Is Blue Velvet Misogynistic?

Check out our full podcast to hear more:

Support this channel on Patreon:

Subscribe to us on Substack:

Like and follow us on Facebook:

Some critics (notably Roger Ebert) have criticized David Lynch's treatment of Isabella Rossellini in the 1986 film Blue Velvet. In this excerpt from our podcast we discuss the accusation of misogyny that has been levelled against Lynch and argue that the character of Dorothy Vallens is actually the emotional centrepiece of the film.

Let us know your thoughts and comments below, and thanks for watching.

Music by MB Jones:

[mircobe]

Wow I love your channel ! please do more podcasts !

[judeinfante]

This film has always haunted me. I saw this at 15. And as a gay man it's horrifying to see what happens to Dorothy And to me she's the main character of the fipm because her presence is so enraptured when in reality she's a brutalized woman who's clinging on to what's she's got left to save her son and please Frank

[kassandrakid]

No. This is absolutely not a good depiction of what it’s like for a rape victim. The majority of films, including and especially his, depict rape in its most violent and/or egregious possible way. It is not possible to accurately portray what it’s like to deal with the trauma of a rape if the film only portrays the fantasy idea people have of what they think rape looks like. (The majority of rapes are not violent in the traditional sense. Certainly some are and that is fucking awful.) Case in point: surely you remember evil coop raping Diane savagely. You don’t see it, but you know that it’s exactly as bad as what Laura went through. The worst of the worst. Do you remember when Dougie was raped though??? His arms flopping like dying fish because he was mentally incapacitated?? But he had a big smile so that’s not ra-NOPE. It was never addressed because clearly it was not seen as rape. In fact, it was played for laughs. This happens often in movies. The sexual assaults of men are played for laughs. Now if that were a already know. I love his films, have since the early 90s. Still not gonna deny the problematic elements of his work.
I think the guy is weird, brilliant and a bit wacko. Old-fashioned values mixed with new age, esoteric bullshit. I think he uses this dark/light, balance thing in his life, just hopefully not to the extreme as what his films symbolizes. He has admitted that he has a fascination with the desecration of females and people notice comments like that. I mean, that’s interesting and definitely aligns with your spiritual beliefs (as long as you’re not putting it into practice.) Its just thoughts that frequent your conscious desecration of females.
Here is my bottom line: if you’re going to bring that bullshit to the table, you better bring every little last bit of your game as well. You did not do that with “the return.” That was a bunch of mental masturbation. A few fun moments. Kind of like masturbation, I guess. Definitely not the real thing though.
Oh, I did want to say that this was a good video and thank you for the content! Do I think that blue velvet is misogynistic? Of course. Along with the majority of almost every other film in the history of the world.

[VictorLugosi]

No. Can we ban Snowflakes from the cinema?