Secretary

There's probably an earlier thread about this film, but I couldn't face scrolling through the 74 pages of Smalltalk topics to find it.

It was on terrestrial TV very late last night in the UK, and I ended up so hooked I couldn't tear myself away. I'd seen it when it first came out, but had missed a lot, too stunned perhaps by that famous scene.



Here's why I liked this film so much, and beware many spoilers if you've yet to see it.

I was engrossed by the development of the relationship. I'd forgotten - or hadn't properly understood - how E. Edward Grey (yes, the same surname as E.L James' 50 Shades 'hero', created some 9 years after Secretary came out) struggles with his own shyness and guilt. I'd also forgotten the scene where he masturbates over Lee's bare bottom, and becomes so disgusted with himself that he smashes all the tokens of their D/s relationship to date (mostly his red-penned circling of her typing errors) adorning the walls of the corridor between his office and her desk in the foyer, before throwing her out with only a slightly generous redundancy cheque.

He's redeemed though by his empowerment of her, particularly when he confronts her about her cutting and gets her to agree she'll never do it again (his influence stronger than all her previous therapists). And she doesn't - not even when her father is hospitalised after another alcoholic binge. And that empowerment bounces back on him after he's fired her (out of guilt, and fear of the intimacy she craves), when she realises, on the verge of marrying fellow-damaged Peter, that all she wants is Edward and she's brave enough now to go for it. She confronts him so strongly with 'I love you' that he sets her the ultimate test - to sit on his chair, feet on the floor, hands flat on his desk (still dressed in her white aborted-wedding dress) "until I get back".

It takes him 3 days, during which she pees herself and endures everyone in her life sitting across from her, trying to reason her out of it. Only her father offers her the wisdom she needs - that her body and life are her own to do with what she likes. "Thanks, Daddy," she drawls delightedly, eyes heavy with every kind of deprivation. She's even on the local TV news, as the 'hunger-striker' (this part's a bit surreal!)

There's a sweet touch in the happy denouement when we're shown their wedded bliss. After a scene where she's tied to a tree being fucked on their weekend honeymoon, she helps him make their double bed to the perfect OCD standard he likes, then she produces a dead cockroach with a naughty smile and drops it on the bed for him to find when he gets home. The last shot, as she sits on their suburban veranda having waved him off to work, zooms in on her blue eyes staring at the camera with defiant self-assurance - through her chosen submission, she's found the courage to cleave to her dream, fight off everyone trying to change her mind, win her lawyer husband and find her own power.

I know it's another portrait of people-like-us being damaged by life and family (though who isn't, in some way) but I like that it shows the characters putting that damage behind them in the realisation of their D/s relationship. I may be showing my ignorance, but Edward is not my idea of a typical dominant male - he's shy, susceptible to guilt about his own yearnings, and needs in the end to be rescued and empowered by her - but they work perfectly together, and it doesn't feel like a cheap or unrealistic portrayal.

Recommended.

I've come to believe that, for some people, be they Dom or sub, they just work better if they have someone to look over. Edward just proves my point. He's better because he looks after his subby wife and she's better because she looks after him after he's given her permission to not do self-harm. Frankly, I've never understood why cutters just didn't get someone to cane them. Safer & they get what they Need & it doesn't stop until the Disciplinarian believes enough has been given.

TEM,

I completely agree with your reading of this film. I have never understood the need within our comunity to denounce it on the grounds that it portrays folk who are damaged in some way and that this might be symptomatic of spankos in general. I loved the way the characters were not perfect, including the peripheral characters, and the way they desperately struggled with their proclivities which are so misunderstood by the rest of the population. Not everyone is perfect, and why can't the film show normal/damaged characters?
The over-the-desk spanking does seem a bit lame, (and the sound is all wrong) but both characters don't really know what they are doing, are afraid of themselves, but by the time of the ending with the bathing and the disappointingly brief tree scene they have come into their power.
That final frame as the camera draws you into Lee's eyes is a brilliantly successful execution of the very thing you are not supposed to do in film making - looking straight into the camera. Lee is challenging us to confront our inner feelings in the same way that she has, saying that she is not ashamed of who she is. She knows we have seen her planting the cockroach and doesn't care. She looks straight into our souls and knows us for what we are.

Disclaimer - I am not being paid by the film makers.

I love the film. It's better that it reaches out to a larger audience. Much better than the usual film that depicts anyone with kinky tastes as a psychopath.
Besides there is a correlation between OCD and kinky people. It's not determining, but it is there. A writer should use their own experience or those they observe. All this made it a better movie. Most in the audience probably saw it as the popular sub genre of romantic comedy where if this couple doesn't find each other who will they find. For instance Harold & Maude or the Lady Eve.

There are several versions of this film, which is not unusual in the film industry. For me, the best version substitutes the masturbation scene for another really good spanking scene. That was shown on TV a few years back but some TV executives obviously feel that masturbation is more politically correct than spanking.

mianders
I really wish there was a way to find the other version you speak of. I personally was not a huge fan of the masturbation scene and would much prefer it wasn't in there... and if I could replace it for a spanking scene, well heck that would be fantastic!

All in all I too loved this movie. I remember when I first noticed it sitting on a Blockbuster video shelve way back when (I doubt it even played in any theaters in the state where I lived, and if it did, I certainly didn't hear about it). I remember seeing the front of the movie and it just had her legs and hands on her ankles and I hoped it had something to do with spanking, but of course it was hard to tell. I remember going in there with my girlfriend several times and me always wanting to rent it, but being too shy to push the point, because nothing else about the cover of movie really screamed something she'd like to watch and we didn't have the type of relationship at that time where I felt comfortable saying hey let's watch this because it looks sexy. Anyway, of course later I was able to rent it or maybe I found it online, I can't remember. It was really great to see some sort of mainstream portrayal of the lifestyle.

I don't think its a perfect movie by any means, but I believe it probably to be the best mainstream type movie with this focus. All other movies I've seen with sub/dom/spanking type stuff are fair too niche to be considered mainstream. Of course that is except for 50 Shades, which of course was exciting to see made, but when watched I didn't see anything in it that was nearly as realistic a portrayal as what was in the Secretary. I mean, I haven't even bothered to watch the second or third 50 Shades because it just seemed silly to me.

I don't mind AT ALL that the characters in these movies are flawed. But I did not appreciate that in both the books and movies, 50 Shades seemed to make the implication that the main character's kink was caused by childhood trauma. I've never seen anyone who has a spanking fetish say they think their kink was caused from childhood trauma. Most people, myself included, don't really know where it comes from and in fact it just seems like something innate within them that they were born with it. Obviously people are impacted by the family, culture, etc they are raised in, which is shown by the fact that British spankos tend to fantasize about caning and Americans, paddling. But I don't think being exposed to those things in real life cause the tendency whatsoever.

In the Secretary, when I first watched it I did not really appreciate the fact that the girl was a cutter and I also did not appreciate that the man seemed to have been possibly abusing, at least verbally, other women before the main character arrived on the scene. But with re watching, those things made more sense to me and I appreciate the movie very much as a fairly realistic portrayal of to unique people who found something they loved together and both made each other feel whole.

The ending of the movie seemed sort of over the top what with all these people being aware of what was going on and coming and talking to her, like the priest, etc. But hey its Hollywood. It wasn't really believable to me, because I think in real life the characters would have been much more secretive, but that may be based on my own bias and privacy. But I did like the priest bringing up things from religion that while not directly endorsing a sub/dom type relationship, certainly raised an interesting perspective.

I agree that it was a bit surreal, but it was intended, I think, to give a quick, broad-stroke representation of the many (mostly disapproving and intolerant) influences that people involved in TTWD have to endure and fight off in order to realise the life-style. Not so much 'Hollywood' then, as a narrative technique to show Lee's bravery and dedication.

I agree with that reading of the visitors to the hands on table scenes, the only person who understands - at least, as far as he can, is her father. I did like the way that she was fed peas on a spoon by someone - again probably her father but it might not have been, the pea motif havgin been chosen as it formed a tiny piece of submission earlier when Edward tells her what she can eat at family dinner - one scoop of creamed potatoes, exactly 4 peas and as much ice cream as she wants.

I like this film because it's actually about two damaged characters being healed BY BDSM not FROM it - Lee is cured of her extreme self-consciousness and her self-harm by a consensual submission to being harmlessly spanked, Edward 's overbearing attitude covering a huge number of flaws is broken down when he finds that there can be power in submission and he doesn't mind losing the battle to Lee in the end. The small touches are great, such as when Lee crooks her finger over Edward's when he is spanking her, and Edward's ridiculously huge set of red marker pens. Way way better than 50SOG.