Historical Revisionism, Romanticising Abuse, and Outright Misogyny
Do I really hate this film? Well, actually, I did enjoy some few things in this film until that nasty and unfortunate second half, especially the ending. I love this film for two things: Tony Leung and Tang Wei. Though, I hate this film for three things: the historical revisionism, the "woman and their affection for jewelry (materialism)" trope, and the toxic romanticism of abuse.
In spite of giving it a decisive one star during my first watch, I still decided to give it another watch as I also could not deny the things I have loved about the film. I have a personal positive bias for both of the leads: Tang Wei and Tony Leung. Indeed, their performances have been great as always. At the very beginning, their characters have already been greatly emphasized: his almost callous and greedy composure and her idealistic and naive courage. This did not change all throughout the film which led to that appalling conclusion.
I do commend the direction also, but for a film about espionage, it was lacking with intrigue and suspense. All throughout, I could only sense a story about a tragic romance blossoming. Even the sex scenes didn't have the electrifying quality of eroticism. It was, indeed, lustful. Though, there was no uncanny or distinct emotion that truly drove the eros. Ang Lee need to understand the difference between pornography and true erotica. Erotica has high-art aspirations. It has emotional and intellectual sensitivity. But, just like some cheap pornography, it seemed that Ang Lee only thought to convey different, but, "controversial" sex positions.
After learning that this was based from a true historical event, I went to read about Zheng Pingru. She was the true-to-life spy based on Tang Wei's character. After learning herstory, I was really appalled. Especially that I am from a country where historical revisionism has been a sensitive issue and a detrimental political propaganda machine, I could never justify the disrespect they made her character in the film. Zheng Pingru was a strong and brilliant woman who has not betrayed her country and people which led to her death at a young age of 22. Her character, though, was made less into someone who has chosen jewelry over her true allegiance.
I AM DISGUSTED HOW THEY MADE A WOMAN'S HISTORY FILLED WITH COURAGE AND DIGNITY INTO SOMEONE'S MISOGYNISTIC FANTASIES OF TRAGIC ROMANCE. Even without tying it to true history and just a complete fictional idea, it is still socially detrimental. It really promotes the foolish long-held idea that men has to be aggressive first in order to fully lure the interest of women. Of course, we have different sexual preferences, but the common denominator in all healthy relationships is consent. Again, Ang Lee has no intelligent grasp of true erotica and he also have no true comprehension of BDSM. I doubt even if the sexual assaults were truly plot devices, but rather misogynistic fantasies. That certain scene could have stopped at the moment she was showing agony as he assaulted her, but that scene concluded with her smiling in bed as if to assure the audience that she enjoyed her assault (yikes).
Furthermore, another long-held idea or trope where women will always be moved by a good, expensive jewelry has ruined the film even without tying it to the historical revisionism. Can a woman only realized a man's affection when he give her material luxuries? Patriarchal society has long been damaging women for believing that men have to do the labour and money-earning while their women sit at home and splurge their money on luxury. This patriarchal belief that women are materialistic is what this film was going for. In any way you look at it, Lust, Caution is a film that is completely detrimental to society. The NC-17 rating is not because of the (almost doubtful) erotic content being inappropriate for young audiences, but rather these foolish long-held misogynistic beliefs should be abolished from young minds.
P.S. Another thing I noticed which I almost forgot to add, the film was also portraying the Madonna-whore complex. Yes, of course, another patriarchal belief of their lack of understanding regarding female sexuality.
"The Madonna–whore complex is a concept first coined by Sigmund Freud. It represents the dichotomy of the Madonna—a wholly virtuous, pure, and chaste woman—and the whore—a promiscuous, seductive, and degraded woman. "
This complex has plagued many men into having affairs because they believed that their wives are only good and pure, thus, they need another extra woman in their life that they can corrupt. In the film, we can see how Tony's character degraded, corrupted, and lusted over Tang Wei's. Though, there was no sexual attraction or tension shown between him and his wife. His dealing with his wife was always "pure", while with Tang Wei, it was "promiscuous". This complex and belief has put so many taboos in female sexuality.
Women desiring sex does not make them less pure neither is sex inherently vulgar or dirty. It was the patriarchal belief that put sex in a taboo category. Sex was purposed to be transcendental, holy, and intimate until patriarchal society decided it was a vulgar obscurity just because they can't master over their own unjust lusts.
In spite of giving it a decisive one star during my first watch, I still decided to give it another watch as I also could not deny the things I have loved about the film. I have a personal positive bias for both of the leads: Tang Wei and Tony Leung. Indeed, their performances have been great as always. At the very beginning, their characters have already been greatly emphasized: his almost callous and greedy composure and her idealistic and naive courage. This did not change all throughout the film which led to that appalling conclusion.
I do commend the direction also, but for a film about espionage, it was lacking with intrigue and suspense. All throughout, I could only sense a story about a tragic romance blossoming. Even the sex scenes didn't have the electrifying quality of eroticism. It was, indeed, lustful. Though, there was no uncanny or distinct emotion that truly drove the eros. Ang Lee need to understand the difference between pornography and true erotica. Erotica has high-art aspirations. It has emotional and intellectual sensitivity. But, just like some cheap pornography, it seemed that Ang Lee only thought to convey different, but, "controversial" sex positions.
After learning that this was based from a true historical event, I went to read about Zheng Pingru. She was the true-to-life spy based on Tang Wei's character. After learning herstory, I was really appalled. Especially that I am from a country where historical revisionism has been a sensitive issue and a detrimental political propaganda machine, I could never justify the disrespect they made her character in the film. Zheng Pingru was a strong and brilliant woman who has not betrayed her country and people which led to her death at a young age of 22. Her character, though, was made less into someone who has chosen jewelry over her true allegiance.
I AM DISGUSTED HOW THEY MADE A WOMAN'S HISTORY FILLED WITH COURAGE AND DIGNITY INTO SOMEONE'S MISOGYNISTIC FANTASIES OF TRAGIC ROMANCE. Even without tying it to true history and just a complete fictional idea, it is still socially detrimental. It really promotes the foolish long-held idea that men has to be aggressive first in order to fully lure the interest of women. Of course, we have different sexual preferences, but the common denominator in all healthy relationships is consent. Again, Ang Lee has no intelligent grasp of true erotica and he also have no true comprehension of BDSM. I doubt even if the sexual assaults were truly plot devices, but rather misogynistic fantasies. That certain scene could have stopped at the moment she was showing agony as he assaulted her, but that scene concluded with her smiling in bed as if to assure the audience that she enjoyed her assault (yikes).
Furthermore, another long-held idea or trope where women will always be moved by a good, expensive jewelry has ruined the film even without tying it to the historical revisionism. Can a woman only realized a man's affection when he give her material luxuries? Patriarchal society has long been damaging women for believing that men have to do the labour and money-earning while their women sit at home and splurge their money on luxury. This patriarchal belief that women are materialistic is what this film was going for. In any way you look at it, Lust, Caution is a film that is completely detrimental to society. The NC-17 rating is not because of the (almost doubtful) erotic content being inappropriate for young audiences, but rather these foolish long-held misogynistic beliefs should be abolished from young minds.
P.S. Another thing I noticed which I almost forgot to add, the film was also portraying the Madonna-whore complex. Yes, of course, another patriarchal belief of their lack of understanding regarding female sexuality.
"The Madonna–whore complex is a concept first coined by Sigmund Freud. It represents the dichotomy of the Madonna—a wholly virtuous, pure, and chaste woman—and the whore—a promiscuous, seductive, and degraded woman. "
This complex has plagued many men into having affairs because they believed that their wives are only good and pure, thus, they need another extra woman in their life that they can corrupt. In the film, we can see how Tony's character degraded, corrupted, and lusted over Tang Wei's. Though, there was no sexual attraction or tension shown between him and his wife. His dealing with his wife was always "pure", while with Tang Wei, it was "promiscuous". This complex and belief has put so many taboos in female sexuality.
Women desiring sex does not make them less pure neither is sex inherently vulgar or dirty. It was the patriarchal belief that put sex in a taboo category. Sex was purposed to be transcendental, holy, and intimate until patriarchal society decided it was a vulgar obscurity just because they can't master over their own unjust lusts.
Was this review helpful to you?