#Free viewing of body of lies movie movie#
It seems nobody could make up their mind: Was Fox too sexy or not sexy enough? Was Jennifer's Body a failed B-horror chick flick or an exploration of the complexity and toxicity of female friendship? And why did so many critics think that a movie written and directed by women was trying to appeal to horny teenage boys? Only Time Magazine's Mary F Pols seemed to have found a more subtle approach in the film, writing that " depiction of the ways in which women like Needy are willing to compromise themselves to indulge an ultimately less secure friend is spot-on." "Its calculated eroticism is enough to make you long for the tyranny of the male gaze," wrote Stephanie Zacharek in Salon. Yet Jennifer's Body also managed to be controversial amongst women for the same reason: while Fox's character wasn't designed to be ogled at, she was seen as too manufactured for liberated feminists. And if a film didn't appeal to that audience, it was judged as having failed. As Constance Grady pointed out in a 2018 Vox essay, "in 2009 it was reasonable for swathes of critics on Rotten Tomatoes to assume that the default lens for a teen horror flick was a straight male one". In the post #MeToo era, the focus on Fox's nudity (or lack of it) is disquieting. One reviewer claimed that "Jennifer's Body is not funny, nor is it sexy (the girls keep their clothes on), nor is it scary (it's all just special effects)." Even Roger Ebert, who ultimately gave the movie three out of four stars, saying that "as a movie about a flesh-eating cheerleader, it's better than it has to be", opened his review calling Jennifer's Body "a Twilight for boys". Jennifer's Body was labelled a "spectacular disaster, the kind of thing a cat might bury in a litter box and still keep building the covering because the stench can't be smothered", and a "lurid adolescent distraction". The film garnered a 44% critics score on Rotten Tomatoes and an even less forgiving 34% from audiences. And while each Halloween, articles and video essays bring more and more people to rediscover the film, they can often overlook its more nuanced message.Įxcept for a few outliers, the critics' opinion on the film when it first hit cinemas was fairly unanimous: slating what they viewed as unrealistic dialogue or claiming Fox's role was either over- or under-sexualised. In BBC Culture's 2019 film poll on the best films directed by women, Jennifer's Body didn't receive a single mention among the more than 300 critics surveyed. Yet despite that reappraisal, the film's audience is still largely confined to its loyal cult following. Critics are now discussing how it failed its intended audience by allowing what was an inherently female story to be marketed as a sexy flick for teenage boys. Over the last few years, though, Jennifer's Body has been rediscovered as a lost feminist classic, an emblem of the #MeToo movement. It arguably garnered a more negative reception than another cheesy romp might have, because people were expecting more from its writer, Diablo Cody, and director Karyn Kusama, best known for acclaimed indie movies Juno and Girlfight, respectively. Yet the film only grossed $31.6 million worldwide on a $16 million budget, and it was mauled by critics around the globe. The sci-fi that predicted modern crisesĪt first glance, it might appear to be the perfect Halloween flick for an 18-year-old guy, especially since that man-eating demon is played by Megan Fox (alongside Amanda Seyfried, who played Jennifer's best friend Needy). But it wasn't just me who missed out on this film, the story of a cheerleader who is turned into a monster in a failed satanic ritual. If I had seen Jennifer's Body then, when it first came out, it probably wouldn't have taken another 10 years to realise I was bisexual. In 2009, I was just entering my teenage years.
0 kommentar(er)
