No thread on Lady Bird? Women: a good mother-daughter relationship portrayal? (Spoilers, duh)

I finally saw it. I see why it is popular - it examines an interesting character in an interesting situation that hasn’t been explored a lot. And it does it well, with great characters and acting and with a happy ending.

I am just trying to wrap my head around some of the underlying messages. Gerwig frames the movie with “attention = love” for women: her mom’s attention to her; Lady Bird’s attention to Sacramento which she wants to flee then realizes she loves from a distance.

It seems, however, that this seems to make the attention “okay in the end” - e.g., her mom says some truly awful, toxic shit to Lady Bird as part of paying attention. After Lady Bird lives a little and then leaves a voicemail for her mom, everything’s okay.

Is that how it works? Wanting more for your kid = okay! Telling her she’s a loser who will end up in jail as part of a constant patter of mean disapproval? Not okay. But we don’t hear from the mom when Lady Bird calls - LB shares her love and realization via voice mail.

So - to all, but women especially: a reasonable portrayal? Reasonable for me to think that the mom was a mean jerk that needed her own moment of realization as much as Lady Bird? Or I should be quiet and roll with it because that’s “just how women fight” - something Gerwig said in the many interviews I heard.

I think that may be how a toxic woman fights, but that doesn’t make it okay to make the movie a love letter to that behavior.

???

Hmm. Maybe this belongs in IMHO since I am asking about the normalcy of the mother-daughter relationship it portrays - ?

[Moderating]
Nah, you’re still talking about a creative work. CS is fine for that.

I loved the movie (it was my favorite of this year’s Oscar nominees), but I don’t agree with its POV on attention = love. I think lack of attention = not love, though.

The relationship was very realistic to me, but not healthy because of that. Lady Bird’s mom is a good person who says some really hateful things, and from my viewpoint they were unwarranted, though I think the film does a good job really alluding to just how much of a pain in the ass LB is (and was before the movie opens).

I don’t think it’s just how women fight (with one exception). I think it is how too many parents speak to their children, and I don’t think that’s gendered. But the fight as they are looking for a dress, where LB is slouching along and her mom snarks at how tired she seems then the both ooh and ahh over a specific dress was a dynamic I have seen many times in my life, usually not between me and my mom, but there, too.

So realistic but unhealthy (for the more vicious parts). Realistic and (I think) healthy for the ability to drop the sniping to reach a specific goal.
ETA: It’s interesting that you found that a happy ending. I’m not sure I see it that way. It’s not a tragic ending, but LB/Christine has been struggling to break free for a whole movie, then finds that she’s still herself at the end, still with that fundamental lack of inner confidence. Only now she doesn’t have a direction. She was so determined to go that she doesn’t seem to have direction now. I found it a very bittersweet ending.

I thought she lived a little, did some stupid stuff, but got to a place where she could look at what her mom was doing with perspective, and also miss Sacramento a bit and express that with love. She wasn’t coming home and was still in the big city, and since in real life, Greta Gerwig became Greta Gerwig, I assumed LB went on to accomplish things.

For me, the fact that she was still doing the same thing as before (telling lies that are easy but pointless) showed that she was still the same person. She hadn’t escaped to a new life, she had carried her life with her. And I don’t think that’s what she thought would happen.

I tend to avoid considering biography when I look at art, so I’m not really sold on using Gerwig’s own life as a (or the) lens to view the film.

All fair. I definitely see her becoming like her mother if she becomes a parent, which, to the point of my OP, isn’t good. I guess that, yes, I kept the autobiographical bit in, even though it is not in the film, so added an implied success based on following her dreams and staying in NY.

And per your earlier comments: yes, that mean, passive-aggressive jerkishness is available to both genders and either/both parent can be guilty of it. Gerwig made the Mother-Daughter manifestation of it the core of this movie, so it’s what I am focused on. That, and the fact that this particular M-D type is somehow being held up as “this is how women, particularly mothers and daughters, fight and relate” and “you will look back and see her love and see value in her actions”.

The first one of those is Gerwig’s assertion; that’s why I’m checking in with women Dopers.

The second one is my read of the movie and my POV on it. I don’t like that conclusion - and I wanted to see if others saw it that way, too, given all the accolades. I really liked the movie. Just that message I got doesn’t work - and it seems you agree.

ETA: yes, Lady Bird was clearly a pain - a charming, smart pain - as a daughter. But it’s also clear that her mom’s trying to fit her into a specific box is a big driver of her behavior. LB could be a free spirit and less of a pain if her mom related to her better.

I think one point of departure between us is whether Gerwig’s assertion of what she meant/intended is important. I didn’t watch the film and think “this is how women fight and that’s okay” which seems to be what you are saying she has said? I watched it and thought “I recognize some of those horrible behaviors” but from people of both sexes. And I thought “I recognize that particular behavior from mother-daughter relationships” but the behavior was no horrible.

IOW, the horrible behaviors depicted struck me as genderless. I recognized some of the neutral behaviors as more closely associated with women.

I don’t know if I’m addressing your question, though I swear I’m trying to!

You keep framing this as if the movie is trying to universalize all mother-daughter relationships. It’s not, it’s telling the story of one specific mother-daughter relationship.

Bingo!

I thought he was saying that Gerwig has made that claim. I may be misreading.

From NPR’s Fresh Air:

GROSS: You said that you’re interested in how women fight. Do you think women fight differently than men when it comes to an argument?

GERWIG: I do. I - well, you know, I never really thought about it as being different until I had the script for the film and I was going around and I was talking to different financiers about putting money into the film and making it. And most of those people are men. And if they were raised with sisters or if they had daughters, they knew what it was.

They said, oh, yes, that’s my mother and my sister, or that’s my wife and my daughter. But if they didn’t, they had no idea that that was how women fought and how they loved, too. I think it was kind of like they were getting to look into a world that they didn’t know existed.


GROSS: Her real name - her birth name is Christine, but she wants to be called Lady Bird. She wants her school to call her Lady Bird. She wants her mother to call her Lady Bird. And it seems like there’s something so passive-aggressive of insisting that your mother, who named you Christine, should now have to call you by a totally different name, Lady Bird (laughter).

GERWIG: Yeah, it’s a rejection of everything her mother gave her, including her hair color. It was just totally, like, I’m not yours.

GROSS: So in this mother-and-daughter story that you’ve written, the daughter rejects the name her mother gave her. Her mother gave her the name Christine. And she says, no, you have to call me Lady Bird now. That’s my name.


[Gerwig]: And I’m always interested in how people use language to not say what they mean. And I think in so many of the fights with Lady Bird and her mother, what her mother wants to say is, I’m terrified. And she can’t say it because it feels too vulnerable or, you know, for the myriad reasons that you can’t say you’re scared. But she just can’t do it. And I talked with Saoirse and Laurie about this a lot, that I wanted the audience to feel like I know exactly where that mother is and I know exactly where that daughter is and that you don’t feel that either one of them is a villain but you do think - oh, man, it’s so hard to love people and to be in a family.


Icarus - I hear you, and am open to leaving it at that. But I do feel that Gerwig is speaking in a broad generalization about mother-daughter relationships in general, or believes she is. She may be doing it by focusing on one specific relationship and all of its fragility and foibles, but it is meant to speak to a rich, complex relationship that she feels isn’t featured enough. So it is not how every M-D relationship goes, but by showing this one, shows how complex and tough they can be.


Ah - check this out: https://screenwritingumagazine.com/2017/11/16/greta-gerwig-powerful-mother-daughter-love-story-lady-bird/

Gerwig: “Lady Bird has a difficult time accepting her mother’s love. It’s so much easier to fight. When she gets those letters [from her mother] at the end, she can’t take it in. She does everything to not take it in. She gets rip-roaring drunk, she makes out with someone, she winds up in the hospital, she wanders around and then she goes into the church because in some ways that’s home. When she’s listening to the choir, it all hits her. She can’t run away from it anymore. So she’s able to take it in and say thank you. To me, that is the transformation. To be able to accept that love and know that it’s unconditional. That’s a mother’s love.”

That is interesting. I hadn’t connected all of that. ETA: however, I would say Gerwig is wrong about something: The mom’s love was NOT unconditional. It was fervent and deep, but it was VERY conditional on Lady Bird conforming to the mom’s desires for her. Christine/LB ends up appreciating the depth of her mom’s love, but that doesn’t mean the mom has let go of her expectations for LB.

For me, I’m too much into Reader Response theory to give Gerwig much deference when it comes to the actual message of the film.

Not a woman Doper, but:

I loved the movie, mostly because the family dynamic felt very real, in the same way that I loved Rosanne because it felt real (funny because of the Laurie Metcalf connection… I don’t think that’s why I make the comparison, though). Everyone’s just doing the best they can, despite their flaws. Sometimes parents are just as much in the wrong as the teenagers, but life goes on.

Again, fair! Maybe that’s what I am doing. She meant it whatever way she did; as a viewer, I was struck the way I have described.

Clawdio - yes, I appreciated its realness, too. That’s why its got me thinking!

My review here.

Come on, Dopers! This movie was on so many end-of-year lists - folks saw it and loved it and I would assume thought about the dynamics it showed. No one else wants to comment on their relationship, even if only to tell me I am clueless about it, or what Gerwig was trying to do – or that Gerwig’s view stopped mattering when she released it, etc.???

This is a worthy topic!! :wink:

I enjoyed this movie, although it was in the latter half on my list of the nine Best Picture nominees this year. Unlike some of the other movies on the list, I did not walk away from this one thinking about any deeper meaning or broad societal implications. This, to me, was just a very well-told story about the relationship between one person and that person’s mother.

I’m also not convinced that Lady Bird completely came around at the end—this, to me, was only a partial awakening on her part. One of the things that resonated the most with me in the film was the inability of a child to appreciate the sacrifices parents have to make in order to survive. Lady Bird didn’t want to be from the wrong side of the tracks. She didn’t want to be poor. She wanted things that other kids had that she couldn’t. And she seemed to view that as a failing on the part of her parents (and possibly of her mother, in particular). At the end of the film, I think we see her beginning to grasp the depth of her mother’s love, but I’m not sure she understood (at least at that point) exactly what that meant her mother had gone through over the last 18 years.

If we’re optimistic, we can assume there was a further awakening for Lady Bird down the line, but she’s not there yet. And I’m not convinced she was going to get there in the near future.

Nice. A rich look at it. Thanks.