From Owen Gleiberman‘s “Could Babygirl Have Been Made by a Male Director?’, posted in Variety earlier today:

“Babygirl is a film about someone” — Nicole Kidman‘s CEO character — “who feels, and believes, that her deepest desires are wrong.

“It’s important to recognize what a common sensation that is. There’s an old saying that goes, ‘Sex isn’t good unless it’s dirty,” and I think what that expresses is that it’s intrinsic to the nature of human sexuality that people are drawn, in the erotic arena, to acting out things that feel ‘naughty’ or ‘bad’ or whatever. It’s whatever floats your boat. And it’s why we have porn, which Kidman’s character in Babygirl is addicted to. That’s the realm where her libidinous imagination can roam free.”

HE’s answer: No male filmmaker would DARE to try and make such a film, as this would be politically suicidal. And the mob that would lash and eviscerate this guy would, of course, be progressive women.

Woke female mission statement: “We’ve reached a position of power that allows Halina Reijn to make this kind of film, but woebetide any dude who would be stupid enough to try and make such a film himself.”

Gleiberman: “What if a man had made Babygirl You could certainly say it would be more controversial.

“[But] the real answer is: A male director would not and could not have made Babygirl the way that Halina Reijn made it.

“It’s not just about the cultural identity politics. It’s about how the film’s power emerges from a hard-wired female consciousness. Kidman’s performance is extraordinary (the best by a female actor this year, in my opinion), but part of what makes acting like this possible is that the role is conceived with an intimacy that renders Romy’s gaze more potent than ours. She’s gazing into the sadomasochistic abyss of her own longing.”