Best Picture Rundown: Part 1 – Moneyball

31 Jan

MoneyballOn IMDB, the headline actors for this movie in search results are “Brad Pitt, Robin Wright.” Thisquite literally made ma laugh aloud because Robin Wright has approximately 2 minutes of screen time during the 133 minute run of the film. In fact, there seems to even be a Facebook page about it.

Moneyball is a movie about baseball. But not even the athletics game so much as baseball as a business. It is a stellar movie, a fascinating movie, and as Brad Pitt says in the film, “It’s hard not to be romantic about baseball.”

Baseball is, of course, an almost exclusively all Boys Club. Naturally, the movie is no exception.

Here are some notes I wrote while watching this movie.

  • Movie until you see a woman (in the background): 12 minutes 48 seconds (a woman in the bleachers of a game)
  • Movie until a woman speaks: 13 minutes 41 seconds (this is a secretary who escorts Billy into an office)
  • Movie until a woman converses with another character in a significant way: 22 minutes 48 seconds
  • Movie until a woman is framed in the center of a shot: 37 minutes
  • Movie until we actually see Robin Wright (the female “lead”): 40 minutes and 7 seconds.

I don’t have to straight out tell you that this movie does not pass The Bechdel Test, right?

There was some space in the movie when a group of old men sat around in a grey room together talking about players they were scouting. And these words actually come out of someone’s mouth: “He’s got an ugly girlfriend. Ugly girlfriend means no confidence.” And multiple scouts nod in agreement, as though there is some universal understanding that 1. physical attractiveness is the only redeeming quality in a woman, 2. it is the only thing a man could possibly want from a woman, and 3. ugly girlfriend = bad ball player. Insulting to allparties involved.

Back when Denzel Washington and Halle Berry won Best Actor and Best Actress in the same year. I remember hearing a lot of apologists claiming that the reason there weren’t more people of color nominated for Best Actor/Actress was because there weren’t a lot of roles written for people of color. As though that were an excuse. As though no one thought to ask, “Well why the hell not?”

Robin Wright?

Who is this again?

Despite living in a post-racist Hollywood (ha!), we’re still not living in a post-sexist world. Are you really telling me that in all of Billy Bean’s exploits as the General Manager of the Athletics, the only women he encountered were his secretary, others’ secretaries, his ex wife, his (adorable, talented, charming, precocious) semi-estranged daughter, and players’ wives? In fact, now that it’s all out there, there isn’t a single woman in the movie who isn’t defined by her relationship to a more prominent male character. Yikes.

So what’s the takeaway, here? I don’t even know. I’m not going to pretend that half the cast of every movie should be female, but can we at least stop pretending that women don’t really exist in these narratives?

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Overthinking It’s Strong Female Character Flowchart

13 Jan

Overthinking It's Strong Female Character Flowchart

Overthinking It’s Strong Female Character Flowchart

This is fairly spot on. There are a couple of times when I thought “oh, this spot is too generic or oversimplifying something” but really, isn’t that what it’s about? Making generalizations? I also love that this takes the Bechdel Test to the next level. We should demand more. Much more.

Tags: , ,

Rape & The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

29 Dec

Image

// Spoiler & trigger warning //

My mother and I have a great reputation for going to see dark-as-hell movies on Christmas and Easter. Did you even know the movie theaters are open on those days? They are, and this year my mother and I went to see The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.

It was an incredible constructed movie, Rooney Mara is a force to be reckoned with and you could just feel the Fincherism seeping through the theater as you watched. It was excellent.

I haven’t read the novel of the same name, but I’m going to make the assumption that many of you have. And therefore you knew (unlike me) that there are a series of very graphic rape scenes that take place over the course of the movie. This movie needed a trigger warning like nothing I have ever seen before. Forced oral penetration, sexual assault, violent sex, anal rape. Not to mention some asexual abuse-of-power scenarios which in themselves can be triggering. So if you haven’t seen the movie, be careful. Consider this the missing trigger warning.

Lisbeth Salander, the titular character, is a bisexual hacker-sociopath with an incredible amount of androgynous sex appeal. But Lisbeth, for reasons only briefly touched on in the movie, is a ward of the state, subject to the whims of a hideous and manipulative rapist caseworker. At first he demands oral sex in exchange for access to her own money, and then later, he incapacitates her, ties her down, and forcibly sodomizes her. The rape is loud,violent, horrible, and completely unflinching. It’s quite a long scene and then you’re asked to watch as Lisbeth limps her way out of his apartment and returns home to recover from her substantially bloody injuries.

I’ve been thinking about how films approach rape lately, my thought process triggered by a recent post by Joey Comeau in which he noted that “There is way more rape in horror movies than there are rapists. It is so often cartoonish monsters, or bad guys so evil that anyone can look at them with disgust. I think there is a place in horror for depictions of rapists that are a little closer to the truth.” While Joey was speaking about horror as a specific genre, I think there’s a lot to be expanded to other genres as well.

ImageLisbeth’s rapist, Bjurman, is gross. He is bloated, sweaty, unkempt. His apartment is dark and empty. His behavior is power hungry, manipulative. He is, for reasons beyond the actual sexual assault, one of the monsters of the film. He is not attractive. He is much older than Lisbeth, and spends a good portion of his time insulting her. We are not supposed to like him. We don’t.

For some reason,we are still at a point where portrayed rapists can’t be attractive, in shape, or “normal.” That might hit too close to home. But in reality, rapists aren’t always the kind of person who gives you the creeps when you look at them. Sometimes rapists are attractive, or wealthy, or charming. Sometimes they are trusted friends. If this film was so determined to showing us an unflinching look at the rape itself, why not go a step further and commit to admitting that not only the most obvious monsters rape? Why are we willing to concede that rape exists and is a horrible, atrocious thing, but we still can’t fully accept that it happens to all of us, not just the disenfranchised or vulnerable, and the perpetrators aren’t just the predators lurking in dark alleys? Are we worried about making our audiences uncomfortable? Weren’t we already?

Tags: , , ,

Millionaire Match-hater.

30 Sep

I have a problem with Patti Stanger, and here it is: the lady is a nutbag. She makes women look bad, and it just seems quite…odd, to me.

Patti (aka The Millionaire Matchmaker) is bright, energetic, independent, and doing pretty well for herself. Everything you want out of a strong female television character. And that’s what she is – despite starring in a “reality” show on Bravo – Patti is a Bravo character.

But, she also seems to hate women. To a disturbing degree.

I could pick apart this image, but it's just too easy.

Patti’s business is mostly millionaire men. They show up wanting hot, smart, funny, perfect girlfriends. Patti says she’ll make this happen. I will give her points for being realistic. When a 45-year-old shows up and says his dream girl looks like Scarlett Johannsen, she stops the buck right there. She tells men they need to date age-appropriately. But that’s about it. Her other rule is no sex before monogamy. In light of her business, I think this is okay. Her clients have to take dating/relationships seriously, so, she doesn’t want them showing up looking for sex only, claiming the “date” didn’t work out, and getting another set-up to repeat their behavior, Ok, I get it.

But on a recent episode, a female millionaire showed up. She ran a couple of pole-dancing gyms and was a character in her own right. Tattoos, wild hair, sexy clothing. Patti insists she change her hair, tone down her makeup, and dress conservatively (but still show cleavage because damnit, men love boobs). The client was clearly uncomfortable in this get-up, and her date didn’t work out. This is not shocking. She pretended to be someone she was not, the guys expected her to be that person, she was not, it did not go well. Of course it didn’t, Patti.

There is no rule in dating that dressing like a dumbass means you are only allowed to date dumbasses. A relationship will work based on a lot more than how one looks – the superficial only goes so far.  But Patti is obsessed with it. And I think there’s a difference between what she does with her male clients and female. The male clients get makeovers too, but they are maybe a haircut and new outfits that still reflect their style. When women show up, Patti rips them a new one. “You look like a whore.” “Men don’t like curly hair. Straighten it.” “Wear a shorter, tighter dress.” “Lose 20 pounds.” “You look old.”

Shut up, Patti Stanger. You’re perpetuating a beauty myth wherein only young, hot, skinny women get the man. But that’s not true, is it? There’s no reality there. There are ugly millionaires and ugly women and fat female millionaires and fat regular men, and people fall in love because they are compatible, not because she wore a shorter, tighter, dress. Yes, there’s a difference between showing up in sweats and a cocktail dress but there’s also something to making people uncomfortable in their own skin so they can maybe have a date.

Patti, bring a little reality to your weirdo (but successful – and you go girl!) business and stop hating women. It’s getting old.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sister Wives as a Feminist Lifestyle

18 Aug

Like most people, I first started watching the show Sister Wives because I wanted to spy on the funny little polygamist family and probably mock them.  Being a highly opinionated feminist and gay rights activist, there is little that riles me up more than religious fundamentalism and all its oppressive ways (need I mention who provides the main opposition to marriage equality, abortion, condom distribution?).  Polygamy as it is practiced in Mormon communities seemed to me, at its core, extremely anti-women.  But I am here to make the argument that the show actually opened my eyes to what I might consider a feminist lifestyle.  Or at least revealed the ways in which polygamist lifestyles offer some opportunities for female empowerment that traditional male/female pairings often cannot.

The Browne Family

The Brown Family

First, let me begin by explaining why I was skeptical of the Brown family, with husband Kody, four wives Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn, and their 13 children.  The reality about polygamy in the Mormon fundamentalist community is that the arrangement is always gendered as such—one male and his harem of ladies.  This is of course inherently unfair to the women because Kody gets to sleep around with whomever he chooses—and indeed in the first season, decides to add the fourth wife because three is just not enough—while the women are stuck with old Kody (and only two or three nights a week at that). Despite the fact that the women are clearly comfortable with sharing their sexual partner, it is clear that Kody would never allow them to meet, date, or sleep with another man.  In fact, he mentions in one episode that the thought of Meri being with another man “disgusts him”—and then heads off to bed with another wife.

This core imbalance, wherein the man gets to do something that he would never let his wives do, leaves me questioning the power balance of their entire relationship.  It’s my fear that in polygamist households that are structured as such, the man gets to make all the decisions and hold all of the power.  This comes not only from the base unfairness of the arrangement, but also from the fact that this practice stemmed from a religious decree.  Joseph Smith heard the revelation from God that man should take many wives, and that’s why Mormon fundamentalists do it.  You know what else he said?  Well, I’m no expert, but I am sure there is the requisite amount of religious shit about women being subservient to their husbands, women not being allowed to be priests, and women being expected to birth babies instead of becoming financially independent.  So you can understand my skepticism.

But let me tell you what I discovered when I started watching Sister Wives.  First of all, Kody is a bit of a doofus.  He mainly plays the role of family jester, running around making jokes and seeming bewildered by everyday life.  The women, on the other hand, come off as competent, articulate, and in control.  Although their frequent statements that “we outnumber Kody!” come off as a bit preachy and forced—as if they are already sensitive to this critique—there is rarely a moment when Kody seems to wield an iron fist.  Rather, it really seems as though the women get their way and have a loud voice in the goings-on of the household.  When Kody tries to cajole Meri into trying for another baby, she clearly stands her ground and he is forced to back off.  They also continually emphasize the fact that it is Meri who initiates the process of searching for a new wife, not Kody.  This is a bit debatable, given how hurt they all are by the process of courting fourth wife Robyn, but it still seems important to the family that decision-making appear equitable.  Sisterhood is indeed a powerful force in the Brown family, with the women clearly supporting and caring for one another in profound (if not sexual) ways.

Another element of the show that surprised and pleased me was the fact that the famed “mommy wars” debate over choosing work or family is completely negated by the formation of an extended family structure.  Through the amazing support that this structure provides, each woman is able to have exactly the lifestyle she chooses (I’m granting that she chose polygamy to begin with, which the show claims each did).  Janelle wants to be a working woman, so she heads off to the office each day and ends up providing most of the income for the family.  This is made possible for her by the fact that Christine stays home with the kids and babies, of which Janelle contributed six.  Meri wants to be a mother of a large brood, but due to infertility issues, only ends up with one child.  Through her plural marriage, she is able to join up with the other women and be a mother to thirteen.  And finally, Christine is the content stay-at-home mom, mothering her infant Truely and the others when they return from school, but her duties are clearly supplemented and augmented by the other wives, most notably when Robyn joins up and also stays at home.

Can you imagine how much cooking, cleaning, and laundry would get done with four women contributing?  I would never make the argument that women are naturally better at nurturing or doing household labor, but I do believe that women have been socialized to feel responsible for these tasks, and therefore often require less instruction and nagging to get it done.  I personally would love to have an additional member of the family who happily took on as much of the household chores as I do, even in my reasonably equitable marriage where my husband happily takes on the dishes everyday.  Screw that, I want another wife who will birth and raise my children while I head out to the office every day, guilt-free!  It’s like living with a daycare right upstairs, but one staffed only by people you love and trust and with whom you have made a lifetime commitment.  I can only imagine that the kids love living in such a kid-rich environment.  They might suffer from a lack of individual attention, but I always think kids from big families—particularly big extended families, where cousins hang out regularly—have way more fun.

So this brings me to my conclusion that the plural marriage that the Browns embody really doesn’t bother me.  In fact, I support and commend them for creating a family structure that matches their own needs and desires, and leaves each individual member feeling appreciated and fulfilled.  What could be more feminist than that?  I’m certainly not one to condemn non-monogamy; I think everyone should sleep with whomever they want, as long as it done in way that is agreeable to all involved parties.  So the only complaint that remains is that this relationship still seems so patriarchal when it is systemically limited to one man to many women.  Maybe to fix polygamy’s uneasy image, all we need to do is open it up to arrangements like two men and two women, or one woman and three men, or heck, six women and thirteen men!  If every polygamist family could be as stable, full of love, supportive, and equitable as the Browns, I’m fully on board.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Introductions, etc.

10 Aug

Hi. You’ve stumbled upon The Female Gaze, a blog about women watching television. Thanks for reading.

This blog was started in August 2011 after my dear friend Amy posted on her Facebook, “These are the kinds of things I think about: there will come a time when someone will watch the series finale of Six Feet Under and all of the death dates will have passed, and that person might be the kind of person who gets taken by the fact that the characters are not just dead in the show, but they’ve died in time as well.” So after I clicked the “Like” button and mentally high-fived her because I’ve thought of the same thing, I went to take a shower. And it was in the shower I realized that there aren’t very many women talking about television, and there should be. So here we are.

I’ve scoured a couple of web places for women who might be interested in contributing (and am still looking for more) and I hope to get this off and running with lots of thoughtful discussions about the boob tube. Please see the contributors page if you are interested in writing something for the site.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.