WTF Hollywood?!

[Jaguar]

The Contender. Joan Allen's character: Laine Hanson refuses to sell out her convictions as a contender for U.S. Vice President.

 

[ceecee]

Do you mean in terms of historical accuracy? It looks like it might be worth a watch.

More like accurate for the time than actual historical events - 16th/17th century. The play differs quite a bit from the Holinshed's Chronicles, which it's based on. You also have to remember that James I was James VI of Scotland prior to succeeding the English throne. Shakespeare was certainly keeping his royal patron in mind when writing Macbeth, it could have ended badly if he hadn't, like loosing a head badly.

I saw the film version with Katherine Hepburn and found it really interesting. Talk about an unhappy marriage.

Well I don't know that a better story of ambition, manipulation, greed, warmongering and straight up apathy exists. I couldn't fully blame Eleanor for her betrayal, just like I couldn't fully blame Henry for imprisoning her. Naturally the entire family was incredibly dysfunctional but this is how it was in the 12th century. Individually they all have fascinating stories too. It's one of my favorite times in history because it molded so much for the centuries to come.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Vice President Glenn Close in Air Force One?

 

[ceecee]

The Contender. Joan Allen's character: Laine Hanson refuses to sell out her convictions as a contender for U.S. Vice President.

 

[Hitoshi-San]

I really appreciate that you brought this up, actually. I do agree that some people are way too picky with entertainment. It's like they asked someone to make a movie/book/show/song for them and they're throwing a hissy fit because it has to be all about what they like and it's not like anyone else is going to be around it and have their own interpretation of it.

"Strong" people get killed. "Weak" people get killed. You can't have the female protagonist be a Mary Sue due to perfection because then someone will say that she needs her flaws, which is true. But some of these "feminist" characters are so obnoxious with their flaws that the character herself is impossible to like.

My best guess is these movie makers are trying to get brownie points with their viewers and to get their movies more widely known if we're thinking about this in the terms of a job.

 

[Cellmold]

I always thought Ripley was a good female character because she was more realistic. Yes, she could kick ass, but she was deliberate and thoughtful about her actions and the situations she was forced into. I'd like to see more of these traits in both male and female action heroes

What's funny to me is how male leads in hollywood have become more sensitive (case in point: Daniel Craig's Bond), inverse to female leads becoming increasingly brutish ass kickers. Perhaps someone already made this point but thread is TL;DR.

Hollywood has a way of taking things to extremes and beating popular archetypes like dead horses.

Yeah it's that harsh dichotomy between what people consider feminine and masculine. When really we inhabit a whole range of traits that could easily be attributed to either.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Yeah it's that harsh dichotomy between what people consider feminine and masculine. When really we inhabit a whole range of traits that could easily be attributed to either.

The labeling is really arbitrary, especial when you study history and anthropology and realize that different cultures had different conceptions of what was considered feminine and masculine. Some Native American tribes even had a third gender.

 

[yeghor]

It kind of annoys me that most time that a movie is haled as being "feminist" it tends to have the female characters (or at least the protagonist) going around beating people and killing them and I really don't get how that's particularly pro-HUMAN, let alone pro feminist

I mean, you have things like Kill Bill, Mad Max:Fury Road, Resident Evil, Ultraviolet, I Spit on Your Grave (though those guys deserved for SOMETHING terrible to befall them!) and such where the protagonist is a pissed off woman who goes around and behaves like a male action star and then they get called "strong female characters" and such- how? there's rarely even any character development or much background to let us know if they really ARE a strong female character or if they just like killing people! You don't get people praising Rambo for teaching little boys how to be strong for goodness sake

I don't get it... there are plenty of good examples out there of women who use their brains and such to make things BETTER for people (like Clueless, for an example... yeah, it was a comedy, but it showed the evolution of the main character into someone who was less concerned about her image and who did have concern for the happiness of others... or Legally Blonde, where the main character overcomes stereotypes and succeeds thanks to being smart, being a decent person and working her ass off) but they aren't generally the ones who get praise

Basically this is a "what the hell people? is this what you want girls to grow up aiming for? that strength = asskicking instead of that we can overcome obstacles and ourselves to make something better?"

this is not a debate on feminism or men's rights or what have you... I really don't want to hear about divorces, custody or pay differences here because it's not what I'm asking about... I'm simply curious as to what the fuck is up with movie people

There's a difference between a "strong" woman (i.e. usually depicted as masculine ST woman) and the strong feminine (SF and NF) that people fail to notice.

Masculine is a more offensive (like DPS) mindset whereas feminine is more a defensive (like Healer and Tank) one.

Women need not be a DPS to be regarded as strong, though they can very well be one, depending on their mindset and skillset.

Hollywood's attitude in this is a protest to SF/NF stereotypes being forced on masculine women, but they are going overboard with it to the point that they are neglecting the feminine.