Mad Max: Fury Road

[kaberett]

Over in access_fandom, jesse_the_k quotes from an article on prosthetics in Fury Road:

Again, the Punch & Judy department of Warner Brothers throws a faked disability, a faux handicap, at us, in their Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) movie, and again, we consider it, just as we considered the attempts in Kingsman, or, Home of the Brave (2006), or, maybe in the ill-fated attempt for cinema titled “Hancock”.

[...snip...]

So, here they go again; what do they do there? Is it good? And, before glorifying it just because (they even write “watch Furiosa punch Max in the face, with her nubbins” which she really doesn’t; she punches him with her hand while sticking the nubbins out in the air) – why not actually *use* our eyes, to look, to ogle, to view, and (in a more strict sense) “watch” it? It is so much a visual and so not much a verbal movie so we really have to switch on our eyesies. What is there to be actually seen, what do they really show? Is this empowering or what does it really say?

... and I went and read the article and then I had OPINIONS, mostly "I am interested in the mechanical details but I am absolutely seethingly furious about how he interprets the final sequence and the story arc", and then I expanded on that a bit more in comments, which I am reproducing here for my own archives.

So my actual issue is that [Wolf Schweitzer is] also approaching this in an incredibly male-gazey way and self-absorbed way:

This visual representation is relevant as missing part of an arm is far more of a communicative disability (in that it interferes with communication) than just a practical manual handicap – and that is what is visually highlighted and emphasized here. After all (we said that already), this is not the movie of the most brilliant verbal dialogues – but it does try to be an exercise in visual story telling.

And that is the visual of a disfigured woman who realizes that a man who could have matched her in some if not many ways walks out on her. Really, that ends up as the movie’s actual essence.

... like... what???? no????? NO??????????? Furiosa has shown absolutely no interest whatsoever in Max as a romantic prospect rather than as furniture; she's shown absolutely no interest in any men [beyond threat assessment]; she is actively trying to get away from them.

And he's got PTSD. And it's not about her being disabled. It's not. He leaves because he's so fucked up that he can't people, he can't the number of people in that citadel, he can't feel safe and he needs to keep moving and he feels like he needs the isolation. He gave her blood. She's not wearing her prosthetic in that scene because she's incredibly weak from blood loss and exhaustion, and he gave her blood, and that means so much more than any kind of bullshit shoehorned romance arc that neither of them wants. And he looks at her - he witnesses her literal ascent to power - and he apologises for being unable to stay and keep being furniture for her or whatever, but this isn't where he belongs and she doesn't actually want this dude who showed up out of nowhere to be seated upon her right hand or whatever, she's got women for that. The citadel isn't a community he belongs in. I can't see how he can possibly read that scene the way he does apart from having massive insecurities of his own in ways that to me honestly read more like standard douchebro whining about how Nice Men Finish Last with a specific different focal reason, dressed up as solidarity for and standing up for a woman. And, you know, I'm entirely willing to believe that he believes that's what he's doing -- but I think the only way you can get to that interpretation is by assuming that the thing Furiosa wants most is A Man, because She's A Lady, and I just... react so strongly against that that I can't even.

Comments

[starlady]

Well said. His reaction is a very telling contrast to Laura Vaughn's imo.

[kaberett]

Yesssss. And Laura Vaughn's take on it highlights one of the other things I've said in comment over at access_fandom -- part of the point of Furiosa's body is that it's just treated as completely normal, entirely commonplace, not something that any of them give even the faintest impression of a second thought to. And to have her normalised like that, to have her treated as a whole person both with & without the prosthetic -- yes yes YES. (And! As Vaughn says! That she is allowed to be seen without it without shame or fear or whatever -- obviously using a wheelchair is a very different thing, but YES, actually, she's got this visible disability and she manages it and her assistive tech in the ways that work for her, not ways designed to make anyone else including the audience more comfortable.) Thank you so so much for the link.

[davidgillon]

I'd already seen Vaughn's post, and I criticised that then for being a bit too willing to accept actors cripping-up, but it's a hell of a lot more balanced than Scweitzer's.

[kaberett]

And of course there's the point that Schweitzer sneeringly dismisses the fact that she has a wrench strapped to her arm, because what's the point and what's the function, even as he talks about it being a film of aesthetic and a film of visuals -- the point isn't that it's something for her to use, the point is a great big FUCK YOU, the point is (at least to some extent) the same as the engine grease on her face or the shiny-and-chrome or the arm painted on her car door -- it's decoration, adornment, in the context of her world and of her film. And I just. FEELINGS.

[davidgillon]

My immediate reaction to reading that was that surely the point and the function is she's in a post-apocalyptic wasteland and may need to make emergency repairs on her arm with what she has immediately to hand. I'm really not certain he's able to think himself into non-contemporary environments/societies, and that limits his ability to understand the film's milieu.

[damerell]

Isn't the grease anti-glare, a la Jack Sparrow? But I did think the complaints about the practicality of the prosthesis were fairly inane, given that essentially every other piece of technology in the movie is embellished with all sorts of pointless bells and whistles...

[sasha_feather]

It's amazing to me how this blogger missed the entire point of the film. Thanks for calling it out.

[firecat]

Well I suppose a work of art is whatever the viewer interprets it as, but I sure as hell didn't interpret it as any kind of romance.

[ysobel]

But there is a boy lead and a girl lead so ~clearly~ it's a romance, I mean duh

[vladmradio]

Mad Max without Mel Gibson is any movie, but not Mad Max/

[recessional]

It's not about her disability.

It's about HIS disability.

[kaberett]

Yes, I think to large degree my issue with the OP can be summarised as "nice to know you don't think the guy's disabled, w o w".

[recessional]

Honestly I think Max is way the hell and gone more disabled by his PTSD than Furiosa is by being an amputee. Hell for that matter I suspect FURIOSA is more disabled by HER PTSD than she is by her lack of arm, given that she seems to know Max's experiences (the nightmares/hallucinations/etc) from the inside in the times she interacts with them.

[kaberett]

You will be astonished to discover that I agree with you entirely on this one, I am sure. :-p

(The way Furiosa interacts with her arm honestly reminds me a lot of how I interact with my chairs: they're (a removable) part of my body, they do cool shit, a partner across the room casually using them as a footrest is if anything more intimate than a partner actually touching me, and sometimes you just can't be having with using them for all they're great.)

[recessional]

Yeah, that. And the fact that she has a removable part of her body is as a context of her life much more like how some people are very short and some people are very tall (for instance) and that limits you in specific ways. Or how some people are very pale skinned and some people are very dark skinned and in a world with no shade-cover this ALSO limits and affects you in specific ways.

It's a context of her! It's an important part of her life, and it designates where certain limitations are, and her specific limitations are different than other people's. But it's not like not being able to sleep, or being in constant pain, or having dead little girls appear suddenly in front of you in the middle of a battle.

(I admit my immediate response even seeing the extract in the access DW was "oh FUCK OFF" but I am supposed to be avoiding angry growling arguments on the internet not seeking them out so I did my best to ignore it.)