Repulsion

I will not include my hatred for Roman Polanski in this rating, else it would be a zero star movie. It is however very unsettling to me how this movie was produced, how Polanski  stated that she "always was like that" instead of letting the end be an explantion of her trauma coming from her childhood, how it is often interpreted. The movie makes her  "insanity" the main focus, even though her repulsion is very much reasonable (especially considering the child abuse (interpretation)) and it is devastating how Catherine Deneuve was forced to sexualise herself in the process and marketing of the film, which is completly failing the point of her character. Considering his problemtic and disdainable background, i truly do not believe, that this movie was inteded to be what we, mostly women, are making out of it. To me it seemed like he was trying to frighten the audience with the uncharted female hysteria and insanity, rather than explaining how male overreaching leads to trauma, isolation and most importantly self defense. Carol was not sick. The men arround her were. Some examples are Micheal slapping her sister, insulting her by making her seem ill and claiming she needs a doctor, Colin stalking her and not respecting her boundaries, the Landlord invading her privacy and attempting to assault her after portraying her as a sexually provocative purchasable being and men constantly staring at her.  Eventhough we like to see this movie as satirical/progressive to a certain point and view the male characters as threatening and unsympathetic, it was however made in the 60s and produced by a disgusting mysoginist. I do not believe we can expect him to make a movie as feminist and relatable as our interpretion of this film. The male characters might be disdainable  today and to some people back then, but they are an accurate depiciton of men in our society, especially back then. Therefore, their overreaching and violent behaviour is not seen as abnormal, her response to it is.  After all the abuse Carol went through in the film, the main focus is still her "weird" and "uncanny" behaviour, which is not once validated as fear or trauma response. As a horror fan, i have trouble deciding if this was the right genre for a movie with the message it has, not the one we want to see in it. Yes, the female experience is like a horror movie. The woman getting  revenge by being the psycho killer is however not portrayed as freeing or acceptable. In a world where women are treated like this and barely get any help or get their abusers into prison, murder is seen as the worse, or at least more provable, while women are often not believed when stepping forward about their experience. Carol was seen as unreasonable and abnormal instead of being understood. She will always be the suffering one in this society and sadly, to many, probably also Polanski and the audience back then or even today, she will be the "bad" and "evil" character. However, i believe this movie is very aesthetically shot and is a great (even feminist) movie, if we interpret it in our favour and in todays feminist perspective, including a respectful view on trauma and the acknowledgement of female suffering.  My rating of this movie is therefore based on my interpretation and in complete ignorance of my believes on Polanskis intentions. I admire the film in a sense of comforting traumatised and disturbed women, that are afraid of encountering men and stepping out of the house, by making them feel seen. I am in awe of women actively taking their power back and doing themselves, what men fail to do and mostly even oppose to. Protecting women.