The rules for men and women are very different. I learned it the hard way."
Described by Slavoj Zizek. It is the obscene other side, the dark side of the Superego. Rob Reiner has it in the movie A Few Good Men. Everybody knows the red code. But not allowed to pull it into daylight. Used when the ethic code of togetherness is in danger. The official, written Law vs the 'obscene' unwritten Law - the spoken traumas sound of the Superego. For a short moment the three "Few Good Women" limelighted the Behind behind the veil.
Disregarding the French Civil Code Book (1804) § 340 Scrutiny as to paternity is forbidden... But: ... § 341 Scrutiny as to maternity is admissible.The (fe-) male director Stephen Stafford, ends the TV-play with the following text "Altough inspired by three true stories, certain characters, names, places and events have been created or altered for (male) dramatic purposes."
Seeing recently, September 2015, the movie again together with my Colombian sister: we believed that the 'hollywoodending' was needed but: ... not necessary.
|Plot summary||Ratings||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|