Stegman
1
Erin Stegman
Dr. Mara
English 330
October 17, 2012
Chadha’s Combined Use of the Erotic Female and “Buddy Movies” in Bend it Like Beckham
In Chadha’s 2003 film Bend it Like Beckham, the two lead characters, Jules and Jess,
fight over their soccer coach while trying to be the women that they want to be, although
conscious of the opposing wishes of their families. In Laura Mulvey’s 1975 article entitled
“Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,” she describes the role of women in one traditional style
of movie, where the two male protagonists fight over an erotic, attractive woman who is caught
between them. In this type of movie, the woman does not have an extremely significant role—
she is merely there for the visual pleasure of the two lead males and the audience watching the
film. In Bend it Like Beckham, the traditional role of women in Mulvey’s idea of a woman
caught between two lead male characters is reversed. While many traditional films integrate a
woman into this sort of role, where the woman is solely an erotic object being fought over by the
two lead male characters, Chadha fights this ideal. In her film, Chadha uses the two women—
Jess and Jules-- as the lead characters, using them to fight over a male character, Joe the soccer
coach. The film also reflects Molly Haskell’s idea of the “buddy movie,” as both Jules’ and Jess’
families in different parts of the film mistake the friendship between Jules and Jess for a
romantic homosexual relationship. Chadha breaks the rules of this Haskell’s article and
combines both Mulvey’s use of an erotic, fought over “female” and Haskell’s “buddy movie”
into one plotline in order to produce a feminist film where the female characters are not placed
into limited, rigid roles.
Stegman
2
In traditional films, two men fight over one woman character. Chadha, in writing Bend it
Like Beckham, challenges this type of film. Mulvey states that, “the woman displayed function[s]
[…] as erotic object for the characters within the screen story” (5). While this type of character
setup is present in the film, Chadha reverses it. In Bend it Like Beckham, Jules and Jess take over
the traditional male roles, leaving Joe as the desirable, traditionally “female” character. Joe as a
character does not move the plot along, but serves as a character who breaks Jules and Jess apart
in the film. Chadha makes a statement about the role of males in films by placing Joe in the
traditional “female” role. In making Joe the object of desire, she reverses the stereotype of
women as discussed in Mulvey’s article. This reversal gives the female protagonists the ability to
shape and influence both their lives and the situation around them, as the storyline follows Jules’
and Jess’ personal growth instead of the male character’s.
Chadha does not place the physically attractive character, Joe, as the traditional “male”
character. Joe is a very attractive man, causing Jess and Jules, as well as viewers of the film, to
be physically drawn to him. In accordance to haptic space, when the “sense of sight behaves just
like the sense of touch” in film (Dudrah 33), Joe as a character acts as the object to which the
audience feels a false sense of contact with. Similarly, Mulvey addresses analogous themes,
speaking of Freud’s theory of “scopophilia.” She writes that scopophilia “arises from pleasure in
using another person as an object of sexual stimulation through sight” (Mulvey 4). Being an
erotic character, viewers of the film connect with Joe on a bodily level, where the caring, loving
way in which he feels and acts towards Jess affects the audience sensationally. Although viewers
cannot physically feel Joe putting his arms around Jess or dancing next to her at the bar, the
audience feels a biological stimulation at the thought of being touched by Joe. The use of
cinematographic elements in Bend it Like Beckham also aid in the artificial feeling of proximity
Stegman
3
to Joe. Chadha uses close ups of Joe’s face as well as good lighting on his features to strengthen
the appeal for viewers. Most scenes that feature Joe use straight on cameral angles, where Joe is
the center of the screen and the center of viewers’
attention (see figure 1). Because Joe is attractive,
fit, and attentive to the women’s needs, he serves
as an “erotic object for the spectator within the
auditorium” (Mulvey 5) as well as a desirable
object for Jess and Jules. With regards to the good
lighting, the type of camera angles and close ups,
Figure 1. Chadha uses close ups and good lighting to
strengthen Joe’s appeal to Jess, Jules, and the
audience.
as well as the casting of the character Joe himself,
Chadha creates a sexualized character in which
the audience, Jess, and Jules feel a close physical connection to. In this way, Chadha mixes up a
traditional film genre by replacing the eroticized female with an eroticized male. This reversal
opens up an opportunity for the female protagonists, as they are also attractive, fit, and viewed
positively by the audience. Chadha uses these tactics of exhibiting strong female leads to
challenge the viewers’ expectation of traditional film genres. Throughout the film, Chadha keeps
the audience’s reactions to her character choices and her intentional reversal in mind.
The target audience for this film greatly influences the way that the film is received.
According to Irene Gedalof’s article, this film is for a “Eurocentric liberal feminist audience”
(Gedalof 141), meaning that the viewers of Bend it Like Beckham would be females who have
previous knowledge of gendered roles and feminist ideologies. While this role of an erotic image
is usually given to a female character, Chadha uses Joe instead. This reversal of gendered roles in
Bend it Like Beckham changes the genre in which this film can be placed. By changing the way
Stegman
4
in which viewers see who the object of desire is, it changes the film from a romantic comedy to a
new sub-genre, or a “familiar and comforting narrative to Western feminist audiences in that it
properly deposits the modern woman…in the West where her feminist self belongs” (Gedalof
141). This reversal strengthens Chadha’s feminist film by allowing the female protagonists to
have more “masculine” roles. Because her male character is the eroticized, traditional “feminine”
character, Chadha rewrites the rules of previous film genres.
Chadha changes the rules of traditional film in her retort to the concept of “buddy
movies.” Chadha does something very interesting in her film by having both Jules’ and Jess’
families believe that they are lesbian lovers, addressing Haskell’s ideal of the “buddy movie,” in
which “the active homosexual eroticism of the central male figures can carry the story without
distraction” (Mulvey 5). At different points in the film, Jules’ parents and Jess’ sister Pinky’s
future in-laws are led to believe that the two women are involved in a romantic relationship with
one another. Haskell writes about movies in the ‘70s and ‘80s where the fight over the female
character is completely left out of films, and the eroticism between the two male characters
drives the plot along without the need for a woman to fight over. In Bend it Like Beckham, Jules
and Jess are the main characters, and their friendship, soccer drama with each of their families,
and personal growth could drive the plot along without the use of Joe as an object to fight over.
However, Chadha breaks the rules and combines the theories of both Mulvey and Haskell
together, creating eroticism between Jules and Jess and the love triangle the three characters
create together in one plotline in order to challenge the ideal that a film must fall into one
category or the other. While the eroticism between the male characters in buddy movies may be
downplayed or more subtle, Chadha utilizes Jules’ and Jess’ relationship to make an example of
this understated eroticism. In order to address the subject of eroticism, Chadha must bring the
Stegman
5
perceived homosexual relationship to the forefront. Although Jess and Jules are not lesbians in
reality, several characters that serve as relatives or family friends in the film are led to believe
that they are, in fact, lovers. Chadha addresses this issue by bringing the eroticism to light, but
does not solely use this erotic tension to move the plot along.
By including homosexual themes, Chadha addresses another cultural issue that exists in
society today. A stigma surrounds female athletes, insinuating that strong or competitive women
cannot play a sport and remain heterosexual. Jules' mother believes that because her daughter
prefers sports bras and soccer to “feminine” things, she must be a lesbian. In the same way, Jess’
family and friends believe that Jules is a man and is Jess’ lover because her hair is cut very short.
Although each woman is from a different background, both Jess and Jules experience this type of
stereotyping from each of their families. In Anjali Gera Roy’s article, the way in which each
mother voices her dislike in both Jules’ and Jess’ behavior is discussed at length. Roy states, “If
Mrs. Bahrma works hard to groom Jess for the rituals of arranged marriage…Jules’ mother
desperately thrusts her daughter into the British courtship game. Football is as taboo in Jules
English home as in Jess’ Sikh one” (64). Expectations for each woman shape the way in which
their families criticize them.
Concerning Jess’ family life, she is expected to be well bred, dressed appropriately in
terms of her Sikh/Punjabi/Indian background, and to grow up learning to cook and be a
respectable, marriageable lady. While Jess’ sister Pinky seems to accept the roles that her gender
is assigned, Jess tries to break free of the rules. This is evident in most of the film. Jess breaks
rules concerning her background by showing her bare legs while playing soccer and bringing
home soccer shoes instead of dressy shoes for Pinky’s wedding. She is criticized for spending the
money on useless shoes, and is forced to take them back. Jess uses shoes from Jules’ closet
Stegman
6
instead to please the wishes of her mother. Choosing soccer over the “proper” way of life breaks
the rules of being an Indian, according to Jess’ family, and mother in particular. The evidence for
Jules’ treatment by her family is substantial as well.
Jules faces similar criticism for refusing to adhere to the gender roles assigned to her by
her mother. In one scene, Mrs. Braxton tells Jules that no man will want to date a girl who has
bigger muscles than he does. In this way, Mrs. Braxton tells her daughter that, in playing soccer,
her daughter’s chances for finding
a date will be significantly
diminished (Roy 63). In another
scene near the beginning of the
film, Jules and her mother are
shopping in the lingerie shop
where Mrs. Braxton works. As
Figure 2. Mrs. Braxton tells Jules that more “feminine” bras will give
her a more attractive figure, making it easier to catch a man.
Mrs. Braxton admires the more
lacy, colorful bras, Jules searches through the sports bra rack, to which her mother replies, “Oh,
not the sports bras again” (Chadha) (see figure 2). Jules is not only criticized for choosing a
sports bra over a more feminine underwire bra, but she is attacked for not having a fuller, more
womanly frame. In this same way, her family criticizes Jess’ chest. Jules’ experience in the
lingerie shop is mirrored in Jess’ storyline, where she is being fitted for a blue sari. The woman
who is acting as a tailor says that, by wearing this garment, even Jess’ small breasts will look like
“juicy juicy melons” (Chadha). Although the two women are from different cultural
backgrounds, the divide caused by such social roles is brought together by Jules’ and Jess’
gender. Because the two women do not adhere to the rules that society has placed upon their
Stegman
7
gender, they are actively disrupting the expectation of the audience of the film for them to be
traditional female characters, reinforcing the feminist themes set forth by Chadha.
The shared action of gender role breaking between Jules and Jess is seen as a homosexual
relationship. Not only is their relationship misconstrued, it provokes judgment and hard feelings
from both sides of the cultural divide. Jules’ mother cannot get over the fact that her daughter
may love another woman, and weeps for a good part of the last third of the film. When she drops
Jules off at Pinky’s wedding, she is livid at finding Jess wearing her daughter’s shoes, saying,
“Get your lesbian feet out of my shoes!” (Chadha). Similarly, Jess’ situation concerning her
perceived relationship with Jules is misconstrued and judged by her family and community.
When she is seen embracing Jules at the bus stop, her sister’s future in-laws break off the
engagement between Pinky and their son. In using this misinterpreted relationship between Jess
and Jules, Chadha twists the idea of Haskell’s buddy movie. She uses the homosexual eroticism
to bring the idea of two eroticized protagonists to the forefront, before she addresses it and
reinterprets it in her film. In order to fully break the rules of traditional film, Chadha must first
bring this issue to light. In reversing the roles of who the “buddy” characters are, Chadha
effectively changes the traditional form of this type of film, creating a strong feminist work.
Jules and Jess do not adhere to the traditional view of what a female character should
look or behave like. Although their bodies are shot in fragments in some scenes, and many
camera shots depict Jules’ muscular belly, they are not necessarily the epitome of male fantasies.
In many ways, these women challenge the idea that the woman is the eroticized character in
traditional films. Because they do not have large breasts and do not choose to dress like more
“feminine” women, such as Mrs. Braxton or Pinky, these women shift the paradigm of viewers
of the film. Mulvey states,
Stegman
8
Woman then stands in patriarchal culture as signifier for the male other, bound by a
symbolic order in which man can live out his phantasies and obsessions through
linguistic command by imposing them on the silent image of woman still tied to her place
as bearer of meaning, not maker of meaning.” (Mulvey 1)
In Bend it Like Beckham, Jules and Jess are not bound to this type of role. Because they are the
two main characters, as well as protagonists in the film, they are given the majority of lines and
scenes in the film. They are the opposite of silent. In contrast to the scenes where their bodies are
shown in fragments, viewers hear each of the women’s voices and opinions as well as feel each
of the women’s emotions. The women create their own meaning separate from the sort of
meaning that the patriarchal society would place onto them; they do not allow a false meaning to
be placed upon them because they break the rules that others would have them follow. Jess and
Jules are focused on Joe, and their friendship is tested because of it; however, their success as
soccer players and women does not rest solely upon the patriarchal society that they live in. In
placing these two females as traditional “male” characters, Chadha is able to reverse the model
outlined by Mulvey.
Along these lines, Chadha tackles the idea that women, specifically female athletes
cannot be friends without some type of a conflict between them. In this way, Joe is put between
them, and they find it hard to remain friends because of their mutual attraction for him. Although
this ideal is not outlined in Mulvey’s
article, it is important to examine the
heterosexual relationship between Jess
and Jules, as much of their argument is
directly affected by the love triangle
Figure 3. Jess and Jules find it hard to remain friends after the
Germany trip, where Jess and Joe are found kissing.
Stegman
9
created between them and Joe. During the nightclub scene in Germany, Jules, who has a major
attraction to Joe, catches Jess in an intimate, physically close conversation with Joe that ends in a
kiss (see figure 3). While Jess is not completely to blame for the awkward scene, Jules places
most of the blame on her, and their friendship is tested. Although they are still playing on the
same team, and the scout wants to see both of them play and succeed, the two do not seem as if
they can remain friends after the incident at the nightclub. The audience may believe that the two
girls cannot share soccer notoriety, friendship, and a relationship with Joe at the same time, but
eventually the two girls work this issue out. The two women are able to put the mutual attraction
to Joe aside and play the final soccer game together, eventually moving to America together to
play soccer in college. In choosing friendship over the romantic relationship, the two women
defy patriarchal society. Traditional patriarchal society values the romantic relationship over
friendship. Because Jess and Jules work out their issues before Jess agrees to the relationship
with Joe, they place more significance in their friendship than the budding romance. Chadha
fights the societal topic of female feuds by allowing Jules and Jess to remain friends and be
strong and competitive soccer players at the same time.
Bend it Like Beckham is a film about two female soccer players who both fall in love
with their soccer coach, Joe. While Mulvey states that the stereotypical film features two lead
male characters who fight over one sexualized woman who is there for the erotic pleasure of both
the men in the film and the men in the audience, Chadha reverses the roles of who the typical
“male” and “female” characters are. Jules and Jess take the roles of the typical “male” characters,
while Joe acts as the “female” character. Chadha also addresses the theory of Haskell’s “buddy
movies,” in which she creates a false sense of erotic, homosexual tension between Jules and Jess.
In short, Chadha combines both theories in her film, creating an interesting, unique work. This
Stegman 10
film is a great example for future filmmakers who are looking to break the norms of traditional
film or would like to stay away from forcing female characters into inflexible, limited roles, as it
combines both types of traditional film. The female characters are given the protagonist roles,
changing the way audiences think of Mulvey’s traditional film frame.
Stegman 11
Works Cited
Chadha, Gurinder, dir. Bend it Like Beckham. Kintop Pictures, 2003. Film.
Dudrah, Rajinder. “Haptic Urban Ethnoscapes: Representation, Diasporic Media and Urban
Cultural Landscapes.” Journal of Media Practice. 11.1. (2010): 31-46. Print.
Figure 1. “Bend it Like Beckham.” Rotten Tomatoes. Rottentomatoes.com. Web. 14 November
2012.
Figure 2. “Bend it Like Beckham.” Joblo’s Movie Emporium. Joblo.com. Web. 14 November
2012.
Figure 3. “Picture of Bend it Like Beckham.” Listal. Listal.com. Web. 14 November 2012.
Gedalof, Irene. “Finding Home in Bend it Like Beckham and Last Resort. Camera Obscura. 26.1.
(2011): 131-155. Print.
Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” Screen. 16.3. (1975): 6-18. Print.
Roy, Anjali Gera. “Translating Difference in Bend it Like Beckham. New Cinemas: Journal of
Contemporary Film. 4.1. (2006): 55-66. Print.