MovieChat Forums > North Country (2005) Discussion > Soooooooooo one-sided.

Soooooooooo one-sided.

posted 18 years ago by robert-954
44 replies | jump to latest

Did it occur to anyone besides me that there were a grand sum total of two decent men in this entire movie? 99% of the men were portrayed as rapists, wife beaters, hateful harassers, raging disrespectful sons, emotionally absent and vindictive fathers, creepy leerers, and weak silent observers. Does that seem like a fair portrayal of our society to you? I know that the story was based in some part on a true story, with a whole lot of "artistic license" applied to make it a more interesting movie. But are we supposed to believe there were no decent men in that mine? Hell, in that town? A few more decent male characters, who did the right thing when they had the chance to do so, would have made this a much more realistic and interesting movie. As it was, it was just an offensive caricature of males. Imagine the outrage if Hollywood offered up a movie where every man was honorable, decent, and deserving of admiration, and every single woman was an evil, lying, violent, vindictive, careless, and murderous bitch.

Is a little fairness in the retelling of the facts of the incident too much to ask for? Oh yeah, I forgot, that wouldn't have been as popular.

[–] z01 18 years ago

I had that impression the first time I saw it. I was confused because my understanding was that the women insisted that some of the "good guys" were shown, and many people in the community were concerned that it would give them a "bad reputation."

When I saw it the second time, I realized that they did try to make a point of showing that it was only a few men who were the problem. It's really just the same three or four men involved in the incidents. A few DO step in (port-a-potty, Sherry's cigarettes) but they go un-noticed because the behavior of the few was outrageous enough to over-ride the others.

Most people just didn't get involved. That's pretty realistic. Male or female. This was also represented in the movie. The mother, the other women, they didn't want "trouble."

"people don't [crap] where they eat." as one character said.

So far as this being "unrealistic," well, hollywood, in this case, actually tamed down the incidents and left a lot of the more serious situations out.

There is a book, called Class Action, which is an account of this case based on court records, interviews, and other documents. There are also several articles available. Google "Jensen v. Eveleth Mine"

[–] SillyGayBoy 9 years ago

Just wanted to agree I have seen countless real life situations where people don't get involved and I want to look those up now. Thanks.

[–] ramzilba 18 years ago

I understand your argument, however you must realize that this is based on a TRUE story...there wasn't a whole lot of artistic license they could use. As it is, they applied much more than I thought they would. Read the book, and you'll understand why I say that. This isn't about entertainment value or popularity...they were just telling the story.

[–] Taffybird 18 years ago

Well, I've never read the book and I knew nothing about the case beforehand. "North Country" is the sum total of my exposure to the story.

I have to say I didn't get the impression that all the men were evil oppressors and all the women were tragic heroines. It was pretty clear to me that most of the men at the mine were not involved in the abuse that was going on, and many were actively opposed to it. It always seemed to be the same handful of guys who picked on the women. It was made clear that there were other guys who were prepared to step in and put a stop to it - if they were in the right place at the right time.

Surely the scene at the meeting where the hall erupts in applause when Hank gives his speech shows that most of the men agreed that what had been going on was unacceptable.

So basically, I don't agree that the movie implies that there were no decent men at the mine. It was pretty clear to me that there was just a rotten element that got away with too much for too long before someone had the courage to blow the whistle... and when she did, a lot of people, both male and female, found some courage of their own.

I saw plenty of decent guys in the film. But the story wasn't about them. It was about the nasty ones, and the women who were expected to just put up with them. That's why the emphasis was on their behaviour, rather than the good guys.

[–] weresmurf 18 years ago

My grandfather worked in the refinerys in Victoria (Australia) for over thirty years, after watching this movie, which I have to say I was pretty unimpressed with anyhow (Rather bland I thought...) I asked him about the treatment women got in general when they first started working at the ESSO refineries.

He told me the movie does about a 75 - 80 percent accurate job of what happened at his work. He said women were harassed, the bathroom thing didn't happen there, they had instances where the guys however did pour oil into their change lockers.

He said also that there were indeed a lot of men who wanted to give the women a fair go, to see if they could cut it. In general, as it's always been, it was a few who ruined it for the many on both sides of the argument. He said a few women who couldn't 'cut the mustard' as he puts it, used to bring it down for all the others, he said a few of the men who did the harassing, made everyone else look like absolute a**holes.

It's true that we did only really see one side, but in this case, I do think the movie was a very very dimmed view of what was an important issue and still is. It still happens on a much lesser scale as we know, and I really didn't think something like this which set a precedent in the legal WORLD (Not just america mind you...) should've been treated with a lot more respect than turning it into the goddamn Hallmark tv movie of the week (It really did feel like a tv movie.)

[–] mista_bone2004 18 years ago

Y'know, it's funny....I haven't seen a single person on here from the northwoods of the midwest or southern Manitoba or Ontario state their opinion, so I guess I'll be the first. I am from Wisconsin, and the northwoods of Wisconsin, upper Michigan, and northern Minnesota are all very much alike in many respects, one being iron mining as a livelihood. Hockey is a staple just as much as football. Winters suck. This is not simply a Hollywood dramataziation - this is real. Mining was very much considered a "man's job", and the women knew it. I am not taking sides, I am not saying that the men in the film were right or justified in what they did, and I'm certainly not saying that women shouldn't get a fair shake at it. If they can hack it, then more power to 'em, and there ARE a LOT of women that can. I know, I'm from here, and I've seen 'em. Some of these women I wouldn't dare get into a barfight with, because they'd kick hell outta me. Unfortunately, this type of discriminatory behavior still goes on in certain areas to a certain extent, albiet certainly not to the extent that it once did, thankfully. However, the fact remains that the women (especially the 50+ ones) in this area know where they stand. That is not intended to be a sexist remark. Anyone from up in this area understands what I mean. I applaud the women who had the courage to take on this huge undertaking and make a difference throughout the world. All they wanted to do was make an honest buck. Instead, they wound up making history.

[–] z01 18 years ago

"Y'know, it's funny....I haven't seen a single person on here from the northwoods of the midwest or southern Manitoba or Ontario state their opinion..."

I lived & worked in Northern Minnesota. So, you HAVE heard from someone, people just don't always identify themselves as such. There are others on the board, also.

"Some of these women I wouldn't dare get into a barfight with, because they'd kick hell outta me."

One of the women at a neighboring mine responded to harassment by breaking the man's ribs. Of course, no one should have to respond to such behavior with violence.

"the women (especially the 50+ ones) in this area know where they stand. That is not intended to be a sexist remark. Anyone from up in this area understands what I mean. "

I think I know what you mean...although I wouldn't phrase it as such. The original plantiff was not from the iron range. She was an outsider coming in, and seeing behavior that people who lived there had come to regard as "normal," even if "distasteful." As the case progressed, this became more and more apparent. This was also reflected in the "switching sides" in the middle of the proceedings. That wasn't "hollywood," the majority of plantiffs joined after already testifying against "glory" and "josie." They did so to keep their jobs & avoid retailiation. The case jumped from 3 plantiffs to around 30.

So far as "cutting the mustard," the issue at hand was NOT whether or not the women could do the job. They could, and at time BETTER then some of the men. The point of anti-discrimination laws is to NOT use assumptions or stereo types of one "group" of individuals to factor into employment decisions. One group cannot be held to a different standard than another based on a charateristic such as race, gender, religion, etc.

So, a woman with some sort of job performance issue cannot be treated differently than a man with a job performance issue, just because of gender. This also would happen in this case. The women were held to stricter reprimends than men for the same thing. Certainly it does not "justify" illegal discrimination.

There is no valid "argument" for "another side."

What happened at the mines was illegal. Plain & simple.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ramzilba 18 years ago

yeah, I'm from Minnesota too. The Twin Cities mainly, but I went to school in Duluth and have a cabin by Tower and relatives in Hibbing, so I've spent a fair amount of my life up there.

[–] Ichabod_Fletchman 18 years ago

I get where you are coming from. And I can see how they thought it was unfair for the women to come in take jobs that they thought were rightfully their's (I don't really agree but I can understand it). But that still doesn't justify what they did to her or how they treated her. It just doesn't.

"We have no say in the laws, yet we have to obey them like children." Alice Paul, Iron Jawed Angels

[–] ktr8rmv814 18 years ago

I didn't get that impression at all. there were both types. The good and the bad. The bad were more extreme, and it's the truth. The good does go unnoticed and the bad noticed. I loved this movie and thought it showed men, both in their best and worst characters. Also, it wasnt supposed to be a movie about the portrayal of man, it was supposed to tell a story of woman during this time who went through events like these.

VICTIM:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0479204/
Babysitter Wanted:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0819755/

[–] Tabbycat (878) 7 months ago

It’s a fair point that so many women in the film kept silent or justified the abuse.
All that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.
Same goes for good women.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Tabbycat (878) 7 months ago

“ Surely the scene at the meeting where the hall erupts in applause when Hank gives his speech shows that most of the men agreed that what had been going on was unacceptable.”

Surely you remember the men grabbing their crotches and saying GET THE FUCK OUT BITCH and worse *before*;his speech shamed them into silence?

And don’t call us Surely.

[–] inthepalemoonlight 18 years ago

That's funny. Because in movies like The Color Purple and The Joy Luck Club, there weren't really any good men either. But those guys were black and Asian in those films and at that time there weren't really any many movies out there with positive representatives of black and Asian men to counter such portrayals. On the other hand there are always countless movies in the cinema in which the white guys are the heroes and good guys who save the day, save the towm, save the planet, save the damsel in distress, etc. So whether you think the movie is one sided or not (even though its based on a true story) I suggest you just brush it off and acquire some thicker skin. After all there are 100 movies coming out this year in which the women are secondary sex objects and the focus is on the great male heroes who have no flaws.

[–] meg_matthews_16 18 years ago

THANK YOU! You rarely hear people complaining about how women are under-represented in movies. There are so few roles for women in cinema. They are mainly victim and sex object, or mother and seductress. It is rare to see the woman kicking butt and saving the man, and when she does she is still fetishized, wearing sexy clothing that one would find themselves having a hell of a hard time fighting in.

Guys hate a movie that portrays them as the abuser, but they don't mind a movie wherein the woman has little to no real reason for being in a man's world. Wonder how they would feel in this side of the gender-role.

cheers

"Be Seeing You"

[–] jgevr 18 years ago

I couldn't agree more, this was nothing but typical male bashing feminist rhetoric made into tedious and draining film. A prime example of reverse sexism starring an actress that has made such mindless drivel her calling card. First of all, if you're going to work in fire, don't act surprised when you get burned. Taking a job in a coal mine isn't exactly the most effeminate career move that one could make. I guarantee you that the men in that mine gave each other the same amount if not more grief that they gave to the women. Woody Harrelson and Bob Dylan should be ashamed of themselves for giving this film their likeness and music respectively. Let’s all celebrate one of the founding members of our current litigious society. On second thought, let’s not….
Cellar Door,
Johnny G.
JG4EVER

[–] z01 18 years ago

"I guarantee you that the men in that mine gave each other the same amount if not more grief that they gave to the women."

That's a pretty strong statement without much thought put into it, I think.

I find it extremely unlikely that ANY of the men at the mines worried about sexual assualt, or had people walking into their homes & even bedrooms in the middle of the night.

I find it extremely unlikely that they routinely packed mace, knives, and rope (to tie the doors secure to their work areas) along with their lunches.

Had this been the case, these men would have only needed to show that they were treated "just as badly" as the women because ALL employees were treated badly--and there would not be a case for "sexual harassment." (although perhaps assualt, in some situations).

There were no such situation.

There was no graffitii, posters, etc. degrading men as there were women.

The inteniton was to discourage the women from work.

That is illegal harassment.

http://www.d.umn.edu/~epeters5/Cst1201/Articles/A%20HOSTILE%20WORKPLACE%20INTO%20AN%20ABYSS%20OF%20SEX%20HARASSMENT%20AT%20EVELETH%20MINE.pdf

[–] evan_harvey 18 years ago

I think you ought to be ashamed of yourself. Either that or you should pull your head out.

"First of all, if you're going to work in fire, don't act surprised when you get burned".

This is the kind of attitude that the film highlights. It doesn't matter if "the men in that mine gave each other the same amount if not more grief that they gave to the women". I agree that you need to be able to roll with things to a point. I'm not sure there's much point explaining it to you.

I found the film a bit draining, and it did have flaws. None of those flaws had anything to do with "typical male bashing".

[–] Isaac5855 18 years ago

As much as I enjoyed this movie, it was pretty obvious that most of the male characters were portrayed as one-dimensional cardboard villians in order to make Josie's story more viewer-friendly. On the other hand, what I didn't expect was the way they women didn't instantly rally around her cause either, mainly out of fear of losing jobs they desperately needed.

[–] remifontainemoi 18 years ago

This movie is very similar to the several dozens of movies that portray black people as poor victims of the evil white people. It is totally one-sided.

[–] CalamityDrain 18 years ago

I think the movie was pretty accurate in it's portayal of a good percentage of men's behavior when there aren't any reprecussions for their actions. If men feel threatened in any way by women being able to do something they can do, they behave terribly. I can say that from experience. I doubt every man in the mine did those things, but they didn't exactly step up and tell their friends to stop, either. Doing nothing is as bad as actually harrassing. This was also at a time before a lot of the sexual harrassment, class action suits were filed. I don't think it was one sided. I think the men there acted like pigs. As for them being portrayed in a bad light? Good. I hope they're ashamed. I hope they learned something. I figure they probably just grumble because they got in trouble and now the world knows about their behavior. I doubt they ever took it as a learning experience and tried to empathize with the women. So, in my opinion, I don't care if they think they were made to look bad by hollywood. They made themselves look bad.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] z01 18 years ago

I don't belong to a union, so I can't give much of an opinion on that. But I can tell you that in that area, anyway, there is still a sort of "us" and "them" attitude between managment & labor.