Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10 (click to see context) from:
* SeinfeldIsUnfunny: [[spoiler: An evil white woman sending a poor innocent black man to prison just to cover up her own wicked deeds]]? Scandalously shocking to a 1940s audience. The film was even banned in some places because it dealt with racism
to:
* SeinfeldIsUnfunny: OnceOriginalNowOverdone: [[spoiler: An evil white woman sending a poor innocent black man to prison just to cover up her own wicked deeds]]? Scandalously shocking to a 1940s audience. The film was even banned in some places because it dealt with racismracism.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 4 (click to see context) :
* DarknessInducedAudienceApathy: Virtually every character in the book is screwed up in some way. Stanley is an utterly horrible manipulator who uses everyone she meets, Roy is a doormat who lets herself be used, Lavinia is a hypochondriac who worries everyone, Asa is bitter about his fall from grace, Uncle William is well....[[DirtyOldMan Uncle William]], Peter is a cheater who quickly turns to the bottle, and Charles is an extreme DoggedNiceGuy. Virtually the only good character is Parry, and he of course gets royally screwed over. The film is a little better, where Roy is less of a doormat [[spoiler: and Stanley ultimately gets her comeuppance]], but it's still a very bleak story.
Added DiffLines:
* TooBleakStoppedCaring: Virtually every character in the book is screwed up in some way. Stanley is an utterly horrible manipulator who uses everyone she meets, Roy is a doormat who lets herself be used, Lavinia is a hypochondriac who worries everyone, Asa is bitter about his fall from grace, Uncle William is well....[[DirtyOldMan Uncle William]], Peter is a cheater who quickly turns to the bottle, and Charles is an extreme DoggedNiceGuy. Virtually the only good character is Parry, and he of course gets royally screwed over. The film is a little better, where Roy is less of a doormat [[spoiler: and Stanley ultimately gets her comeuppance]], but it's still a very bleak story.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4 (click to see context) from:
* DarknessInducedAudienceApathy: Virtually every character in the book is screwed up in some way. Stanley is an utterly horrible manipulator who uses everyone she meets, Roy is a doormat who lets herself be used, Lavinia is a hypochondriac who worries everyone, Asa is bitter about his fall from grace, Uncle William is well....[[DirtyOldMan Uncle William]], Peter is a cheater who quickly turns to the bottle, and Charles is an extreme DoggedNiceGuy. Virtually the only good character is Parry, and he of course gets royally screwed over. The film is a little better, where Roy is less of a doormat, but it's still a very bleak story.
to:
* DarknessInducedAudienceApathy: Virtually every character in the book is screwed up in some way. Stanley is an utterly horrible manipulator who uses everyone she meets, Roy is a doormat who lets herself be used, Lavinia is a hypochondriac who worries everyone, Asa is bitter about his fall from grace, Uncle William is well....[[DirtyOldMan Uncle William]], Peter is a cheater who quickly turns to the bottle, and Charles is an extreme DoggedNiceGuy. Virtually the only good character is Parry, and he of course gets royally screwed over. The film is a little better, where Roy is less of a doormat, doormat [[spoiler: and Stanley ultimately gets her comeuppance]], but it's still a very bleak story.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 6 (click to see context) from:
* FetishRetardant: Invoked by Bette Davis, who rebuffed the studio's efforts to make Stanley more attractive.
to:
* FetishRetardant: Invoked by Bette Davis, Creator/BetteDavis, who rebuffed the studio's efforts to make Stanley more attractive.
Changed line(s) 8 (click to see context) from:
* HilariousInHindsight: Watching ''Film/HushHushSweetCharlotte'' with Olivia de Havilland as the evil sibling (well, cousin in this case) and Bette Davis as the good one gives the impression that Roy got her revenge on Stanley in the end.
to:
* HilariousInHindsight: Watching ''Film/HushHushSweetCharlotte'' with Olivia de Havilland Creator/OliviaDeHavilland as the evil sibling (well, cousin in this case) and Bette Davis Creator/BetteDavis as the good one gives the impression that Roy got her revenge on Stanley in the end.
Changed line(s) 17 (click to see context) from:
* ValuesResonance: While some aspects of the story haven't aged well, the racial dynamics are very reasonant with a modern audience. Notably a white woman's word trumping a black man's, and black people being scapegoats for crimes are oddly reminiscent of modern stories about police brutality.
to:
* ValuesResonance: While some aspects of the story haven't aged well, the racial dynamics are very reasonant with a modern audience. Notably a white woman's word trumping a black man's, and black people being scapegoats for crimes are oddly reminiscent of modern stories about police brutality.brutality.
----
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 17 (click to see context) from:
* ValuesReasonance: While some aspects of the story haven't aged well, the racial dynamics are very reasonant with a modern audience. Notably a white woman's word trumping a black man's, and black people being scapegoats for crimes are oddly reminiscent of modern stories about police brutality.
to:
* ValuesReasonance: ValuesResonance: While some aspects of the story haven't aged well, the racial dynamics are very reasonant with a modern audience. Notably a white woman's word trumping a black man's, and black people being scapegoats for crimes are oddly reminiscent of modern stories about police brutality.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 2,3 (click to see context) from:
** It's not hard to see Stanley as a product of her environment. Due to the family once being upper class, she's been raised with that
mindset rather than having been taught how to be a productive member of society. As she's relied on Uncle William for handouts all her life, she simply doesn't realise that spending excessive amounts is going to put Peter under pressure. That's not to mention the implication that Uncle William could have been grooming her, as he propositions her towards the end.
mindset rather than having been taught how to be a productive member of society. As she's relied on Uncle William for handouts all her life, she simply doesn't realise that spending excessive amounts is going to put Peter under pressure. That's not to mention the implication that Uncle William could have been grooming her, as he propositions her towards the end.
to:
** It's not hard to see Stanley as a product of her environment. Due to the family once being upper class, she's been raised with that
that mindset rather than having been taught how to be a productive member of society. As she's relied on Uncle William for handouts all her life, she simply doesn't realise that spending excessive amounts is going to put Peter under pressure. That's not to mention the implication that Uncle William could have been grooming her, as he propositions her towards the end.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* AlternateCharacterInterpretation:
** It's not hard to see Stanley as a product of her environment. Due to the family once being upper class, she's been raised with that
mindset rather than having been taught how to be a productive member of society. As she's relied on Uncle William for handouts all her life, she simply doesn't realise that spending excessive amounts is going to put Peter under pressure. That's not to mention the implication that Uncle William could have been grooming her, as he propositions her towards the end.
** Why does Roy keep helping Stanley after all she's done? Is it out of sisterly love, in spite of how awful she's been? Is she under pressure from her mother, who blatantly favours Stanley? Is it some kind of sisterly StockholmSyndrome? Does she feel sorry for Stanley?
* DarknessInducedAudienceApathy: Virtually every character in the book is screwed up in some way. Stanley is an utterly horrible manipulator who uses everyone she meets, Roy is a doormat who lets herself be used, Lavinia is a hypochondriac who worries everyone, Asa is bitter about his fall from grace, Uncle William is well....[[DirtyOldMan Uncle William]], Peter is a cheater who quickly turns to the bottle, and Charles is an extreme DoggedNiceGuy. Virtually the only good character is Parry, and he of course gets royally screwed over. The film is a little better, where Roy is less of a doormat, but it's still a very bleak story.
* FairForItsDay: Despite the 'white saviour' elements being present, the film was notable for really showing race relations as they actually were on the big screen. Parry is an actual character, as opposed to a LivingProp, and Bette Davis herself insisted on making him seem like a real person instead of resulting to UncleTomfoolery. His mother Minerva also functions as a character, rather than just a typical maid with a couple of lines. Bonus points for being played by Hattie [=McDaniel=], the original {{Mammy}} - who herself was an example of this trope.
* FetishRetardant: Invoked by Bette Davis, who rebuffed the studio's efforts to make Stanley more attractive.
* FridgeHorror: Uncle William's treatment of Stanley reads a lot like child grooming.
* HilariousInHindsight: Watching ''Film/HushHushSweetCharlotte'' with Olivia de Havilland as the evil sibling (well, cousin in this case) and Bette Davis as the good one gives the impression that Roy got her revenge on Stanley in the end.
* JerkassWoobie: Stanley in some areas, when you consider that she does admittedly go through the trauma of [[spoiler: coming home to find her husband dead]] and if you realise that her excessive spending is really just her way of trying to feel some kind of happiness. The fact that she stole her sister's husband and manipulates everyone at every turn prevents her from being fully sympathetic though.
* {{Narm}}: There's lots of it to be had with the bizarre naming convention of the two daughters. It's never explained and doesn't seem to serve any purpose.
* SeinfeldIsUnfunny: [[spoiler: An evil white woman sending a poor innocent black man to prison just to cover up her own wicked deeds]]? Scandalously shocking to a 1940s audience. The film was even banned in some places because it dealt with racism
* SlowPacedBeginning: The early parts of the book are very internalised, with various characters questioning their purposes in life. The same with the film - where an hour of {{Melodrama}} builds to the dramatic third act [[spoiler: where Stanley frames Parry for her crimes]].
* ValuesDissonance:
** The IncestSubtext between Stanley and Uncle William is a holdover from the times when many people in the south would marry their own cousins.
** There's a huge element of WhiteMansBurden between Roy and Parry, that's simply reflective of the values of the day.
** The bleakness of the story hasn't aged well. It was reflective of the attitudes during the Great Depression; that life couldn't get better and that everywhere was doomed to poverty - especially with the threat of World War II looming ahead.
* ValuesReasonance: While some aspects of the story haven't aged well, the racial dynamics are very reasonant with a modern audience. Notably a white woman's word trumping a black man's, and black people being scapegoats for crimes are oddly reminiscent of modern stories about police brutality.
** It's not hard to see Stanley as a product of her environment. Due to the family once being upper class, she's been raised with that
mindset rather than having been taught how to be a productive member of society. As she's relied on Uncle William for handouts all her life, she simply doesn't realise that spending excessive amounts is going to put Peter under pressure. That's not to mention the implication that Uncle William could have been grooming her, as he propositions her towards the end.
** Why does Roy keep helping Stanley after all she's done? Is it out of sisterly love, in spite of how awful she's been? Is she under pressure from her mother, who blatantly favours Stanley? Is it some kind of sisterly StockholmSyndrome? Does she feel sorry for Stanley?
* DarknessInducedAudienceApathy: Virtually every character in the book is screwed up in some way. Stanley is an utterly horrible manipulator who uses everyone she meets, Roy is a doormat who lets herself be used, Lavinia is a hypochondriac who worries everyone, Asa is bitter about his fall from grace, Uncle William is well....[[DirtyOldMan Uncle William]], Peter is a cheater who quickly turns to the bottle, and Charles is an extreme DoggedNiceGuy. Virtually the only good character is Parry, and he of course gets royally screwed over. The film is a little better, where Roy is less of a doormat, but it's still a very bleak story.
* FairForItsDay: Despite the 'white saviour' elements being present, the film was notable for really showing race relations as they actually were on the big screen. Parry is an actual character, as opposed to a LivingProp, and Bette Davis herself insisted on making him seem like a real person instead of resulting to UncleTomfoolery. His mother Minerva also functions as a character, rather than just a typical maid with a couple of lines. Bonus points for being played by Hattie [=McDaniel=], the original {{Mammy}} - who herself was an example of this trope.
* FetishRetardant: Invoked by Bette Davis, who rebuffed the studio's efforts to make Stanley more attractive.
* FridgeHorror: Uncle William's treatment of Stanley reads a lot like child grooming.
* HilariousInHindsight: Watching ''Film/HushHushSweetCharlotte'' with Olivia de Havilland as the evil sibling (well, cousin in this case) and Bette Davis as the good one gives the impression that Roy got her revenge on Stanley in the end.
* JerkassWoobie: Stanley in some areas, when you consider that she does admittedly go through the trauma of [[spoiler: coming home to find her husband dead]] and if you realise that her excessive spending is really just her way of trying to feel some kind of happiness. The fact that she stole her sister's husband and manipulates everyone at every turn prevents her from being fully sympathetic though.
* {{Narm}}: There's lots of it to be had with the bizarre naming convention of the two daughters. It's never explained and doesn't seem to serve any purpose.
* SeinfeldIsUnfunny: [[spoiler: An evil white woman sending a poor innocent black man to prison just to cover up her own wicked deeds]]? Scandalously shocking to a 1940s audience. The film was even banned in some places because it dealt with racism
* SlowPacedBeginning: The early parts of the book are very internalised, with various characters questioning their purposes in life. The same with the film - where an hour of {{Melodrama}} builds to the dramatic third act [[spoiler: where Stanley frames Parry for her crimes]].
* ValuesDissonance:
** The IncestSubtext between Stanley and Uncle William is a holdover from the times when many people in the south would marry their own cousins.
** There's a huge element of WhiteMansBurden between Roy and Parry, that's simply reflective of the values of the day.
** The bleakness of the story hasn't aged well. It was reflective of the attitudes during the Great Depression; that life couldn't get better and that everywhere was doomed to poverty - especially with the threat of World War II looming ahead.
* ValuesReasonance: While some aspects of the story haven't aged well, the racial dynamics are very reasonant with a modern audience. Notably a white woman's word trumping a black man's, and black people being scapegoats for crimes are oddly reminiscent of modern stories about police brutality.
