: “Well it was pretty mind-numbing, which is always bad for my dreaming processes, but I do think that the very tightly controlled persona and tightly controlled emotional range of the narrative were telling in the sense that there must be a lot of real life characters who simply cannot break out into a mode of spontaneity no matter how hard they try. This was a movie about a desperate attempt to break out of a complete lack of spontaneity and into spontaneous life, and the failure to do so. I think I can recognise it as I have also been there, although I did break out and this character did not. Actually what is necessary for an effective jail break is for women who have been highly socialised by Christian ideology into a narrow gender role to embrace some of the features of the “opposite” gender. Or, to put it differently embrace those features of the other that you are not. Unfortunately, even the male romantic hero near the end of the plot was highly feminized in terms of this Christian pattern. He had to be advized by his son that it is time to have a sex life, which is indicative of his extreme lack of spontaneity. Therefore, trying to gain knowledge of spontaneity from the male (in this instance) would also lead to failure.
In all, spontaneity — the breaking free of the spirit back into life — was not achieved. I didn’t watch the movie to the end as I could tell that the character would not achieve it (and the time was almost up for that).
It is very, very unfortunate if one is trapped in this way, behind a glass wall, but I don’t think that story can be easily told.”
‘via Blog this’