Categories

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Sex Roles in Cinema

Before I even tackle the risky business of sexual roles in cinema let me list off the obvious truths.

Women's liberation began in late 19th century and began as fight for woman to have equal rights to their male counterparts.  Long before this happened, women quite often than not took a tertiary role in cinematic pieces and if they didn't, they often fell into very restricted archetypes: the femme fatale, the "weak" woman who must depend on a male as her moral backbone and so on. Along the way, the movement sublimated the use of a women's sexuality as an essential tool for women, a notion that is still showing gradual resurgence today.

Modern cinema, at least in North America, has shown a greater degree of latitude in women's roles.  We have on one extreme, the Rambo-type of female perhaps most evident in the film Aliens, wherein James Cameron depicts of a woman named Ripley, a gun-toting woman who shoots her way in order to save a young girl, an image that figures prominently in promotional signage for the film.  Such a depiction is merely putting traditional male attributes over a female fascade: outwardly feminine, inwardly a male.

In modern cinema, we also see a resurfacing of certain femme fatale type characters, or at least characters that exhibit the qualities of one.  Sexuality, when wielded by female, is still considered dangerous, if not stated outright, then implied. I won't exclude the Erin Brockovich-type, which, even under selfless or good motives, seems rather debasing. (argh its late, argue with me if you want)

To no one's surprise sexual roles in society are more confusing then ever before. What began with Women's Liberation paved the way for the male revolution.  Women began to acquiesce to the "new male", one who is sensitive to a woman's feelings, and is also confortable with showing feelings himself. That of course, is already known.

What we discover in popular media right now, is that the male gender has taken to many of the insecurities of women as well.  It was women who had to worry about looks as it relates to how she will be accepted by the opposite sex and now men have the same insecurities, however superficially mended by alterations such as cosmetic surgery, etc.

The same ideas found its way into modern cinema. Male characters seem to hover somewhere between liberated and clueless: they may have some traditional male qualities but are confounded with the opposite sex, and vice versa with female characters. This is a great theme for comedies, in fact its probably exploited well by that genre.

Let me say that I do not agree with the Rambo-type characterization that is given to females. This renders essentially male, and I don't think, truly deserving of the term "Empowerment", a word that's used far too loosely. Jungian principles talk about "Anima" and the "Animus", basically a feminine and masculine energies inherent in all individuals.

Let me be brief by saying film protagonists need to exhibit both qualities to create a truly multi-dimensional character. A female protagonist should be able to emote well in film and 
moreover, show that this can be positive and constructive as well. Producers and writers need to show more than ever, they have a greater degree of freedom and control, initiating change and action in a plot as well exhibiting the range of emotions that were previously reserved for males protagonists.

Argh, I must sleep. 



Sunday, April 19, 2009

Is Hollywood Ready for the Rise of the Geek?

How ready is Hollywood for the rise of geek?

Comic book-type movies are now occupying the movie lineup each box office season.   Could it be film executives are paying attention to geeks? And why is that?

Fans have to applaud the film industry for having the audacity to tackle the Watchmen, a comparatively obscure comic book which grossed a modest 55.7 million (according to Variety magazine) domestically, compared to 158.4 million for the Dark Knight (domestic). 

I would think that having cross-over writers such as Joss Whedon and Kevin Smith has something to do with this.  But of course, a large part is due to the fact film execs are were completely caught be surprise by some sleepers such as the Dark Knight and the Spiderman trilogy. 

But are fans dictating what they want to see on the silver screen or are the producers doing the dictating? I think that Hollywood is yet to understand the fanbase and how to best reach them. 
Despite their best efforts however, I doubt film people still see the comic book as a respectable format of story-telling and perhaps treat it as such.  Fans can only hope that directors aren't looking at comics as just a bunch of elaborate storyboards and read the subtext and immerse themselves in the language of the medium to determine how best to translate it into theatrical format.  Let's not look at it just for the sake of generating sizable box office figures.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Twilight - Movie Review


Having never read the book I can't give a very informed opinion about Twilight, the film. Considerable evidence however, would suggest that the film would not be able to stand on its own without its large group of literary fans who love the book.  Acting is horrible, cinematography was okay, and the blue hue over the entire film was slightly grating.

And yet girls camped in the rain overnight for the film opening and to catch a glimpse at the cast, and the DVD sold through the roof. It just goes to show, don't underestimate the tween girly demographic. Because they will hurt you if you do.

Sports in Hollywood

I once joked to my buddies back in my college days that despite the fact there are so many movies centered around sports, there will never be one about table tennis.  And yes, there was. With Christopher Walken. In drag.

So here I've compiled a short list of "sports" I'm secretly praying will appear in a future film:
  1. tiddlywinks
  2. hopscotch
  3. ring around the rosy (remember, it was about the Black Plague)
  4. jump rope 
  5. tetherball
  6. water polo
  7. cock fighting
  8. roach racing

*crosses his fingers*

Friday, April 17, 2009

Nightmare on Elm Street -- Reboot

Lets see...The Omen...Halloween...Prom Night...House...Friday the 13th...The Evil Dead (coming soon)...Nightmare on Elm Street. Am I missing a horror franchise redo here? 

Jackie Earle Haley (The Watchmen) is slated to play Freddy Krueger and the decision looks to be firm. 

I have to ask though, is a redo really necessary?

With Rob Zombie's retelling of Halloween, some scenes are lifted whole from the original done in 1978.  Even if it legitimately pays homage, what's the point? Is it really worth watching it again? And not quite as well done?  John Carpenter is good director who has created a particular tone for the character and film. Given, Rob Zombie is a good director in his own right, judging from House of 1000 Corpses and Devil's Rejects, but he just doesn't seem to fit the right "mold" for Halloween.

On the flip side, I haven't watched the new Friday the 13th, but I've actually read some decent reviews.

Getting back to Nightmare on Elm Street, even if the new movie turns out to be good, aren't we all suckers for watching the same movie again and paying for it?  The franchise practically made Robert Edlund, and it's easy to see why.  Other than the series, who remembers his role in Phantom of the Opera? (come on, someone please...)  

Mind you, I don't have too much doubt that it might at least be half good, given Hollywood's fascination with evil and villainy. Every decent film, with rare exception, has an incredible antagonist but on notable occasions a film will study a villain to such a degree it becomes glorification. And if so, horror film franchises definitely tops the bill.

If so, are we oft to blame for watching and rooting for them?  Or is Hollywood so fascinated with them they keep recycling the same material?  In any damn case, I think I will go watch the new Nightmare on Elm Street movie anyway.

Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist - Movie Review


There is an unlikely chemistry between Kat Dennings and Michael Cera but they make a cute, if improbable, couple. The soundtrack really shines in this, in fact its so cute you want to marry and have cute sex babies with it.

The Watchmen - Movie Review


The film was a slight disappointment. What should have been a character study is, at times, stooping to protracted action sequences. Although, Zack Snyder should still be given credit for having attempted to interpret such dense and wide-reaching material. The movie's source is so laden with rich allegory, its hard to replicate, but some of it does remain intact in the film.

Malin's performance should have been a keynote, but she falls short of really filling the role that her character required. Billy Crudup's CG performance doesn't quite have the poignance, as showing the pathos of someone losing touch with humanity at the same time, unable to prevent it.

The film is comparable to its cult graphic novel source in breadth and scope, and does deserve a repeat viewing to really scrutinize it.