Battle of the Sexes
Oct. 5th, 2017 10:11 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
This week's excursion to the theater took me to Battle of the Sexes, a movie about the 1973 tennis match between women's tennis all-star Billie Jean King and former tennis champ (and self-proclaimed male chauvinist pig) Bobby Riggs - who, spoiler alert (is it a spoiler if it's history?), got his ass comprehensively handed to him, which is extremely satisfying.
(And even though I knew at the outset that King wins, the tennis match is nonetheless quite tense to watch. You know it's going to come out right, but all the same I was sitting on the edge of my seat, because WHAT IF IT SOMEHOW WENT WRONG AND HE WON?)
Although actually the filmmakers did something quite clever, in that they had a secondary antagonist, head of the Lawn Tennis Association Jack Kramer, who kicks Billie Jean and her tennis buddies out of the LTA when they walk because he refuses to pay the women equal prize money, even though their matches sell as many tickets as the men's. This freed the filmmakers up to explore Bobby Riggs' character, and thus make him more sympathetic - he's one of those boisterously charismatic people that it's hard to loathe even if you really want to - without undermining the film's condemnation of sexism.
In fact, I think it actually strengthens it. Kramer's is a far less in-your-face and flamboyant sexism than Bobby Riggs - but it's even more insidious, because Kramer genuinely doesn't seem to see it for what it is. He's not dashing around telling women to get back in the kitchen like Bobby Riggs, so in his eyes, he's perfectly reasonable.
But this perhaps makes the movie sound preachy, when really it's an excellent example of a movie that unfolds its social message organically. You never get the feeling that the characters have suddenly turned into mouthpieces for the authors: they always seem like themselves, and even when they directly discuss things like sexism they're always genuinely talking to each other, not at the audience.
Also, I just really enjoyed the story of King and her band of eight plucky top women's tennis players forming their own tennis league to say "screw you" to all the organizers who refuse to pay women tennis players as much money as they deserve. There's a delightful League of Their Ownishness about it; it's delightful to watch them all playfully rag on each other and on their take-no-prisoners organizer, Gladys, blunt, droll, chain-smoking, but passionate about women's tennis.
The one problem with the movie - well, it isn't really a problem with the movie, per se; the one problem is that I just really do not like infidelity plotlines, even if the unfaithful character has a really good excuse like "being a lesbian but stumbling into a heterosexual marriage because society is so homophobic that she had been attempting to repress her true sexuality, but then she meets this girl..."
Fair enough I guess, but I still don't enjoy watching it happen. There's a terribly sad scene where Billie Jean's husband finds her new girlfriend's bra in the hotel bathroom - while Billie Jean sits in the other room, watching him in the mirror - and he just puts it back down (although he knows what it means, and Billie Jean knows he knows), and comes back to Billie Jean and kneels down to help ice her knees, and neither of them says a damn thing about it. BOTH OF YOU. WHY. I mean, I know why. BUT WHY.
He's so supportive of Billie Jean and her career, and it just seems so unfair - although really I don't think you can measure affairs of the heart in terms of fairness. You can't earn love; you can't buy it with good deeds any more than you can with money. It is and has to be a gift.
(And even though I knew at the outset that King wins, the tennis match is nonetheless quite tense to watch. You know it's going to come out right, but all the same I was sitting on the edge of my seat, because WHAT IF IT SOMEHOW WENT WRONG AND HE WON?)
Although actually the filmmakers did something quite clever, in that they had a secondary antagonist, head of the Lawn Tennis Association Jack Kramer, who kicks Billie Jean and her tennis buddies out of the LTA when they walk because he refuses to pay the women equal prize money, even though their matches sell as many tickets as the men's. This freed the filmmakers up to explore Bobby Riggs' character, and thus make him more sympathetic - he's one of those boisterously charismatic people that it's hard to loathe even if you really want to - without undermining the film's condemnation of sexism.
In fact, I think it actually strengthens it. Kramer's is a far less in-your-face and flamboyant sexism than Bobby Riggs - but it's even more insidious, because Kramer genuinely doesn't seem to see it for what it is. He's not dashing around telling women to get back in the kitchen like Bobby Riggs, so in his eyes, he's perfectly reasonable.
But this perhaps makes the movie sound preachy, when really it's an excellent example of a movie that unfolds its social message organically. You never get the feeling that the characters have suddenly turned into mouthpieces for the authors: they always seem like themselves, and even when they directly discuss things like sexism they're always genuinely talking to each other, not at the audience.
Also, I just really enjoyed the story of King and her band of eight plucky top women's tennis players forming their own tennis league to say "screw you" to all the organizers who refuse to pay women tennis players as much money as they deserve. There's a delightful League of Their Ownishness about it; it's delightful to watch them all playfully rag on each other and on their take-no-prisoners organizer, Gladys, blunt, droll, chain-smoking, but passionate about women's tennis.
The one problem with the movie - well, it isn't really a problem with the movie, per se; the one problem is that I just really do not like infidelity plotlines, even if the unfaithful character has a really good excuse like "being a lesbian but stumbling into a heterosexual marriage because society is so homophobic that she had been attempting to repress her true sexuality, but then she meets this girl..."
Fair enough I guess, but I still don't enjoy watching it happen. There's a terribly sad scene where Billie Jean's husband finds her new girlfriend's bra in the hotel bathroom - while Billie Jean sits in the other room, watching him in the mirror - and he just puts it back down (although he knows what it means, and Billie Jean knows he knows), and comes back to Billie Jean and kneels down to help ice her knees, and neither of them says a damn thing about it. BOTH OF YOU. WHY. I mean, I know why. BUT WHY.
He's so supportive of Billie Jean and her career, and it just seems so unfair - although really I don't think you can measure affairs of the heart in terms of fairness. You can't earn love; you can't buy it with good deeds any more than you can with money. It is and has to be a gift.
no subject
Date: 2017-10-05 03:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-10-06 09:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-10-05 04:54 pm (UTC)Yeah, matters of the heart are great for showing how life can be unfair, and I think maybe it hurts all the more because there's some obscure sense (at least in me?) that there ought to be fairness in matters of the heart--like, virtue ought to be rewarded with love, or kindness, or devotion, but no. And whereas you can do a duty because you ought to, you can't manufacture love just because you ought to.
no subject
Date: 2017-10-06 09:09 pm (UTC)In stories virtue often does get rewarded with love - the good guy gets the girl etc (or the good girl gets the guy) - which probably contributes to this sense that there ought to be something fair about love. Although I think even if stories didn't push this narrative so hard, it would still be a tempting belief, because it's comforting to think that there's something you can do to ensure that you will be loved, and very scary to realize that it's very much not under your control.
no subject
Date: 2017-10-07 04:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-10-05 05:07 pm (UTC)OH. This has the opposite effect and makes me instantly want to watch it. (It's not that I enjoy infidelity as a standard plot, but that kind of situation like that, makes my heart hurt in the right way. REPRESSION. Yes.)
Sorry. Clearly this is an excellent review and I am a terrible person.
no subject
Date: 2017-10-06 08:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-10-06 08:52 pm (UTC)I think most things depend how they're done - infidelity plots can be v tiresome and uncomfortable, but as you say complicated and messy and full of pining and angst and YES.
no subject
Date: 2017-10-06 09:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-10-05 11:56 pm (UTC)That sounds extremely valuable to have in a movie of this nature, especially since it's the kind of sexism viewers are more likely to encounter (or promulgate) in real life.
no subject
Date: 2017-10-06 09:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-10-07 04:42 am (UTC)Yes!
no subject
Date: 2017-10-12 03:30 pm (UTC)I also saw "Battle of the Sexes" and enjoyed it, with the same quibble.
I would love more book friends, and so I have friended you -- let me know if that's not okay! Nice to meet you. :)
no subject
Date: 2017-10-12 10:43 pm (UTC)<3 <3 <3 Battle of the Sexes. Now that I have a bit more distance from the movie, the bits that I didn't like as much are fading, while the parts that I liked still stick in my mind. I love that moment, right before the Battle of the Sexes match begins, when Billie Jean King says "I'm done talking. Let's play." And then EVISCERATES Bobby Riggs. So satisfying.