Finally saw the tediously heavy-handed Black Swan

Contrary to what I've seen discussed elsewhere, I don't think it was actually about the pursuit of perfection. Nina was nowhere near perfect, and that was clear from the beginning. Her dancing was forced and unnatural (and honestly, if Aronofsky had wanted a good ballet performance, he would have cast an actual dancer). Her personality is meek and child-like. She has a history of scratching and cutting, and she's bulimic. Neurotic does not equal perfectionist. In fact, the only evidence that she seeks perfection is that she says it -- squeaks it -- when she visits Thomas. The way she lives and behaves does not indicate any understanding of perfection, nor of what it takes to achieve it. Please, she doesn't even have the bruised, callused toes of someone who's spent any time in toe shoes. I can't believe Aronofsky neglected that detail by accident.

This movie is about manipulation, and it casts women in a harsh light to prove that point. Thomas manipulates his dancers to get a certain quality in their performances. This is legitimate, from what I've both seen and heard of directors, but his methods are unseemly. Also, I would think they'd be ineffective, as the aggressive, confrontational sexuality he tries to use on Nina seems only suited to get her defenses up even higher.

Regarding how this movie is unkind to women, it's the female characters who are, with only one exception, toxically manipulative and damaged. The mother has an unhealthy, smothering obsession; Nina is dysfunctionally neurotic; Beth is petty, jealous and self-destructive; that other dancer is just a catty bitch. Only Lily is presented as happy and functional, but she's also cast as the bad influence and the dangerous presence. Hers is the only character that I didn't find utterly annoying, cliche, terrible and overwrought; yet Mila Kunis's is the performance that everyone seems to be trashing.

We've had more than enough movies that show competitive, ambitious women in a negative light; aren't we bored with them yet? This movie is just a more artfully shot Showgirls, as far as I can tell. And not to beat a dead horse, but if you do a comparison of how ambitious women are portrayed in film versus ambitious men, you'll see there is a hugely unfair disparity.

As for the sexuality aspect, I thought that was utter bullshit, practically a red herring. Thomas equates a liberated and passionate dance performance with being sexually wild, as if there were no other ways to be free and open. As for ...Nina's masturbation scenes, I may be naive, or in some bizarre secret way frigid myself, but I can't imagine anyone so uptight and sexually repressed getting all gaspy and moany after like two seconds of touching herself. Seems to me that it would take her a bit longer to loosen up and get into it. Again, manipulative.

One question -- how the hell was Portman even *able* to get pregnant? At least she had some muscle, but still she definitely looked too thin to ovulate. Nasty.

Non-compete clause

Believe this or not, as you wish, but I'm not competitive.

True, I want my credit when it's due, but I don't need to win over someone else. I usually figure that my god-given smarts, charm, grace, Amazing Rack^TM -- what have you -- should be recognized and appreciated on their own merits. If I have to self-promote, then what's the point? The game's already lost.

I also have an aversion to trying too hard that is so strong, I will sometimes overcompensate by not trying at all. For example, my writing? Please! I can't write a pitch letter to save my life, and if through some miracle I actually get an assignment despite myself, I almost never follow through and write it. Wouldn't writing something with my name splashed all over it be... overeager self-promotion? And it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Yes, I know this is ridiculous and self-defeating (and totally contradictory to my chosen profession). And yes, I am aware that I only act this way when I'm thinking about it. If you can get me out of my head -- acting or reacting on instinct -- I do just fine, thanks.

The corollary of this means that I have absolutely no game. Call upon me to flirt on demand, and I'll probably retreat to a corner with my knitting. Ask me to close the deal, and I'll leave for home on my own. Certainly, I'm a naturally gifted flirt and I've had (more than?) my share of hook-ups, but I can't choose to do it.

So it was with great interest that I watched a friend of mine work her game tonight. She shot the lights out!
Perhaps this requires further anthropological study . . .

Addendum: While looking for just the right hoops expression to extend my already tired metaphor, I was given the following suggestions from the guys in my office:

• move well without the ball
  
• getting some good, open looks
  
• bury the three-point shot.
  
• really dish the rock
  
• instant offense
  
• taking it to the hole
  
• great at no-look passes
  
• great with dribble penetration
  
• had the hot hand
  
• good in the clutch
  
• really score in transition ...
  
• pounding the ball inside
  (at which point we really began to notice how many hoops cliches are so double-entendre-y)
  
• dominated in the paint
  
• playing above the rim
  
• raining threes
  
• hit the money shot
  
• pulled it out in overtime
  
• a come-from-behind win
  
• nailed the buzzer beater
  
• "pulled out a come-from-behind win" = triple entendre
  
• "nailed a buzzer beater to seal a come-from-behind win" = quardruple entendre

Got more for me? Comment away, baybee!