On another level "Kimberly" explores the actual idea of simultaneous multiple partner relationships, and seeks to peek below some taboos. That's cool. But it doesn't go at all deep. It's all formulaic female wish fulfillment -- commit through competition, one full man out of four -- and no real dynamics or exploration of motivations, true drives, and what can work, and can't, for any period of time.
Meanwhile the prevailing social climate is framed by the most virile, intelligent and attractive of the four guys announcing to the college class he is teaching that it is a new age, a new dawn between the sexes, with independent women, and dependent men. Interestingly, and tellingly, he turns out to not be "the one". Probably because he wouldn't work as the dependent. Not really. But he can announce and appear to submit to the principal.
Ah yes. That's the chick's movie crowd pleasing, "original", "cleaver" theme of this shallow romantic farce.
I'm all for looking underneath taboos and social norms, and finding out what's really there, or needs to be there. I'm all for accepting diversity; for letting people do their own thing.
Just one question though. Would any of you care to name the American film of the last decade and a half or more, where a man is in a similar position -- with three or four different women at the same time? That is, where that is celebrated, as the reverse is here in "Kimberly", rather than reviled. All of whom came to know about each other, and remained or became fast friends, though not without rivalries for the top edge of affection from the irresistibly man. You know, where as in "Kimberly" he loves each of the two or three or four women really and truly for their different and unique personal qualities and looks, but doesn't want to give any of them up. And where the whole thing is treated as, if not for everyone, still intriguing, adorable, interesting, and heartwarming.
I'll give you a clue. It doesn't exist. Not in the last fifteen years, anyway. Not remotely. On the other hand, films which sympathetically treat or rather celebrate women at the center of several men's competing and then co-existing love interests, well beyond the initial "courtship" or getting to know you stage, are becoming increasingly common. See e.g. "Splendor", released in the same year as Kimberly. It takes the same idea as Kimberly even further. It's also a considerably edgier movie, though still most definitely feminist correct -- or actually, even more so.
This is despite the fact that everyone who knows anything (and isn't a blinkered ideologist) knows that two woman threesomes are a central male fantasy, not just in America but everywhere. (Actually, polygamy has been a reality and not just a fantasy in much of the world through most of history, for more wealthy or high status men.) Exploring how it could work in contemporary American post feminist culture is hardly old had -- it would be ground breaking. Yet where is it? It's the great feminist taboo.
Oh, I can imagine that a two women, one man menage-a-trois set in contemporary American culture could hit the screens soon. But for it to be "avant" or "edgy", one or both women would have to have the clear balance of power -- as Kimberly in the film of that name, and Victoria in Spendor unequivocally do. How, when it's changed to a one man, two or more women situation? Simple, make both women not a little, but predominantly gay. Hey, that could take male emasculation in feminist dominated American media culture to a new level. The one in the center then becomes the bi woman, or both of them on an alternating basis, if neither are dyke, lesbo only types. Something like that does occur for a while in "Slaves of the Underground" (1997), before the lesbian draw wins out completely and the male is left all alone. But hey, he is admired for his lapdog affection for lesbian power.
Anything but having one male in a predominately hetero loving and involved three or more way. THAT would be unthinkable. Shudder. In America that is. In Europe, especially France or Spain, it's a different story.
Meanwhile the prevailing social climate is framed by the most virile, intelligent and attractive of the four guys announcing to the college class he is teaching that it is a new age, a new dawn between the sexes, with independent women, and dependent men. Interestingly, and tellingly, he turns out to not be "the one". Probably because he wouldn't work as the dependent. Not really. But he can announce and appear to submit to the principal.
Ah yes. That's the chick's movie crowd pleasing, "original", "cleaver" theme of this shallow romantic farce.
I'm all for looking underneath taboos and social norms, and finding out what's really there, or needs to be there. I'm all for accepting diversity; for letting people do their own thing.
Just one question though. Would any of you care to name the American film of the last decade and a half or more, where a man is in a similar position -- with three or four different women at the same time? That is, where that is celebrated, as the reverse is here in "Kimberly", rather than reviled. All of whom came to know about each other, and remained or became fast friends, though not without rivalries for the top edge of affection from the irresistibly man. You know, where as in "Kimberly" he loves each of the two or three or four women really and truly for their different and unique personal qualities and looks, but doesn't want to give any of them up. And where the whole thing is treated as, if not for everyone, still intriguing, adorable, interesting, and heartwarming.
I'll give you a clue. It doesn't exist. Not in the last fifteen years, anyway. Not remotely. On the other hand, films which sympathetically treat or rather celebrate women at the center of several men's competing and then co-existing love interests, well beyond the initial "courtship" or getting to know you stage, are becoming increasingly common. See e.g. "Splendor", released in the same year as Kimberly. It takes the same idea as Kimberly even further. It's also a considerably edgier movie, though still most definitely feminist correct -- or actually, even more so.
This is despite the fact that everyone who knows anything (and isn't a blinkered ideologist) knows that two woman threesomes are a central male fantasy, not just in America but everywhere. (Actually, polygamy has been a reality and not just a fantasy in much of the world through most of history, for more wealthy or high status men.) Exploring how it could work in contemporary American post feminist culture is hardly old had -- it would be ground breaking. Yet where is it? It's the great feminist taboo.
Oh, I can imagine that a two women, one man menage-a-trois set in contemporary American culture could hit the screens soon. But for it to be "avant" or "edgy", one or both women would have to have the clear balance of power -- as Kimberly in the film of that name, and Victoria in Spendor unequivocally do. How, when it's changed to a one man, two or more women situation? Simple, make both women not a little, but predominantly gay. Hey, that could take male emasculation in feminist dominated American media culture to a new level. The one in the center then becomes the bi woman, or both of them on an alternating basis, if neither are dyke, lesbo only types. Something like that does occur for a while in "Slaves of the Underground" (1997), before the lesbian draw wins out completely and the male is left all alone. But hey, he is admired for his lapdog affection for lesbian power.
Anything but having one male in a predominately hetero loving and involved three or more way. THAT would be unthinkable. Shudder. In America that is. In Europe, especially France or Spain, it's a different story.