Just watched the movie - the uncut version with some 3 minutes of restored scenes and dialogue that were considered too risque for people in the 50's. I have to admit that this is one of the most sexually charged movies I have ever seen - by that, I don't mean there are a lot of love scenes or nudity or sexual dialogue. None of that. The few that are, tell a lot more via suggestion than anything explicit.
I think it was Marlon Brando - it is the way he looks, he walks, talks and acts - he is a complete and total sexual being and makes you aware of it (speaking as a woman) just being there on the screen. He portrays that raw, animal instinct that speaks directly to the somewhat baser instincts in people of the other sex. Of course, his being that was the story - that sexiness he exudes is the biggest plot-point.
Blanche DuBois (Vivian Leigh) is the sister of Stella (Kim Hunter), who lives in New Orleans with her husband Stanley Kowalski (Marlon Brando). Blanche has led a pretty promiscuous and sorry life back home and has feigned nervous breakdown so she can stay with her sister, after she has been run out of the town for her ways. Blanche still has all the pretentiousness of a once well-brought-up woman and thinks Stanley is a brutish, common man.
She keeps trying to force her sister to leave the marriage, especially after she sees Stanley hit her. There is no love lost between Stanley and Blanche and Stanley finds out about her sordid past and breaks up her affair with his buddy, Mitch. Blanche retreats further into her crazed fantasies to escape from the reality of Mitch's rejection. Blanche and Stanley are alone in the house while Stella is in the hospital delivering a baby. Stanley rapes Blanche - I almost saw this as the viciousness of a boy kicking a puppy just because he could or as revenge even, as opposed to any sexual attraction towards her. It looked to me as a purely power play, which lands Blanche in an asylum and Stanley alone as his wife leaves him.
Now coming back to my point about Brando's sexy brutishness, it was extremely important to the movie that he be an animalistically attractive man - Blanche flirts with him and some of her dialogue verges on jealousy that her sister got the man. Stella is obviously in love with his physicality - his brutish behaviour "thrills" her and when he repents in front of her after abusing her, she gets aroused by his submission to her. Ultimately, it is Brando in his tight T-shirt, muscular body manliness makes the story go. I highly recommend the movie, especially to women ;) It is definitely good to see a sexy movie in which there is absolutely no nudity and no lip-smacking kisses (gawd! I hated the scenes in "Possession", but that is a story for another time).
Posted by shanti at May 26, 2003 6:10 PMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.realwomenonline.com/scgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/2456
I watched the movie some months back. I just didn’t get it (always wanted to get a woman’s perspective though…Its been said that this movie is liked by women a lot). As for Brando I just don’t understand why he is called the best actory of all times. Maybe its because people hyped it too much before I started watching his films. I liked him in Godfather I. I saw Apocalypse Now and I failed to grasp his ‘immense’ contribution to the movie (he always appears in ethereal lighting and murmurs horror the horror! :-))
After watching the movie, whenever I see brando I get the image of him shouting Stellaaaaa! :-)
Posted by: Ender at May 27, 2003 5:52 PM
Ender, I guess it is just this animal manliness that Brando projects in the movie that is so attractive to women ;)
I always thought of Brando as the hoarsely whispering overweight man of “GodFather” and “The Score”. I didn’t like “Apocalypse Now” that much - such movies are too depressing and boring to me.
I do like the way he screams “Stellaaaa” :tongue3:
Posted by: Shanti at May 27, 2003 6:38 PM