Skip to main content

Fried Green Tomatoes (1991)

Fried Green Tomatoes. Feature film. (1991, 130 mins) IMDB

...you don't have to be a woman to enjoy this film, hating racist bastards helps...

T

he title is unforgettable. I remember watching this film quite a number of years ago and a few images stuck, but for the most part I didn't remember the storyline. I remembered the scene with the bees. In watching it again this evening, it was clear the performer was dealing with the real thing. It was her and there were hundreds of bees swarming the tree, swarming her. In watching the feature with the DVD, it's not hard to see why it worked, but it's something few people could do. As with most wild animals, the best advice is to stay calm. They are more afraid of you than you are of them. Easy to say, but hard to do.

In watching the feature, everybody suggested that fried green tomatoes were a Southern thing (southern US). I don't know where they get that. My mother made them with tomatoes picked from the garden. It was a case of not waiting for them to ripen. And if my mother did, her mother did and so on.

But what about the film. To write about what happens in the film would take as long as watching it. Many characters with two story lines--one in the present and one flashing back to the 1920s and 30s.

The present deals with a middle-aged woman (Bates) who meets an elderly woman (Tandy) by chance in a nursing home. The older woman tells her a story about her sister from long ago.

It wouldn't be fair to say that the bulk of the story is about the flashback because events happen in both time lines. We watch as Bates struggles with her marriage and mid-life while we see the events of the past with Idgie and Ruth and a large cast of characters. There are many familiar faces in this film. It's really two films in one.

Bates' husband is a cliché--fat, career-driven, the bread winner, expects his wife to make dinner and do the household chores while he spends his evenings watching baseball or some other sport on TV. Bates wants something more and begins to take charge of her life.

But sixty years ago, things were different. We meet Idgie as a young girl on the day of her older sister's wedding. Idgie doesn't want to wear a dress. The scrapped knees tell us she's a tom-boy. She pouts and runs off but her older brother Buddy, the voice of reason, comes to the family's rescue. After his intervention we cut to the church and Idgie is wearing a boy's outfit complete with tie.

During the reception we meet Ruth. She's a young woman in love with Buddy. They kiss on a bridge crossing over a railroad. Her hat is caught in the wind and blows down onto the tracks. Buddy like any 18 year old runs after it and runs after it until his foot is caught in the tracks and a train whistle blows and he can't escape and the train can't slow down in time. Death comes suddenly to this wedding.

I didn't like this sequence. I suppose I could say it was melodramatic and it is and I could say we've seen this before and I'm sure we have, but mostly I'm not sure what purpose it serves in the story. The story needs Ruth and Idgie to meet and become friends but at this point in the story there's such an age difference (18 for Ruth, 12 for Idgie), this doesn't seem like the time. The story also requires Ruth to marry Bennett which means she can't marry Buddy. So why have Buddy and Ruth in love? It's just not a necessary bit of the story. Once Buddy dies, we don't think of him and neither do the characters.

With the story setup and time advanced, we meet a young Idgie as an adult and the same Ruth. Neither seem to age in this story, but, as Ebert would say, oh well.

Idgie is not a lady. She wears cloths like a man. She spends her free time at a "bar" where she drinks and gambles and swears. She is a free spirit. She's also most likely a lesbian but that word is never spoken in this film.

Ruth marries someone named Frank Bennett. She moves into a large house with him. When Idgie comes to visit, she discovers Bennett is a wife beater. The black-eye tells the story even if Ruth won't.

If Ruth and Idgie are the central characters of the historical plotline, Bennett and his death create the mystery that drives the story. We know he died or went missing, the question is what happened.

The story answers the question in quite an interesting way and in doing so jabs at the KKK for the bastards that they are and people like Bennett. I don't think I'll ever understand how a husband can hit his wife. We clearly have no sympathy for Bennett nor should we.

This leads to an interesting point about characters in fiction. Stories tend to portray characters in the extreme. If they are good, we only see their goodness and if they are bad, we only see their badness. We never once see anything about Bennett for example that is admirable or worthy. He's a wife beater, a thug, a member of the KKK. Can something really be that one-sided? No, but in story telling that's the case.

Two questions follow. Should that be the case and how does it effect person's reality of the real world.

George Bush The Stupid said you're either with us or you're against us. There's good and there's evil. If you believe in fairy-tales these extremes exist, but not in real life. Even George Bush The Stupid is not entirely evil, although some believe that.

(Note his father is George Bush The Enlightened. I use the nomenclature because it reminds me of the Italian father and son team and the invention the semi-colon.)

People are quick to judge and place people into neat little boxes, and while that serves a purpose, it also closes the mind to other possibilities.

As for the second part, on whether that's appropriate for storytelling, well, that could take months and months to discuss. Critics often speak of two-dimensional characters as opposed to well-rounded, three-dimensional characters. The later being the preference. But is Iago from Othello purely evil and therefore two dimensional or are there signs of benevolence? Is he three dimensional? Perhaps he is more complex, yet evil. A psychopath.

Having said that there is, in this film, lively characters who conflict with one another in a way that is interesting and I suppose that's what we want to see in fiction and film.

The film is also what most would be describe as a chick-flick. That may not be the right description. It's definitely a film in which the focus is on women and therefore would appeal to women, but yet I found interesting. You don't have to be female to enjoy this film.

Posted 2009/04/22 at 18h41ET in Movie Commentary.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Day 5: Writing a Novel—The Deep Blue Hold

Monday, November 21st, 2016 No work on the novel on Day 4. Note: Unedited writings from my notebook for this novel. Square bracket items represent added comments.
At 18:31—Office ... if I use Leänne instead of Leanne how will people react... Y esterday was Sunday and I took it off, plus I was dealing with some mental health issues. I know this story is something that is simply a matter of putting in the time to make it happen. I’m supposed to be working on it as much as I can but I haven’t been doing that. Two main reasons. It’s been a while since I’ve worked on a story. Then there’s the issues of my mental health. Things happen. I get down and it impacts on my writing. I might be using it as an excuse, but it’s clearly something I need to deal with. I have to find a schedule I can work with. Perhaps I need to put this first and cut out other things. Not sure but I will figure it out. A name for the hero came to me. For the moment going with Leanne or is it Leanna? Should be Le…

Writing a Novel: The Deep Blue Hold–Introduction

Thursday, March 9th, 2017 ... I fight my insecurities and doubts and I withdraw farther away from people and life ... I n November 2016 I started work on a new novel with the working title: The Deep Blue Cage. A few weeks after I started, I stopped. I was feeling too depressed about everything including the idea of writing a new novel. It happens to me at various times, with varying degrees, and it is debilitating. The ultimate issue was: Why bother? Why bother write another novel no one will read and no one will care about. I also found I was dreading the writing process more and more. It was painful to think about. I walked away and focused on other things. Or tried to. That didn’t work either. I felt trapped and unsure where I should head, what I should do. I even asked the big question, what the hell is life about anyway. There’s no one answer to this question despite the proclamations of some and because I believe I can think critically, can reason, I look at it from many a…

Day 6: Writing a Novel—The Deep Blue Hold

Tuesday, November 22nd, 2016 Note: Unedited writings from my notebook for this novel. Square bracket items represent added comments.
At 20:44—Office ... Lost at sea, she's rescued by a ship and wished she had never set foot on it.... N othing new on this story. Nothing came to me while I was sleeping or when on my errands. I thought something would come about, but nope. So be it. I have two chapters written. Not sure if they are any good but they are there. And so Chp. 3 to write. And I don’t see the scene because I’m not sure what should happen. The question is what is the cliffhanger. Nope. 3 about her, not the ship and crew. And I’ve already written the last line of the chapter. She wakes up and feels immense pain. Not sure if I should mention blood in the water. This chapter or the following. So it’s early dawn or not quite sunrise. And she’s in the cockpit unconscious. But how do I write it from her POV if she’s out. Hmmm. I can do it but should I do it? And I don’t w…