MovieChat Forums > Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) Discussion > Anybody else think this film was horribl...

Anybody else think this film was horribly misogynistic?

posted 16 years ago by jackdarrenhunt
47 replies | jump to latest

Joanna is an emotional basket case (verging on a psycho-stalker) who walks out on her son 'to find herself'.

Phyliss is an easy lay who gets naked and humiliated as a cheap thrill for the audience.

Margaret decides to go back to her ex-husband.

The only other women in this film is Ted's PA - who comes out of it quite well.

Having said that all the men are macho *beep*

Not really a film that shines a warm light on humanity.

That's a feckin' jazz haircut!

[–] Prom_Queen_Carrie 16 years ago

Hell no this film was a big part of feminism in cinema simply because it showed how misogynistic society can be.

People who make signatures are whores who should punch themselves and laugh

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] delmonte21 16 years ago

I completely agree. The American gaze appears to be fiendishly scathing against his womenfolk when watching this film. The ladies are idiots, the men are sensible heroes. I mean, come on.

Down with America

[–] snsurone 16 years ago

Well, I disagree! This film perfectly displayed how a woman could become successful at a career, and how a man could become equally successful as a parent. It's a film that shatters traditional gender roles.
Bravo!

[–] nek-5 12 years ago

if you live in the states, i swear - put a grenade in your mouth and chew. there is nothing worse to me than someone who badmouths his country while enjoying its freedoms and wealth

[–] RainAndTangerines 16 years ago

I actually thought it was more about the role that women have on families and how important women are because Joanna left for herself, rather than always taking care of everyone else, and pretending she was okay with being in a loveless marriage. She did eventually come back, and even though the reasons why she just up-and-left her family was not responsible on her part, she wasn't meant to be perfect, which I thought was a strong point... that everyone makes mistakes and everyone deserves a second chance.

[–] franzkabuki 16 years ago

The reasons for her leaving the family were so vague and borderline absurd as to be mere smokescreen necessary to get the plot going.

Other than that it´s a ´horribly´ manipulative, contrived tearjerker designed to sweet the ocean and win awards. Speaking of which, this sh-t being chosen as best picture over Apocalypse (as well as countless other, better films) is sheer lunacy. It´s utterly preposterous.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] Seanpdineen 15 years ago

The book explores that more. She talks an internal monoluge about how she has
struggled because her hubby is doing important work while she is dealing with her kid wanting a different kind of snack. Women were held back,
that's was feminism was about, rightfully before all this abortion stuff

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mr_Megalomaneac 15 years ago

And these are examples of the film being pro male?

Ted's boss thinking that Ted should come to the party when he had a child he had to raise. And later, simply letting him go just before Christmas and the court case.

That both the lawyer and the judge apparently seemed to think that it was a bad choice for Ted being late to a presentation and having to leave work early, because his son needed him.

Anyone who still has faith in humanity has never been to the imdb boards.

[–] okwong-e 15 years ago

The film is quite frankly far more balanced in showing how flawed and self-involved BOTH Ted and Joanna are until it both sets in that they're potentially screwing up their son for life. And as a review of the film once stated may have already done him damage despite the 'happy' ending.

The whole 'misogyny' accusation was and is only thrown at the picture due to it's huge popularity on release. There are always critics/wannabe psychologists who believe that every popular movie ever made is peddling some sort of ultra conservative, bigoted viewpoint and twist the material around to suit their conceptions.

[–] liscarkat (18910) 4 years ago

"believe that every popular movie ever made is peddling some sort of ultra conservative, bigoted viewpoint"

Who believes that? Most people realize that when movies peddle viewpoints they are almost always leftist.

[–] DingusStudley 15 years ago

It casts dudes in a pretty negative light too.

person above points out how it portrays the lawyer/boss as careless and unsympathetic towards families and kids and all that. That's real nice.

Also there's the fact that Hoffman's character is horrible with his son, at least initially. Losing his temper on several occasions, not really knowing how to deal with him.

[–] scalzmoney 15 years ago

Earlier poster was right. Streep's exit is just a plot device so they can examine the Hoffman character. And does he ever earn that Oscar in this. I think the story was both forward thinking and set it the past at the same time.

It usually isn't the mother who walks out in these stories. It usually isn't the father who winds up taking care of the kid. So in that regard the movie sort-of sets out to tell a unique story. But then they fall back to the typical, old school stuff like the way the judge handles some of the questioning.

'Do you have lover?'

'Objection!'

'Over-ruled! The witness can answer...'

Then of course, for the sake of tear-jerking the court rules against the transformed, hero dad only to have him wind up with the son at the end because the mom realizes that she's still selfish or something.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ccr1633 15 years ago

I don't see how anyone could possibly think this film hasn't aged well. The only big difference between then and now is the ease with which a woman can have an independent career. That's it. Everything else translates directly to the year 2010 and beyond.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] byteM3 14 years ago

lol, GTFO...

Killing people is easy...if you can forget the taste of sugar.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kag2-1 12 years ago

I didn't find it mysogynistic.

1) Joanna was emotionally troubled. Hardly unheard of.

2) Putting down Phyllis as an "easy lay" ignores that we don't know how long her and Ted knew each other, how many dates, etc. Besides, if she was easy, then so was Ted. And let's face it, she looked great nude.

3) Margaret seemed very decent, and I thought she and Charlie were split for good. But if not, well, going back to an imperfect spouse is hardly unheard of, and not always a bad decision.