The Subtle Sexism that Entertains us
I had the opportunity, recently, to finally watch the 2011 version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. This is the Sony Pictures release of the film sometimes called the “American Version” or the “English Language Version” of the film. The film is based on the novel by Stieg Larsson, that was published in 2005, not long after his death. Interestingly enough, the title of the novel, when it was published, was: Män som hatar kvinnor which translates to “Men Who Hate Women.”
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009 Movie Poster)
Let me state a few things up-front:
I went to see The Girl with a Dragon Tattoo, Swedish Language Version, in an independent movie theater when it was released in 2009. For the rest of this essay, I will call it the “Swedish Version.”
I was so impressed with the story and the film, that I read all three books (initially called the Millenium Trilogy, and later Millenium).
I also saw the second and third films (both in Swedish) in the theaters and purchased a box set of all the extended versions of the films shown on Swedish television. All three of the original Swedish movies remain some of my all time favorite films.
When the 2011 version of the film (Directed by David Fincher, starring Daniel Craig and Rooney Mara) came out, I was disappointed that they had to “remake” the film for an American audience. For the rest of this essay, I will call this version the “American Version.” I watched it just a few weeks ago on Netflix for the first time.
This essay is about the fact that American entertainment is infused with subtle sexism that, ultimately, shapes our perspectives of women. It contributes to inequality and, I believe, it is something we should all take more time to be aware of. It is my assertion that we cannot begin to come to terms with any “-ism” until we begin to identify and try to address the subtle nature of things that happen in everyday life that contribute to its presence.
I am focused on the entertainment we consume, and have been consuming, in abundance particularly since lockdowns began in early 2020. The business of films, streaming content (let’s call this television), and traditional broadcast television is no stranger to characters and dialogue that are ridiculous, totally unbelievable, or just plain insulting to the viewer. Some brilliant wannabe actors and comedians have done some wonderful parodies of clichés, tropes, and just plain ridiculous characters that we see all the time but don’t think too much about. My favorite is probably Natalie Walker’s take on women’s roles in movies. If you haven’t seen her short videos (check out the Vulture article about it here), it is pretty brilliant along with others who are doing the same. I have found that I don’t often pick up on the subtle nuances of dialogue, casting, wardrobe, and cinematography that can shape those messages that aren’t obvious. And this wasn’t something I gave too much thought about, other than an eye roll when it was incredibly obvious.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011 Movie Poster)
Then I watched the American Version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. You know how people say there are things you can’t “unsee?” Well that’s what happened to me with this movie. This is not a review of either movie. The American Version was positively reviewed (link to the reviews here from Rotten Tomatoes). It also had a decent showing at the box office. Many of the reviewers believed it to be better than the Swedish Version. I disagree. I selected this movie because you have two very different perspectives of the main female character in two different takes of the same exact movie, released only two years apart. Both movies were written and made by men, so I am not arguing that women writers or filmmakers would be less sexist. Because they were released so closely in time (two years), we are able to control for variations in societal perspectives about gender, sex, and women’s roles in society because the sensibilities of the average world citizen were not vastly different in 2009 than they were in 2011.
By comparing the movies side-by-side and eliminating the variables that might explain the elements that I deem are sexist, I believe it is easier to pick up and appreciate the subtleties that we might not otherwise be aware of. I am strictly focused on how the American Version has a number of elements that are all, however subtle, sexist in that they diminish the female character and her representation in the film. I have selected a few examples to illustrate my point.
Who is the Movie About?
In the Swedish Version and the book, the main character of this story is Lisbeth Salander or the girl with that dragon tattoo. This is reinforced by the second and third movies (and books) in this series which focus on her relationship with her father and then her trial for murder. The story of Mikeal Blomkvist, in the Swedish Version and the novel, is really a plot device to bring Salander into a world that she had, previously, not been a part of. The Swedish version has her playing, arguably, the most important role in identifying the back story of the Vanger family and what actually happened to Harriet. Specifically, I want to point out one important plot point here:
There is a list of names and, what looks like, phone numbers written in the back of Harriet’s diary that Blomkvist and the police—who did the original investigation—could not figure out what they meant.
Salander is the one who discovers, and anonymously shares with Blomkvist, the fact that the names are the names of murder victims and the numbers refer to passages in the bible.
The fact that Salander and Blomkvist have to work together to follow the clues brings them closer in an awkward romance consistent with what we know about Salander. In this version, Salander is definitely Batman to Blomkvist’s Robin.
In contrast, the American Version portrays Blomkvist working mostly on his own and the focal point of most of the drama. The way the American Version has Blomkvist discover the plot point about the murder victims is Blomkvist’s daughter, who is visiting. She tells him that the numbers are passages from the bible. Taking Lisbeth out of the equation as the person who finds the critical clue that leads to solving the final case. The American Version is, without a doubt, a story about Blomkvist and Salander is the supporting character here.
The Character of Mikael Blomkvist
I am going to put aside who gets top billing in both movies, because in each movie it is the male lead. I believe that, in both cases, Daniel Craig and Michael Nyqvist were the “bigger stars” cast and therefore probably had the fact they would get top billing put into their contracts as is the custom in most filmmaking ventures. However, I want to focus on the fact that the two representations of the characters couldn’t be more different. I would add that reviewers of the novel have brought up that Larsson, in his novel, intended to expose the, “the incompetence and cowardice of investigative journalists.”
In the Swedish Version, Blomkvist is clearly a past his prime journalist who is a victim of his own rash behavior (he goes to prison in this version as a result of the defamation case). I would describe him as being “schleppy.” While possessing some oddly lovable qualities, he is a mix of college professor and the ex-womanizer who is mostly skeezy in middle age (and was equally skeezy as a younger man). The Swedish Version’s Blomkvist is, most definitely, not the typical leading man seen in films and television. He is not physically fit, he dresses a decade or two behind the current trends, and comes across as if he has a much higher opinion of his attractiveness than pretty much anybody else. There is a scene where he is walking around the cabin in a pair of ill-fitting tighty-whities and a shirt that accentuates his expanded mid-section. I think this is intentional and an important aspect of the story. Blomkvist’s most redeeming trait is his commitment to justice and truth. Which comes through in Salander’s research on him and, I believe, is the reason she finds him attractive. Salander’s world view is shaped by continual injustices and abuses against her. Blomkvist’s drive for justice is something that resonates with Salander’s own world view.
The American Version, takes a very different approach. I, for one, am a big fan of Daniel Craig and consider him to be the best Bond in film. I am not here to argue that he was a poor cast for the role, but from the very beginning his Blomkvist gives the audience a very different impression. If you choose to watch the film, pay special attention to the wardrobe selected for Craig’s Blomkvist. From his suit in the beginning to the cuffed jeans, layered vests and sweaters over a stylish t-shirt, winter coat that is both stylish and tailored, to the beanie—properly slouched off the back of his head—and scarf—perfectly wrapped around his neck. He is the picture of the Burberry Man, through and through (While I am making it sound like I am “in the know” about fashion, I am really not. I am more the Swedish Blomkvist than the American Blomkvist when it comes to fashion and style!). Even his underwear—black briefs—are stylish and fit his majestically shaped ass perfectly (yeah, it’s pretty majestic). Which leads me to his completely shaved, beautifully sculpted body. A man of his age (somewhere between 45 and 55), has to work pretty damn hard to look that perfect. Nothing about the American Version of Blomkvist is “schleppy.” At the climax of the American Version, you have a hard time believing that Craig’s Blomkvist would really be overpowered to find himself bound.
So why is the character of Blomkvist an example of the sexism? In this case, the filmmaker responsible for the American version has specifically created a character to be the lead in every aspect. The Swedish Version provides the contrast of the actual hero, a very strong woman who is street-wise and pretty bad-ass, against the past-his-prime, schleppy, middle-aged man. Salander is someone who has survived on her wits and suffers unspeakable horrors and abuse in the film, but remains strong throughout. That contrast is important to her identity as a strong female character. At no time in the Swedish Version did I believe that Salander couldn’t easily beat the crap out of Blomkvist.
The American Version presents a Blomkvist that, from the start, is the leader. Even to the point of the visit to London to spy on Harriet, where Salander and her hacker friends are characterized as Blomkvist’s crew of henchmen while he leads their covert activities.
The Sex Scene
Sexual Agency is an important concept that I will explore in future essays, and is something I want to explore in relation to the two depictions of Salander in each film. If you are considering the narrative arc of Salander in what you see both onscreen and through the clues you get about her that you don’t see, her Sexual Agency is a contrast to the rape scene and sexual abuse she experiences at the hands of someone who has power over her. We know that the author of the source material, Stieg Larsson, was inspired by the real gang-rape of a 15 year old girl (there is debate about if he was there, or heard the story second hand) to create the character of Lisbeth Salander. Both the book and the Swedish Version of the film, given their focus on Salander as the protagonist, attempt to tell a story of a young woman who has suffered abuse and tragedy at the hands of institutions and the men in her life. Thus the title of the book being: “Men Who Hate Women.” In the Swedish Version, Salander’s ability to have sexual agency is important to the film’s narrative thread and also provides the viewers with a plausible reason for greater connection between Salander and Blomkvist.
Noomi Rapace and Michael Nyqvist as Salander and Blomkvist
The scene itself in the Swedish version is important because it shows Salander being the one who initiates sexual contact and, to the viewer, uses Blomkvist to achieve her own orgasm. She then ends the act before he has his own orgasm. The scene is awkward and a little uncomfortable to watch. It captures the essence of Salander’s character and makes perfect sense because she has been, in effect, stalking Blomkvist for an extended period of time before they are even together in the cabin. The Swedish Version provides us with a very realistic depiction of someone who has built up emotional barriers to prevent greater harm from the emotional damage of relationships. The sex is decidedly not sexy (although I could be convinced that it is very sexy in a perverse way). What is also expertly done in this scene is how the character of Blomkvist reacts to this experience with Salander. He is surprised and perplexed throughout all of it. Appearing afraid to do much more than following where Salander is leading.
The American Version is completely different. First, the viewer is not given as much insight into Salander’s fascination with Blomkvist. You do not see the extent to which she researched him and kept monitoring his activity on his laptop. Because they haven’t been working together very much, the reason for her desire to engage him sexually seems odd, at best, or contrived, if I am being cynical. Most importantly, the sex scene itself begins with Salander’s initiation, but then Craig’s Blomkvist quickly takes control once the act begins by flipping Salander over and climbing on top of her. An act, that I would argue, might solicit a negative response from Salander (if the American Version were attempting to remain true to the character as written in the book and in the Swedish Version). This is important, because whatever sexual agency that Salander begins with at the start of the scene in the American Version, is removed once he rolls over and takes charge. The movement itself reminded me of the kissing scene from, “From Here to Eternity” a 1953 film.
NOTE: That’s a pretty old reference. I haven’t seen this movie, but I remember the scene as it has been used numerous times over the years in all sorts of different ways. I am not into old movies, so my interpretation of the scene may be misguided. It just reminded my of it because the woman seems to kiss the man first, then, after they run to the towel on the beach, he climbs on top and becomes the aggressor.
Salander’s Mother
The story arc of Salander’s childhood and both her and her mother’s abuse at the hands of her father is an important narrative thread which informs and helps shed light on the relationships she has with men in power. Both the Swedish Version of the film and the novel delve into this. It complicates Salander’s narrative and presents the viewer with a very clear picture of a woman, herself the victim of abuse, who was unable to protect her daughter. It shapes Salander’s world view and provides a thread that links to the next novels and Swedish Versions of the movies that follow. In my opinion, it provides the viewer with detailed information about why Salander is who she is in the movie. We also see Salander care for her mother and show tenderness to the feeble woman who no longer is in full possession of her faculties. This level of detail is important for the viewer to see Salander as the flawed protagonist of this story. I think it also helps to solidify the viewers appreciation of Salander even if we don’t share the same upbringing and experiences of the character we are watching on the screen. Especially if we don’t agree with her actions. We can still feel for her and respect her life choices, her strength, and her vulnerability.
In contrast, the American Version, shares very little of the back-story and removes all of those contradicting elements that makes Salander’s character complex and interesting. I agree that Rooney Mara’s acting is excellent, but the filmmaker never puts her at the center of this film as he did with Craig’s Blomkvist. Which, ultimately, leaves the viewer seeing Salander as there to further Blomkvist’s journey. Rather than the other way around. I believe, this is opposed to the intent of the novel.
Erika Berger
Erika Berger, Blomkvist’s lover and business partner, plays an important role in both the Swedish Version and novels. As a foil to Blomkvist, she is rational and business minded when it comes to the consequences that his actions have on the stability of the magazine. The character is an intelligent and capable woman who has what we might describe as a polyamorous relationship with two men she cares about. The Swedish version presents her as both an empowered women professionally, personally, and, most importantly, emotionally. The viewer has the impression, in the Swedish Version, that without Berger, Blomkvist might be working at an electronics store selling old radios. All of this is subtext, but if you look for it, you can see it pretty clearly.
In contrast, the American Version has reduced Berger to a plot device to help with exposition. It is hard to have any opinion about her because there really is very little that she adds to the story. I would argue, without any context of the book or the Swedish Version, the viewer might actually be at a loss of why she is sleeping with Blomkvist. Other than the fact that he has an amazing body. Which, to be honest, I would probably sleep with him for that reason alone as well. I love Robin Wright, despite her limited range as an actress. Everything she is in, I love watching. I think she was wasted in this film. The American Version has done a disservice to the important role Berger plays in Blomkvist’s life and the eventual resolution of the story.
Why Should You Care?
As I said at the beginning (and in the title of this essay) sexism in entertainment can be subtle. Look no further than the need to portray Gal Gadot in the new Wonder Woman 1984 movie wearing wedge heel boots as part of her primary Wonder Woman Costume and in the Gold Winged Costume (I have not seen the movie). But see for yourself:
In this photo, you can clearly see Gal Gadot wearing wedge heel boots.
In this photo, that appears to be part of the same sequence in the White House, what is clearly the stunt woman (the size of her thighs and arms are clearly more muscular than Gal Gadot) is wearing a VERY flat shoe. One would assume that the reason for this is so that she doesn’t break her ankle when she lands on her feet after the flip.
While I do not have a photo of her shoes in the Gold Wing Suit from the movie, the wedge heel is a part of the collectible action figure being sold. See for yourself.
I won’t bore you with the tactical and safety reasons for not wearing heels in battle. I will point out the fact that heels are, in their own way, a tool to feminize women in a manner that is the antithesis of the “battle ready warrior.” Something Wonder Woman is supposed to be.
NOTE: I love heels and appreciate it when a woman wears them if she is choosing to wear them because she wants to. But I can see how they have no place in a fight, battle, or even when a woman has to get somewhere at a full sprint.
My argument is simply that the subtle elements of sexism in our entertainment should be things we watch for and call out. Hold the people who are responsible for our entertainment accountable to being better and doing everything in their power to not let these things slip past their notice. Examples abound all over the place and you don’t have to look hard to find them. Recognize them, and call them out when you see them. Like micro-aggressions, these subtleties only serve to further stereotypes and misconceptions. They reinforce the negative and make it harder for women to find equal footing in a society where the balance of power is not in their favor.
To the men who end up reading this (let’s hope someone reads it!). We owe it the ideal of an equal and just society to stand up for the principles of equality and fairness. A truly equal society benefits both men and women.
- M
Copyright © 2021 - Malcolm Bolivar. All Rights Reserved.