A cliffhanger...

Madame Freedom is, immediately to many of its viewers, progressive, avant garde, brave in its portrayal of women and their role in society. Madame Freedom's main characters explore their sexuality and femininity, take finances into their own hands, and question the meaning of beauty. At the end of the film, however, things are not looking up for the main character, Seon-Yeong; after straying into a series of love and financial scandals, her husband casts her out of the house because she is no longer acceptable to him.

Women throughout ages have been known to explore their role in society; what connects this film to all those other instances is that, in the end, Seon-Yeong realizes doing her straying from the norm has ruined everything, and she suddenly becomes the antagonist (or is this a slow transition? Depends on the viewer). Things were simpler and easier when she "stayed in her place"--her family was happier, her friends did not look on suspiciously.

However, it occurs to me that someone sitting next to me could approach the ending of the film entirely differently. When Seon-Yeong's son escapes outside to embrace her, loyal despite her 'downfalls', is this action suggesting that Seon-Yeong is re-accepted into her home? Perhaps someone else could interpret Professor Jang as the 'bad guy'...it does, however, seem like the film has done a pretty good job at trying to lead its audience to lose respect for Seon-Yeong, especially because she has neglected her child (and here we are obliged to consider, why is it her duty alone to look after her son?).

To look at several instances of women being shown as strong characters: At the women's meeting with live performances and tea, Seon-Yeong says, “Their husbands must make a lot of money.” Yun-Ju corrects her: “Even so, who would do that for them? The women have their own businesses."

Other exchanges: “My husband wouldn't approve.” “Who would?”

“Especially us women—we need to be economically independent to avoid the tyranny of our husbands. We're just withering roses.”

“Women are slaves to makeup and it gets them to be more like prostitutes," says Mr. Han. “That is abusive language. Makeup is needed for beauty and mind. You are uncivilized,” says Seon-Yeong. “Now I'm being deprived of my qualifications of being a gentleman.”

“Anyway, you don't have the right to accept my love.” “'The right'?” “You have a husband.”

So, what? Are all of these instances of women understanding their power meaningless after the outcome of the movie is revealed? Or is there some compromise the viewer understands? Does the movie actually create the opposite message that it seems to start in the beginning? It is difficult to say...