On The Basis Of Sex (2019) - Movie Review

For both understandable and woefully misguided reasons, feminism as it exists in the modern conversation is not what it used to be. A branch of civil rights activism that remains at the core of some of the most vital changes in human society, it has gone the way of an unfortunate bulk of activist stances and become a hotbed for all things on the fringe of the discourse. I myself have railed against the current face of feminism, and while I know the precarious position that puts me in, I also recognise what feminism represented at its peak.

It wasn’t a way of thinking that insisted on the same pedestaling as the opposition, acting as a mirror that only reflects prejudice rather than a hammer that reshapes it, but a movement that wanted equality among the sexes. The stereotypes that bind one half of the binary do the same for the other, and until both sides are placed on even ground, both end up suffering. It is because of this, among other things, that this film strikes a serious chord with yours truly.

With the aid of a phenomenal cast from Felicity Jones as the woman who would become the Notorious RBG (even if her accent isn’t always convincing), to Armie Hammer as her husband, partner and weapons-grade eye candy, to Justin Theroux’s sweaty Ron Burgundy impression as a member of the ACLU, to Sam Waterston as all things patriarchal within the legal system, even Kathy Bates’ minor but pivotal role as part of the older guard of the feminist movement, it all checks out. Everyone fits in their place excellently, which only makes the remarkable sharpness of the dialogue ring through even clearer.

While the writing carries a lot of Sorkinisms as far as bringing the headiness of legal jargon to a mainstream audience, scribe Daniel Stiepleman shows a lot of crispness for what is his feature-length screenwriting debut. All the major points are boiled down to their essentials in a way that makes it all easier to digest, and the added touches in nearly every scene result in either memorable quips, rousing emotional moments, or a quality blend of the two.

Whether it’s highlighting how legal precedent works, like with Hammer’s Martin explaining how taxes in Sweden resulted in a lower marriage rate, or explaining why freedom of choice is more important than whether an individual will choose not to, like the line from the trailer about women not being able to work as miners, it makes for a breezy but learned depiction of the American legal system, why it is the way it is and why it would benefit from not staying that way.

But for all of its legal footwork or courtroom drama, the main thing that makes this stick out is the intent behind Ginsberg’s decision to take on what is ostensibly a simple tax case: Starting a snowball that would lead to bigger chances for equality in future. Now, as much as her opposition are rather cartoonish in their rebuttals (there’s only so many times I can hear the phrase “the natural order of things” before I feel the need to gag with every syllable), their main intent is something that persists to the current day.

Sure, their slippery slope "this could ruin the American family" catastrophizing is the stuff that even suicidal depressives would think they’re overreacting to (that's the reaction I had, at least), but their perspective of one little change resulting in the end of everything? That is the bulk of what I heard during the same-sex marriage debate in this country, the hypothetical ramifications of which are still being pushed by conservatives to this day.

And much like with that instance of wanting for more equality, the stance made by Ginsberg’s opponents is both technically true (as far as setting legal precedent, at least) and quite disingenuous. It’s something that only further highlights why RBG’s mission remains as crucial as it is: By standing up for someone who fell through the cracks of the legal system’s approach to the sexes, she stands up for everyone affected by it on both sides of the binary.

It’s a showing of genuine, forward-thinking feminism that seems to have fallen by the wayside as far as mainstream representation, considering how the far more sexist tinges of the latest wave of feminist doctrine get a lot more lipservice nowadays. It’s one of the main reasons why I still have a disdain for a large number of so-called ‘chick flicks’, and it’s also why I have a lot of respect for this film, its intent and the beautifully articulate way in which it presents that intent.