“Habitually isolated in her quiet apartment, a vulnerable girl ventures out to a local video store, where she meets a charming store clerk who immediately falls for her and tries to win her affections. Leading actress and screenwriter Palka makes her directorial debut with this appealing story about finding love and handling new relationships.”
Don’t let Netflix’s description of this movie (or its movie poster) fool you.
IMDB has a somewhat truer synopsis: “Good Dick is a modern fairy tale about a troubled, reclusive young woman and the persistent video clerk who draws her out of her claustrophobic world by starting up a unique courtship with her.As they become closer, her sexual antipathy is met with his unflinching optimism, until finally her aggressive defenses overwhelm them both and the relationship bursts apart.Profoundly affected by his presence in her life, she finds that she has the courage to face her past.”
Unfortunately, I had checked it out based on Netflix’s recommendation.
Habitually isolated? Vulnerable? This girl is screwed up. She goes to video store for old erotica. She never voluntarily speaks to other people. She doesn’t appear to leave her apartment for anything else. She has some mystery source of income that allows for such a life. She doesn’t allow any physical contact. She’s constantly insulting the guy and both physically/verbally trying to push him away. It’s obvious from her interactions with the guy that she has had some emotional, probably sexual, and possibly other physical trauma in her past.
Persistent? The guy seems nice and normal compared to the girl, but he’s not so much charming as he is manipulative. He’s a former drug abuser living in his car. He’s intrigued by the girl who comes into the video store, looks up her address on the computer, finds ways to get into her apartment,and peeps through her window to watch her masturbate to the rentals. He then lies about why he’s in the building, and then he lies to force himself into her apartment after she has repeatedly told him no – and is holding a knife to him. His creepiness knows no bounds. He worms his way into sleeping on her couch and then later her bed. (Note that they didn’t actually have sex in the film. She was disgusted by penises, and she would go absolutely insane when confronted with an erection.)
He used her, and he called it love.
She desperately needed a human connection, so the movie seems to say, “Look how he’s helping her. See? How sweet.” But this is someone who obviously had been trampled and run over by a person (or several) in her life. A person who didn’t listen to her cries to stop. Now we have someone new in her life doing the same. Sure, the movie says his intentions were good, but he didn’t respect her voiced wishes.
She needed someone to help her find the strength in herself. She needed someone to help her find the confidence and self-esteem to expect others to respect her. She needed someone who had a interest in her well-being who didn’t also have a vested interest in free housing.
In the end, she’s suddenly able to clean up, brush her hair, put on a dress, and confront the person who didn’t understand the word “no” so that she can go to another man who doesn’t understand the word “no.” Yea! Another happy ending!*
*Please note the dripping sarcasm.
I understand that relationships are not simple, but I’ve always believed in being with someone because you want to be with them. I don’t want to be with someone because I need to do so in order to survive. I’ve never bought into the “You complete me” line. I’d rather hear “You complement me.” Perhaps that’s why I didn’t like this movie. I don’t like seeing such a co-dependent relationship put in a positive light.
