GRcade

But Nemo's Father should be his Mother.

Preezy wrote:Finding Nemo is a film about fish.

...is it?

Obviously not, it's a film about fatherhood. Why fatherhood as opposed to motherhood?

Sssh.

Because the vast majority of people in the film biz are male and therefore fatherhood is their de facto experience. Same thing is happening in the game industry now (The Last of Us and God of War for eg)

Tafdolphin wrote:

Hime wrote:What does equality actually mean in this context? Is it about more women getting leading roles in the types of films that would normally be cast with a male actor? Is it cool for the women to be scantily clad if the film is shot from a women's perspective? It seems like the kind of issue that can always be applied if you spin your argument appropriately.

It's about representation. It's about films being made that appear to a female audience. It's about, if we go off camera for a second, women getting paid as much as men. It's about films fulfilling the Bechdel Test



And any argument can, of course be spun any way you like. What you can't spin is the fact that there are less women in leading roles than men, that they are paid less and that when women do appear they are often portrayed as a sexual object.

Again, it's getting better. Not within the blockbuster genre so much, although films like Ghostbusters, Ocean's 8 and Bridesmaids are more and more common, but look at indie films with recent releases like Lady Bird and even I, Tonya.

So you think women enjoy films more when a women is in the leading role?

That chart is exactly what I mean, there are loads of films that they could choose that wood make it completely different, they have been chosen to support a specific agenda.

See Ghostbusters is an interesting one, the new film is obviously from the female perspective but I'd say the female characters in the original are far better female characters. The slightly rapey scene side Venkman is the character falling over himself while Dana is strong and confident. Janine is also excellent.

Hime wrote:So you think women enjoy films more when a women is in the leading role?

I'm not a woman. I can't say for sure. What I do know is this: given the relative population of men to women, men are overly represented in film. If it were the other way around, I'd be pretty pissed wouldn't you?

That chart is exactly what I mean, there are loads of films that they could choose that wood make it completely different, they have been chosen to support a specific agenda.

I'm not sure what agenda you're talking about there. The Bechdel Test is an established metric within film academia that is used to show the under-representation of women in film. It's pretty cut and dry.

See Ghostbusters is an interesting one, the new film is obviously from the female perspective but I'd say the female characters in the original are far better female characters. The slightly rapey scene side Venkman is the character falling over himself while Dana is strong and confident. Janine is also excellent.

The fact that you can so casually say this is...yeah. The problem really. I strawberry floating love the original GB but Venkman is a strawberry floating creep in that film. And that's besides the point: the point is not the quality of the writing so much as it is the existence of writing that attempts to portray women as something other than the sidekick or a romantic foil for the male lead.

Tafdolphin wrote:

Hime wrote:So you think women enjoy films more when a women is in the leading role?

I'm not a woman. I can't say for sure. What I do know is this: given the relative population of men to women, men are overly represented in film. If it were the other way around, I'd be pretty pissed wouldn't you?

That chart is exactly what I mean, there are loads of films that they could choose that wood make it completely different, they have been chosen to support a specific agenda.

I'm not sure what agenda you're talking about there. The Bechdel Test is an established metric within film academia that is used to show the under-representation of women in film. It's pretty cut and dry.

See Ghostbusters is an interesting one, the new film is obviously from the female perspective but I'd say the female characters in the original are far better female characters. The slightly rapey scene side Venkman is the character falling over himself while Dana is strong and confident. Janine is also excellent.

The fact that you can so casually say this is...yeah. The problem really. I strawberry floating love the original GB but Venkman is a strawberry floating creep in that film. And that's besides the point: the point is not the quality of the writing so much as it is the existence of writing that attempts to portray women as something other than the sidekick or a romantic foil for the male lead.

Not really, I watch films to... watch good films. I've never watched a film that has a women in the leading role and thought I'd enjoy it more if it were a man.

I haven't said there is anything wrong wth the test, just the films they have chosen. You could show the same test wth different films and get a different result.

How have I been casual about it? I could have ignored it entirely but I chose to mention it to demonstrate that I understand it is not acceptable. I completely disagree wth your argument though , I would rather be represented as a good, well written side character than get the leading role as a zany caricature even if it meant I was technically better represented.

Tafdolphin wrote:

Preezy wrote:Finding Nemo is a film about fish.

...is it?

Obviously not, it's a film about fatherhood. Why fatherhood as opposed to motherhood?

Deliberated about posting this because I can’t be arsed with getting into a long debate quote chain when I’m watching the World Cup, but I just have to say that this is a load of horse gooseberry fool. Finding Nemo is not about fatherhood, it’s about parenthood. The gender of Nemo’s parent isn’t important, there’s nothing in the film that’s specifically about fatherhood or viewed from the male perspective. It’s entirely about the need for a parent to protect their child. That’s it.

I can’t believe I’m arguing about Finding Nemo on the Internet, what have I become

Agree to disagree then, as I too have worn myself out.

Hip hip hooray!

Winner

Hime wrote:Winner

Ha!

There's a trophy for winning the internet? Must start winning more. It'll be my first trophy.

Pedz wrote:There's a trophy for winning the internet? Must start winning more. It'll be my first trophy.

It's a nice feeling. I've been training for this battle for a while by reading old copies of loaded and fast forwarding to egregious
nudie scenes in movies, Melancholia wad a good one as I knew how upsetting Taf would find this film after being engrossed in the pretentious twaddle only for Kirstin Dunst to get her tits out for no good reason. The dancing bit in True Lies was a weird one as I'm not sure how attractive Jamie Lee Curtis is in this film but I was committed to my training and ultimately has worked out.

Stick in there and I'm sure you'll be in with a chance next time.

Tafdolphin wrote:

Hime wrote:What does equality actually mean in this context? Is it about more women getting leading roles in the types of films that would normally be cast with a male actor? Is it cool for the women to be scantily clad if the film is shot from a women's perspective? It seems like the kind of issue that can always be applied if you spin your argument appropriately.

It's about representation. It's about films being made that appear to a female audience. It's about, if we go off camera for a second, women getting paid as much as men. It's about films fulfilling the Bechdel Test



And any argument can, of course be spun any way you like. What you can't spin is the fact that there are less women in leading roles than men, that they are paid less and that when women do appear they are often portrayed as a sexual object.

Again, it's getting better. Not within the blockbuster genre so much, although films like Ghostbusters, Ocean's 8 and Bridesmaids are more and more common, but look at indie films with recent releases like Lady Bird and even I, Tonya.

I love that one of the only movies out there that is acceptable to feminists is Silence of the Lambs. A movie where a man butchers women in order to wear their skin.

I also think it’s ridiculous to put The Shawshank Redemption in there. If a feminist doesn’t like it they can strawberry float off.

Tafdolphin wrote:

Preezy wrote:We mustn’t ever be forced to see the outrageous and frankly dangerous image of a lady in her undergarments, this is Victorian England don’t you know!

Frank wrote:Doesn't Ruffalo wake up naked in the wreckage of a swimming pool after hulking out in the Avengers?

Under the proviso that this is fake footage and we're now talking purely about hypotheticals I want to say something about these two reactions: it's not just about a woman appearing in her underwear. It's about, as I mentioned, the male gaze.

I only mentioned the Banner scene as a response to the post directly above mine (can't remember who it was by and I'm on my phone so can't easily check ). Wasn't really trying to disprove your point of view or anything, I can usually see where you're coming from with the whole "male gaze" thing.

What about topless Kylo in the Last Jedi?

Frank wrote:What about topless Kylo in the Last Jedi?

Popping back in quick just to say I did mention that, at the bottom of the post you quoted. It made me feel funny in my trousers and had me questioning my otherwise steadfast masculinity.

Preezy wrote:I also think it’s ridiculous to put The Shawshank Redemption in there. If a feminist doesn’t like it they can strawberry float off.

I've never met anyone that doesn't like The Shawshank Redemption, it's a great film, and one of the most accessible "best films" to non-film-nerds at that (even I can see why it's good!).

I don't think feminists have a problem with it, I felt the point of that table was just to show a selection of popular films and say, hey, most of these are really guy-oriented, maybe we should have more of a mix, y'know?

Moggy wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:

Hime wrote:What does equality actually mean in this context? Is it about more women getting leading roles in the types of films that would normally be cast with a male actor? Is it cool for the women to be scantily clad if the film is shot from a women's perspective? It seems like the kind of issue that can always be applied if you spin your argument appropriately.

It's about representation. It's about films being made that appear to a female audience. It's about, if we go off camera for a second, women getting paid as much as men. It's about films fulfilling the Bechdel Test



And any argument can, of course be spun any way you like. What you can't spin is the fact that there are less women in leading roles than men, that they are paid less and that when women do appear they are often portrayed as a sexual object.

Again, it's getting better. Not within the blockbuster genre so much, although films like Ghostbusters, Ocean's 8 and Bridesmaids are more and more common, but look at indie films with recent releases like Lady Bird and even I, Tonya.

I love that one of the only movies out there that is acceptable to feminists is Silence of the Lambs. A movie where a man butchers women in order to wear their skin.

Still trying to remember the second female role.

Is it the girl in the well?

Clarice has a black female friend she speak to about the case (about a man).

Ruth Martin the senator as well.

Creed II trailer.