The Girlbossery of Cinderella (2021)

[This article is adapted from my 2021 video essay of the same name.]

Did you ever watch that new Cinderella movie? I hear it has a feminist twist! I mean, it’s really not surprising seeing as it comes to us from the most socially conscious production company there is, Amazon Studios! Yas queen, you can be a woman in the workforce! Get it, girlboss! But according to Amazon, we are going to have to lay you off if you try to join a union. Let’s just say I was a little put off by the latest Cinderella adaptation’s attempt at social commentary. I’m certainly not the first person to take issue with this; in the months leading up to the film’s release, it became a fairly popular target of internet ridicule. Pretty much every piece of news released about this film made it sound worse and worse. A neoliberal take on a classic fairy tale? Starring Camila Cabello? And James Corden? And it’s a jukebox musical?! The people of twitter, excluding Camila Cabello stans, came together in a rare moment of unity to absolutely bully the hell out of this movie. And I’m disappointed to announce that the bullying was justified. This film was marketed as a feminist take on the classic fairytale, but its narrative is ignorant at best and willfully propagandist at worst. It seems to want to correct things about the story that no one was asking to have corrected, it promotes an outdated, corporatized idea of feminism, and even outside of its thematic failures, it’s still a pretty bad movie. Allow me to gaslight-gatekeep-girlboss my way into these issues.

I’d say the most immediate problem with this concept is that the original Cinderella story is not all that offensive to begin with, and that lampooning or subverting even the most sexist elements of the story is played-out and uninteresting. Let’s take a look at gender in the classic Cinderella story. There are many folk tales resembling Cinderella from all around the world dating all the way back to ancient Egypt, but most people in the West get their idea of the original, definitive Cinderella story from Charles Perrault’s Cendrillion, written in the late 17th century. This story is a product of its time, largely in the gender roles of the characters; in this story, women can only really be servants or rich housewives, all of the eligible women in the story have the singular goal of marrying a prince, etc. These are the elements of the story that people seem to like to call attention to the most, but honestly, if we’re examining gender and sexism in Cinderella, I think a far more interesting thing to analyze would be the role of the stepmother and stepsisters. There’s a very clear dichotomy between Cinderella and the other women in her family; the girl and ‘other girls’ if you will. It’s sort of like whatever the G-rated version of a Madonna-Whore complex would be. In the original story and many subsequent adaptations, the stepfamily, especially the stepsisters, are almost caricatures of femininity. They’re obsessed with their looks, their clothes, their hair and makeup, and attention from men. They wear gaudy dresses and jewelry, their hair is piled into those bulky sausage curls. But what’s interesting about this is that Cinderella herself also desires beauty and fine things and the prince’s attention, but it’s okay when she does it because she’s poor and… less annoying about it I guess? This is a sentiment about women that very much still exists; wanting women to look and act desirable all the time, but demonizing women who visibly make an effort or god forbid, think or know that they’re attractive. Call it the ‘One Direction What Makes You Beautiful’ effect. It’s actually hotter when she’s insecure about the way she looks.

I’m not saying that the stepsisters did nothing wrong, I’m aware that they’re abusers and whatnot, I’m just saying it’s interesting how most versions of the story accentuate their evil-ness with supposedly undesirable feminine traits like ‘ugliness,’ poor taste, even bad singing. In general, Perrault’s version is kinder than a lot of the subsequent versions; the stepfamily isn’t quite as evil as they are in other versions, and the story even ends with Cinderella forgiving the stepsisters and inviting them to live with her in the castle. And then meanwhile you have the Brothers Grimm version where Cinderella’s magical doves peck the sisters’ eyes out. So if you were to address sexism in Cinderella, I personally think that would be the most interesting place to start. But as I said, I think most modern Cinderella stories, including the 2021 version, that attempt to take aim at sexism in the story generally only really care to address the ‘marrying a prince’ part. This is, in my opinion, a basic and uninteresting angle. An unbelievable exchange in Cinderella (2021) comes when the prince says, “We’ll get married and you will live the rest of your life as royalty.” Ella responds, “Royalty? What about my work?” I guess when I read a fairytale from the 1600s, I can understand that at that time, marriage was considered the apex of a woman’s life. And I can recognize that that is patriarchal and unfair, while also not really needing to see it subverted in the year 2021 when I’ve been seeing media critique that very thing for my entire life. For me, Enchanted was the last enjoyable lampooning of basic fairytale tropes, and since then it’s kind of felt like old news. So to see a Cinderella adaptation in this day and age where the only real subversion of the original is to make the women more independent feels a bit played out, to say the least.

But it’s not simply the fact that the film does this, it’s how it does this. What exactly is feminism according to this film? The film’s attempt at feminism is a corporatized fantasy in which women not being a part of the workforce is seemingly the only manifestation of sexism or the patriarchy. It’s worth mentioning here that sexism is also seemingly the only inequality to exist in this universe. There’s no hint at all of the existence of racism, classism, or any other systemic prejudice. Presumably because the movie didn’t want to have to deal with that. In this world, women simply need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps in order to break free from oppression. It’s actually kind of comical the way almost every female character in this film at some point reveals that she wishes she could do X dream job instead of being a lowly housewife or princess; Ella wants to own a dress shop, her stepmother has the tragic backstory of not being able to pursue her dreams of playing piano, and of course, the prince’s sister yearns to rule the kingdom! Nothing like ending sexism by integrating women into the monarchy. Because, you know, there’s nothing less patriarchal than the monarchy. By this film’s logic, the only thing standing between women and emancipation is work and money. By this film’s definition, feminism is capitalism. Now I don’t mean to sound like a crazy radical or anything, but I personally don’t think capitalism is conducive to women’s liberation. Or really, anyone’s liberation. In many ways, capitalism and the patriarchy are in a symbiotic relationship. And I don’t think that’s the most unpopular sentiment, especially among young people. But this film seems to believe the opposite: That capitalism is liberation. You’d better have an LLC name picked out ladies, because the only way you’re going to get equal rights is by hustling for that coin! Is it any surprise that this very rhetoric is what helps market pyramid schemes to financially vulnerable women? This type of girlboss feminism, in addition to being dated and reviled in the mainstream consciousness, especially the very demographic that this film was trying to market itself to, feels like putting a band-aid over the issue of sexism. Asking women to liberate themselves by joining the system that helps facilitate their oppression is completely counterintuitive.

Goodness, look at the time. If I don’t boost my return-on-investment by midnight, I’ll turn back into a socialist pumpkin! Frankly, girlboss feminism is not the 2021 Cinderella’s only problem; the inclusion and selection of songs is nonsensical, much of the casting is questionable, and the cringe factor of the dialogue is genuinely off the charts. There’s nothing wrong with you if you liked this film, but I would encourage critical thinking regarding what it- and anything you watch- is trying to say to you. As much as I love a completely dumb fun bad movie, what really fascinate me are these films with deep ideological issues. There’s just nothing like it. Speaking of which, stay tuned for Amazon Studios biographical film about the first female detective in the Pinkerton Detective Agency! You know, the famous union-busting security firm... recently hired by Amazon... to bust unions! It really is important to be mindful and critical of the media we consume. Which, of course, is why I only watch Lifetime movies and the filmed 25th anniversary production of Phantom of the Opera.