My two cents, if you didn’t actually see the movie, then don’t get mad when you’re asked to play one of the more minor roles.
Full disclosure: Didn’t read the full article, only skimmed it.
I personally don’t think that there is anything wrong with celebrating a beautiful woman. I love me a beautiful woman as much as the next guy or gal. I think the issue is that a woman’s beauty or physical appearance is generally the primary or only thing being celebrated. Yes, men and women are biologically different and in most cases better suited for different things. The problem is that men are constantly portrayed in a multitude of ways in media (smart, stupid, masculine, feminine, hero, villain, strong, weak, etc). Women more often than not are damsels or eye candy.
I’m not going to sit here and act like there are no examples of empowered female characters, pretending they don’t exist doesn’t help the discussion but actually hurts it. But a handful of examples of empowered female characters doesn’t equate to the hundreds of male examples (in a wide variety of shapes and sizes). I’m not saying we need to replace male leads with female leads, I’m not saying we need to bash men to lift women up, I’m just saying that there isn’t anything wrong with women being portrayed in media in a multitude of different ways that don’t fall back on their physical appearance.
My thougts exactly!
1 Like
I read the whole article, I suggest whenever you get a chance to read the whole article, it’s a good’n.
I’m with you 100%. You know, this got me thinking, though…
Wouldn’t there be a case for a man, such as myself, to demand equality in a similar way? I stand a 5’6, and weigh in at a staggering 145lbs. I am a pretty average skinny white boy. Why is it that just about every male hero is some Dwayne Johnson looking character? WHERE ARE MY SKINNY WHITE BOY HEROES??? And sure, there are a “handful” of heroic characters that aren’t these gigantic freaks of nature, but… isn’t it the same kind of argument?
Couldn’t these “unattainable” characters of beauty, for either sex just be considered “eye candy”?
that’s why Spidey was created
Just because I’m a skinny white dude doesn’t mean I’m a constantly bullied nerd! Stop assuming just because I look this way, means you know who I am!
See how that works?
It totally is the same kind of argument, albeit on a slightly more focused scale. I don’t think that there is anything wrong with the Dwayne Johnson type of hero, but I do think that there is room for other types of heroes just like I think there is room for women. I’m a 5’5 160lbs Hispanic and as it turns out we’re not all maids, criminals, Spanish only speaking foreigners, or George Lopez.
Unattainable standards and gender equality are definitely related, like second cousins. I think unattainable standards are a rough thing for both genders, but I think women still have it rougher in that department too. That’s not to say that it devalues a man feeling that way. For some reason, people have decided that equality means taking something away from someone and giving it to the other side.
Depends what purpose you have though doesn’t it? If Hollywood started making pro-war films would everyone like that?
Not quite. Compare the ratio of good movies featuring males to female ones and it’s about level. Quantity doesn’t count, quality does.
Look back at the Sony leaks. Pascal and Feig wanted to put forward their own feminist views into Ghostbusters. All they did was take an existing properly and add their values. There was no creativity behind this. It’s like me saying “we need to have a porn movie, great now we’ve decided that we need to come up with a story”. Screenwriting doesn’t work like that. There was no excuse for such a lazy, cynical way they went about this. I mean come on, Feig never even intended to make the movie originally. If Pascal had sent him on his way as he wanted he would have made another film with female leads. The man is incapable of writing a film about men. Don’t believe me? Here, take a read of this:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/paul-feig-why-men-arent-449025It’s not made up conspiracy. By the way I never watched the accompanying video until now. I always knew Feig was a clown but… :mrgreen:
Regardless if people like it or not, if someone wants to use a film to artistically express a pro-war stance then they can … because its ART. Just because YOU value story and character over everything else does not mean that someone can’t make a film for other reasons. I’m not saying you have to like it, I’m just saying you can’t stop them.
I don’t understand your argument here. The quality of a movie doesn’t play at all into the representation of a gender.
Yeah you’re right. The sad truth. 
Well you want obviously a well represented female done right and in a good movie. That’s what I mean.
And just to be clear, most of the time I’m right there with you wanting good story and characters.
That’s what I thought you meant. I just wanted to be sure. In a perfect world, absolutely I’d want both men and women done right and in good movies. Unfortunately, not all movies are good and unfortunately not all bad movies contain purely bad representation.
My point is: regardless if the movie they are in is good or bad, a male character has a better chance of being portrayed in a multitude of ways and a female character generally falls into one of a few different camps. Even with the good examples we have of good female portrayal in film, there are many many more examples of good male portrayal in good or bad movies.
Again, I’m not suggesting that we knock ourselves (men) down in order to lift up women. Men exist and need to be in movies too. I’m saying we (men) should pull women up so that they’re on the same level that we are.
Again, what are the views presented in the movie? I’m not interested in behind the scenes gossip, I’m interested in the final film.
The entire basis of the movie IS feminism. If it had been an even ratio of male to female, the argument would hold absolutely no water. But, four exclusively female leads, is a feminist “girl power” message, in and of itself.
Not saying it’s wrong at all, but its there. No doubt.
1 Like
IMO, that’s barely a blip of an agenda.
When compared to TFA, our lead is A (one) female, but has a strong supporting cast of males. THAT is a small blip of an agenda. If Finn and Poe were women, I promise you, people would be having the same conversation on Star Wars forums.
Perhaps it’s just a difference of an opinion and a difference of the programming inside of our heads (upbringing, political leanings, life experiance, etc).
I suppose the real question here is… Was the selection of four female leads completely based around a feminist agenda? Or was the selection of four females leads a coincidence?
Do you believe this movie didn’t calculate every risk, calculate every move? The attention to detail in terms of east eggs and technology was most certainly calculated. What’s to say the placement of four women as the leads wasn’t a calculated finely tuned vehicle to push… something bigger?
If I remember correctly, and I could be wrong but I recall Feig not wanting to do it at first and then only agreeing once they settled on reboot with female led cast. He feels comfortable working with women, he always works with women to push equality. That is a feminist agenda (not that that’s a bad thing). It wasn’t coincidental but I don’t think the man is an evil genius out to ruin Ghostbusters for men everywhere and plant the feminist flag on our moon either.
I do think “feminism” gets a bad wrap due to “neo feminists” who taint the pool of people just pushing for equal rights. Anyone who think that men and women should be equal in a world where women are not, those people are feminist to a certain degree regardless of whether they outwardly support it. People who try to knock down men to bring women up are neo feminists and THAT is wrong, those people are actually hurting gender equality.
That being said, Sony handled the lead up to this movie poorly and the leaked emails didn’t help either. I honestly think that when they put the pencil to the pad they didn’t think a female led reboot was going to be as big of an issue as they thought. The reboot issue part was them misunderstanding what people wanted from Ghostbusters (legitimate criticism), the female led cast issue part was people being shitty and less forward thinking than they were given credit (sexism).
The man wanted to do a complete reboot/remake with all women to push “equality” (even though men are mostly presented in a negative way in his films) in Hollywood. He didn’t want the original creators to interfere with his vision and got pissed when the official Ghostbusters twitter account deleted a tweet promoting Hilary Clinton to be president.
His goals are pretty evident. Just a shame Ghostbusters got caught in the middle and was used as a vehicle to push it.
2 Likes
Hmm, making it a reboot had nothing to do with Gender equality, nor does his wish to elevate from a straw man to Ivan (which almost all approached directors had a problem with).
Could you provide evidence only men are presented in a negative way in his movies? Because while I do see some people acting like dum dumbs, it does not seem to be gender specific.
Feig being pissed about a removed tweet is news to me as wel. Do you have a link?
Cha-Chow.
Now I shall wait for the spin on this to be crafted.
It’s me or Feig and Sony doesn’t see eye to eye anymore? Cue to: new director and production staff for the next movie.