Super Social Analysis: Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and LGBT in Movies

[starri]

She's technically Brunnhilde of Asgard.  The "spirit" of Valkyrie has inhabited a few different women over the years, including Barbara Norris, although they haven't used that alter ego in a long time.  In Thor's first few years of existence, he was the spirit of Thor bonded to a normal human named Donald Blake, although they dropped that by saying that, much like the plot of the first Thor, Odin wanted him to learn humility, so he was sent to Midgard without his memories.  They've also mostly dropped that aspect of Valkyrie as well, and she's just an Asgardian woman.

Because comics.

[methodwriter85]

9 hours ago, galax-arena said:

So apparently there was a scene in Thor Ragnarok where we see a girl leaving Valkyrie's bedroom after sex, but it was cut because it ruined the flow~. That's convenient. I just hope the movie doesn't expect any cookies for LGBT representation. 

For the record, I actually liked Ragnarok and I absolutely adored Valkyrie's character regardless. But I'm so tired of movie cast/crew talking about how so-and-so is totally gay/bi/whatever in interviews but not actually bothering to show it in any meaningful way on screen. 

They really seemed like they were setting up Thor and Val. I'm guessing leaving that scene in would have been detrimental to that ship.

[DisneyBoy]

I've been reading that Call Me By Your Name is a step backwards from Brokeback Mountain because it doesn't go for it with the sex snd instead plays it safe. True? I assumed studios would be more willing to be daring than they were decades ago, if for no other reason than to get butts in the seats.

Edited November 8, 2017 by DisneyBoy

[Irlandesa]

14 hours ago, DisneyBoy said:

I've been reading that Call Me By Your Name is a step backwards from Brokeback Mountain because it doesn't go for it with the sex snd instead plays it safe. True? I assumed studios would be more willing to be daring than they were decades ago, if for no other reason than to get butts in the seats.

Full disclosure: I loved the book. I have not seen the movie.  I am super excited to see the movie.  I am biased. But I've also read/seen more about/of the movie than I want to (so many spoilers) so I can kind of address it.

Ultimately, it depends on how you define "go for it with the sex" and "step back."  It's not Stranger By the Lake.  It's not even as explicit as God's Own Country. I have seen an obsession by some gay writers/critics over the lack of dick.  (And found it hilarious when later, one of those same critics praised restraint in a movie with heterosexual love scenes) On the other end, other reviews/blog posts highlight how sexy the movie is.  Here is why I think both can be true.

From what I've read, the love scenes--
 

Spoiler

 

Do show more with Elio and his girlfriend while panning away when Elio and Oliver are about to get down to business. So no bump and grind. 

Luca says it was an artistic choice because it would have felt like intruding on such intimacy.  From what I understand, the scenes are pretty intimate but not explicit while the scenes with the girlfriend might be more explicit but lack that intimacy.

 

 

Based on that, I can see why some wish for more.  But there are things this movie does in other ways that I find very erotic and, from what I've read, absolutely convey deep desire. More importantly, I don't think they're "playing it safe." I mean the peach scene?  Playing it safe.  Nah. Spoiler--specific mention of some scenes without too much detail but detail.
 

Spoiler

 

Elio masturbates into a peach, Oliver finds it and tries to eat it.  I think he even gets to taste it before the scene takes an emotional turn.  There are also blow jobs and Elio sniffing Oliver's shorts.  That doesn't sound like playing to the masses.

 

 

But one of the unique things about this movie which I definitely feel is a step forward is the fact that it's a pure romantic drama that lacks some of the typical cliches you'd find in many other queer romantic dramas. Cliches for a reason but there are more stories to tell. The producers had a hard time finding funding it because so many willing to put up the money wanted Elio and Oliver have to fight against disapproving figures to be together.  That isn't this movie.  The only conflicts are the inner turmoil of wondering if the person you like in that way likes you back.  It's the turmoil of realizing that summer's end is coming soon and not wanting to waste time. 

Edited November 9, 2017 by Irlandesa

[NUguy514]

On 11/8/2017 at 6:43 AM, DisneyBoy said:

I've been reading that Call Me By Your Name is a step backwards from Brokeback Mountain because it doesn't go for it with the sex snd instead plays it safe. True? I assumed studios would be more willing to be daring than they were decades ago, if for no other reason than to get butts in the seats.

I saw the film at a screening Saturday night, and while I loved it, I absolutely think it was de-sexed.  I don't need full-on nudity or anything, but we weren't really shown anything beyond kissing.  I think I would've been less bothered by the lack of sex if I hadn't read the book (which I also loved).

Spoiler

For instance, while the movie does have the peach scene, it does not end with Oliver eating the peach, which he does in the book.  That really bothered me.  Also, while we can assume watching the movie that they've had intercourse and probably assume Oliver was the top, we aren't given any indication that Elio was ever the top, which he was at least once in the book.

I think my basic issue is that the sex would absolutely have been more explicit had this been a love story between a teenage girl and a guy (like The Diary of a Teenage Girl) or even between two women, instead of between guys, and I'm over that at this point.  Showing gay relationships (and gay sex) as if they're just normal parts of life (which they are) would go a long way toward making them seem less titillating or terrifying to the general audience.  This film could have done that in some way and didn't, which is a shame.

Timothée Chalamet and Michael Stuhlbarg are incredible in the movie, though – so fantastic.

[galax-arena]

Quote

I have seen an obsession by some gay writers/critics over the lack of dick.  (And found it hilarious when later, one of those same critics praised restraint in a movie with heterosexual love scenes)

I can see why, tbh. M/F love scenes exist in a different context to M/M & F/F love scenes. Gay/bi characters still struggle to get their relationships told in a way that isn't completely desexed (but also not weirdly fetishistic). So of course people are going to be more sensitive about a desexed same-sex love scene compared to a desexed het love scene. Note, I'm speaking generally, as I have not seen CMBYN. 

Anyway... last week I saw the movie Novitiate, which is about a teenage girl who joins a convent in the 1960s. As you can probably guess by the fact that I'm typing this in the LGBT thread, she ends up developing feelings for another novice. I'll copy & paste a description of the scene from this review:

Quote

Sister Emanuel (Rebecca Dayan), another novice, visits Cathleen in her room, bringing her soup and urging her to eat. But Emanuel wants to know: “Why? Why did you stop eating?”

Says Cathleen: “I thought if I starved on the outside, I wouldn’t feel myself starving so much on the inside.”

Moved by Cathleen’s sadness, Sister Emanuel touches Cathleen’s hand. At first Cathleen recoils, but then she reaches back, surrendering to her need for human connection.

Later than night, Cathleen does the unthinkable. She goes to Sister Emanuel’s room begging to be let in, repeating over and over, “please comfort me, please comfort me, please…” At first afraid and reluctant, Emanuel soon concedes, taking Cathleen into her room and her bed. We witness the sheer desperate power of Cathleen’s passion, the voraciousness of her sexual hunger. The scene is raw, frantic, and utterly without sensationalism. There is no nudity, no below the waist shot, no woman slamming her partner against a wall to illustrate unleashed passion. Yet, this is among the most powerful sex scenes I’ve ever seen.
 

It's a fairly small part of the movie, which is less about Cathleen's desire for same-sex female intimacy than about her desire for intimacy in general. But it was still a pivotal moment in the story. The movie as a whole could sometimes veer towards being a bit... over the top lmao, but overall I really liked it. 

Edited November 9, 2017 by galax-arena

[angora]

I can't speak for Call Me By Your Name, but I do think that in general, there's a greater expectation placed on LGBTQ stories to choose between depicting sex or conveying intimacy, especially when it comes to m/m couples.  Sure, I've seen plenty of down-and-dirty straight sex scenes in movies, but I've also seen plenty that were very tender.  It's not solely a matter of "tastefully" panning away as soon as the action starts - it's more about what the actors are doing and what sort of ambience (music, etc.) is backing the scene up.  Whereas, with same-sex scenes, it seems the films are too often presented with the argument that you have to choose between the two.

[Irlandesa]

4 hours ago, galax-arena said:

I can see why, tbh. M/F love scenes exist in a different context to M/M & F/F love scenes. Gay/bi characters still struggle to get their relationships told in a way that isn't completely desexed (but also not weirdly fetishistic). So of course people are going to be more sensitive about a desexed same-sex love scene compared to a desexed het love scene. Note, I'm speaking generally, as I have not seen CMBYN. 

I do get that.  However, when I say lack of dick, I literally mean lack of dick...a.k.a. full frontal which I think is different than more explicit sex scenes.  (And I'm a proponent of full frontal with men if women are asked to do it but that's a different argument.)

5 hours ago, NUguy514 said:

I think I would've been less bothered by the lack of sex if I hadn't read the book (which I also loved).

Considering the

Spoiler

peach scene almost got dropped because LG didn't think it was possible, I'm happy some semblance of it got in.  While I always enjoy more explicit sex, the one thing I really miss from the book not making it in because they didn't show their first time was the lack of "You'll kill me if you stop."

[xaxat]

Chadwick Boseman crowned "Most Popular U.S. Actor in China

Quote

Actor Chadwick Boseman was on hand to receive an award for “Most Popular U.S. Actor in China” during the 13th Annual Chinese American Film Festival (CAFF), which runs from November 2 – 30, 2017. CAFF is organized by EDI Media and supported by the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television of China (SAPPRFT) and the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in the U.S. and it draws in celebrities and other high profile industry personnel from both the United States and China. 

Black Panther is going to be huge.

[NutMeg]

On 11/6/2017 at 7:27 PM, JBC344 said:

Another amazing Halle performance that gets forgotten is "Things we lost in the fire".  If you haven't seen it, I recommend it. 

Yes, definitely.

[Wiendish Fitch]

Here is an interesting video defending Disney's Cinderella (the animated one). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huLSdm6IH0g&t=717s

[Spartan Girl]

15 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Here is an interesting video defending Disney's Cinderella (the animated one). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huLSdm6IH0g&t=717s

Just watched it and WOW. This was good stuff. After watching the live action Cinderella, the whole "have courage and be kind" message made me reevaluate everything I always assumed about the cartoon. And rewatching it through this new perspective made me notice things I hadn't before. Like just how afraid Cinderella was of Lady Tremaine and how much strength it really took to endure the abuse.

There's one scene which really demonstrates this. After they've kept her busy all day and thus prevented her from fixing her pink dress in time for the ball, she calmly goes to tell them their carriage was ready. Lady Tremaine just can't resist twisting the knife a little further and mock her passive aggressively ("You mean you DIDN'T finish the gown...oh, there will be other balls"). There's this look that crosses over Cinderella's face. You can tell that she's really upset and disappointed; she's really tempted just to tell them all off. But instead she just simply cuts them off with a curt "Yes. Good night."

That's dignity, people.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Spartan Girl

[NUguy514]

On 11/23/2017 at 3:43 PM, Wiendish Fitch said:

Here is an interesting video defending Disney's Cinderella (the animated one). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huLSdm6IH0g&t=717s

That was an excellent exploration of the film and its themes.  I've always felt the character of Cinderella was somewhat unfairly maligned as anti-feminist, and this video lays bare the reasons why that criticism might be misguided.  In my very humble opinion, the Disney princess who really exemplifies terribly anti-feminist traits is Ariel: she falls in love with a guy she has not spoken a single word to and changes everything about herself to try to get him to fall in love with her.  I still love the film (and its music), but I find it really difficult as an adult to watch what she does to herself.  If the film had stuck to Andersen's original story more closely, I might not have such issues with it.

[coppersin]

6 hours ago, NUguy514 said:

In my very humble opinion, the Disney princess who really exemplifies terribly anti-feminist traits is Ariel: she falls in love with a guy she has not spoken a single word to and changes everything about herself to try to get him to fall in love with her.  I still love the film (and its music), but I find it really difficult as an adult to watch what she does to herself.  If the film had stuck to Andersen's original story more closely, I might not have such issues with it.

There's a set of YT videos called Advice for Young Girls, and Ariel's sums it up perfectly: "My best feature is my voice... so I sold it for plastic surgery!"

[aradia22]

Quote

In my very humble opinion, the Disney princess who really exemplifies terribly anti-feminist traits is Ariel: she falls in love with a guy she has not spoken a single word to and changes everything about herself to try to get him to fall in love with her.  I still love the film (and its music), but I find it really difficult as an adult to watch what she does to herself.  If the film had stuck to Andersen's original story more closely, I might not have such issues with it.

Quote

There's a set of YT videos called Advice for Young Girls, and Ariel's sums it up perfectly: "My best feature is my voice... so I sold it for plastic surgery!"

I've never seen Ariel as a role model but instead (ironically) one of the more flawed, realistic and human Disney princesses. She's the spoiled youngest child. She's adventurous and always brushing up against danger. A lot is made of the "I Want" song but Ariel is entirely a creature of want. It's cool to see a female character who has desires and actively pursues them. She's the most explicitly teenager-y of the princesses. Most teenage girls aren't that mature. They rebel against authority figures, they chase boys, they make some bad choices that they need to be rescued from... And isn't that how infatuation works? You see a cute boy and you start fantasizing about him and then you throw yourself into his path to see if you can make him like you back. I don't think she would have continued pursuing things if he was awful but he ended up being a nice guy when she spent time with him. She doesn't change everything about herself. She's still quirky (fork in the hair) and adventurous (jumping the gap in the carriage). She just can't speak and she has legs. I think it's notable that she doesn't take Ursula's advice of "body language" to seduce him or become this very shy creature. And also notably, even before seeing Eric she's been fascinated with the human world. She has a whole collection of man-made objects. The ending when she leaves the sea might be sad until you realize she was never totally happy as a mermaid. 

No one is ever like, God, Faust is such a bad role model. Part of me misses when female characters could just be characters and didn't have to be role models and/or represent all women. 

I think copying the Hans Christian Andersen story would have been way worse. First, he's a weird dude. The little mermaid spends her time with legs in absolute agony. Second, all that odd moralizing about souls would have been out of place. I do think it would have been nice to have more of her sisters but eh...

[Wiendish Fitch]

6 hours ago, aradia22 said:

I've never seen Ariel as a role model but instead (ironically) one of the more flawed, realistic and human Disney princesses. She's the spoiled youngest child. She's adventurous and always brushing up against danger. A lot is made of the "I Want" song but Ariel is entirely a creature of want. It's cool to see a female character who has desires and actively pursues them. She's the most explicitly teenager-y of the princesses. Most teenage girls aren't that mature. They rebel against authority figures, they chase boys, they make some bad choices that they need to be rescued from... And isn't that how infatuation works? You see a cute boy and you start fantasizing about him and then you throw yourself into his path to see if you can make him like you back. I don't think she would have continued pursuing things if he was awful but he ended up being a nice guy when she spent time with him. She doesn't change everything about herself. She's still quirky (fork in the hair) and adventurous (jumping the gap in the carriage). She just can't speak and she has legs. I think it's notable that she doesn't take Ursula's advice of "body language" to seduce him or become this very shy creature. And also notably, even before seeing Eric she's been fascinated with the human world. She has a whole collection of man-made objects. The ending when she leaves the sea might be sad until you realize she was never totally happy as a mermaid. 

No one is ever like, God, Faust is such a bad role model. Part of me misses when female characters could just be characters and didn't have to be role models and/or represent all women. 

I think copying the Hans Christian Andersen story would have been way worse. First, he's a weird dude. The little mermaid spends her time with legs in absolute agony. Second, all that odd moralizing about souls would have been out of place. I do think it would have been nice to have more of her sisters but eh...

Well stated, aradia22. I think a character should be a character first, a role model second, if at all.

I get why people take issue with Ariel's deal with Ursula, but

1. That's more or less what happened in Andersen's original*, and

2. I think Ariel's more positive traits get unfairly overlooked: her grit, her imagination, her joie de vivre, her curiosity and sense of wonder at a much bigger world, I think these are all admirable. 

There's always room for criticism for any character. I love Belle, but some accuse her of being latently shallow and only loving the Beast for his palace and riches. Or Wonder Woman, who seems to get mountains of crap for any sliver of praise she gets (she's too pretty, too strong, not strong enough, cares too much about Steve Trevor, etc.). 

I sometimes wonder if female characters get more scrutiny than they deserve; people dismiss them as boring if they are "too nice" or have too few flaws (see the Cinderella video above), or if they are intentionally written as flawed, they are written off as horrible, even though there might be male characters who possess the same faults, if not more. I've griped more than once about how Rupert Pupkin from The King of Comedy is described as a "lovable underdog"... even though Eve from All About Eve has many of the same traits, but is seen as a villain.

Everyone's entitled to their opinions, of course, but a Facebook friend of mine made an excellent point: there's a disturbing number of children's toys and accessories with Darth Vader on them, despite Darth Vader being a genocidal maniac who terrorizes and even maims one of his own children (yes, in Leia's case, it's debatable if either of them knew that, but it doesn't negate the point). Yeah, yeah, he kind of redeems himself at the last second in Return of the Jedi, but I can't shake off the image of him cutting off poor Luke's hand in The Empire Strikes Back, or threatening Leia with that horrifying syringe torture ball in Star Wars.

 

*While we're on the subject, while I don't object to sad stories for children, I think too many of Andersen's stories are brutally, self-indulgently sad for no good reason. His passive protagonists suffer and suffer and suffer some more, but to what end or cause? I read The Fir Tree once, and I'm amazed I didn't just end it all by the last passage. 

Edited November 26, 2017 by Wiendish Fitch

[aradia22]

Quote

I love Belle, but some accuse her of being latently shallow and only loving the Beast for his palace and riches.

I won't pretend to be any kind of expert but I try to see characters as who they genuinely are (or sometimes if they're poorly written, what the writer is trying to say through them). I like Belle though that isn't one of my favorite Disney movies. I feel like people map everything they want onto her. She's a feminist, she's an educated woman, etc. etc. Really, she doesn't want to marry a jerk just because he's relatively handsome and everyone in town likes him and she likes reading books. More specifically, she likes fairy tales and romances. That's made explicit every time she describes what she's reading or has read. She's not reading Mary Wollstonecraft. She's not even reading Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. ;) 

Quote

*While we're on the subject, while I don't object to sad stories for children, I think too many of Andersen's stories are brutally, self-indulgently sad for no good reason. His passive protagonists suffer and suffer and suffer some more, but to what end or cause? I read The Fir Tree once, and I'm amazed I didn't just end it all by the last passage. 

I have a huge book of HCA I haven't touched in ages. And I know, blah blah "death of the author." But from my vague recollections of his bio, he was a somewhat depressed guy who had some issues with interpersonal relationships. So there's probably a bit of self-flagellation and probably a bit of writing sad fates for people who rejected him, etc. 

[ChelseaNH]

7 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Yeah, yeah, he kind of redeems himself at the last second in Return of the Jedi

I love the recap of Luke's perspective here:

https://captainawkward.com/2011/01/17/reader-question-4-my-friend-is-dating-someone-terrible-or-secrets-of-the-darth-vader-boyfriend/

[kathyk24]

I think Merida from Brave gets a bad rap, She's a tomboy with a mother who wants a feminine daughter. Merida wanted her mother to change her opinion not turn into a bear.

[Spartan Girl]

Why would people think Belle is a gold-digger? She came to love the Beast for his own merits, him being a rich Prince had nothing to do with it. Ugh, fucking Honest Trailers, man...

And I totally agree that Ariel's story was a lot more nuanced than giving up her voice for a man. She wanted to be a human long before she even met Eric. And even without her voice, was still essentially the same vibrant, quirky girl she always was. 

It always pisses me off when people accuse her of turning her back on her family. In the end, Triton realized humans weren't as bad as he thought, which put an end to his law about the surface world bring forbidden. So even if she wasn't living in the ocean, it wasn't like he could never see her again...

[Wiendish Fitch]

13 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

Why would people think Belle is a gold-digger? She came to love the Beast for his own merits, him being a rich Prince had nothing to do with it. Ugh, fucking Honest Trailers, man...

And I totally agree that Ariel's story was a lot more nuanced than giving up her voice for a man. She wanted to be a human long before she even met Eric. And even without her voice, was still essentially the same vibrant, quirky girl she always was. 

It always pisses me off when people accuse her of turning her back on her family. In the end, Triton realized humans weren't as bad as he thought, which put an end to his law about the surface world bring forbidden. So even if she wasn't living in the ocean, it wasn't like he could never see her again...

Not to mention there's no didactic "Ariel realizes the error of her ways and desires and sticks to being a mermaid" moral at the end. There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanderlust or wanting to be something bigger than yourself, and no one should be punished for their ambition (It's a Wonderful Life, I'm looking at you).

And can we give it up for the underrated character of Grimsby?! Who could forget this wonderful advice he gave Eric?

Eric, if I may say, far better than any dream girl is one of flesh and blood. One warm, and caring, and right before your eyes.

 

Re: Honest Trailers

Yeah, fuck that stupid series; that, and "Blah blah blah Things Wrong with Whatever Movie, Which are Just Stupid Nitpicks we Yanked out of Our Asses."

Edited November 26, 2017 by Wiendish Fitch

[starri]

3 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Re: Honest Trailers

I dunno, Honest Trailers' read of the racism and sexism in Peter Pan is pretty spot-on.  

[Spartan Girl]

Honest Trailers can be spot-on at times. It just depends on the movie. 

I LOVED Grimsby. Here's hoping they do him justice in the live action TLM. I didn't mind Cinderella's Grand Duke being a bad guy or LeFou being more nuanced (and gay) but Grimsby should be unchanged.

Getting back on topic, I mentioned in another thread that Ariel's desire to become a human could parallel the struggle of transgender people.  Or anyone that feels and/or is in love with someone different than what their family may expect. So from that perspective, it's not so antifeminist at all.

And give Eric credit: he fell in love with Ariel before he knew she was the one that rescued him. Before Ursula/Vanessa stepped in, he was ready to choose her. He realized, as Grimsby so eloquently put it, that the real, imperfect girl with a personality was far better than a dream.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Spartan Girl

[Annber03]

10 hours ago, aradia22 said:

 I like Belle though that isn't one of my favorite Disney movies. I feel like people map everything they want onto her. She's a feminist, she's an educated woman, etc. etc. Really, she doesn't want to marry a jerk just because he's relatively handsome and everyone in town likes him and she likes reading books. 

Well said. 

I liked Belle, too. I love to read, so I could relate quite well to that. I remember wanting a huge library like the one she got in the castle. 

Jasmine was another favorite Disney princess for me. She was smart, independent, caring, and spoke her mind. 

[Zuleikha]

When people talk about Ariel, I'm never sure if people have rewatched The Little Mermaid recently or are working off memories from when it first came out. Personally, when I rewatched it with my daughter I was shocked at how different Ariel is as a character than the critiques and my memory. I find her one of the most feminist and independent of the Disney princesses. Her story isn't really the love story with Eric: it's her struggle to get Triton to accept Ariel as an independent person with her own interests. She is literally standing up to the patriarchy.

A lot is made of her giving up her voice for legs in the deal with Ursula, but what people often seem to forget is that Ariel's whole introduction was about how she was sick of swimming/ready to stand. She wasn't making some grand sacrifice just to pursue a boy. She was paying a price to get something she'd been wanting for herself for her long time: the opportunity to be part of the human world. The motivating factor was also Triton destroying her treasures and trying (again) to forbid her from exploring, not simply a conflict over Eric.

In addition to that, Ariel is the one who rescues Eric from Ursula and while Eric is given a key role in the final fight against Ursula, so is Ariel. 

Quote

 More specifically, she likes fairy tales and romances. That's made explicit every time she describes what she's reading or has read. She's not reading Mary Wollstonecraft. She's not even reading Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. ;)

Yes! That was another thing I was shocked by when I rewatched Beauty and the Beast. Belle gets talked about like her book reading makes her a deep intellectual, but she's not reading for knowledge. She's reading for escapism. Which is fine and consistent with Belle's personality/I Want, but doesn't make her some great feminist role model character. I know Belle and Ariel aren't in direct competition as characters, but because the movies came sequentially, I always find it weird the way Ariel gets condemned and Belle gets praised. I find Belle a much more problematic character and Beauty and the Beast a much more problematic story. It's the one Disney movie I actually am trying to keep my daughter from watching.

ETA: Oh one thing I literally just thought about in regards to Ariel is that at least one of Triton's attempts at forced conformity involves Ariel's singing. Remember the opening with Ariel's failed debut. So again, there's a symbolic level where giving up her voice is a move towards liberation for Ariel.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Zuleikha

[aradia22]

Quote

It always pisses me off when people accuse her of turning her back on her family. In the end, Triton realized humans weren't as bad as he thought, which put an end to his law about the surface world bring forbidden. So even if she wasn't living in the ocean, it wasn't like he could never see her again...

Except for that nonsense sequel we don't speak of. ;)

But really though, I forget the term but it's a clear case of that kind of progression from childhood to adulthood. Particularly for a certain time period there's a transition for a woman from being in her father's house to being in her husband's house. It's murky in my brain. I can't remember if it's a literary criticism thing or a psychology thing.

[NUguy514]

I have watched The Little Mermaid recently, and I stand by my opinion that Ariel and the movie are difficult for me to watch now.  While I take everyone else's points about Ariel, I find her to be lacking any and all sense of self-worth.  There is no way I can view anyone willingly giving up his/her/their voice as self-liberating.  And I don't think Eric really fell in love with her while she was voiceless; he was going to settle for her because he couldn't find That Young Woman With The Voice.

I think the senses of wanderlust and of wanting something different for yourself than what's expected were better embodied by Jasmine; Jasmine was a bad ass.

[aradia22]

Quote

 There is no way I can view anyone willingly giving up his/her/their voice as self-liberating.

I don't think anyone was arguing that. Just that a fully-realized character should be able to make bad choices, suffer the consequences, learn from the experience, etc. 

Quote

And I don't think Eric really fell in love with her while she was voiceless; he was going to settle for her because he couldn't find That Young Woman With The Voice.

Eh. I bought it. 

Quote

I think the senses of wanderlust and of wanting something different for yourself than what's expected were better embodied by Jasmine; Jasmine was a bad ass.

Disagree. Compared to Ariel, this attempt at Spoiled Princess 2.0 cranked up both the "spoiled" and the "princess." Ariel is more of a teenager whereas because Jasmine is more sexualized and there's all this business with marriage and affairs of state, she comes across as a lot more petulant in her reactions. Also, she's kind of a dummy. She doesn't know you have to pay for things??? At least Ariel was just misinformed by a seagull. And don't get me started on over-sexualizing non-white female characters. 

[festivus]

I haven't seen The Little Mermaid in probably 25 years, didn't know there was a backlash against Ariel. This thread has been a really interesting read.  I had two big books of fairy tales when I was a kid and I do remember my favorite story was The Little Mermaid. I don't know what that says about me because that story is tragic. There is no way that version could have been a Disney movie for kids. I should probably watch the movie again but I never had a problem with Ariel as a character. I always thought the story was about her wanting something more from life more than it was a love story where as what I remember from the original is that it was all about a man. My memory isn't the greatest so I think I'm going to go get it and read it right now.

[kiddo82]

Not to change the topic but marvel sent this out and I thought it was pretty cool and wanted to share.

 Carry on.

[Spartan Girl]

Too bad they did have Pepper, Maria Hill, or Sharon.

[aradia22]

I don't watch the Marvel movies. I looked it up on imdb and I guess Karen Gillan plays Nebula? I don't know who the other two on the right are. Cute photo and all but let's not pretend they don't have a problem with female characters. As far as gender, they were the Justice League not so long ago. 

[Lugal]

On 11/25/2017 at 11:16 AM, aradia22 said:

I think copying the Hans Christian Andersen story would have been way worse. First, he's a weird dude. The little mermaid spends her time with legs in absolute agony. Second, all that odd moralizing about souls would have been out of place. I do think it would have been nice to have more of her sisters but eh...

As I understand it, the Little Mermaid is an allegory for HCA trying to fit in with the upper classes, as well as his tendency to fall in love with unattainable people (he was probably bisexual).

I would agree that Ariel int he movie seems to have more agency than the unnamed mermaid in the story, although it's been a while since I read it.

[JBC344]

11 hours ago, aradia22 said:

I don't watch the Marvel movies. I looked it up on imdb and I guess Karen Gillan plays Nebula? I don't know who the other two on the right are. Cute photo and all but let's not pretend they don't have a problem with female characters. As far as gender, they were the Justice League not so long ago. 

The other two women are Evangeline Lilly (Ant Man) and Pom Klementieff (Guardians of the Galaxy).  I'm curious what problems you are referring too? 

[aradia22]

@JBC344 I don't watch the movies so it's not something I can speak to with as much authority as Disney movies but I'm not the first person to bring it up. I'm sure a bit of light googling would turn up plenty of articles. You can start with equal representation. Until very recently, I think the female characters were mostly girlfriends (no wives, right? Or moms?) and side characters. The original Avengers lineup is 5:1 men to women which is what I meant by the Justice League comment. You'd have to look up those articles for more in depth analysis about specific problems in each movie. 

[kiddo82]

18 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Too bad they did have Pepper, Maria Hill, or Sharon.

And Peggy.  Peggy might be my favorite.

[xaxat]

First trailer for Avengers: Infinity War.

 

I was really grateful that Marvel allowed Ryan Coogler to make a Black Panther movie set in Wakanda that is so "black". Now, I really appreciate that that is not a one off incident and Wakanda (like Manhattan) is a full part of the geography of the MCU. 

[Silver Raven]

Disney has cast Chinese actress Liu Yifei as Mulan for their live action version.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/marcusjones/disney-mulan-casting-liu-yifei?utm_term=.lla8Dr6eJ#.uv3bxqlQ3

[Morrigan2575]

She was a little wooden in The Forbidden Kingdom but, I liked Sparrow.

[Spartan Girl]

It's about freaking time we got some Mulan news!

[Luckylyn]

New and much better trailer for Love, Simon

[starri]

It makes me kind of sad that we're in 2017 and we still need movies about it being okay to come out.

[Zuleikha]

'm curious what problems you are referring too?

That they've had three movies with a man named Chris playing the lead and 0 movies with a female lead. In their initial phase of movies, the female characters were romantic leads and sidekicks. Even after Black Widow was added, she was presumed not to have superpowers (despite her comic book counterpart having canon superpowers at that point in time). She's still been fairly unexplored as a character despite being well received.

After a TON of criticism, they are slowly improving. They've now cast non-white women and have multiple female characters with powers. But they had to be dragged into it, and their female characters are still secondaries rather than primaries. IIRC, Captain Marvel isn't even shooting yet. 

This also reflects crap hiring behind the scenes. They've never had a female director (Natalie Portman used all her capital to bring in Patty Jenkins for Thor 2, but Jenkins left because she couldn't persuade Marvel to fix the crappy script). Their only female scriptwriter had her contributions minimized by her replacement. 

[xaxat]

Great interview with Byron Allen (whom those of a certain age may remember as a stand up comedian back in the eighties) who is now an increasingly important producer of independent movies. 

I remember him working the late night TV talk show circuit back in the day. I had no idea he was a better businessman than comedian. His latest,

[methodwriter85]

So 2017 had the emerging break-out black actresses with Zendaya  and Laura Harrier in Spiderman: Homecoming. And then there's Gugu M'Batha Raw with Black Mirror (technically late 2016) and Beauty in the Beast. My money's on Gugu M'Batha Raw. She looks like she has a pretty busy 2018 lined up. I was really proud of Laura Harrier, though, because I remember her first acting gig being her turn as Destiny on the short-lived One Life to Live reboot in 2013. It was awesome to see her in Spiderman: Homecoming four years later. It was also really see an inter-racial love triangle where only the guy in the center is white and both of the love interests are black girls. I loved how diverse they made Peter's school.

Also, Tessa Thompson made good on 2015 Creed breakout with her very well-received turn in Thor Ragnorak. Good for her.

Edited January 8, 2018 by methodwriter85

[Silver Raven]

The New York Times was apparently unable to define EGOT-winning actress of color Rita Moreno, and just referred to her as "guest"

 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DS-mLHBWAAA1tyi.jpg:large

[methodwriter85]

5 minutes ago, Silver Raven said:

The New York Times was apparently unable to define EGOT-winning actress of color Rita Moreno, and just referred to her as "guest"

 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DS-mLHBWAAA1tyi.jpg:large

I guess they expected her to still somehow look as she did 56 years ago in West Side Story?

Norman Lear called that out pretty fast.

[Silver Raven]

5 minutes ago, methodwriter85 said:

I guess they expected her to still somehow look as she did 56 years ago in West Side Story?

Norman Lear called that out pretty fast.

Did he?  I didn't see that.

[festivus]

Seriously? I can tell that's Rita Moreno.

[aradia22]

When I saw Rita Moreno in the Race and Ethnicity thread I thought it was going to be something about her playing Tuptim in The King and I. No, I'm still not over it.