MovieChat Forums > Albert Nobbs (2012) Discussion > Why I loathe the beach scene...

Why I loathe the beach scene...

posted 11 years ago by MyMovieTVRomance
12 replies | jump to latest

I couldn't stand the beach scene, as much as I loved this film, because to me, takes what could be an otherwise positive character who happens to have been forced into cross-dressing, and makes her a pathetic prisoner. It's as though the filmmakers were trying to tell us "look -- look how much happier Albert is in a dress!" And if that is indeed what they were trying to tell us, then I don't want to hear the message!

The reason I can't stand it is because I like to think that deep down, Albert really does feel like a man and Albert really is comfortable in that lifestyle -- the only thing is, if the society's pressure switch caused him to go that route, but I like to think that in the process, he discovered that indeed, that is who he really was. In other words, I don't want to agree with other people, who call him suppressed, a prisoner in his own body, etc. I just don't like to think about it like that. And, why must it be like that anyway? This is the doing of the scriptwriters, probably. I know that it was based on a short story, but the scriptwriters of course, embellished it. Why not just have a female character who likes dressing like a man? Why do we have to be shown otherwise?!

For me, the scene spoiled a lot of positivity that I get from the film. Because right or wrong, the way I see Albert is not as a prisoner, but as someone whose life forced him into a circumstance which caused him to realize who he really was. And I don't appreciate this scene trying to change my mind about that.

Am I alone in this perspective? Is there anyone else who would prefer that Albert just like being a woman dressed as a man?

Please excuse typos/funny wording; I use speech-recognition that doesn't always recognize!

[–] dblake78250 11 years ago

Albert wasn't more comfortable acting as a male. Multiple scenes depicted this including the "coming out" beach scene, where she longed to be herself. I believe you may be forcing modern day cross dressing fettishes on a day when women were subordinate to men and were not welcome to open a business or hold a gender specific employ such as a waiter.

[–] MyMovieTVRomance 11 years ago

I never said that Albert was more comfortable as a male, I merely tried to explain that with such a story, it could have went either way, so I resent the fact that we are made to believe that he wasn't comfortable being a male. Not that he was, but that it's possible that he could have been. Why should we believe that every woman who dressed like a man must have done so as to do only*because of being forced?

Sure, being forced may have been what started it, but, the character may have ultimately come to appreciate that kind of lifestyle, as it may have resonated with a part of himself or herself that she never knew existed before, and that was my point.

Why should we be forced to see this story negatively, when it's perfectly possible that the story could've been just as positive. I'm sorry that I'm the only one who seems to realize this.

And I'm speaking as someone who is putting herself in those shoes -- it's possible that once I started dressing that way, I may have ended up appreciating it. I am not forcing 21st century ideals onto the past, I am actually putting myself back in the past, and thinking how I might reason a certain situation, w that with that mind frame.

Please excuse typos/funny wording; I use speech-recognition that doesn't always recognize!

[–] xhepera 11 years ago

Considering that the role was played in the manner depicted by the author of the novella when it was published in 1916, perhaps your beef should be with him. He was known, by the way, for writing in a realist style. It's quite likely that he drew upon personal knowledge of such a person (or people) as Nobbs in writing the character.

You say that you're not forcing 21st century ideals, etc., but it is very definitely what historians call presentist to attempt to determine the bona fides of a character in Victorian Ireland based on what *we* might have done in those shoes. The fact of the matter is that actions have consequences. We don't truly know all of those consequences for someone like Albert.

Never wrestle with a pig. You'll just get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jayhawk-18 11 years ago

Was Albert happy because s/he was wearing a dress and feeling girlish ('embracing her curves' as Gok Wan would say), or because s/he wasn't at work and was with a friend at the beach enjoying the fresh air and the surf?

If anything, the dress scene showed the limitations of having to wear a frock and heels. Maybe the message of the scene is that regardless of what a person wears and how we'd like to portray ourselves to the outside world, harsh reality intrudes on our fantasies.

[–] milo44 11 years ago

I loved it , and was not expecting it .. I saw her free for the first time .
......

I'd like a chance t' shoot at an educated man once in my life .

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MicahFish 10 years ago

You do not understand the character of Albert Nobbs at all. You are portraying Albert as a lesbian, which she is not. She isn't in it for the sex appeal. She's in it for safety, and security. You are twisting the whole thing.

[–] vauxhall19 10 years ago

and you are twistng the whole thing if your only conclusion is that the character is not a lesbian and is only doing it for security. I don't suppose it ever occurred to you the character may have been transgendered (which is not synonymous with being attracted to your own sex ... in case it needs spelling out).

[–] tessany 8 years ago

The character was NOT transgendered. She had been a young woman trying to make her way in the world. She was brutally raped and dressed as a man in order to a) find gainful employment and b) have safety from harassment. This is not the story of a transgendered man but a story of the struggle of women back when women were literally considered property

Albert only became interested in Helen AFTER another character mentions how having a sweet little wife like Helen would help draw people into the store.

If anything, Albert is completely A Sexual, and that is the way Ms. Close chose to play the character.

[–] m-bach777 10 years ago

The only thing that came to my mind, when i saw the movie, was how unbeliveable ugly, Albert Nobbs looked, male or female. Simply an ugly, repulsive personage.

[–] HarlowMGM 9 years ago

I think the scene is just to show a moment of complete freedom for Albert, not having to put on any public face as he has had to do for years. Note he goes right back to being Albert without any real discomfort and he clearly wants a "wife" and to go on playing the male role. Also, Hubert clearly was uncomfortable at being seen as a woman and obviously had no desire to be one again even for a moment.