Mary Kearney observes:


> One thing I found intriguing about Jennifer Lopez's femme fatale character
> in  U-TURN was that the audience gets to learn about her past (i.e., her
> relationship with her father), which is used as an explanation for her
> present bad-girl behavior.  To my knowledge, such back-story explanations
> for the development of femme fatale behavior didn't occur in earlier film
> noir. But they make sense in our society's present approach to
> understanding "deviance."

A good point, although there are a few examples where the fatale's
behavior is motivated by fear of poverty (the dark side of "As God is
my witness, I will never go hungry again!") or there is the
naturalistic suggestion of "tainted blood" or the like.  (Similarly, in
SHADOW OF A DOUBT, we are told that Uncle Charlie was never the same
after being dropped on his head as a child.)  But those are generally
mere hints and can be considered almost as throwaways.  Growing
sensitivity to child abuse (sexual or otherwise) has given filmmakers a
new set of categories to fall back on.

(On a related note, my students readily pick up on the hint in CITIZEN
KANE that young Charlie is sent away from his father to avoid physical
abuse--"a good thrashing."  But I have to invite them to consider the
alternatives that the scene also suggests: that Kane was overprotected
or spoiled, readings at least equally likely for a 1941 audience.  The
scene is deliberately ambiguous, positing at least two of the several
"explanations" of Kane's character in the film.)


> I think another point to consider are *teenage* femme fatales. This trend
> is not new; it has been going on for decades.  However, today's teens
> (especially girls) are far more explicitly sexual than in the past.
> Consider Sarah Michelle Gellar's character in the recent remake of
> Dangerous Liaisons, or the bad girl/fantasy object in American Beauty (an
> interesting twist since she explicitly uses her sexuality as a means to
> power, but then reveals that she's never actually engaged in sexual
> intercourse).

The explictness is the difference, of course.  Veda in MILDRED PIERCE
is a good example.  What is implied or muted in the film is made clear
in Cain's novel.  There are similar issues between the two film
versions and the novel of LOLITA.

Don Larsson


----------------------
Donald Larsson
Minnesota State U, Mankato
[log in to unmask]

----
Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
University of Alabama: http://www.tcf.ua.edu