It’s interesting to look back at the early 1990s pop culture from today. It was a unique time. Coming off the back of the conservative 1980’s, a cultural unspooling toward independence occurred. Women, buoyed by third-wave feminism, felt more confident in embracing their individuality and their sexuality. Madonna, always on the cusp of culture, published her SEX book. Boundaries were pushed in all directions for what it meant to be a sexually liberated woman. Women could be grungy, be corporate, be sensual, be a riot grrl.
This tonal shift reflected itself in cinema. During this time a string of tragi-comedic romance films were released. They challenged the societal norms of the day. Pretty Woman and Indecent Proposal are examples of films that highlighted tales of the independent, yet seemingly imperfect, woman. But what were these imperfections? And could they, by today’s standards, even be considered as such? Here we take a look back at these films and examine them through modern eyes.
In 1990, Pretty Woman was released. Starring Julia Roberts and Richard Gere, it was a classic tale of guy meets girl. The film was an immediate hit and has remained a cultural touchstone. Julia Roberts is ‘Vivian’, a sex worker, whilst Richard Gere is ‘Edward’, a financier. Edward stumbles upon Vivian one night when asking for directions. This results in him offering her a job for a week, to act as his “date” for social functions. In return, she will be paid $3000. By the end of the movie, Edward and Vivian have declared their love for one another and drive off into the sunset together.
From the outside looking in, one could argue that in the end, Vivian gets the happy heteronormative ending. The so-called ‘marriage plot’ storyline. That is a nice, pretty girl (because she must be both) getting married to a man with economic and social power and an open heart.
This is underscored by Vivian being portrayed as a “good girl” sex worker. Seemingly out of place on Rodeo Drive, easily transformed via clothes to a ‘wealthy’ status. “You clean up real nice. You sure don’t fit in down on the Boulevard lookin’ like you do, not that you ever did.” observes her friend Kit. In the eyes of the viewer, she isn’t a “bad” girl.
However, Vivian is far more than a piece of social construct. She argues that she is beholden to no one. Refusing to use a pimp, instead preferring to choose who and when her clients are. Demanding authority over her body. Vivian says what she wants and remains resolute. Even at the very end, when Edward asks, “So what happened after he climbed up the tower and rescued her?” she replies, “She rescues him right back.” She is autonomous. It’s a feminist view that is downplayed in the film.
Looking back on it with today’s eyes, we know that the film offers a sanitized version of sex work. The reality is that most sex workers will not meet an ‘Edward’ type. But today’s audience would most likely be less judgemental of Vivian’s profession (indeed the irony is that they would most likely be more judgemental of Edward’s). The themes of consent, of independence, would be highlighted. Perhaps they wouldn’t have a marriage as a happy ending, and that would be okay. But at its core, Vivian is a very modern woman.
Indecent Proposal was released in cinemas in 1993. It’s a tale of a married couple, Diana (Demi Moore) and David (Woody Harrelson) who are broke and about to lose their land. They travel to Vegas in a last-ditch attempt to earn the money they desperately need. Here, they encounter John (Robert Redford). John offers them $1 million for a night with Diana. Feeling the constraints of debt, she accepts. Unfortunately, this money doesn’t save their land or their marriage. Diana begins a romantic relationship with John, and divorce papers between her and David are signed. She leaves him her half of the cash, which David then donates to charity. John realizes that although he ‘has’ Diana, she will never love him like she does David. In the end, she runs back to David, who immediately accepts her love again.
The movie was slated by feminists at the time of its release. A common argument was that Diana was nothing more than the chattel of men. That she trades her body for the benefit of her husband. This much is arguably true. Screenwriter Amy Holden Jones offered a different viewpoint of the film. She argued that Diana wanted to sleep with John for the mere sake of sleeping with him. She realized that sex was sometimes just that, sex. That the money wasn’t a priority to her, but a bonus. It’s a modern take, that women take ownership of their pleasure.
If the movie was remade today, it would most likely stick to the original ending that the screenwriter penned. Amy Holden Jones had written an ending where Diana leaves John of her free will. This was squashed by Robert Redford, who did not want to be in a role where a woman left him. His rewrite took priority. In this version, Diana only has mere glimpses of independence. In a way, she has far less autonomy than Vivian.
We’ve come a long way in society since the early 1990’s. Women are more free to express themselves than ever before. But what we can see from these films is that societal change happens slowly. What was once scandalous, is now par for the course.
Today, it is more of a given that women have autonomy over their bodies and minds. It no longer needs to be as window-dressed to make the movie more palatable for the conservative viewer. We wouldn’t think twice of a woman having sex for her own pleasure, nor of a woman stating she wants financial independence. It’s a given these days. And it is a welcome change from the previous ‘femme fatale’ roles or the ‘final girl’ roles that have historically populated films.
