TIFF 2017: mother!

Javier Bardem and Jennifer Lawrence (IMDB)

While Aronofsky’s artistry is at an all-time-low, it's his misogyny that makes this film abhorrent.


Director: Darren Aronofsky
Cast: Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris
Studio: Paramount Pictures
US Release Date: 2017-09-15
... it's well known that violence against women exists, and the simple regurgitation of it on screen is not illuminating.
Shot mostly in close-ups, Darren Aronofsky’s mother! meticulously follows Jennifer Lawrence’s character, having her constantly fill the screen. Playing a young woman married to an older poet (Javier Bardem), she comes into his life after his home has burned down and she begins rebuilding his house. Despite her help and devotion to him, she is ultimately neglected.

Matters are complicated when some fans of the poet’s writing (Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer) arrive, which culminates in a fight between their sons -- one of them dying. To the wife’s protests, the poet continues to invite volatile people into their house, which pulsates, bleeds, and crumbles, particularly from a fleshy, vaginal-like opening in the floor which leads to a secret room in the basement. When the wife becomes pregnant, the writer begins to care for her once more -- until his new work, inspired by the conception of their baby, is finished. With the release of his book, fans once again arrive at their home, taking over their lives, and the pregnant wife must fight to gain control over her situation.

In this melodramatic relationship, the couple isolated and microcosmic, Lawrence as the titular mother is subjected to a series of abuses and torture. Initially rejected by her husband -- her needs and desires are never met while she does everything in her power to please him -- her situation only worsens as he becomes more and more interested in other people. His fans validate him, and he places their, and his own, interests above those of his wife, who meekly accepts out of a deep love for him -- a love which seems never reciprocated. Her situation becomes more dangerous as the murder occurs in her home, and as, in the third act, the fans turn the house into a literal war-zone.

Running the gamut of violence against women, the wife experiencing everything from emotional to physical abuse, mother! is very pointlessly a work of pure misogyny. Films which depict extreme abuse in order to make a point that abuse exists are not effective: it's well known that violence against women exists, and the simple regurgitation of it on screen is not illuminating. The reproduction of misogyny, without thought or solid critique, can very rarely be effective beyond its lifelessly repetitive presentation, so often indistinguishable from works of more earnest hatred. But mother! goes far beyond a simple straightforward representation of abuse.

Aronofsky’s film becomes extreme in order to depict constant trauma. It's bad enough to watch the mother trembling in fear, illness, confusion, and submission. It becomes unbearable to watch when her husband, as she insults him, forces herself on her: the rape scene turns to passion as she stops fighting back and begins to enjoy it and, taking charge, grips his body with her legs. It's equally unbearable to watch as Lawrence is beaten, punched and kicked in the face with her breasts exposed, while her attackers call her a “cunt” and a “whore”; a scene which feels more like violent porn, the pandering to a specific fetish, than anything else.

Between moments of unwatchable violence, the film is peppered with shots of Lawrence’s body. She spends much of her time wearing a sheer nightgown and is framed in medium shots so that we may see her breasts. We take up her perspective and watch as she herself looks down her shirt, this time her breasts in close-up. With such a classic adherence to the male gaze, Aronofsky’s filmmaking matches his thematic misogyny perfectly.

mother!’s violent sexism is its biggest problem, but not it's only one. Incredibly heavy-handed, and centering around a simplistic religious allegory, the narrative feels juvenile at best. Lacking real atmosphere, and so overly focused on Lawrence’s face and body that it ignores everything else, the film never creates proper tension which it so desperately needs. The anxiety the mother feels over the constant invasion of her home is just one-note frustration: from start to finish, her husband ignores her wishes, and with no progression, the evenness of conflict is boring. And the sound, designed to draw out and emphasize shrill notes to express the mother’s delirious perspective, is amateurish and unoriginal rather than a creative way of conveying a subjective sensory experience.

While Aronofsky’s artistry is at an all-time-low, it's his misogyny that makes the film abhorrent. Even if the point is to illustrate the unending slog that is patriarchal oppression, the result is a truly angry film towards women. With its disgusting, sexist abuse of the mother, Aronofsky’s film is perhaps the most hateful of 2017’s Toronto International Film Festival.


In the wake of Malcolm Young's passing, Jesse Fink, author of The Youngs: The Brothers Who Built AC/DC, offers up his top 10 AC/DC songs, each seasoned with a dash of backstory.

In the wake of Malcolm Young's passing, Jesse Fink, author of The Youngs: The Brothers Who Built AC/DC, offers up his top 10 AC/DC songs, each seasoned with a dash of backstory.

Keep reading... Show less

Pauline Black may be called the Queen of Ska by some, but she insists she's not the only one, as Two-Tone legends the Selecter celebrate another stellar album in a career full of them.

Being commonly hailed as the "Queen" of a genre of music is no mean feat, but for Pauline Black, singer/songwriter of Two-Tone legends the Selecter and universally recognised "Queen of Ska", it is something she seems to take in her stride. "People can call you whatever they like," she tells PopMatters, "so I suppose it's better that they call you something really good!"

Keep reading... Show less

Morrison's prose is so engaging and welcoming that it's easy to miss the irreconcilable ambiguities that are set forth in her prose as ineluctable convictions.

It's a common enough gambit in science fiction. Humans come across a race of aliens that appear to be entirely alike and yet one group of said aliens subordinates the other, visiting violence upon their persons, denigrating them openly and without social or legal consequence, humiliating them at every turn. The humans inquire why certain of the aliens are subjected to such degradation when there are no discernible differences among the entire race of aliens, at least from the human point of view. The aliens then explain that the subordinated group all share some minor trait (say the left nostril is oh-so-slightly larger than the right while the "superior" group all have slightly enlarged right nostrils)—something thatm from the human vantage pointm is utterly ridiculous. This minor difference not only explains but, for the alien understanding, justifies the inequitable treatment, even the enslavement of the subordinate group. And there you have the quandary of Otherness in a nutshell.

Keep reading... Show less

A 1996 classic, Shawn Colvin's album of mature pop is also one of best break-up albums, comparable lyrically and musically to Joni Mitchell's Hejira and Bob Dylan's Blood on the Tracks.

When pop-folksinger Shawn Colvin released A Few Small Repairs in 1996, the music world was ripe for an album of sharp, catchy songs by a female singer-songwriter. Lilith Fair, the tour for women in the music, would gross $16 million in 1997. Colvin would be a main stage artist in all three years of the tour, playing alongside Liz Phair, Suzanne Vega, Sheryl Crow, Sarah McLachlan, Meshell Ndegeocello, Joan Osborne, Lisa Loeb, Erykah Badu, and many others. Strong female artists were not only making great music (when were they not?) but also having bold success. Alanis Morissette's Jagged Little Pill preceded Colvin's fourth recording by just 16 months.

Keep reading... Show less

Frank Miller locates our tragedy and warps it into his own brutal beauty.

In terms of continuity, the so-called promotion of this entry as Miller's “third" in the series is deceptively cryptic. Miller's mid-'80s limited series The Dark Knight Returns (or DKR) is a “Top 5 All-Time" graphic novel, if not easily “Top 3". His intertextual and metatextual themes resonated then as they do now, a reason this source material was “go to" for Christopher Nolan when he resurrected the franchise for Warner Bros. in the mid-00s. The sheer iconicity of DKR posits a seminal work in the artist's canon, which shares company with the likes of Sin City, 300, and an influential run on Daredevil, to name a few.

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.