As someone still learning how to apply feminist film theory, I decided to use Laura Mulvey’s concept of the male gaze to analyze Glo’s Christmas commercial, “Feliz Navidad Nigeria!” At first glance, the ad is filled with color, music, and celebration. But watching it through Mulvey’s perspective helped me notice things I had overlooked. In her well-known 1975 essay Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, Mulvey argues that women in film are often presented not as full characters, but as objects of visual pleasure for the male viewer. While this ad doesn’t follow a typical storyline or feature a male protagonist, I realized that many of its visual elements still reflect what Mulvey calls the “to-be-looked-at-ness” of women. In this essay, I’ll explain how I saw that play out.
One of the first things that stood out to me was how the camera consistently centers women in the frame, drawing attention to their makeup, outfits, and body movements. There are plenty of slow-motion shots and glamorous close-ups that spotlight their appearance rather than their voices or personalities. This aligns with Mulvey’s idea that women in visual media are often styled to appeal to the viewer’s gaze—usually assumed to be male. Even though the ad is meant to feel festive and joyful, the way the women are filmed makes their beauty feel like a performance. They aren’t just part of the celebration—they are the spectacle. That’s why Mulvey argues that women are often positioned as objects of display rather than as active participants.
Even though the women in the ad are dancing and singing, they remain largely passive when it comes to meaning or message. They don’t speak, lead, or express any personal thoughts. Their main role seems to be adding beauty and excitement to the festive setting. This helped me understand another key point Mulvey makes: that men in film are usually active drivers of the narrative, while women are more passive. In the Glo ad, there aren’t any visible male characters, but the camera itself seems to adopt a controlling gaze—showing women in a way that emphasizes their physical form over their inner life. That taught me that the male gaze isn’t just about a man being present on screen—it’s also about how women are framed by the camera and what kind of visual choices are made.
The ad is undeniably polished and visually striking, with lots of glitter and bright colors. On the surface, it feels light and empowering. But as Mulvey might point out, the glamor can mask deeper issues. The women aren’t given real depth or agency—they’re mainly there to set a tone and sell a product. This made me realize that even “positive” or joyful representations of women can still fall into the trap of objectification if they don’t offer space for real expression or complexity.
As a student, this analysis made me ask a bigger question: what would it look like if the ad resisted the male gaze instead of reinforcing it? What if the women weren’t just beautiful and joyful, but also shown making decisions, expressing themselves, or interacting in ways that reflect real relationships and experiences? Mulvey writes about the need for new forms of cinema that let women express desire, act with purpose, and step outside the role of being simply looked at. That same idea can apply to advertising too. Representation isn’t just about who is shown—it’s about how they are shown, and why.
Using Laura Mulvey’s theory to view Glo’s ad helped me look past the surface glamour and understand how even commercials can reinforce subtle power dynamics through visual language. It reminded me that it’s important to think critically about the way women are framed in media—not just who appears on screen, but how they’re presented, and what that says about gender and power.
No comments:
Post a Comment