MYST #6: Winter's Bone

OK, if this film isn't bleak, I don't know what is; and I mean that in the best way possible.
My parents adore Jennifer Lawrence (I find her a bit overrated), so I found myself situated on the floor of the family TV room with a bowl of freshly-popped stove-top popcorn this past weekend prepared to watch one of her movies of their choosing. I was totally surprised to discover that "Winter's Bone" is not a glamorous, grand affair like "The Hunger Games", but is in fact rewarding, nuanced, genuine, and even hopeful. Written and directed by Debra Granik, "Winter's Bone" holds a 94% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and was nominated for Best Picture at the 2011 Academy Awards. The budget of the film was two million dollars and, true to independent form, opened in only a handful of screens, four to be exact. Today, the film has grossed nearly fourteen million dollars.

The film is set in the American Ozarks and details the life of the dirt-poor Dolly family. Seventeen-year-old Ree (Jennifer Lawrence) takes care of her mentally ill mother and younger siblings while her meth-manufacturing father, Jessup, is absent. Ree learns that her father, scheduled for a court appearance, has completely disappeared, skipping his bail as a result, and put up their house and property as collateral for his bond. To protect her family from eviction, Ree must locate Jessup, but the members of the community that she turns to for help are unwilling to grant any information and seem to adhere to a strict code of silence. Ree's uncle, Teardrop, suggests that her father is most likely dead, but with no evidence, no clear truth is known and Ree refuses to capitulate.

An element of the film that deeply struck me was the establishment of the horrid economic conditions of the Ozark region. The movie was shot on location and focuses on a society which I had no idea even existed. America is rarely portrayed as anything but a land of plenty, even if a movie includes hints of poverty, but "Winter's Bone" incorporated no suggestions of wealth among any of its characters. Even the meth dealers don't have money, and they produce the drugs in dilapidated shacks that could potentially combust at any moment due to lack of proper equipment. The Missouri landscape appears catastrophic with garbage, made up of dated appliances and commodities that people could perhaps once afford, building up around the homes of the community members. There are no simplistic stereotypes or cliches; the problems faced by Ree are realistic, such as having to care for children and a sick mother with no financial ability, proper education, or parental guidance to help her claw her way out of the situation. Where the family's food and water will come from is a constant concern, and Ree teaches her six-year-old sister how to hunt squirrels. This is actually common in the real Ozarks. In the 2010s, this seems ridiculous, and the fact that such a lifestyle is normal in a region not so far away from where I live in Illinois is jarring. It makes me feel slightly embarrassed for the trivialities I worry over while these people deal with much more brutal conditions as simply a fact of life.

The film culminates in a disgusting scene that made my skin crawl. Ree is taken out onto a frozen

lake by the women of her community to the site where her father's body was disposed of. Leaning over into the marshy water, Ree grasps her decaying father's arms and saws them off to bring to the town sherif, prove Jessup's murder, and save her family from having everything taken from them. The climactic scene begs the question of what would audience members be willing to do for their families? Would they be able to endure such fear as to take desperate action and handle the body of a deceased loved one? The idea of the emotional torment is enough to make me want to turn away from the screen and cover my eyes.

I give this film 4/4 stars!

MYST# 5: Gladiator

After hearing various lovers of this movie, both guys and girls, insist that I watch it, I decided to see what all the fuss was about. Directed by Ridley Scott, who also directed one of my favorite movies, "Alien", "Gladiator" holds a 76% on Rotten Tomatoes, an 8.5/10 on IMDB, and won five Academy Awards, which include Best Picture and Best Actor. I'll admit, I definitely enjoyed the movie, and it earns bonus points from me for being a historical drama. The action sequences were unblinking and enthralling, the villains were ruthless, the history was more accurate than expected, and the performances were stellar, but I can't help but wince a bit at the fact that the movie is pure Hollywood escapism. I cannot say that the film is particularly profound, but I must acquiesce that for the "sword & sandal" tale of glory that it was created to be, it is pretty epic.

The story of "Gladiator" follows the undefeated general, Maximus Decimus Meridius (Russell Crowe), who is beloved by his soldiers, the Roman people, and the aging emperor, Marcus Aurelius

Aurelius and Commodus

(Richard Harris). Aurelius, aware that his death is drawing near, entrusts Maximus to succeed him as the heir of the empire, over his own son, Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix), and to pass power from the Caesars to the Senate. Enraged and denied, Commodus murders his father and orders the execution of Maximus and his family. Maximus escapes, but is unable to save his family and is captured as a slave, sentenced to become a gladiator and entertain the masses through shows of bloodshed. Eventually, the fallen general and his fellow gladiators are brought to Rome to fight in the Collosseum. Maximus devotes himself to winning over the citizens of Rome so as to earn his freedom, exact revenge upon the corrupt emperor, and fulfill the last wish of Aurelius.

"Gladiator" utilizes historical figures and events to flesh out its background. Marcus Aurelius, for example, truly did rule until his death in 180 AD and is known as the last of the "Five Good Emperors" of Rome and a Stoic philosopher. Germanic and barbarian tribes were presenting themselves as a problem for the Roman Empire during this time period, which can be seen at the beginning of the movie when Maximus leads his legions against such a coalition of groups. After having done some more extensive research, another accuracy surfaced in the film's depiction of

Commodus battles Maximus in the Collosseum

Commodus. He was despised by the senate and was a complete megalomaniac, though he remained popular with the common people, especially for his obsession with the gladiatorial games. Much like in the film, Commodus did fight in the Collosseum, but it was to a far greater extent than shown in "Gladiator". He was cruel and sadistic, once ordering all of the cripples and "undesirables" of Rome to be thrown into the arena and forced to hack each other to death. What I find most interesting about the movie, however, is its portrayal of the brutality and corruption that riddled the Roman Empire. There are a good number of films that portray the society as a peaceful, philosophic republic, which is an over-romanticized notion. Life in the ancient world was filthy and gory and there were many ways which a person could be excruciatingly maimed or killed. War, not diplomacy, was the favored way of keeping empires strong and dissenters and deviants were exterminated to undermine opposition. Emperors and senators alike were even out of each others blood; conspiring assassinations and holding false elections to place new rulers in power.

Personally, my favorite part of the movie was Phoenix's outstanding villain, Commodus, who is a lost soul of cunning and vindictiveness; pitiful, yet detestable. I'd only seen Phoenix in the movies "The Village" and "Signs" before watching "Gladiator" and I couldn't remember those performances, but his acting in "Gladiator" blew me away. One of his scenes that stood out most to me occurs near the end of the film. Commodus has discovered his sister, Lucilla, and Maximus's plot against him and threatens Lucilla and her son with death if she does not obey and love him. The ease with which he quietly states his ultimatums is downright creepy, showing how he has no qualms with doing wrong, which ultimately serves to portray him as a foil to the heroic Maximus. Commodus is so disconnected from his family that he harbors incestuous love for his sister and demands that she provide him with an heir of "pure blood". As the scene builds, the camera places itself in Lucilla's position of powerlessness, looking up at Commodus as he looms over her and screams "Am I not merciful!"

Overall, I give this movie 3.5/4 stars.

FFS #2: Main Characters with Mental Illnesses

In modern America, society seems to be fixated on being perfect. Magazines dominated by

airbrushed models, television shows whose content is a competition to see which contestant can lose the most weight, and advertisements trying to convince consumers that purchasing a product will result in them acquiring sexy friends and a sleek car assault the average citizen every day. However, behind the "perfect" media fabrications lies a destructive condition known as perfectionism. Perfectionism, psychologically speaking, is a personality trait characterized by striving for flawlessness, setting excessively high standards, and overly critical self-evaluations and concerns regarding others' opinions. For a perfectionist, life is an infinite downward spiral of never truly being able to achieve an ideal existence, which most often causes them to sink into depression or develop other psychological disorders. For this formal film study, I focused on the critiquing of American perfectionism through three main characters who experience forms of psychosis as a consequence of their futile pursuit of unreachable perfection: Patrick Bateman of American Psycho, Nina Sayers of Black Swan, and Jay Gatsby of The Great Gatsby.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YnGhW4UEhc
Review: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/american-psycho-2000

In American Psycho, directed by Mary Harron, a wealthy banking executive in Manhattan, Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale), hides his psychotic mannerisms from his colleagues and friends while descending deeper into his instability. Bateman obsesses to a ridiculous level, which can actually be considered humorous, over his body, clothes, reservations at the most luxurious restaurants, money, apartments, and even the look of his business cards. Though he is violently antisocial, murderous, and experiences a personality disorder, Bateman is intended to be a perfectionist "yuppie" (a male focused on elite perfection) satire. When the audience is first given an in-depth introduction to the main character, Bateman takes viewers through an explanation of his daily morning routine where he describes his efforts to maintain an ideal appearance through exfoliation, anti-aging products, "a balanced diet and a rigorous exercise routine", and ice packs to remove any hints of puffiness from his face. His apartment is modern and elegant, but as the audience later finds out, it isn't as nice as Paul Allen's (Jared Leto) Central Park flat. Allen's new business card is also better, at which Bateman is horrified and remarks in a sweaty daze, "Oh my God, it even has a watermark." His efforts to be top dog fail and he

resolves to wipe out the competition; preferred weapon, an axe. Bateman gets Allen drunk and invites him over to his apartment, supposedly for drinks. He puts on the song "Hip to be Square" by Huey Lewis and the News, during which his perfectionist critiquing, this time of the music, continues. The scene ends with Bateman dancing around and swinging a beautifully polished axe at Allen. As more people get in the way of Bateman achieving perfection and success, the more bodies begin to pile up. The message of "down with perfectionism" can be witnessed written in blood in Bateman's closet: "Die Yuppie Scum".


Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jaI1XOB-bs
Review: http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/black-swan-review-a-second-opinion/

In Black Swan, directed by Darren Aronofsky, ballet dancer Nina Sayers (Natalie Portman) wins the dual lead role of Odette, the white swan, and Odile, the black swan, in her ballet company's production of Swan Lake. From the beginning of the film, the viewer is able to see that Nina is driven by her obsession with performing the perfect dance. I was a ballerina once, and what I garnered from my experience was the pain and criticism that came with staring into mirrors for hours, while the strict instructor screeched at the dancers and whacked the "lazy" ones with a ruler, and becoming preoccupied with whether someone could pirouette more precisely or had longer, more delicate legs than I did. Black Swan perfectly captured the brutality of ballet and the psychological effects that it can impose on young women. First off, Nina's anxiety disorder manifests in bulimia and anorexia. She barely eats, consuming only half of a grapefruit for breakfast, and she refuses to touch any "dangerous" foods. For instance, Nina turns down the cake that her mother brings home to celebrate her getting the lead role in the ballet, but finally tastes a tiny bit of frosting with an expression of pure disgust playing over her face. She is also shown purging in bathrooms several times in the film, because she knows that she absolutely cannot gain any weight and risk not fitting into her costume. Adding to this, the constant stress of not living up to the company leader's expectations causes Nina to become delusional as well as convinced that a competing ballerina, Lily (Mila Kunis) is out to get her. Knowing the jealousy that exists in the world of dance, this is quite possible, but never proven. Nina's

desire to be the only perfect prima ballerina culminates in her slamming her rival into a mirror, seemingly killing her. On stage, at the end of the performance, it is actually revealed that the incident never occurred and Nina ended up stabbing herself with glass from the broken mirror. As she lays dying, Nina claims that she was perfect, showing that she thinks she achieved her goal, but gave up her life to do so.


Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rARN6agiW7o
Review: http://www.richardroeper.com/reviews/thegreatgatsby.aspx

Directed by Baz Luhrmann, The Great Gatsby tells the story of Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) and his meeting the mysterious Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio) when he moves to West Egg in New York. Gatsby is obsessed with his lost love, Daisy (Carey Mulligan) who lives just across the bay from him in the elite East Egg. While he may just seem to be a man who desires the happiness he had in the past, Gatsby is in fact a pathological narcissist. His ego, grandiose lies, lack of connection with reality, sense of entitlement, and his disregard for the feelings of others become overpowering and destructive by the end of the film, ultimately ending in his death. Gatsby's pursuit of perfection deals with him perfecting himself for Daisy in every single detail. He bootlegs to amass a great fortune, constructs a monstrous mansion worthy of a king, and throws fabulous parties hoping to attract her

attention. He also believes that he is entitled to have Daisy, actually going to far as to see himself as a "son of God", due to which he also in convinced that he can repeat the past. When Nick tells him that such a thing cannot be done, Gatsby insists, "Why of course you can!" Not only does Gatsby wish himself to be perfect, he places Daisy up on the perfection pedestal as well. To him, she symbolizes the purity and wealth that he yearned for since he was a young farm boy, but she ends up not being the ghost that Gatsby designed her to be in his fantasies, which robs Gatsby of his will to live as he realizes that the perfection he chased is not real at all.

Overall, I can understand the message that perfectionism is disastrous and unreasonable, and I completely agree that such an attitude will lead to anxiety and even disorders, having had friends who experienced such an unfortunate circumstance. Perhaps the thing to take away from these movies is a focus on self-acceptance rather than criticism, and the realization that flaws are a natural aspect of humanity.

MYST #4: The Grey

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfb0-U0ydj8

Having seen other films starring Liam Neeson, such as "Taken" and "Nonstop", I was expecting a tale of an anti-hero bent on survival who would be beating the living daylights out of a bunch of bloodthirsty wolves for the duration of the story. However, I was pleasantly surprised to find that the movie is actually quite philosophical, spiritual, and a bit artsy, along with its gripping action sequences. Some may comment that this is simply another "Jaws" knockoff, inserting a furry killing machine instead of a finned one, but this is not the case. Indeed, the featured wolf pack is chilling, but

they are only present to advance the main conflict: an ironic man vs. self situation in which a suicidal man battles for his life so as to confront his inner demons and find answers to humanity's most daunting questions. Why are we here? Is there a life after death? Do we need a reason to live? And what matters most to us when we look death in the eyes?

During his last night at an oil pumping station, where he has been hired as a sharpshooter to fend off the occasional rogue wolf, John Ottway (Neeson) sits in a bar full of unruly, brawling workers as he mulls over a suicide letter that he had written to his wife who has left him. He's starkly disconnected from the other men, seemingly the only honorable figure amongst a horde of felons, ex-convicts, "men unfit for mankind". Ottway is composed, hopeless, and seeking an escape from society and any company outside of his own introspection. Having deemed his life empty and meaningless, he is later seen holding the barrel of a rifle in his mouth, ready to pull the

trigger, but is halted by a distant chorus of howling wolves. The next morning, Ottway and a number of other workers take off on a flight to anchorage, where they never arrive since the plane crashes, leaving most passengers dead and the remaining seven, stranded in the Alaskan wilderness. The cold is not their only adversary, though, as the local wolves see the humans as a threat to their territory and begin picking them off one by one. The once reserved Ottway takes charge of the broken men, suggesting that they make for the forest instead of remaining in the open, even though it seems certain that they are only putting off their inevitable demise.

What I enjoyed watching the most was the mirroring between the dynamics within the wolf pack and those of the survivors. For instance, the commanding alpha wolf, the most psychologically or physically capable male, calls all the shots for his followers. In this case, that means deciding whether or not the time is right to end the humans' lives. At the bottom of the wolf hierarchy resides the omega, who is the most marginalized and lacks any individual privileges. Omegas are, generally, the most likely member of a pack to challenge the alpha, which occurs during a scene in the movie where, after having opted to observe the humans instead of kill them, the alpha puts down a dissenter who attempts to attack Ottway's group. The audience then witnesses a similar incident where the arrogant tough-guy, Diaz (Frank Grillo), challenges Ottway, the human alpha male. The tension between the two finally erupts when Diaz draws a knife, but Ottway swiftly bests him, pinning him to the ground and practically snarling in his face. The alpha wolf interrupts the two, though, and having singled out Diaz as the weakest link, takes a step forward to assert his own dominance; Diaz reacts by backing away. By relating human and wolf, director Joe Carnahan is able to illustrate that human beings are truly animals when you expose their true colors.

There has been a lot of backlash against "The Grey" for its portrayal of wolves. Environmentalists accuse the movie of showing these animals in an unrealistic manner that is much too brutal and have made a point to boycott it. Wolves are my favorite animal, so I can understand the criticism, but I believe that they are missing the point. The movie does not revolve around the idea that wolves are merciless man-eaters. The behavior of the wolves is only amplified to show the power of nature and the fear it can strike on the human psyche.

I give this movie: 3.8 / 4 stars

MYST #3: Thor: The Dark World

Ok, I loved the first "Thor" movie, had so much fun watching "Avengers", but, for the life of me, could not get into the second installment in which the god of thunder plays the starring role. Where the first film was energetic, had a strong story and great characters, as well as entertaining performances, I found "Dark World" to be overly silly with a horrendously lacking plot. There's some humor to be found, sure, but I grew bored quickly because, quite frankly, watching something that seems like a repeat is a bit of a yawn. The movie also appeared to be just another excuse to put a shirtless Chris Hemsworth up on the screen (looks like guys are now being objectified, too). This may entice other girls to see "Dark World", but I really couldn't care less about what the actor's muscles look like.

Here's a funnier interpretation of my feelings on the movie by Honest Trailers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eAgsrEX_CA

"Dark World" begins with the recounting of a battle that took place eons ago between the Asgardians, Thor's people, and the Dark Elves, led by Malekith (Christopher Eccleston), who desires to bring eternal darkness upon all of the nine realms of the universe using a magical weapon known as the Aether. Why does he want to do this? Why can't he just be happy with having his own realm, Svartelfheim, be in total darkness and not bother everyone else? It's not really explained, but he's willing to sacrifice his own people to do so, so I guess the audience it just expected to go along with it. The Asgardian army ends up defeating the Dark Elves, thus taking possession of the Aether and hiding it away in a place where no one is supposed to ever be able to find it. This play goes terribly awry when Jane (Natalie Portman), Thor's love interest, stumbles into it when she passes through one of the portals that have begun to appear on Earth due to the nine realms aligning, which occurs for a short time every few thousand years. The Aether then attaches to Jane, making her its host When Malekith, who went into some kind of five-thousand-year-sleep after being defeated on the battlefield, awakens and seeks out the Aether to attempt another universal domination, it ends up being Thor's job to travel back to Earth to rescue Jane and destroy the Aether.

The one thing that had me cringing the most from embarrassment (I suggested watching this movie) as I sat with my family in our TV room, was the writing. The dialog was so unrealistic and the characters were completely one-dimensional, except for Loki (Tom Hiddleston), who arguably carried the film. Many of the lines that are supposed to be funny, aren't because they're just forced. In the acting world, it's considered common knowledge that when you try really hard to be funny, it isn't going to fly. Jane's intern, Darcy, who was actually clever in "Thor", is now obnoxious in "Dark

Well, maybe there is one admirable quality about Malekith.
He has better hair than I do. Seriously, check out that braid.

World", and one of the main scenes that the movie attempts to draw laughs from is Jane's mentor running around without his pants on. The villain is deficient as well. The writers didn't give Malekith anything interesting to do or say. He walks on screen, looks around, announces that the Aether is a powerful force that belongs to him blah, blah, blah... and that's it. Nothing is revealed about his motivations and he's very static.

I mentioned Loki in the above paragraph. I sincerely think that I wouldn't have been entertained at all my the movie without his input. Aside from getting almost all of the lines with actual substance, he is the only character that seems to develop at all throughout the story and Tom Hiddleston stole the show with his performance every

time he appeared on screen. The scene that made an impression on me takes place between Loki and Thor after their mother's death. Loki, locked away in the dungeons of Asgard for his crimes during the "Avengers" time period, finally lets his facade of the aloof, untouchable antihero fall and the audience gets to see a new side of him. We realize that he's wounded and raging on the inside, agonizing over losing the one person who never gave up on him, despite his past deeds. This scene is Loki at his lowest. He is haggard, he cackles with a quality that makes him seem psychotic, and the camera looks down on him. The audience never gets the sense that he has lost any power, however. His devious grin and intense gaze hint that he has schemes already in the works.

I give this movie: 2 / 4 stars

MYST Post #2: Howl's Moving Castle

Considering that I am a huge fan of director/animator Hayao Miyazaki's work, it is shocking that it took me this long to watch "Howl's Moving Castle". Loosely based on Diana Wynne Jones' novel of the same name, "Howl's Moving Castle" holds an 84% from top critics on Rotten Tomatoes and was named the best Japanese movie overall at the 2004 Mainichi Film Awards. The film contains all of Miyazaki's talent for creating beautifully-developed characters and a fantastic story, coupled with vibrant animation and Joe Hiyashi's enchanting soundtrack, so I definitely wasn't disappointed.
(Soundtrack, Main Theme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BioNW_DNlg)

In simplest terms, "Howl's Moving Castle" is metaphorically and literally a love story between Sofie

(Emily Mortimer), a plain-looking young girl who is cursed into the form of an elderly woman (elderly Sofie is voiced by Jean Simmons) by an envious old hag, the Witch of the Waste, and Howl (Christian Bale), a mysterious wizard who lives in a peculiar residence that can walk and fly due to its being magically powered by a fire demon named Calcifer (Billy Crystal). Unable to tell anyone about the spell that she has been put under, Sofie adventures to the hills known as the "Wastes" on the outskirts of her hometown to seek out a solution. She takes refuge in Howl's castle and Calcifer, who is able to see that Sofie has been cursed, agrees to a deal saying that he will help her become young again if she is able to free him of the contract that has bound him and Howl together. During her time with Howl, Sofie is able to help him confront his inner monster, which becomes progressively more physically apparent, as well as discover her own outstanding bravery. Aside from romance, the movie deals with the themes of war, confidence, and age.

The metaphorical love story begins when Sofie, not yet cursed at this point, first meets Howl and they literally walk on air, which visually symbolizes the first feelings of infatuation at the beginning of a relationship. Howl had earlier been described by the girls of the town as handsome and having a disposition to sucking out the souls of young women; a metaphor for a player. When the Witch of the Waste, who seeks Howl's physical heart, appears before Sofie and antagonizes her, the audience is introduced to the "jealous ex-girlfriend" of the story. Sofie, damaged and belittled, ventures out into the desolate Wastes where she encounters Howl's castle, which actually symbolizes Howl himself.

The castle is a slapped-together mess with different faces that moves through the fog to hide itself and carries a substantial amount of baggage, thus making it heavy. It perfectly illustrates the way Howl constantly keeps his true self hidden due to past emotional pain. Once Sofie enters the castle and gains power over Howl's heart, represented by Calcifer, she cleans the place and brings love into Howl's life, showing how he is made into a better person by having Sofie with him. By the end of the movie,

the castle is completely remodeled and freely flies in plain sight since Howl and Sofie fall completely in love and live happily ever after.

The scene that struck me most while viewing the film was the first time in which the audience witnesses Howl participating in the war due to his being summoned by the king. Homes are ablaze below him as he flies and aerial battleships collide with each other; neither side is shown to be winning or losing. Whilst using his magic to fight, Howl takes on the form of a bird-like creature. This can also been seen happening to the other witches and wizards in the battle. They have continuously utilized their magic for evil and warfare, so they have turned into monsters and will never be able to become human again and won't be able to recall ever being human either. This scene serves to critique war, suggesting that all it serves to do is to destroy not only physical things like buildings and bodies, but psyches as well. The witches and wizards slowly turning into monsters and losing their humanity the longer they fight in the war relates to the damages inflicted on soldiers during combat in the real world. After being in a war, a person is often tormented by the events that they witnessed, or, of they have had to kill another human being, feel as if they are evil.

Despite the deeper messages woven into the story, this gorgeous movie is also very humorous. Once Sofie is cursed and begins to acclimate to her elderly form, she acquires a sassiness and confidence that produced quite a few laughs from me. My only critique is that the ending is fairly abrupt and a bit predictable.

I give this movie: 3.9 / 4 stars

FFS #1: Women in Horror Movies

 Horror often isn't as highly regarded as other film genres, even though it strongly reflects the values of a culture by revealing what scares society most. The films are filled with symbolism, especially regarding the feminine gender, which is frequently depicted in a negative or demeaning light. Being a feminist, this instantly caught my attention. True, there are films that include a heroine, but the majority also invoke the cliché stereotype of the hyper-sexualized, blonde "damsel in distress" who is the first one killed by a blood-thirsty psychopath due to some foolish mistake. In an attempt to dive further into the women's studies component of horror movies and see how women are represented in such films, I decided to watch three movies that are labeled as classics by the horror community: Psycho (1960), A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), and Carrie (1976).

Psycho is one of the jewels in renowned film director Alfred Hitchcock's crown. It ushered in the era of the "slasher" film and set new levels of toleration for violence and sexuality in American movies. Whether or not people have seen the movie, they recognize the iconic shower scene in which Marion (Janet Leigh) is stabbed by an unknown killer. The film centers around Marion Crane, a secretary whose divorced lover cannot marry her due to alimony payments he owes his ex wife, and Norman Bates, a timid, disturbed man who runs the Bates Motel and is under the control of his mother. Unhappy and unfulfilled in her relationship, Marion steals $40,000 in hopes of starting a better life.

Psycho is a story of gender and power. 

At the beginning of the film, the audience sees that Marion is trapped as a subordinate in her relationship with Sam. In one of the first shots, Marion is lying on a bed with Sam situated over her in a conventional male-dominated arrangement. Though Marion is dressed only in her white undergarments, she plays the traditional pure female by telling Sam to cease his sexual advances for the moment and listen to her as she turns the topic of their conversation to marriage, which Sam expresses aversion to, illustrating the stereotypical female desire to begin a family life. Marion, in this scene, is portrayed as virtuous, playful, yet protective of her modesty. The perfect, compliant woman. This depicts the way the horror films tend to stick to standard gender roles, with women being shown as the weaker of the sexes. Later on, though, Marion adopts a more masculine demeanor when she steals the $40,000, something that a demure lady wouldn't do. Her sexuality is played up as well as she is again shown undressed, but in a black bra this time. The message this seems to send is that when women break from their feminine gender roles and become too assertive, like a man, they become dangerous and untrustworthy. The images of Marion in her underwear also enforce the notion that women are sexual objects to be sought after. When Marion arrives at the Bates Motel, Norman Bates spies on her as she undresses, but is shy around her because of his overbearing mother. In one of their conversations during Marion's stay at the motel, Norman likens Marion to a bird, which brings the two to Norman's fascination with taxidermy. He comments that he likes the look of stuffed birds because birds possess a passive nature, but he hates when wild beasts are stuffed. This implies that women are supposed to be passive and submissive, while men are meant to, like wild beasts, be dominant and aggressive. Norman portrays the male desire for dominance in his final act towards Marion. He stabs her while she is in the shower; the ultimate assertion of power and a symbolic version of rape. Her nudity represents her powerlessness and emphasizes her femininity, reinforcing the idea that women are meant to be controlled. Hitchcock makes this event to be Marion's punishment for challenging her traditional feminine identity.

Review: http://www.timeout.com/london/film/psycho

 In A Nightmare on Elm Street, the audience gets to see a variety of opposing female roles, mainly, the virginal versus the sexual. Due to the progress of the feminist movement, we also are able to witness a strong woman in a leading role, in the form of a heroine who defeats the male villain using only her own strength and intelligence. In this film, a deceased child molester, Freddy Kreuger, who has the ability to invade peoples' dreams and cause the dreamer actual physical harm while within their mind, takes it upon himself to terrorize and murder the teenage children of the parents who burned him alive. While the main character, Nancy (Heather Langenkamp), is strong, the other female teens are killed off, though. The reason? They are sexually promiscuous. While Nancy remains a virgin throughout the entire film, her friends do not. Here we encounter the classic stock character of the pretty, sexually active girl who gets killed first. It seems as if the girls are being punished for their sexual involvement, which leads to the message that sex means death in horror movies. In the scene where Tina is shown having sex with her boyfriend, Tina later falls asleep and is ripped open by Freddy. Though the film does feature a strong female lead, the argument can be made that Nancy only is able to conquer the villain due to adopting stereotypically male traits, such as anger, aggressiveness, and independence. These characteristics set her apart from the other girls in the movie. Being more masculine, she is able to be accepted by the audience as a plausible hero. Her lack of sexual urges also helps the audience to ignore her femininity. However, none of this occurs before Nancy is sexually exploited. When Nancy falls asleep while taking a bath, Freddy's clawed hand rises up out of the water between her spread legs. She is vulnerable and powerless, similar to a traditional picture of a woman, while Freddy expresses his wish to dominate and take advantage of her. Nancy escapes, but we witness her at an emotionally weak point where the message is again sent to the viewer that women are fragile and objects of desire. Nancy is also violated when she attempts to make a phone call for help and the end of the telephone transforms into Freddy's mouth, allowing Freddy to lick her. After taking on her masculine persona, though, Nancy saves herself from the killer. Unfortunately, all is not well at the end of the movie. Our heroine ends up being killed anyway, asserting that the male gender will always be dominant.

Review: http://www.reelviews.net/php_review_template.php?identifier=993

Now, here's a fun one. In this movie, the audience is given the rare image of the female horror villain. Carrie tells the story of Carrie White (Sissy Spacek) who is abused by her religiously fanatic mother and discovers that she has telekinetic abilities. Constantly bullied in school for being naive and different, Carrie is pushed to her limit by a cruel prank on prom night and unleashes her power in a deadly fashion. At the beginning of the movie, the audience in practically assaulted with female nudity as all of the girls change and shower after gym class in the locker room. During this time, Carrie experiences her first period and, having no prior knowledge of menstruation, is convinced that she is bleeding to death and is horrified. The other girls react by jeering at her and throwing tampons and pads at the naked, humiliated girl. Carrie's nudity, like Marion's in Psycho, demonstrates the powerlessness of women. Carrie's mother's reaction to Carrie's womanhood is even worse, as she condemns her daughter, furiously accusing her of being a sinner for her feminine traits, and shoving her into a storage closet to beg Jesus for forgiveness. Here, we have an extremely intense demonization of the female sex, with Carrie's mother's opposition to feminine sexual occurrences, as well as her fanaticism. The movie seems to portray women as unstable and unclean. Carrie also appears to illustrate the male fear of menstruation, as there is a substantial amount of blood that surrounds Carrie, ultimately ensuring her connection with sin and evil. On prom night, one of the popular girls dumps a bucket of pig blood all over Carrie, sending her over the edge and into insanity. Due to her newfound rage and power, she is not able to be reasoned with and she becomes absolutely terrifying, even for the boys at the dance. The audience sees that a female killer is just as threatening as a male killer. They are supposed to be afraid of Carrie when she is portrayed as equal to a man. Carrie's rampage leads to her own death at the end of the film, showing that no good can come of a woman who asserts power.

Review: http://www.timeout.com/london/film/carrie-1976

Though the leading ladies of the three films are each unique, one implication follows them: that women are sexual objects who, if given power, should be punished. Through the horror genre, a viewer can witness the fears and stereotypes that society has for females. By killing off women in horror movies who express sexual dominance or uncharacteristic strength, it might be implied that men fear female sexuality. More modern films, though, have been more influenced by the feminist movement and are beginning to depict characters who can triumph by relying on "girl power". Since women have more influence in the world today, it is easier for filmmakers to show them, not as damsels in distress, but as heroes and even monsters, but since society is very much patriarchal and, sometimes, misogynistic, there will always be movies that feature scorn for or exploitation of women.

connecting article: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2007/apr/06/2