elisi | Very different links

Entry tags:

Very different links

CONNOR (to Faith) So, vampire slayers. I was told about them. How come you're always girls?
FAITH I dunno. Better at it, I guess.

Would you know, Faith was right! ^_^

The Theory That Men Evolved to Hunt and Women Evolved to Gather Is Wrong
The influential idea that in the past men were hunters and women were not isn’t supported by the available evidence

~

No One Doling Out Award Nominations for 'Poor Things' Talks About Its Ick Factor

(Sorry, I forget who linked to this!) ETA: It was

mecurtin!(Post here.)

ETA: And via

sea_thoughts:

Poor Things is one of the most misogynistic films I’ve seen

~

Also realised I never posted the link to the newest chapter of 'Breakages':

Chapter 14: The Butterfly People

~

And via

jerusha:

We Saw Nuns Kill Children: The Ghosts of St. Joseph’s Catholic Orphanage
Very very VERY long and incredibly upsetting buzzfeed article about the abuse that went on at Catholic orphanages in USA (and Canada).

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I haven't seen Poor Things but the synopsis reads like the Born Sexy Yesterday trope on speed so I'm intending to avoid it. A shame because I love Lanthimos's films normally and I like Emma Stone.

Here's someone who didn't think it was a feminist masterpiece: one of the most misogynistic films I've seen

I haven't seen Poor Things but the synopsis reads like the Born Sexy Yesterday trope on speed so I'm intending to avoid it. A shame because I love Lanthimos's films normally and I like Emma Stone.
Same here. :( Someone commented that it was the classic Male Fantasy of Female Emancipation Through Prostitution... So yeah, going to stay clear.

Here's someone who didn't think it was a feminist masterpiece: one of the most misogynistic films I've seen
I don't have a subscription, so I can't read it. But I like the headline.

I don't have a subscription, so I can't read it. But I like the headline.

Try putting the link into this: https://12ft.io/ 12ft doesn't work for EVERY subscription site but it's always worth a try.

EDIT: I found the MSN link, you can read it here

Someone commented that it was the classic Male Fantasy of Female Emancipation Through Prostitution...

Mmhmm.

Edited 2024-02-01 19:31 (UTC)

Oooh thank you! The second link worked! I shall add it to the post.

Thank you for "Born Sexy Yesterday", very useful. I wrote the post elisi was talking about.

Ah, you're welcome! It is very useful, because it pops up so often and almost always gets a pass from audience and critics (because the actress is an adult...?). Thanks for the link to your post.

I was the one with that link. One of my commenters reported: "I found the book so repulsive in the worst male gaze way that I have no interest in the film."

I keep wondering if I should make a warning post on Tumblr, saying: This flick is up for multiple Oscars, people are going to be talking about, AO3 tags would include: Underage, Rape/Non-Con, Dubious Consent, Emotional Abuse, Grooming. Clearly the movie industry as a whole has failed Consent 101, they don't actually recognize what they're putting onscreen.

I saw your comment pop up and my brain went 'THAT WAS IT!' ^_^ Thank you. Added you asap, am just late with replies...

One of my commenters reported: "I found the book so repulsive in the worst male gaze way that I have no interest in the film."
Fuck, that's awful. She breasted boobily the whole way through I'm guessing. :(

I keep wondering if I should make a warning post on Tumblr, saying: This flick is up for multiple Oscars, people are going to be talking about, AO3 tags would include: Underage, Rape/Non-Con, Dubious Consent, Emotional Abuse, Grooming.
Can't hurt.

Clearly the movie industry as a whole has failed Consent 101, they don't actually recognize what they're putting onscreen.
For sure. They see 'quirky' and 'sexy' and little dollar signs appear in their eyes.

This is kind of interesting, there appears to be a huge disagreement on Poor Things, and well on Barbie. Feminists after all this time, are still not in agreement on well feminism.

I've not seen Poor Things. (Nor do I really plan to - I don't like the Frankenstein horror trope at all.) But a friend of mine who is an actress, professional belly dancer, six feet tall, and a woman's right's activist, who has written and performed feminist pieces - posted on FB that "Poor Things was the Real Feminist Movie of the Year, not Barbie!" And a lot of folks agreed.

Another close friend of mine - who is a serious feminist, and also active in the women's rights movement and always has been, really really wanted to see Barbie. (I did not because I don't like the trope - satire about Mattel toys, and dolls is not my thing and Ryan Gosling creeps me out.) So I caved and we watched it over Christmas. She hated it. I didn't mind it as much as she did nor did I find it as triggering (but I also had seen the trailers and knew what I was getting into, she did not.) She found it to be trite, triggering, offensive and not really feminist. (My friend never played with Barbie dolls (I did), so didn't get it.)

While others online on FB loved Barbie to pieces, and thought it was feminist.

So...this appears to be a subjective thing? In short, it depends on what you see and focus on. And well, more proof that we all don't see the same movie.

I think there are two separate things going on...

The first one is genre. Barbie is very much a very specific vibe - like, Disney movies are a very specific genre, as are Wes Anderson movies. I adored Barbie (except for one point, but I have written about that already), and we went to watch it at the cinema as a family, all dressed up in as much pink as we could. It was fab. However, if someone is not into that, I can easily understand why it'd be off-putting.

Poor Things is a completely different genre, and black comedies are generally more 'prestigious' than the bubblegum aesthetics of Barbie.

Similarly, then different people respond to different narratives, so I'm not surprised that Poor Things works for many people - it is clearly generally a good movie, if we disregard all the problematic/gross elements, and Emma Stone is a great actress.

However if I had to objectively compare the two, both of which are about women's emancipation, one is about finding out who she is from learning from other women and moving away from objectification and the expectation of submitting to the male gaze (and makes Barbie, the very epitome of these things, asexual) - and the other is about a [literal] child in a woman's body who gains her emancipation through being a sex worker [and simultaneously fulfilling every male fantasy, see the Born Sexy Yesterday trope].

You can tell which one was written by a man, is all I'm saying.

I'm trying to think of a good analogy... Maybe Cordelia's overall arc [on Angel]? I love Cordelia, and I can absolutely appreciate how she grew from a shallow Valley Girl to a Champion - but she was also majorly screwed over by the narrative/writers. It creates huge obstacles to climb over in order to get to the positives. I think the same goes for Poor Things - I'm sure there is positive, feminist stuff in there, but one needs to look past the really deeply problematic aspects to get at it.

Interesting - thank you for sharing your perspective on this. I admittedly would never have thought of comparing the two films myself - until I saw my friend's incendiary post on FB stating "Poor Things is more Feminist than Barbie". And I thought okay...interesting and let it go, until I popped over on DW and saw your post with the links about how Poor Things was misogynistic. And I just burst out laughing. And thought...okay, what is going on here?

I've not seen "Poor Things" nor did I want to. It's not my genre, and the description completely turns me off. (I don't like the young girl/older guy romance dynamic - it kind of squicks me?) However, now, I'm curious about it. Although...I refuse to pay for it. If I see it - it'll be on streaming.

I have seen Barbie, so can comment more on that. I kind of disagree about Barbie - it's not a bubblegum movie. Oh sure it looks like one on the surface - which is kind of clever actually. I give them a lot of credit for pulling that off. I honestly think a lot of the jokes went over the audience's heads.

But Gerwig and Baumbach did a dark and rather biting satire on binary gender issues. (Note Barbie was written by a man and woman, they did it together. They are both nominated. It was not written just by a woman. That's kind of important - because it explains why we have two perspectives, Barbie's and Ken's. It's as much Ken's film as Barbie's - which is why a lot of people had issues with it, I think. My friend certainly did. And other's actually liked it - they liked Ken's perspective. However, more importantly, it was directed by a woman. And in film - it's the director that matters not the screenwriters. Poor Things was just by men.) And if you look deeper, it's rather disturbing. I mean women are objectified as dolls. There's a lot of inside jokes about Hollywood (and how it objectifies men and women), the male and female gaze, Mattel (and toys), and sex. And I only picked up on a few of them. I mean it triggered my friend, who didn't pick up on a lot of them - mainly because she never played with Barbie dolls or knew the marketing, and I do. Also, it's very well Baumbach and Gerwig - who like to do repetitive satires about Middle White America to the point in which I'd like to smack them upside the head.

What is fascinating to me is how differently people are reacting to the two films and comparing them?
I'm less interested in the films, then I am in how folks are reacting to them - if that makes sense?

Edited 2024-02-05 03:31 (UTC)

I admittedly would never have thought of comparing the two films myself
Neither did I until your comment! ^_^

I kind of disagree about Barbie - it's not a bubblegum movie.
Oh I meant aesthetically. As you say, below the surface it's very clever, but it trades in PINK. The message is almost smuggled through... I mean, it's not, it's very clever (oh that first trailer copying 2001!), but the visuals are a world away from what I've seen of Poor Things.

Note Barbie was written by a man and woman, they did it together. They are both nominated. It was not written just by a woman.
It's funny, because I almost went back and added 'hashtag - not all men'!)

I really love Barbie and allll the layers and how MAD it made a, um, certain group of men - but it wears it lightly. A bit like, oh, The Truman Show? Looks silly, but is deeply profound about the human condition.

I'm less interested in the films, then I am in how folks are reacting to them - if that makes sense?
Oh yes, very much so. I think it's one of the reasons I write so much meta? I want to show people what *I* can see, because we all see different things.

Yeah, we totally saw Barbie differently. But I've not seen Poor Things. So can't honestly compare them.

I wouldn't compare Barbie to the Truman Show (which is far more subtle in its satire and less of a parody). Barbie kind of combines parody and satire. (It's parodying the Barbie cartoons and advertising). I found it a bit too on the nose, in places?

Yeah, we totally saw Barbie differently. But I've not seen Poor Things. So can't honestly compare them.
Same, can't compare, although I'm not sure we saw Barbie differently... I just do not have the spoons to dig into it right now. :(

I wouldn't compare Barbie to the Truman Show (which is far more subtle in its satire and less of a parody). Barbie kind of combines parody and satire. (It's parodying the Barbie cartoons and advertising). I found it a bit too on the nose, in places?
I was just trying to think of ANY movie that plays with the format as inventively as Barbie. The Truman Show does very different things, but makes very original choices.

I think Lego Movie is a better comparison in some respects - it's a toy product placement, that acts as satire and parody for a family audience. Also has Will Farrell.

There's two other movies that have been done about fictional characters getting lost in the real world. OR vice versa. One's a Woody Allen flick with Mia Farrow and Jeff Daniels that I can't remember the name of, and another one had Tobey Maguire and Reese Witherspoon (parody of Leave it to Beaver, and the 1950s television family sitcom). Then there is Wanda Vision where the characters get stuck in a television show, and can't get out.

So yeah, it's been done a lot. Just not often from the perspective of a toy acquiring agency and becoming human and no longer an objectified toy.

I... had forgotten the LEGO movie existed. /o\

However, as much fun as that movie was, the main character/hero was Mr Generic White Guy, and there are SO MANY movies about generic white guys.

In terms of story I am liking my (mostly accidental) comparison to The Truman Show, which follows a character leaving their artificial world behind and becoming 'real' (for very different definitions of that). Yes there are a ton of differences, but it deals with the question of what it means to be human. :)

I think the Truman Show did a better job of it? The difficulty Barbie had was it...was trying to do too much? Truman Show was just focusing on what it meant to be human, which fits within the idea of AI.

Barbie wasn't that interested in that theme - it's main theme was the toxicity of the patriarchy, and being objectified. Or being forced to fit into a category. Which is quite different?

The Lego Movie - a friend of mine (cjlasky) compared the Lego Movie and Barbie, and said the two were similar in how they both paid homage to toys, and parodied them at the same time. I've not been able to get through the Lego Movie - and the aspects of Barbie that are similar to it - I cringed at.

Basically the only part of Barbie that I liked was "existenstial Barbie trying to be human and thinking I'd rather be human than someone's plaything", but I'm not sure the Truman Show is the best analogy for that? Maybe Toy Story 4?

I was mostly just trying to think of a movie that played with format - The Truman Show did that in its own way, although very different from Barbie.

I've not been able to get through the Lego Movie - and the aspects of Barbie that are similar to it - I cringed at.
Well, I enjoyed it very much! I think would have been more interesting if the protagonist was more interesting, but it's a very silly movie so I don't mind all that much.

Basically the only part of Barbie that I liked was "existenstial Barbie trying to be human and thinking I'd rather be human than someone's plaything", but I'm not sure the Truman Show is the best analogy for that? Maybe Toy Story 4?
I've not seen Toy Story 4, so alas can't compare.

My difficulty with Lego movie - is I can't stand the animation. ;-D. (I'm admittedly very picky when it comes to graphic art and animation.) Also I don't like Lego, so there's that. And that was my difficulty with Barbie as well - not a fan of Barbie as a product. I've noticed that if you don't like the toys - it most likely won't work for you? Although I liked Barbie better than Lego.

That's kind of why I was comparing Lego to Barbie. They are both product placement films, that were produced and funded by toy companies. Lego made the Lego Movie. Mattel paid for and made the Barbie movie.

Well if you don't like the animation, it's an uphill battle! *g*

I've noticed that if you don't like the toys - it most likely won't work for you? Although I liked Barbie better than Lego.
Not sure about this? I loved Lego as a child, and never really played with Barbies. And yet I found the Lego movie fun, but nothing more, whereas Barbie was chewy and trying to SAY something. Nostalgia might play a part in people's reaction, but - for me at least - it did not translate into which movie I preferred.

It's subjective, I think? Or depends on the person?

My friends Wales, didn't play with Barbies at all. Her sister did, she didn't. She hated the Barbie movie - which is amusing, considering she "really" wanted to see it in the movie theater. Had it planned out and everything - but it fell through. And she's an activist - a big-time feminist. Also she loves Greta Gerwig and Noah Bumbauch films and their writing. But she hated that movie. (I watched it with her over Christmas at my place.)

I liked it better than she did. (I went in with very low expectations, but I also had seen the trailers - so knew it would bug me in places and was prepared.) And I played with Barbie and Ken dolls as a kid - used them to tell myself stories, usually adventure stories. Lost at sea. Survival.
Godzilla. Stuff like that. Although my best friend at the time - had the dream house and was into fashion Barbie. So I knew about all of it - and caught all the inside jokes and references (there are a lot of them). But they went over her head.

Legos? We didn't play with. They weren't really that big a deal in the early 1970s. I don't think legos really took off until the late 1970s or 80s? And by that time I was kind of past all of that?
I don't have kids - and my niece did not play with legos. (My brother is against anything that is heavily branded due to his background in marketing.) And my cousin well, she worked for Lego for a bit (it was not a pleasant experience). So we really aren't a lego family. I'm not even sure I owned them? I have no memory of playing with them. We built stuff - just not with legos. And I can't watch that movie - it irritates me. Although the song was engaging.

It's subjective, I think? Or depends on the person?
Yeah. There is also the fact of 'Your friends are not watching the same show you are' (this was an online essay that has now vanished, alas) - that is, we all come to the table with different things and are engaged by different aspects of stories/media.

And since nothing can be everything to everyone, we just have to enjoy what we can, and let the rest go. :)

Yeah, we all see things differently. It makes sense. I mean - it's actually weird that we agree as much as we do on things. Or see them similarly. It's not strange that we see them differently - that's a given, but that we ever agree...miraculous connection.

♥ ♥ ♥ This was a lovely comment to wake up to.

Huh - women - are always put down and underestimated by the male-view of history (and prehistory!).

IKR? It's great that history is being looked at through a less prejudiced lens.

After reading that article- 'Ick Factor' is an understatement.

Yeah, I had no idea - I'd just seen a trailer somewhere and thought it was 'weird and kooky movie'...

Re: nuns killing children - recently I was reading about the Magdalene laundries in Ireland. Hateful and horrifying.

Yeah, the horrors are just... unimaginable. :(

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Very different links

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject