IMDb RATING
6.2/10
1.1K
YOUR RATING
Investigates the politics of cinematic shot design, and how this meta-level of filmmaking intersects with the twin epidemics of sexual abuse/assault and employment discrimination against wom... Read allInvestigates the politics of cinematic shot design, and how this meta-level of filmmaking intersects with the twin epidemics of sexual abuse/assault and employment discrimination against women, with over 175 movie clips from 1896 - 2020.Investigates the politics of cinematic shot design, and how this meta-level of filmmaking intersects with the twin epidemics of sexual abuse/assault and employment discrimination against women, with over 175 movie clips from 1896 - 2020.
- Awards
- 2 wins & 5 nominations total
Raja Bhattar
- Self
- (as Dr. Raja Bhattar)
May Hong HaDuong
- Self
- (as May Hong Haduong)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Coming here to read the reviews after finishing the documentary and seeing so many angry men labelling the director obnoxious, "bpd feminist", etc etc, just proves the point that this documentary was NEEDED in the field of filmmaking.
The documentary is a window towards a new perspective in filmmaking, where women directors (and anywhere in the movie industry) are empowered by having equal opportunities to express their creativity while having it valued justly by the industry.
The director Nina Menkes raises some essential questions which are upon the future generations of creatives to answer. She has a way of engrossing the viewer to what is being presented, while also making them an active part of it.
I hope this documentary sparks a new era in the filmmaking industry and beyond.
"The first feminist act is looking. To say, "Ok, you're looking at me, but I am looking right back." Agnes Varda.
The documentary is a window towards a new perspective in filmmaking, where women directors (and anywhere in the movie industry) are empowered by having equal opportunities to express their creativity while having it valued justly by the industry.
The director Nina Menkes raises some essential questions which are upon the future generations of creatives to answer. She has a way of engrossing the viewer to what is being presented, while also making them an active part of it.
I hope this documentary sparks a new era in the filmmaking industry and beyond.
"The first feminist act is looking. To say, "Ok, you're looking at me, but I am looking right back." Agnes Varda.
Authors and guests dive deep into every aspect of film making and history, to find "patriarchal" elements. There are a lot of axioms, which are not defined, but can be perceived through their comments. For example, predatory behaviour comes from men and patriarchy. They set very clear divide between two sexes with many generalisations, which might be true(statistically speaking), but same people would never accept the same treatment if real statistics were used as counter arguments. It's the cat and mouse game between generalisation and specialisation. They usually take whatever suits them best, for a particular situation. Authors don't want to discover, research, learn. They want to impose, in a very "patriarchal" way. Here lies the ultimate truth. Within is the answer they refuse to accept. Every person is a microcosmos. A combination of the worst and the best humanity offers and everything in between. We are biologically separated by combination of X and Y chromosomes, that govern our physical traits but all other characteristics fall into a spectrum. Some are very common and some fall generally more on one side. None of them is inherently good or bad. It's all about the context. Even when we use archetypes from psychology, like "tyrannical father" and "devouring mother", gender is used just as a description, not a permanent label. A man can behave as a "devouring mother". It's sad to see all these accomplished and grown people not being able to behave as adults.
It's interesting to see the different opinions from the comment sections. I saw someone made a comment and it goes something like "yes women are being objectified but they are also doing so on their own accord..."and they (sorry to assume but i guess there is 89% chances that they are a cis-gender heterosexual man) used examples if instagram influencer and models...
Utterly speechless, why so defensive? This is a desperate try to distract people and themselves from the actual issues at the core of this film which is extremely poignant. If we are talking about male gaze, and the objectification of men toward women, we are talking about an oppressive troupe which put women in a passive position, dehumanizing women, ignoring their subjectivity and voices while fragmenting their bodies, privileging the male gaze. Influencers and models are a different issue here, what they suggest that is women dont have autonomy and sense to empower themselves by displaying and posing their bodies on sns in their own way. Cuz whatever we do is to cater your gaze and perpetuate male oppression right?
Women have the freedom to choose whatever the way the want to celebrate and display their bodies, its about being comfortable in one's own skin.
And also why not think of why women feel the need sometimes to cater or as they suggest perpetuate the objectification? Its patriarchal pedagogy and propaganda which a lot of us have to unlearn. Its structural, still pinpointing to the cultural of female objectification. Stop being defensive, look inward. Or else you are not getting any point of this documentary.
Utterly speechless, why so defensive? This is a desperate try to distract people and themselves from the actual issues at the core of this film which is extremely poignant. If we are talking about male gaze, and the objectification of men toward women, we are talking about an oppressive troupe which put women in a passive position, dehumanizing women, ignoring their subjectivity and voices while fragmenting their bodies, privileging the male gaze. Influencers and models are a different issue here, what they suggest that is women dont have autonomy and sense to empower themselves by displaying and posing their bodies on sns in their own way. Cuz whatever we do is to cater your gaze and perpetuate male oppression right?
Women have the freedom to choose whatever the way the want to celebrate and display their bodies, its about being comfortable in one's own skin.
And also why not think of why women feel the need sometimes to cater or as they suggest perpetuate the objectification? Its patriarchal pedagogy and propaganda which a lot of us have to unlearn. Its structural, still pinpointing to the cultural of female objectification. Stop being defensive, look inward. Or else you are not getting any point of this documentary.
Why did we not see Mr Craig as Bond coming out the water in slow-mo in Casino Royale, but we saw Halle Berry from Die Another Day. I wonder why?
Cinema is meant to mirror real life, that's be honest here us men as stupid, from the early teens women control us. I wonder if these women interviewed have ever used there bodies to attract men? To get things from men? Women go for looks the same as blokes all this BS about "we are deeper then that" BS try a dating site, try meeting in a room of singles, they see the cover and decide the same as men.
Look at Playboy and the other mags, did people force the women to go into the magazines? NO they done it for money and fame.
A woman who is a close "friend" said to me once, we sit on a pot of Gold you men are so weak, I could not argue with her Monroe who begged to be a straight actor, and was refused got to the heights she did by being pure SEX, Some like it hot for one film.
Women can't get the hump when they use their sexuality to control us like a dog on a lead, then cry when they are portrayed as that in some films.
That Doc is BS some of the old films they showed in black and white these actors could ACT yes they looked sexy, but did you see any skin? And some of these films won awards they were great films, so we hate them now cause of the way the camera shot them.
It would be interesting to know how many blokes in that audience had to adjust their trousers as some of these clips were hot stuff it's like Helen Mirren now one of the Greatest Women actors EVER how did she start off her career, was she forced to do that film?
Cinema is meant to mirror real life, that's be honest here us men as stupid, from the early teens women control us. I wonder if these women interviewed have ever used there bodies to attract men? To get things from men? Women go for looks the same as blokes all this BS about "we are deeper then that" BS try a dating site, try meeting in a room of singles, they see the cover and decide the same as men.
Look at Playboy and the other mags, did people force the women to go into the magazines? NO they done it for money and fame.
A woman who is a close "friend" said to me once, we sit on a pot of Gold you men are so weak, I could not argue with her Monroe who begged to be a straight actor, and was refused got to the heights she did by being pure SEX, Some like it hot for one film.
Women can't get the hump when they use their sexuality to control us like a dog on a lead, then cry when they are portrayed as that in some films.
That Doc is BS some of the old films they showed in black and white these actors could ACT yes they looked sexy, but did you see any skin? And some of these films won awards they were great films, so we hate them now cause of the way the camera shot them.
It would be interesting to know how many blokes in that audience had to adjust their trousers as some of these clips were hot stuff it's like Helen Mirren now one of the Greatest Women actors EVER how did she start off her career, was she forced to do that film?
10shash
This is a must watch film. It is raw, honest and critically important. BRAINwASHED creates a much needed awareness in the film industry and describes how camera angle and other filmmaking elements contributes to issues that effect women: sexualization, employment discrimination and even the rape culture that sadly exists in our society. A must watch!
This is especially important for the younger generation of film makers, as they are the ones who can truly make a difference and show that it is possible to choose differently when filming the female body in a way that is engaging but not sexualizing.
This is especially important for the younger generation of film makers, as they are the ones who can truly make a difference and show that it is possible to choose differently when filming the female body in a way that is engaging but not sexualizing.
Did you know
- ConnectionsFeatures La fée aux choux (1896)
- How long is Brainwashed: Sex-Camera-Power?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Brainwashed: Sex-Camera-Power
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $1,550,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $28,826
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $7,409
- Oct 23, 2022
- Gross worldwide
- $46,077
- Runtime1 hour 47 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
What is the Brazilian Portuguese language plot outline for Brainwashed: Le sexisme au cinéma (2022)?
Answer