Every morning, when I eat breakfast there are these wonderful few minutes when I check my RSS reader for the updates of my favourite web comics. I actually think that these free web comics are far better written and much more beautifully drawn than most of the commercially published stuff, but that is just my opinion. So here is a list of my top favourites aka those I am definitely buying the printed version of. Some of these may have adult themes, sex, violence and so on. The genre is, well if I get it wrong in your opinion then sorry, I am not good with labels. The order is probably chronological according to when I stumbled upon these lovely stories:
1. Digger – genre: fantasy; finished. It has a cool expressionist style, fabulous characters (a wombat among them!), absurd sense of humour.
2. Two Rooks – genre: sf/criminal; on-going, sort of *sigh*; plot driven and what a plot it is, needs re-reading to see that all fits together soo well, stylistically stunning (manga inspired), witty dialogues, and on a personal bias note all guys have long hair ❤
3. Marsh Rocket – genre: cyber punk; finished, really sad because it lacks a definite conclusion, but the author moved on to do other things *sigh*. Nice criminal plot, hilarious dialogue. Interesting drawing and colouring style.
4. Lackadaisy – genre: noir?; on-going; sepia, cats, the prohibition in the USA, sweet characters, the language may be tad of a challenge for a non native speaker.
5. Gone with the blast wave – genre: the title speaks for itself, post-apocalyptic sf; on-going, sort of; two soldiers lost in an endless city, slightly morbid but hilarious dialogue, interesting art.
6. The less than epic adventures of TJ and Amal – genre: … romance I guess or a road comic?; on-going; two guys driving across the USA, there might be a plot in there somewhere, but I can live without it , because the story is simply cute and the art is exceptional
7. Oglaf! – genre: fantasy comedy porn; on-going; unrelated or loosely connected shorts or single strips; hilarious especially if fantasy is your thing.
8. Gunnerkrigg Court – genre: fantasy; on-going; a must read for all Neil Gaiman fans; magical plot and wonderful art.
9. Chirout – genre: fantasy; on-going; starts a little slow, but has nice characters and becomes addictive, I just hope the website will be improved soon.
10. String Theory – genre: sf; on-going; begins very innocently, but it is merely a deception, the plot thickens, weird characters weirder plot.
11. The Abominable Charles Christopher – genre: fantasy with cute animals; on-going; actually rather serious, has quite a few current themes in it, very beautiful, very touching, often quite funny.
These are not the only web comics I follow, my RSS reader has probably around 40 subscriptions in the comics section. These, however,are those that excite me most, when I see an update. There are some that might get onto a second version of this list If I choose to write it some time in the future, but they are still too short for me to be over-excited about them. They need to prove themselves like these did, that they are capable of maintaining a decent quality for a long time – preferably till the end. If you have your favourites please link to them in the comments.
Sometimes dreams come true. But in this particular case it is a fantasy that materialised and took form a fashion world sensation Andrej Pejic. I love androgynous people, I have a single aesthetic ideal for all people however they choose to identify themselves. And Andrej personifies this ideal. I am sure that there are many people, who share Andrej’s qualities, but well, they are not as famous as he is and they do not have a wonderful blog dedicated to them (I bow to the Haus of Andrej Pejic and its creator), where I could daily feed my aesthetic obsession.
I will not write yet another biography of Andrej, the Internet is full of those. I want to share my love with those, who still were (luckily for them 😉 ) deprived of my overly enthusiastic babble about the first ever model I know anything about.
If I managed to interest you in Andrej then I wish to point out, that as he gets more and more famous there is already some controversy surrounding his person.
First was the censorship scandal.
And he was voted world’s 98th sexiest woman (seriously though with all the generic Hollywood dolls before him, he should have been at least in the top twenty). There was, however, a major fail on the part of the magazine, that publishes this particular list.
I am becoming more radical with age and as I am still not ready to become a full activist there is a need in me to write about things that rub me the wrong way.
Those, who know me are aware that I do not watch television. I do, however, listen to the radio when I do my chores or while commuting. Depending on my mood there are two types of stations I listen to: a news radio called Tok.fm, where they mostly talk and serve information; or rock/alternative music radios. And in all of these I have noticed a trend, which is either pathetic or disturbing – or maybe both. The target listener of the music stations are young people, usually high school or older, quite educated. The information radio targets people of all ages, middle-class and higher, mostly educated – they aspire to be a voice of intellectuals for intellectuals. And for some reason all of those stations decided that they need a strong masculine program, that has some primitive sexist blokes invite some other sexist guys – some of the guests are even professors (sic!) – to whine about how real men are in the retreat and how the male privilege is disappearing. And these programs are in prime time. It is infuriating, because these guys are trying to convince everyone that male privilege and patriarchal society are good and positive. So it is a tragedy that they are disappearing now.
Both of the above mentioned statements are untrue. There is nothing good about a society, where one group is privileged and this is probably in all societies the group of straight males from the majority ethnic group (I am not writing white, because there are societies, where white people are a minority). There is really no reason for them to be privileged and it totally sucks that they are. And, yes they are, this privilege is very far from disappearing. There are certain small steps that kind of go in that direction, but because of deemed legal (not really there though) equality they will be very little steps, because the remaining inequalities are not always obvious and are very deeply rooted in our societies. Many women are willing to protect them, because of their indoctrinated upbringing. And with these tiny steps those retarded radio programs fight. They ridicule women, sometimes even express completely blatant homophobia (obviously, since homophobia and transphobia are forms of sexism) and quote some sexist research – obviously always giving only random numbers out of context without providing the information who made the whole research and who sponsored it.
I can understand why commercial music radios run such shows. But with Tok.fm I have to admit I am shocked and puzzled. “Bez laski” (ouch the subtle innuendo in the title… – means “without a chick”) is one of the evening programs, which are usually long conversations with experts about books, culture, science etc. Placing the program among such high quality, informational and reliable programs gives it extra credibility that it should never have. It pretends to be one of them, a scientific approach to culture, but it is not. I listened to a couple of “Bez laski” shows, and even if a professor comes (and shame on those who actually are such starved for attention sexist pricks that they had accepted an invitation to speak there) he often speaks about general things, even if he is no expert on the particular subject. For example: on the show a couple of weeks ago two journalists and an anthropology professor had a great laugh about what jobs were available to women in the Middle Ages, namely: saints or hookers. The fail of it. First of all this taps into the sexist stereotype virgin/slut, that women are either one or the other, there is no in between. Secondly this is completely inaccurate, anyone who has even a basic idea about that period knows that. Unfortunately most people know nothing about Middle Ages or history in general, so when they hear such an opinion voiced on a national radio in a presence of a professor they will never question it.
I do not see the purpose behind this show, other that imprint and enforce sexist stereotypes and defend the patriarchal privilege, with all its pathological consequences. So I will never understand why Ms Ewa Wanat, the editor-in-chief, a very intelligent woman, tolerates this incompetent and ignorant show in her radio. Have you ever listened to this sexist babble, Ms Wanat? If not it is time you did, so that you can put an end to it, because now it compromises the credibility of your radio, at least in my eyes.
P.S. Oh and Mr Dąbrowa, if being equal to the rest of the world and not privileged scares you so much that you need to whine about it once a week then according to you retarded standards you are not exactly a real man, because this imagined real man is no coward and would never stoop to whining publicly.
I am rather depressed at the moment, the main cause is obviously Easter. One more redundant and tedious holiday. I do not care for the religious meaning, and I would rather not be under the family pressure, big cleaning and cooking for guests I am not too keen on seeing. So Easter wise: big SIGH.
But there is a sad anniversary coming my way soon (like all the other anniversaries since I was 16 I will not be celebrating this one – those who know the date are discouraged from sending wishes, for I perceive them as sarcasm) . Behold, for a decade has passed since I had become legally adult, since I have been fully responsible for all my actions. I these ten long years I have managed to achieve absolutely nothing. No kidding here.
I did not manage to get a degree, even though I tried twice on different faculties – and this is not some sad turn of events, it is my own doing, I did not have what it takes (i.e intelligence) to manage that.
I have no useful skills, that would make it possible for me to have a career, I am unemployable for any white-collar position. I am pathetically bad in what I do – translating, interpreting, because my writing skills in my native tongue are worse than in English, and everyone, who reads this knows the level of my English… If I had a conscience I would never translate again.
Decline would probably be a better word. I have become much more radical, quarrelsome and short-tempered. People annoy me easily and my general misanthropy has grown. I hate a lot of people I know, despise even more people (whether I know them or not is irrelevant), there is no one I love, hardly anyone I care for, very few people I like – and that is a fluctuating emotion, because irritation with particular individuals overcomes it rather frequently. I have become even more unlikeable than I was in high school. People seem uneasy when they first meet me. That is if I speak to them. I generally do not initiate a conversation or make eye contact, so most members of the general population are spared. Well at least one thing improved, in high school I used to be clingy. Since now I am more self- aware, I know what kind of torment it must have been to the people who knew me, and why most of them decided not to keep in touch with me. Even though I was hurt by that, now I know that they made a wise choice and respect them for it.
I am more ill then I used to be, ironically, because I went to a doctor and tried to get some treatment. A mistake, obviously, but now I am in a situation I cannot avoid doctors. For the time being, hopefully. As soon as I can I plan to cease all this pointless waste of time and money. I do not recommend being ill, avoid it at all cost. Unless you have some common, easy ailment, you will not get any help from doctors. Because they will only treat you for the most common conditions and tell that you are being ridiculous saying the meds they prescribe have side effects. The odds of meds having side effects are low, they are for special people, so please do not be vain enough and bother the good doctor with your megalomaniac ramblings about feeling much worse after taking the expensive (aka helpful beyond any doubt) pills.
I have not finished writing any of the stories that clutter my head. No harm done here, they are generic and boring, just personally important to me – not unlike imaginary friends. I would be probably better off without them, because I would have more space in my brain for useful stuff and maybe I would not had failed so miserably in the important parts of life.
None that I can think of. I do not know who I would like to be or what I would like to do with my life. I made many wrong choices, because I had never known the answer to neither of these two basic questions. This probably explains all the points I made above. I have never been good at anything, so no obvious path materialised and I never had any guidance. Until I failed at university my parents never took any notice of what I did with my life. Now they are just disappointed that I do not have a degree, a job and a family – and they have to keep quiet at family gatherings, no boasting for them. And this way, making a full circle, I neatly come back to Easter.
With this rant post spam I think I initiated my emotional spring cleaning. It felt good to get these out of my system, the Xavier Dolan thing had been bugging me for two months or so. Hopefully I will be less lethargic from now on, please keep your fingers crossed.
To feel good with myself I just need to pick up on the abandoned so-called project. Hopefully getting rid of these angry thoughts and frustrations will give me some space for inspiration, because I am creatively stuck at the moment.
Rating: A!!! & D
Rant not review so expect spoilers. Again a film that annoyed me greatly. I have never believed in “gay propaganda”, I have always thought it was an offensive expression coined by homophobes, and yet it does exist. Seriously, if you do a propaganda film, like this one, no matter what you are promoting(even if it supposedly is tolerance and equality), it is bound to be bad and insulting.
This film starts in a very interesting way. We have a lesbian couple Jules and Nic. They both had a child using the same sperm donor, so their family comprises also of Joni (18yrs old) and Laser (15yrs old). The boy wants to meet the donor, who agrees to see the children The meeting is slightly awkward. but generally positive and they decide to keep in touch. The mothers find out and they decide to meet him too. And so Paul enters into their life causing quite a stir. He commissions Jules to design and arrange his garden. They spend quite a lot of time together, which leads to an affair. Nic finds out and Jules is ostracised by the family, but then she grovels and they mercifully accept her back. Ha… Crappy ending.
Basically, I guess, the propaganda message was: a lesbian family can be very strong and resilient, it will withstand any difficulty, work out any problem. The one I received is: patriarchal family model is still very strong, so strong in fact that even if technically there are two females in a marriage it can still be an oppressive institution, that discriminates women.
You see, we actually have a very traditional patriarchal family in this film. Nic assumed the part of the husband/single breadwinner/controlling master and as it is mentioned in the film she had emotionally blackmailed/ bullied Jules to become the stay at home mother. Jules had got a degree but never had the chance to have a career. And Nic constantly puts Jules down, that she has no income, no career – she has no fucking right to say these things, to mock Jules about it, but she does. Nic got upset because Jules bought a car to start her gardening business. And when Jules won the car argument, quoting Nic’s own previous condescending comment, Nic was visibly angry that her housewife outsmarted her in that conversation, but she could not think of a good comeback.
Apart from mocking Jules’ for the life choices she had made for her, Nic also ignores Jules and finds her unattractive. Jules has to ask her whether she would like to watch a porn flick with her to try and have some sex. But Nic is more into the film than into Jules and actually uses the first excuse possible to end that embarrassing moment. I do not mind people watching porn to spice up their sex life, but here porn is a bait to get a tiny amount of very pathetic attention. No wonder she falls for Paul, who show her real attention and desire.
Nic is also controlling, domineering, condescending etc. She set self-righteous rules for the whole family and sees to that they are followed. When Jules asks her once not to overdo with the alcohol, Nic snaps at her: “Stop with the micromanaging”. Miss fucking double standard. And in what universe it is wrong to ask somebody not to drink too much.
Jules is the only one guilty in he end. She is the only one apologising. What the fuck. That was so messed up. She was bullied and put down, made feel unsuccessful and unattractive. But she betrays her wife and master so she apologizes and everything is fine. The thing is that the affair was not the problem, it was the consequence of an abusive relationship. I was not rooting for Jules to stay with Paul, I mean he is an OK guy, has as many flaws and virtues as anyone. I was rooting for her to leave Nic. But she could not do that. After all her self-esteem had been gradually undermined for years. She could not even fight for her right to be appreciated for what she had done, for Nic and their mutual family. Ignoring her own ambitions and career is a huge sacrifice, plus being a home-maker is a tough job. Coming back to the job market after so much time is even tougher, one needs encouragement and support, all Nic had to offer was criticism, that Jules was not generating income. None of the underlying problems was resolved, Jules came back to square one. Or maybe her situation even got worse, with the affair being a perfect means to put her down in the future.
This tribute to traditional, patriarchal values – a bad family is better than no family, a woman should be submissive and faithful to her husband, should not want anything for herself – made me sick. Yes, an affair is wrong, hurtful etc, but it was an act of desperation and Jules did try to improve her marriage, she was the only one that tried. The title is right though. The kids were all right, as in really cool, intelligent people.
More details here.
Again this is a rant, so spoilers ahead, I hated the film and do not recommend it.
This is very sad, because I had such high hopes for this one. A romantic comedy about lesbians, who have middle eastern backgrounds, written and directed by a gay woman, of South African, Indian descent. And it was so bad, so sexist, so ageist and at one point might have been racist, but it might be just me being already overly outraged with this flick.
The people of the drama:
Leyla and Tala, beautiful, skinny, successful and talented young lesbians.
Leyla’s family rich British Indian Muslims, living in London in what looks like an at least million pound suburban house: Mother a primitive, stereotypical, hypocrite; Father successful, friendly, kind, caring, understanding; Sister progressive, open-minded, caring.
Tala’s super rich family, Palestinian Christians living in Jordan (and other places around the world) in a huge, luxurious house, with a substantial house staff: Mother overbearing, controlling, anti-Semitic, narrow minded; Father elegant, stoic, understanding; Sister 1 (Lamia) stupid, shallow, homophobic; Husband of Lamia sexist, shallow, anti-Semitic, homophobic; Sister 2 (Zina) kind, understanding, open-minded.
Tala is engaged again (4th time) but meets Leyla and falls in love with her. They cannot be together because Tala is afraid to admit who she is to herself, but eventually on the day of the wedding she decides that she needs to listen to her heart and tries to win Leyla back. There is a happy ending.
Every woman older than 35 is stupid, hypocritical and shallow. They all concentrate exclusively on appearances and consider relationships only as financial deals. They have absolutely no redeeming qualities. With one exception, every man, regardless of his age or background is kind, understanding, open-minded. Fathers accept their lesbian daughters and defend them from their raging mothers. It saddens me greatly to see the proof that women can be the biggest women haters. This film shows the worst stereotypes concerning women. I mean the ones that are noticeable in this film, because Leyla and Tala are rather generic and forgettable.
Tala’s family is originally Palestinian, so the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is mentioned. According to the film director, she wanted the film to encourage dialogue, as far as this issue is concerned. If I had not heard it from her I would have never guessed. There is no dialogue, there is shushing it up. Of course Tala’s mother, who brings the subject up does it in an offensive way, so she is instructed by her daughter that she should leave the Israelis alone. It kind of gives the impression that one should not talk about this matter at all. Later on it is suggested that the biggest problem are rich Palestinians, who do not somehow give a new, fruitful life in Jordan to the refugees from the Gaza Strip… Seriously WTF? There is no mention of fanatical attitudes on both sides of the conflict, or of the war crimes on civilians and the silence of the international community. Sarif says that neither her Palestinian girlfriend nor Jewish friend felt offended. Sure they did not. Why, there is nothing controversial in pretending that the issue is not there and in acting as if saying anything critical about the Israelis is instantly anti-Semitic… It would have been better if this subject had been just left out, because the way it had been handled borders on absurd.
And now the bit I felt was racist. We have Nina Tala’s family’s house keeper. She wears a shalvar kameez and is obviously of East or Central Asian descent. From the very beginning of the film she spits into the drinks she brings for Tala’s mother. I agree that Tala’a mother is a horrible person, I would have hated her instantly if I ever met her, but nowhere in this film she is shown to mistreat her staff, insult them or cheat them on their pay. Still Nina behaved in that peculiar way. My though after watching the film: is the message that a person form that region or culture will disrespect their employer for no apparent reason, just because they do not like them? I was beyond shocked hearing that according to Sarif this behaviour was a response to the mother’s anti-Semitism… The house keeper spits into the beverages she serves from the very beginning. We learn of the anti-Semitic attitude far into the film, and I am not even sure Nina is present when these sentiments are voiced. I might be just overreacting, but for me it felt ridiculous and racist.
In the DVD extras the film director constantly moans about the low budget of this film. Well maybe instead of making the film about ridiculously stereotypical rich people, she could have made a film about simple, normal and realistic people, so she would not need to rent very expensive locations, cars and clothes… And possibly she would have had the money to improve the script with some professional, objective script writer and not some bff, who obviously preferred to be encouraging and supportive, when serious critical approach was required.
I usually do not repost stuff I read on the internet. But I recently had a conversation with a male friend, who says he is sometimes even more of a feminist than many women. And I kind of even believe that he truly wishes he is, and he has good intentions. Still he likes stereotypes that women are this and men are that… So I decided to link to a post I read. It is about rape, but it also very simply and clearly explains how culture works, binds certain groups etc. I mean, the things the author of that blog writes should be obvious and still they are not, which is simply tragic.
Not many films touch me on a deeply personal level. This one does in a very bad way. What was even worse were things my friends said after we had watched it. I am still struggling with this film and with how it is perceived. I’ve already written a review of this film somewhere else, an almost proper one, neat and impersonal. But I feel that I need to write other things as well… this is how much I personally hated this film. Previously I only got this involved in films I had found beautiful. So this is even less of a film review than the other ones here. It will be more of an over-share and a rant. And many a spoiler ahead, you have been forewarned.
The plot in short: Hubert a teenager and his mother have a horrible relationship, they fight constantly and do cruel things to each other. This is it… the film is one huge raw cut into (hardly) digestible pieces with interludes of some redundant sub-plots. I guess the other characters and episodes were put in because otherwise this would have ended up as an unwatchable short and not a feature film. The main focus was on the child-parent conflict and the rest was so underdeveloped that it either seemed pointless (the young teacher’s story) or ridiculous (the boyfriend(boyfriends?) story). I shall not go into the teacher bit, because I am truly clueless what was that all about, but I would like to expand on the boyfriend. My reason is that Hubert being gay is mentioned in every piece of commentary about this film that I have heard or read. I do not see why is this detail so important, because anyone can have a very pathological relationship with a parent, regardless of their sexuality or gender. But fine, this is supposedly autobiographical and Dolan is a young, gay male, so I will not argue with that. The ridiculous bit is how was Hubert’s homosexuality is portrayed, more precisely his relationship. Either Canadian teenage gay boys are completely different from other teenagers I have seen (live or on film) or this was the least realistic portrayal of a romantic relationship I have seen in a highly realistic movie (oh and this one does aspire to realism, it even goes as far as naturalism). The teenagers I have encountered were very excited with their relationships, especially when these were very fresh, less than half a year old relationships. They were (even a we could fit in here) constantly in breach of each other’s personal space, even if they were not touching the proximity was high and the affection very obvious in the movements or gazes. Between Hubert and Antonin there is nothing of the sort even when they are alone together in Antonin room (Antonin’s mother knows and approves of their relationship). There is even a scene when they are on the bed just with their underwear on – there was absolutely no sexual tension between them, no affection, if they were two girls instead of boys this scene could have been taken for plain bonding between good friends. If I remember correctly before Antonin’s mother spelled it out I was actually thinking that they are just pals from school and that Hubert is yet to find a boyfriend. And than there was the completely laughable, artsy sex scene, the sole purpose of which was to communicate: “I’m Xavier Dolan, look at me I’m so hot topless!”.
Now to the main event, the acclaimed and hyped mature portrayal of a relationship between mother and son. Well it may have been mature if it not for the super emo monologues in the bathroom, which were trying to sway the viewers to Hubert’s side. He was made to be the bigger victim in the film. That was really cheap and childish, because there was no bigger victim in that pathology… a part of me feels that there was no victim at all. They both seemed to egotistic, completely focused on their own suffering. There is a form of the narcissistic disorder that basically goes like that: look at me, pithy me, I’m an eternal victim of everyone and everything! I felt that both of them suffered from this. They were like little children incapable of empathy and lacking any form of self-awareness. They say cruel things to each other and act as if there was nothing wrong with that… they love each other so they can say anything. For me there was no other love than self-love, because if you love someone else you take their feelings into account. There was this laughable scene, when the mother gets a phone call from the principal of the private school she sent Hubert off to. Hubert ran away and the guy says that this has never happened before. Of course he says other stuff as well, sexist things. And the mother thrives, she makes such a victim of herself, her monologue so dramatic, so desperate – I laughed so hard. Seriously, she loved every bit of it, she was separated from her regular oppressor (Hubert) and that suddenly this one came along. Glory be… I personally know someone like them, someone that needs to be oppressed, is always the victim even if it is her, who uses physical and emotional violence against others. It is also everyone else who has a problem and should seek treatment, not her. And I grew to hate her, and I know I say hurtful things to her, but I do not pretend to love her, I know what I am saying – after years and years of being put in a position of the bully, even though all I did was backing off and keeping my mouth shut I just got fed up and began to retaliate, but I am fully aware of it!
These two characters live, breath and love their pathology, they can be such perfect victims in it. They need it to assert themselves of their own flawlessness and the cruelty of others.
Coco Chanel invites Igor Stravinsky and his whole family to her very modern and fashionable house near Paris. The Stravinsky family had emigrated to Paris running away from the revolution which had been taking place in Russia at that time. The primary reason for Chanel’s gesture is her love for Stravinsky’s music. She wants to offer a fellow artist a quiet place to work. But over time they develop a sexual relationship.
I have to say I found the film rather offensive. My friends found it boring and deprived of well developed characters, and I concur with both these opinions. But as dull as the story was it wasn’t enough for me to fully disengage and ignore the strong sexist undertone of the film. It is very shocking for me that stereotypes can run this deep in a film of this sort. I mean, as depressing as it is cinemas are ridden with half-assed movies filled with sexist and xenophobic stereotypes, but they aspire to nothing more than very cheap entertainment for people, who usually unlearned to read. The Chanel & Stravinsky movie, however, pretends to be something quite different. A beautiful, emotional drama, with art nouveau and classical music in the back ground. Something a hoity toity intellectual might watch together with other members of her/his species.
We have three main characters: Coco – the successful, heartless bitch – seducer; Igor – the weak, pathetic man – adulterer; Katarina – the terminally ill victim – wife. The way the script is written there are no other traits to these characters and the other characters are there just to fill the group shots. There is no reason shown for the passion between Chanel and Stravinsky, apart from her beauty. In best case scenario he views her and her life with patronising amusement, so why would an independent woman like her wish to put up with this kind of attitude – no apparent reason in the film, besides a comment that she collects men. And why does she pursue him in the first place – reason: she loves his music. As much I love the art and craft of certain artists or actors it is not synonyms with: (in a hypothetical situation) I must sleep with them just because we are in the same room.
Katarina bears everything with dignity and mostly in silence, both her physical and emotional pain. Igor is spineless, but has sexual needs. And Coco she takes whatever she wants shamelessly, regardless of the suffering she causes – there is not even a hint of remorse or thought that what she is doing may be wrong. But Coco is a stereotypical independent and successful woman. She is ruthless and mean. She has no respect for her employees. She acts as if everything she wants is so simple and obvious that only incompetent morons are unable to read her thoughts. I do not think I have recently seen such a pure evil career woman portrayed in film especially in an independent, slightly artsy one.
I do not recommend this film. If you are not fazed by prejudice and sexism than it is still plainly dull. And it is a shame all these truly beautiful clothes, houses and interiors wasted on this story.