The Official Movie Thread

[rdowdall]

and it got me thinking, and it got me trying to remember every interaction that I have had with a female.  I'm sure I have told an off-color joke, or invalidated a women in some way with something that I have said at some point through my life trying to be funny, but failing miserably.  I mean probably not through my adult years, but more than likely when I was a teenager.

I think the last few weeks have probably inspired a lot of similar introspection. Which is a good thing. Reflection and a genuine desire to be better in our future behaviours should be a continuous process for all of us.

But let's also acknowledge we're talking about a super-low bar to clear here(mainly it just involves not showing your genitals to anyone who doesn't want to see them). None of these scandals are about women objecting to being politely and respectfully asked out or an occasional off-colour comment.

True.  I guess I think of all the guy "locker room talk" and the comments that get made in there, and everyone is okay with it.  It seems that some of these comments speak to the core individual that they are.  I also think of some of the stories that I heard about some of the football players that I went to highschool with.  I remember this one class that I had, where the guy behind me in my business class told everybody that the girl behind him let an entire hockey team sleep with her.  This happened in the middle of a class.  He said it to a teacher, out loud.  The teachers response was "Oh c'mon, that's gross",  and no one else said anything.  I was a part of that group.  I said nothing.  They're just words, but think about the impact that must have had on her life at that time?  I also think of the rumours that circulated about this other girl that went to my highschool, and the nicknames that they called her as she walked through the halls.  Again, I said nothing.  There is a lot of rage associated with everything that is going on right now, and I look at my own actions, and I feel like I should have done more in my own life.  In retrospect, this seems like something that shouldn't have had to have been "learned". 

Although, I guess I should also focus on some of the positives as well.  I remember going to a restaurant where the women are provocatively dressed.  Some of the guys at are table made some comments, not directly to the women, but sort whispering among themselves.  One of the older gentlemen at the table put a stop to it by basically saying "Easy guys, you will want to be gentlemen from now on, and not schoolboys forever."  The statement worked, but maybe it seems a touch light in hindsight.

We'll attempt to move forward with these social issues, but it just feels like we never get anywhere.  I look at the race situation in the states, and I am not sure that I hold out much more hope for gender relations, but we'll see. 

 

[Kin]

We'll attempt to move forward with these social issues, but it just feels like we never get anywhere.

Maybe but I don't think that's because we've tried a lot and it hasn't worked, I think it's because we really haven't prioritized it as something to shift about our society.

Someone made a good point on twitter yesterday about how with everything going on right now, with race and gender, it can seem like everything is getting worse or that progress isn't getting made. But the fact that these things are out there, that we're learning about these things, aren't a sign that things are getting worse but that our standards are rising and are finally being applied.

 

[rdowdall]

James Cameron's comments were off base. Beauty and strength of character are not mutually exclusive (see Chris Evan's Steve Rogers portrayal, which no one has any such problems with). There are more than a handful of movies in which Gal Gadot (as well as the character of Wonder Woman) is sexualized, but Jenkin's Wonder Woman was not one of them. Cameron had a lot to say about Gadot's body, but oddly had nothing to say about the character's motivations, optimism/hopefulness, sense of justice and compassion, etc.

So just to play Devil's advocate here, why is it that female super heroes are dressed the way they are?  Watch the movie King Arthur, the one with Keira Knightly and Clive Owen.  Warning, it's not the best movie.  Near the end there is a big battle.  My wife flat out said in the middle of the movie "What the hell is she wearing to a battle?"

It's not that beauty and strength of character are mutally exclusive.  It's that you don't have to accentuate one to have a person accept the other.  Gal Godot would still be a powerful female lead if she wore a suit that cover her arms and her legs, much like Batman and Superman.  If Wonder Woman is saving the world in what she is wearing, why isn't Superman fighting crime in a loincloth?  I mean the hole in that argument may be "Well look at Tarzan", which is probably valid, but still.

Look, you know I am a comic book fan, and I like them, but one of the complaints levelled against comics when it comes to female characters is:
3. Sexist Costumes
Look, there's nothing wrong with the occasional leather catsuit. But when every female character in comics is wearing some kind of skin-tight, high-heeled, cleavage-bearing nightmare ensemble, it starts to feel like objectification. Sure, the men might be wearing tights too, but they definitely aren't heading into battle with bare midriffs and exposed breast bones (looking at you, whoever designed poor Powergirl's outfit).
taken from here: https://www.bustle.com/articles/136980-10-struggles-all-female-comic-book-fans-understand

It just seems that in order for the world to accept a powerful women, she has to be dressed in a skin tight outfit, and I think Cameron's comments were "Look at Linda Hamilton in T2.  Powerful woman.  Wore normal women's clothes." which I don't think are completely off base. 

 

[rdowdall]

We'll attempt to move forward with these social issues, but it just feels like we never get anywhere.

Maybe but I don't think that's because we've tried a lot and it hasn't worked, I think it's because we really haven't prioritized it as something to shift about our society.

Someone made a good point on twitter yesterday about how with everything going on right now, with race and gender, it can seem like everything is getting worse or that progress isn't getting made. But the fact that these things are out there, that we're learning about these things, aren't a sign that things are getting worse but that our standards are rising and are finally being applied.

This is true.  And probably a good way to look at it.  However keeping your dick in your pants or don't grope people who don't want you to touch them, as you would say, seems like a pretty low bar to get too.

 

[herman]

So just to play Devil's advocate here, why is it that female super heroes are dressed the way they are?  Watch the movie King Arthur, the one with Keira Knightly and Clive Owen.  Warning, it's not the best movie.  Near the end there is a big battle.  My wife flat out said in the middle of the movie "What the hell is she wearing to a battle?"

It's not that beauty and strength of character are mutally exclusive.  It's that you don't have to accentuate one to have a person accept the other.  Gal Godot would still be a powerful female lead if she wore a suit that cover her arms and her legs, much like Batman and Superman.  If Wonder Woman is saving the world in what she is wearing, why isn't Superman fighting crime in a loincloth?  I mean the hole in that argument may be "Well look at Tarzan", which is probably valid, but still.

Look, you know I am a comic book fan, and I like them, but one of the complaints levelled against comics when it comes to female characters is:
3. Sexist Costumes
Look, there's nothing wrong with the occasional leather catsuit. But when every female character in comics is wearing some kind of skin-tight, high-heeled, cleavage-bearing nightmare ensemble, it starts to feel like objectification. Sure, the men might be wearing tights too, but they definitely aren't heading into battle with bare midriffs and exposed breast bones (looking at you, whoever designed poor Powergirl's outfit).
taken from here: https://www.bustle.com/articles/136980-10-struggles-all-female-comic-book-fans-understand

It just seems that in order for the world to accept a powerful women, she has to be dressed in a skin tight outfit, and I think Cameron's comments were "Look at Linda Hamilton in T2.  Powerful woman.  Wore normal women's clothes." which I don't think are completely off base.

We both know why female 'armour' in most comic book movies is designed that way, and it's stupid. Initially, skin-tight costumes were primarily for ease of repeated hand drawing in comics. Now, it's clearly for other reasons with certain artists.

What's off base about Cameron's comments here are that what Jenkin's Wonder Woman is wearing is not really the point of the movie or the character. What's also off base about Cameron's comments is that he is purporting to be feminist by telling Wonder Woman what she should wear and should not look like.

Let's see here:
https://twitter.com/Rosgakori/status/929803724809211905

Trace the thread in the tweet above and you get to:
http://www.core77.com/posts/67334/Breaking-Down-the-Design-of-the-Amazonian-Armor-in-Wonder-Woman

If he took the time to actually watch the movie, and read up on the research the costume department put into their work, maybe he'd see that Jenkin's Wonder Woman actually portrayed a Wonder Woman, for the first time in media, wearing what a strong woman of her time and context actually wore.

 

[herman]

While we're on the topic of the Male Gaze: check out the Hawkeye Initiative*.

* when you get home. Because you will be a workplace distraction for how loudly you laugh.

 

[rdowdall]

We both know why female 'armour' in most comic book movies is designed that way, and it's stupid. Initially, skin-tight costumes were primarily for ease of repeated hand drawing in comics. Now, it's clearly for other reasons with certain artists.

And it's got to change.  If you can't sell a female lead to a male audience without exposing cleavage or bare legs, there is a problem there.  That seems to be part of the problem with having men accept women as equals. 

What's off base about Cameron's comments here are that what Jenkin's Wonder Woman is wearing is not really the point of the movie or the character. What's also off base about Cameron's comments is that he is purporting to be feminist by telling Wonder Woman what she should wear and should not look like.

Well if you see it that way, I see your point.  I don't take his comments that way.  I see him as saying you should have changed the outfit more, and made it less about how she looked, and more about the person she was.  I think he was saying she could have done even more to advance the perception of women in movies, because he was able to successfully do it in T2.

Now I realize this will all fall apart when Cameron gets accused of some sort of heinous crime in the next couple of hours, and at that point I will have to eat my words, but at this point I don't think that he's trying to tell Wonder Woman to cover up.  He's asking why as a society does Wonder Woman have to be dressed that way for us to accept her.

Let's see here:
https://twitter.com/Rosgakori/status/929803724809211905

Trace the thread in the tweet above and you get to:
http://www.core77.com/posts/67334/Breaking-Down-the-Design-of-the-Amazonian-Armor-in-Wonder-Woman

If he took the time to actually watch the movie, and read up on the research the costume department put into their work, maybe he'd see that Jenkin's Wonder Woman actually portrayed a Wonder Woman, for the first time in media, wearing what a strong woman of her time and context actually wore.

Joan of Arc wore a full suit of armour.  Know why?  Cause arrows to the arms and legs suck.  If you have the metal to make the breast plate, don't stop there. 

 

[Kin]

Yeah, the idea of "practical" armor for women(or anyone) being covered head to toe in metal and/or leather chiefly comes from so much of our concept of "fantasy" being based on Norse, Celtic and Frankish traditions where the climates allowed for that. Mediterranean or African traditions wouldn't call for fully armored warriors of either gender because they'd boil to death(think of our ideas of Roman Centurions).

Now, you could maybe read something into Wonder Woman's origin being Mediterranean and the...uh, salty nature of her creator's predilections being questionable but I don't think we should think of Northern European traditions as being the norm for everyone either.

 

[herman]

Well if you see it that way, I see your point.  I don't take his comments that way.  I see him as saying you should have changed the outfit more, and made it less about how she looked, and more about the person she was.  I think he was saying she could have done even more to advance the perception of women in movies, because he was able to successfully do it in T2.

Now I realize this will all fall apart when Cameron gets accused of some sort of heinous crime in the next couple of hours, and at that point I will have to eat my words, but at this point I don't think that he's trying to tell Wonder Woman to cover up.  He's asking why as a society does Wonder Woman have to be dressed that way for us to accept her. 

James Cameron has been married 5 times, so he's definitely an expert on women. One of them being Linda Hamilton! Who is a strong woman that he apparently made, according how he's going on and on about Sarah Connor.

Anyway, I get what you're saying; I'm just saying it doesn't exactly apply to this particular movie, which pretty much got it right (and at the same time managed to pay homage appropriately to a design that was originally sourced from fetishwear). Themyscira is, as Nik mentioned, in the Mediterranean Sea. They did not have pants, or even sleeved shirts, let alone full body armour.

This is how Jenkin's responded to Cameron, btw:

?James Cameron?s inability to understand what Wonder Woman is, or stands for, to women all over the world is unsurprising as, though he is a great filmmaker, he is not a woman. Strong women are great. His praise of my film Monster, and our portrayal of a strong yet damaged woman was so appreciated. But if women have to always be hard, tough and troubled to be strong, and we aren?t free to be multidimensional or celebrate an icon of women everywhere because she is attractive and loving, then we haven?t come very far have we. I believe women can and should be EVERYTHING just like male lead characters should be. There is no right and wrong kind of powerful woman. And the massive female audience who made the film a hit it is, can surely choose and judge their own icons of progress.?

Strength in women is not for James Cameron to decide.

 

[herman]

Further to all of that, Wonder Woman pushed back against how women were portrayed in movies with the masterful casting of Robin Wright:

 

[rdowdall]

Yeah, the idea of "practical" armor for women(or anyone) being covered head to toe in metal and/or leather chiefly comes from so much of our concept of "fantasy" being based on Norse, Celtic and Frankish traditions where the climates allowed for that. Mediterranean or African traditions wouldn't call for fully armored warriors of either gender because they'd boil to death(think of our ideas of Roman Centurions).

Now, you could maybe read something into Wonder Woman's origin being Mediterranean and the...uh, salty nature of her creator's predilections being questionable but I don't think we should think of Northern European traditions as being the norm for everyone either.

Fair points.  So I guess that blows a hole in that theory.  I guess I just feel that even though Wonder Woman was a step in the right direction, if you do compare her to the Sarah Connor character, there is some merit in saying that the Connor character relied less on looks than the Wonder Woman character.

However, it is a comic book movie, and to be fair, there are lots of scenes in other comic book movie's where one of the Chris's is walking around without a shirt.  So maybe it's more of a genre thing than it is a sexism thing.  I guess it comes down too, would those movies still have a big following if they weren't shown as these physical specimens?  Would Wonder Woman have done as well as it did if they had taken more of an approach that is being suggested by Cameron? 

 

[rdowdall]

James Cameron has been married 5 times, so he's definitely an expert on women. One of them being Linda Hamilton! Who is a strong woman that he apparently made, according how he's going on and on about Sarah Connor.

I've been married for 15 years to one woman.  I am also not an expert on women.

Anyway, I get what you're saying; I'm just saying it doesn't exactly apply to this particular movie, which pretty much got it right (and at the same time managed to pay homage appropriately to a design that was originally sourced from fetishwear). Themyscira is, as Nik mentioned, in the Mediterranean Sea. They did not have pants, or even sleeved shirts, let alone full body armour.

Yeah, I'd have to rewatch the movie again.  I'm going on memory, which is usually pretty good.  I typically only remember the fight scenes though.  A coworker of mine made a comment on how he didn't like that there was a scene where she was naked ( they didn't show anything) and how it didn't have anything to do with the plot.  He's a little more sensitive to these things as he has a young daughter and he focuses on these things when he watches movies.  It was shortly after his comments that I read the Cameron comments, so I guess they just stuck.  I don't really remember the scene that he is talking about though.   

This is how Jenkin's responded to Cameron, btw:

?James Cameron?s inability to understand what Wonder Woman is, or stands for, to women all over the world is unsurprising as, though he is a great filmmaker, he is not a woman. Strong women are great. His praise of my film Monster, and our portrayal of a strong yet damaged woman was so appreciated. But if women have to always be hard, tough and troubled to be strong, and we aren?t free to be multidimensional or celebrate an icon of women everywhere because she is attractive and loving, then we haven?t come very far have we. I believe women can and should be EVERYTHING just like male lead characters should be. There is no right and wrong kind of powerful woman. And the massive female audience who made the film a hit it is, can surely choose and judge their own icons of progress.?

Strength in women is not for James Cameron to decide.

No it's not, and she makes some fair points.  Again we get in to the dicey areas of how things are perceived by individuals though.  Not everyone is going to see things the same way.  Strength in anyone really is not for anyone else to decide, but we all have opinions.  We are what our actions define us as.  There are some actions that are completely indefensible.  There are some actions that require no explanation as to why you did them.  Then there are a whole bunch of actions that sit in the grey and are open to interpretation based on a persons point of view.  And from that angle, in someones else's opinion, you could be a strong person or not,  and at that point, you will need to believe in yourself if you feel you are a strong person.

 

[Kin]

Fair points.  So I guess that blows a hole in that theory.  I guess I just feel that even though Wonder Woman was a step in the right direction, if you do compare her to the Sarah Connor character, there is some merit in saying that the Connor character relied less on looks than the Wonder Woman character.

However, it is a comic book movie, and to be fair, there are lots of scenes in other comic book movie's where one of the Chris's is walking around without a shirt.  So maybe it's more of a genre thing than it is a sexism thing.  I guess it comes down too, would those movies still have a big following if they weren't shown as these physical specimens?  Would Wonder Woman have done as well as it did if they had taken more of an approach that is being suggested by Cameron?

I'm not the biggest fan of these superhero movies(I don't hate them, they're ok for the most part) so I don't remember Wonder Woman that well but I don't remember there being anything overtly sexual in it. Unless you're just referring to Gal Gadot being a good looking woman in which case I'll defer to Jenkins on that one.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

While we're on the topic of the Male Gaze: check out the Hawkeye Initiative*.

* when you get home. Because you will be a workplace distraction for how loudly you laugh.

I'll be in my bunk.

 

[herman]

Yeah, I'd have to rewatch the movie again.  I'm going on memory, which is usually pretty good.  I typically only remember the fight scenes though.  A coworker of mine made a comment on how he didn't like that there was a scene where she was naked ( they didn't show anything) and how it didn't have anything to do with the plot.  He's a little more sensitive to these things as he has a young daughter and he focuses on these things when he watches movies.  It was shortly after his comments that I read the Cameron comments, so I guess they just stuck.  I don't really remember the scene that he is talking about though.   

Perhaps your co-worker was talking about Chris Pine's nude scene in the healing pool, as that is the only (semi-)frivolous 'nudity' I can recall.

Speaking of thing being open to interpretation and having actions define who we are, I alluded to this earlier, but where's the backlash on Marvel casting Chris Evans* as Steve Rogers? Can't we do better than to cast super attractive white males as heroes? Where's the grit and complexity and strength in that? I'm being facetious, but when you put these comments on the other foot, it makes the stupid more obvious.

Why can't strong women also be attractive? Or is it because being a gorgeous woman means no one will take you seriously? Oh she must only get by on her looks? Cameron's comments are just a different way perpetuating that women should be judged by their appearance, while men are judged by their achievements.

* Chris Evans captured Steve's essence perfectly.

 

[rdowdall]

Yeah, I'd have to rewatch the movie again.  I'm going on memory, which is usually pretty good.  I typically only remember the fight scenes though.  A coworker of mine made a comment on how he didn't like that there was a scene where she was naked ( they didn't show anything) and how it didn't have anything to do with the plot.  He's a little more sensitive to these things as he has a young daughter and he focuses on these things when he watches movies.  It was shortly after his comments that I read the Cameron comments, so I guess they just stuck.  I don't really remember the scene that he is talking about though.   

Perhaps your co-worker was talking about Chris Pine's nude scene in the healing pool, as that is the only (semi-)frivolous 'nudity' I can recall.

Speaking of thing being open to interpretation and having actions define who we are, I alluded to this earlier, but where's the backlash on Marvel casting Chris Evans* as Steve Rogers? Can't we do better than to cast super attractive white males as heroes? Where's the grit and complexity and strength in that? I'm being facetious, but when you put these comments on the other foot, it makes the stupid more obvious.

Why can't strong women also be attractive? Or is it because being a gorgeous woman means no one will take you seriously? Oh she must only get by on her looks? Cameron's comments are just a different way perpetuating that women should be judged by their appearance, while men are judged by their achievements.

* Chris Evans captured Steve's essence perfectly.

So the fact that men are judged by their achievements means that it is easier for them to be successful without being attractive.  So much so that Brad Pitt reportedly took roles in Califonia and Twelve Monkeys to downplay his looks so that he would be taken as a serious actor.  You also have actresses like Meryl Streep, Kathy Bates, and Melissa McCarthy who have managed to have great careers and be taken seriously as solid actresses.

The thing with super hero movies is that there is a certain physique that they need to go with.  However, I think they can get away with an ugly male (see Deadpool after burning) and still have the movie be successful.  I'm not saying that a super heroine can't be beautiful and strong.  She definitely can be.  I'm just saying that I don't think they can make a successful super heroine movie with a female character that is considered less than attractive.  When they can accomplish that, then that will be ground breaking.   

I also don't think that there was backlash particularly on the casting of Gal Godot, I think it was more on what the film was appealing to.  Cameron's expanded his comments:

"Linda looked great. She just wasn't treated as a sex object. There was nothing sexual about her character. It was about angst, it was about will, it was about determination. She was crazy, she was complicated. ? She wasn't there to be liked or ogled, but she was central, and the audience loved her by the end of the film. So as much as I applaud Patty directing the film and Hollywood, uh, "letting" a woman direct a major action franchise, I didn't think there was anything groundbreaking in Wonder Woman. I thought it was a good film. Period. I was certainly shocked that [my comment] was a controversial statement. It was pretty obvious in my mind. I just think Hollywood doesn't get it about women in commercial franchises. Drama, they've got that cracked, but the second they start to make a big commercial action film, they think they have to appeal to 18-year-old males or 14-year-old males, whatever it is. Look, it was probably a little bit of a simplistic remark on my part, and I'm not walking it back, but I will add a little detail to it, which is: I like the fact that, sexually, she had the upper hand with the male character, which I thought was fun."

See from my part, I didn't view Wonder Woman as this ground breaking film for women, mainly because of some of the stereotypes that I attach to comic books and the history that I have with them.  I was more shocked that the DCEU was able to put together a great movie. 

Also, I sense you really don't like James Cameron.  Here's an article on him from Linda Hamilton's eyes.  Read it, the title is a bit misleading:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/7345843/Linda-Hamilton-life-with-James-Cameron-was-terrible-on-every-level.html

I get the guy is a self obsessed prick, but I don't think he is as bad as Weinstein.  However I don't know the guy, and he could have been doing evil things all this time.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

However, I think they can get away with an ugly male (see Deadpool after burning) and still have the movie be successful. 

It was still Ryan Reynolds under that costume. They also made sure that his 'package' was large and on display.

 

[herman]

So the fact that men are judged by their achievements means that it is easier for them to be successful without being attractive.  So much so that Brad Pitt reportedly took roles in Califonia and Twelve Monkeys to downplay his looks so that he would be taken as a serious actor.  You also have actresses like Meryl Streep, Kathy Bates, and Melissa McCarthy who have managed to have great careers and be taken seriously as solid actresses.

The thing with super hero movies is that there is a certain physique that they need to go with.  However, I think they can get away with an ugly male (see Deadpool after burning) and still have the movie be successful.  I'm not saying that a super heroine can't be beautiful and strong.  She definitely can be.  I'm just saying that I don't think they can make a successful super heroine movie with a female character that is considered less than attractive.  When they can accomplish that, then that will be ground breaking.   

This is another example of the power differential Nik mentioned earlier today being a root cause of the state of affairs we currently have today. Beauty is power, much the same way money and racial privilege are. The fact a small handful of female actors are being lauded for their ability to overcome their lack of traditional beauty is a symptom of that systemic toxicity. The sure fire way for a woman to gain Oscar buzz is to gain weight and prosthetically mar her natural features in a serious movie (e.g. Monster).

I also don't think that there was backlash particularly on the casting of Gal Godot, I think it was more on what the film was appealing to.
See from my part, I didn't view Wonder Woman as this ground breaking film for women, mainly because of some of the stereotypes that I attach to comic books and the history that I have with them.  I was more shocked that the DCEU was able to put together a great movie. 

I understand how you would consider Wonder Woman to not be groundbreaking as it is a largely vanilla comic book movie ? The Dark Knight* it is not.

* How many Batman films did it take to get there though?

Let me ask you: can you name 5 female leads that young girls who are of an age to watch TV or movies might be encouraged to view as role models? How many of them have identities that are not defined by men? How many of them even talk to other women in their stories? Did those films or shows pass the Bechdel Test?

Chances are, girls grew up with Disney princesses as their role models, who, for the most part, are a) defined by their beauty in men?s eyes; b) waiting for a man to save/marry her; c) victims in their stories. Sure, there were also Linda Hamilton and Sigourny Weaver and Carrie Anne Moss?s characters in the Terminator and Alien and Matrix franchises, but are those movies for pre-teens? Heck, how about for young girls who aren?t white?

That?s the context Wonder Woman (and the Supergirl TV show) are operating in, and shows like Buffy before them. In them girls now have live action role models who are first and foremost a) inherently good and strong; b) smart and capable; c) beautiful but not either virginal victims or lascivious temptresses. Why do you think Frozen was so unbelievably popular?

So yes, I see them as absolutely groundbreaking. I?m not female, but I am trying to see through their lens and it?s an obviously uphill climb. If we want to break society out from this current state where sexual abuse is rampant, rape is handwaved away as ?boys will be boys?, then it begins by changing the narrative that girls and women grow up in, and boys and men building that space with them.

As an aside, Gal Gadot?s casting was absolutely panned by fans and media when it was initially announced 4 years ago. Synder cast her for BvS, so that was the first strike against her (because he?s known for his visual flair and utter lack of depth). She?s a model, with model proportions, so she was immediately judged for not being muscular (by the Amazonian purists), not having the acting range (by those who looked through her IMDB and only saw Fast and the Furious and Date Night), and for having too small a chest (by the lowest common denominator). Even Patty Jenkins initially bemoaned the casting.

 

[rdowdall]

So the fact that men are judged by their achievements means that it is easier for them to be successful without being attractive.  So much so that Brad Pitt reportedly took roles in Califonia and Twelve Monkeys to downplay his looks so that he would be taken as a serious actor.  You also have actresses like Meryl Streep, Kathy Bates, and Melissa McCarthy who have managed to have great careers and be taken seriously as solid actresses.

The thing with super hero movies is that there is a certain physique that they need to go with.  However, I think they can get away with an ugly male (see Deadpool after burning) and still have the movie be successful.  I'm not saying that a super heroine can't be beautiful and strong.  She definitely can be.  I'm just saying that I don't think they can make a successful super heroine movie with a female character that is considered less than attractive.  When they can accomplish that, then that will be ground breaking.   

This is another example of the power differential Nik mentioned earlier today being a root cause of the state of affairs we currently have today. Beauty is power, much the same way money and racial privilege are. The fact a small handful of female actors are being lauded for their ability to overcome their lack of traditional beauty is a symptom of that systemic toxicity. The sure fire way for a woman to gain Oscar buzz is to gain weight and prosthetically mar her natural features in a serious movie (e.g. Monster).

I also don't think that there was backlash particularly on the casting of Gal Godot, I think it was more on what the film was appealing to.
See from my part, I didn't view Wonder Woman as this ground breaking film for women, mainly because of some of the stereotypes that I attach to comic books and the history that I have with them.  I was more shocked that the DCEU was able to put together a great movie. 

I understand how you would consider Wonder Woman to not be groundbreaking as it is a largely vanilla comic book movie ? The Dark Knight* it is not.

* How many Batman films did it take to get there though?

Let me ask you: can you name 5 female leads that young girls who are of an age to watch TV or movies might be encouraged to view as role models? How many of them have identities that are not defined by men? How many of them even talk to other women in their stories? Did those films or shows pass the Bechdel Test?

Chances are, girls grew up with Disney princesses as their role models, who, for the most part, are a) defined by their beauty in men?s eyes; b) waiting for a man to save/marry her; c) victims in their stories. Sure, there were also Linda Hamilton and Sigourny Weaver and Carrie Anne Moss?s characters in the Terminator and Alien and Matrix franchises, but are those movies for pre-teens? Heck, how about for young girls who aren?t white?

That?s the context Wonder Woman (and the Supergirl TV show) are operating in, and shows like Buffy before them. In them girls now have live action role models who are first and foremost a) inherently good and strong; b) smart and capable; c) beautiful but not either virginal victims or lascivious temptresses. Why do you think Frozen was so unbelievably popular?

So yes, I see them as absolutely groundbreaking. I?m not female, but I am trying to see through their lens and it?s an obviously uphill climb. If we want to break society out from this current state where sexual abuse is rampant, rape is handwaved away as ?boys will be boys?, then it begins by changing the narrative that girls and women grow up in, and boys and men building that space with them.

As an aside, Gal Gadot?s casting was absolutely panned by fans and media when it was initially announced 4 years ago. Synder cast her for BvS, so that was the first strike against her (because he?s known for his visual flair and utter lack of depth). She?s a model, with model proportions, so she was immediately judged for not being muscular (by the Amazonian purists), not having the acting range (by those who looked through her IMDB and only saw Fast and the Furious and Date Night), and for having too small a chest (by the lowest common denominator). Even Patty Jenkins initially bemoaned the casting.

So I figured it's two guys arguing about another guys comments.  I thought I would see what a woman thought of them:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/susannahbreslin/2017/08/26/james-cameron-wonder-woman/#16ba55aa40aa

 

[rdowdall]

So yes, I see them as absolutely groundbreaking. I?m not female, but I am trying to see through their lens and it?s an obviously uphill climb. If we want to break society out from this current state where sexual abuse is rampant, rape is handwaved away as ?boys will be boys?, then it begins by changing the narrative that girls and women grow up in, and boys and men building that space with them.

And I think building that space should be based around a pillar that a girl shouldn't be defined by what she looks like.  So many girls in today's society define themselves by how others perceive them and whether or not they are attractive.  There was a study done on the affects of Facebook and how women and young girls are posting photos of themselves just to get the likes.  This extends to other forms of social media such as instagram and twitter.  They believe that this is being driven by a desire to be found attractive.  How does casting super models in to roles of strong women help to alleviate that?  How do we shift the focus off of how a woman looks and on to what she is able to accomplish if all she sees is what society sees as beautiful women in those roles?