Harlan Ellison once reviewed the film, basically saying that it was a sexist piece of garbage. After watching it again, I have to agree.

Michael Douglas cheats on his wife, thinks that the Alex Forest charactor is just some slut who will forget about him once it is over. He encourages her love and feigns outrage at her obsession with him later. He does have a chance to break it off the first time, but he is the one who decides to cheat again with Alex. Alex then gets the impression that he is starting to dig her. This is when the obsession, later insanity begins.

The main sexism is the fact that a man can cheat on his wife, throw another woman away and think that he can get away with it. With women there are emotions involved--men know this, but their dicks take over. Forest even says at the beginning--"shouldn't you be with your wife.? She gives him an out, but he cheats, not once, but twice. The fact that Alex goes insane is just sexist twaddle--the idea that women are all just crazed beasts, and it justifys what Douglas later does to her. The insanity is a tacked on plot point to give Douglas an out for his awful behavior. Cheating on his wife is not the worst thing ever, but the idea that he should be punished for it is bullshit. The film makes you feel sorry for him instead of feeling sorry for her. She is the victim, not him.

The whole film just stinks. I refuse to ever watch it again.

2freaky4church1 said:

life on film.....

scary, isnt it?

Do u agree?

2freaky4church1 said:

Women were taking their men to see that movie when it came out.

Many thrillers/horror movies are exaggerated morality tales. That was the point of the movie. It was all about choices made. Without Glenn Close going postal, you basically have Closer, but the thrust of the movie was to put the guy through it for making a bad choice. And it also teaches you that the people (and pets) around the guilty spouse suffer the most.

I understand what you're saying, though.

Have you seen the alternate ending? I don't want to give it away, but it may change your mind on the movie.

I didn't feel sorry for him in the least. His wife? Yes. His daughter? Yes. But not him. And I really didn't think that was the angle. I thought it was more of a 'see what you get when you cheat?' type thing. It may have been sexist, but was it real? Is not much of what we encounter in life sexist?

I think Douglas' character was absolutely sexist, but I'm not so sure about the narrative itself. Close's character is deeply disturbed (likely by way of an earlier sexual trauma... probably at the hands of a male), but she's not completely unsympathetic (especially given the original ending). Douglas, by the end, looks just as much the villain, and he's emasculated when his wife proves the force that would ultimately save his life.

In that sense, the real victims and the ultimate hero are women. In contrast, villainy is male.

Yeah...ok...Michael Douglas' character in the movie was a cheating dawg, but I distinctly recall that she was just as eager and aggressive about the pursuit, even after she knew he was married...she was NOBODY'S innocent victim who was preyed upon by a predator...she went her crazy ass willingly along the road to debauchery with him...

...so cry me a river of tears for her crazy ass....the rabbit was the only thing that got my sympathy in that movie....

Yes, isn't what most of what Hollywood puts out sexist?!!

reneGade20 said:

Don't forget the little girl.

Lammastide said:

True...not only is her perspective on trusting relationships fucked, but anytime she walks by a , she'll