Controversial Issues in Depalma's Dressed To Kill

Despite the technical excellence of “Dressed to Kill” and its unusual presentation of dream and fantasy, this film has been the subject of an intense and wide range of critical response. Those who review it positively see it as an outstanding motion picture, perhaps the best that Brian DePalma has directed (Canby, 1980; Kael, 1980). Negative reviews and assessments indicate that the profanity, sexuality, and explicit violence are exploitative rather than integral to a failed work of art bereft of human compassion (Corliss, 1980; Morris, 1980). The controversy surrounding the film includes the concern that it panders to an audience that vicariously enjoys viewing violent attacks on sexually stereotyped women who invite aggression as an essential part of their sexuality; such works are said to desensitize the viewer to actual crimes such as murder and rape (Leidholdt, 1980; Rones, 1980). The film might have provoked even more such protests had not significant cuts been made to insure an R rather than an X rating (Wood, 1980). It is interesting that Dressed to Kill should be the specific focus of this type of criticism in the wake of a surfeit of motion pictures that perpetrate obvious sexual stereotyping in the context of gore and titillating sexuality (e.g., The Island, Halloween, Prom Night, Terror Train).

The fact that Dressed to Kill is a popular motion picture with known stars and director has contributed to the amount and severity of the criticism. In addition, the advertisements focus sensationally on the voyeuristic-erotic aspects of violence toward women. However, since so many similar films have not been as controversial, a careful examination of the film may reveal the reasons for such strongly conflicting audience responses. The three major areas of the film will be explored: (1) sexuality and violence, (2) male-female relationships, and (3) view of human nature.