A24’s film Under the Skin (2013) stars the inimitable Scarlet Johansson playing “the woman,” a character who rides around the streets of Scotland in a van, picks up men, seduces them, and then brings them to a strange building in which they walk forward through a black room until they are absorbed by a strange black liquid in the floor that slowly leeches their vitality and body structure, until they are ribbons of maleness floating around in viscous soup.
So, is the woman, as we know her in capitalist society, in our our society, entirely a male construct, doomed to die the instant she recognises who and what she really is, or has been made into? So what do the 'cannibalistic succubus Monstrous Bitch films' represent? All, I assume, are made by men and aimed at a male audience? Are they mysogeny personified? I's like your deconstruction leaves out key elements, or are we meant to 'fill in the gaps' ourselves? I'm interested in the idea that sex, male, female, having been almost entirely commodified, has out of necessity, created two, entirely seperate 'species'. The male has created the female in his own image. It explains why this 'genre' has come about, doesn't it?
So, is the woman, as we know her in capitalist society, in our our society, entirely a male construct, doomed to die the instant she recognises who and what she really is, or has been made into? So what do the 'cannibalistic succubus Monstrous Bitch films' represent? All, I assume, are made by men and aimed at a male audience? Are they mysogeny personified? I's like your deconstruction leaves out key elements, or are we meant to 'fill in the gaps' ourselves? I'm interested in the idea that sex, male, female, having been almost entirely commodified, has out of necessity, created two, entirely seperate 'species'. The male has created the female in his own image. It explains why this 'genre' has come about, doesn't it?