1) it is unnerving.
2) If I am not mistaken, the visual itself has a great deal to do with the plot of the series, which is about lawyers, betrayal, etc., etc....
3) I also think that the imagery of sexual violence-- however subtle-- is probably designed to bring in new viewers.

Either way, the image alone is disturbing, no matter what the context is.

I think the image is attempting to allude to sexual kinkiness in general. There's the prominent shoe (fetishistic), violence, almost-asphyxiation, the back-arch of the one on the ground and her smile at the camera, which both suggest she is enjoying being dominated and abused (as in e.g. B&D) and also that she is aware she is being watched (exhibitionism/porn), AND the fact that both people are female.

All of these aspects of the image are, I think, designed to titillate, but also to maybe suggest that the world of top cut-throat lawyers is like B&D: involving domination, objectification, violence, yet ultimately something the lawyers do to each other for the thrills and (pseudo-sexual) gratification.

I'm not opposed to a little sex & fetish. The sexual violence depicted here (oh it certainly is that!) doesn't seem objectifying-- or if it is, I should say, it doesn't objectify women so much as the situation? I'm with styleygeek in that it definately suggests the power/sex/domination atmosphere.

My interpretation of Glenn Close's smile is that she has to look poised even when she's being the object of violence: women in high positions cannot afford to look vulnerable.

Maybe something to do with age as well? Younger professionals literally walking over older ones?

That's what I thought, featherbrain, only I was thinking of simply younger women stepping over older women. It makes me wonder what I would have thought about it if Glenn Close was stepping on Rose Byrne instead.

In the first season of the show, it was Glenn Close who walks over Rose Byrne.

This kind of faux- sexual violence reminds me somewhat of that Dolce & Gabbana ad with the stylized gang bang. It's unsettling because there is a depiction of what in real life would be horrible violence, but there is not a shred of the emotions we'd associate with that kind of scene in the people's faces. That's why it is so disconcerting.

It's definitely a strange one. Here are a few things that occurred to me when I looked at it:

1. The colours. I'm a former art student, so they stood out for me. In art, yellow and purple are meant to be eachother's complementary colours (like green is to red, purple is to yellow - though there's actually some debate about that). Yellow and purple were two colours that were definitely chosen for deliberate contrast, probably to reflect the power struggle between these two women in the show. So to me, with my art-student mindset, this poster reads like a battle between Yellow and Purple, with both colours looking assured that they'll win or that they have won the fight (Rose Byrne doesn't notice or pretends not to notice Glenn Close's body on the pavement, Glenn Close smiles calmy despite having a *blood red* high heel sticking into her neck).

I have a lot of other issues with this picture but I think most of them have already been mentioned in the comments above. It is bizarro though.
2. Is there something of the paparazzi shot about this image? A glamourous young woman emerging from the back seat of car? Her outfit suggests red carpet, as does Glenn Close's. Are they trying to add a Hollywood glamour to the show? This is, afterall, a program about lawyers. Why aren't these women dressed in their professional garb? Why is the photograph even set on a street rather than in an office or a court? Would viewers be turned off by the idea of a show depicted as being about professional looking women rather than the glamourous types we've become used to from shows such as "Sex in the City" and "Lipstick Jungle"?

I wouldn't say the violence has anything to do with sexual exploitation or any of that. It seems to just illustrate the plot - I say this not being familiar with the show. However, I would say that the woman are sexually objectified just as women, and there happens to be violence in the image.

So, husband and I watched an episode of this show with his parents over the holiday. As someone else mentioned, in the first season (as we learned from the show's own recap and from husband's parents) the younger character does get screwed over pretty thoroughly by Glen Close's character.

I'm having a hard time getting down on this image right now, because Damages is one of the few shows in existence (particularly popular shows) that actually manages to follow the Bechdal Rule. If you're not familiar, the rule is that movies/shows should have 1) at least two women, 2) who talk to each other, 3) about something other than a man. I am continually amazed at how few shows on television pass this test! (more from Bitch PhD, where I learned about it)

SPOILERS BELOW

Also, the show has violent undertones, but not violent in the normal "damsel in distress" way. The younger character's whole motivation is revenge against the Close character. The both of them play roles that are normally given to males. They are both lawyers. The younger one lost her love (because of Close's char.), and lives for revenge. She is very devious and has a long-running plan to bring Close down. She will seem friendly enough in day-to-day, but later she'll do something that reminds the view that everything she does is for revenge.

Close's character is cut-throat to the core and seems to have absolutely no remorse. Her character is the stereotypical old white male's character. The very powerful one who will do anything for money and who is behind the most devious schemes.

So, yeah, this is not your average show from a feminist standpoint.

All of that being said, Tyrone could not be more correct in saying "Why aren’t these women dressed in their professional garb? Why is the photograph even set on a street rather than in an office or a court?" Why indeed. I guess that "normal" views have to be lured in by the same old sexist crap since this show breaks the mold in other ways. I guess I got over having a hard time getting down on the image!

I was thinking about a much simpler explanation for the image: a bad photoshop work. at this resolution it's hard to tell and i can't find a bigger image, but often, even hi-profile stuff, graphics stitch people faces on other people bodies without being to careful about expression, direction and things like that.

Look at the photoshop disaster blog to get an idea:
http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/

So simply there could be no other explanation behind the "strangeness" in this but laziness and lack of attention to details.

The cover of the first series DVD has this kind of problems too:
http://telemania.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/damages_s1_dvd_early.jpg
So that wouldn't be a first.

I'm not saying i'm sure this is the case (and there would still be the issue of why they choose to use the image anyway) but it's something i wouldn't rule out... Light (especially on Glenn Close hair) looks a little weird, after all...

Oh, and btw, a little question for you: why Glenn Close is Gleen Close while Rose Byrne is "the brunette"? ;)

M

Marcello,

Because I knew Close by sight, but not Byrne, and I was too lazy to look it up. :)

Marcello - oh, it's most certainly a poor photoshop job (where the hell does Byrne's other leg go? and Close's contact with the floor is thoroughly unconvincing), but the foot-on-the-throat is the onw well done part of this shoddy picture, so I don't think that's that.

Still, I really can't see where Close is being sexualized here, unless you think that any woman in a victimized position is therefore sexualized, which I don't.

In other words, "I can't really find a specific reason to cue up nipple-hardening feminist outrage at his image, but I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to."

Close's calm expression and the complete lack of awareness Byrne shows her makes me think that Close's character has snuck herself under Byrne's shoe in order to fake sympathy and pretend to be the victim.

Great website! A lot of useful information is here and am so glad to be here and share one more important tips for bing browser users to learn how to erase history from here. Thank you to this support.