Why are so many Disney fans retarded?

Just call anyone who unironically uses the Bechdel test an idiot and move on.

>>87924256
Because they are movies for kids.

Nevertheless, all you need to know about how stupid the Bechtel test is is that a lot of anime like me anime and even fan-service loaded anime would pass it with flying colors.

>>87924256
because the movies are widely, universally popular. these people want to spread their insipid messages to as many people as possible
it's just the same as the moral guardians a few decades ago, who would be objecting to, oh, say... the girl disrespecting her foster parent.

>>87924322
It's not just this one example I have a problem with, it's the amount of stupidity I keep seeing in the whole community.
>A bjillion obvious villains is fine, but a few plot twist villains in a row is unacceptable
>A bjillion love stories is fine, but more than one movie about two sisters is unacceptable
>If the main bad guy turns good in the end, they are no longer the main bad guy
>Everything has to be black or white, because we don't understand anything more complex than that
I could go on.

>>87924322
The Bechdel test is just a demonstration about how many series still don't put women in a favorable light. It's not meant to be the gospel.

>>87924620
can we come up with one for men, then? pretty sure for the last 20 years there's been more examples of men being the niggers, so to speak.

>>87924620
>The Bechdel test is just a demonstration about how many series still don't put women in a favorable light

That's entirely wrong though. It's supposed to highlight just how underrepresented woman are in general. It's not about whether woman are "positively" or "negatively" presented, or if a film is "feminist" or not. It's just supposed to draw attention to their absence.

>>87924256
There are only like 5 characters in the entire film
Like, you could reverse the gender of every character and it still wouldn't pass the bechdel test

>>87925155
>>87924620
The bechdel test was from dykes to watch out for in one strip where the characters are at a movie theater which is showing a bunch of hyper masculine action movies, it's specifically a critique about that.

>>87924322
the post is literally saying the Bechdel test isn't a good indicator of whether a movie has good female characters

>>87925009
>can we come up with one for men, then?
Why not just reuse the bechdel test but for guys?
call it the reverse bechdel test

unless by "can we come up with one for men" you meant "I don't personally feel like doing anything other than complaining, it would be great if someone else did something to my me feel more special"

>>87925240
Actually, it would still pass the Bechdel test the other way, because of the brothers and Flynn arguing about the crown.

>>87925306
>because of the brothers and Flynn arguing about the crown
It wouldn't though
I don't know which part you're talking about
But the scene where they steal the crown didn't last long enough
And the scene where the brothers confront Flynn later they mention rapunzel

Stupidity of the Bechdel test aside, it's a fair point. If there's more than one woman in a movie they tend to be in conflict.
Why is it so rare to just have a couple girlfriends going off on an adventure together?

>>87925385
I don't think the Bechdel test is stupid, I think the people who miss the point of it are
Like, people hear about the Bechdel test without actually reading the strip it's first shown in. They just don't have the context.

It's like how people hear that the Myers-Briggs test was based on the studies of Carl Jung and don't realize that there's no real scientific background for it or that just because something is based on another, doesn't mean it has to completely represent that thing

>>87925385
it's not. that's an entire genre. it's an entire supergenre of genres.

>>87925375
>But the scene where they steal the crown didn't last long enough
That's not part of the original comic, so whatever you're talking about must have been added to the test later. The one I'm talking abot, the original one, only has 3 criteria
1, Has two women in it
2. They talk to each other
3. About something besides a man.
Tangled passes both ways.

>>87924620
Female characters have a lot more pressure on them to conform to a certain standard, and so writers are afraid to give them real, significant flaws for fear of being labeled sexist.

I think this is part of why there are a lot less memorable women in fiction than men.

>>87925520
Well yeah, the test has been adapted so that you can't just have two female characters show up on screen and say "let's go get coffee" and then walk off screen never to be seen again, and still pass the test
Which makes more sense to me, but yeah, technically you are right

File: 200w.gif (213KB, 200x112px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 200x112px

>>87924256
Blah blah blah...
Oh look. Another thread started by someone wanting to make fun of another. Grow the fuck up, manchild.

>>87925559
>Well yeah, the test has been adapted so that you can't just have two female characters show up on screen and say "let's go get coffee" and then walk off screen never to be seen again, and still pass the test
Well then what's the criteria then? It's not a test if it's that open-ended.

>>87925537
Female characters have to "represent women" rather than just being a character in the story.

>>87925612
There are a bunch of different variations
The one I was using, that I foolhardily believed was more common, was that the characters have to talk for more than a minute
Because you could have two female characters say something like
"How about coffee later"
"Ooh I love coffee"
"Yes me too"

There are a few others that bring in other stuff to

>>87925701
So only Bridesmaids would pass the test then. A minute is a long time in a movie, slowing the whole pace down so two characters can have a minute-long one-on-one is only realistic in a couple genres regardless of gender.

>>87925572
>Tiny, looping, low quality .gif
>All it's missing is the tumblr subtitles too long for the loop

actively seek suicide methods

>>87925804
Agree to disagree
I don't personally feel that a minute is that long or too much to ask for to dedicate to two female characters
I can't think of any famous scene that is super memorable that is less than a minute long
And if the movie has to "slow down the pace" of the film just to include two females talking for a minute, I'd say that it wasn't the kind of film that would pass the bechdel test to begin with

Like I said, agree to disagree, but there is no way in hell that a minute is a "long time in a movie"

>>87925804
A scene, not cut anon. Are you seriously thinking that an average length movie has over 60 scenes in it?

Who cares? Tangled was shit.

>>87925537
It's like how feminists hate Katniss because she has flaws

>>87926065
What flaw? Her shit taste in men? Because that's a flaw every YA protagonist has.

>>87924322
>the Bechdel test


What the fuck is this?

>>87926065
Katniss should be hated because she has the personality of a plank of wood

>>87926123
>Does this work have
>1) more than one female character
>2) do they have a conversation with each other
>3) do they talk about something other than men
if yes to all three, it passes the Bechdel test

it's a joke about action movies having very weak female characters that people ended up taking a little too seriously

>>87926065
I thought they loved her because she has ptsd and all feminists have ptsd. It's more the fact Jennifer Lawrence was apparently too white to play her that they disliked.

>>87926169
Read the books instead of just watching the movies. Everyone knows JLaw can't act for shit.

>>87925984
Very bland, overrated movie. The show might be better but I'm glad the movie hype has finally died.

>>87926123
It's literally nothing.

A lesbian comic writer with the last name of Bechdel made a strip with one lesbian character saying to another how she judges movies. If it doesn't pass three specific things, she won't see it:
>Has two women in it
>They talk to each other
>About something besides a man.

Feminists/SJWs learned this and decided to make a "test" to shame any movie that doesn't pass.

>>87926211
We had Black fucking Widow taking down 30 armed bad guys in a single acrobatic sequence in 2010. That's weak?

What the fuck do you want, then? What the fuck is "strong" for you, ffs? Fucking Kamehameha the whole planets away? There is no action movie woman whose fucking lead gets mauled and has her arms broken or her legs cut up like a guy does. There's no action film like Die Hard where her face is bloodied, bruised and she has to crawl through glass and praying - save for James Cameron's Aliens and Terminator.

I'd KILL for a Sigourney Weaver-esque lady to come along again.

>>87928827
>strong character=power level
stop

>>87928664
It's really more an observation than a test. And a pretty out dated one at that.

>>87924256
Why are so many X fans retarded?

>>87926169
Katniss has so much personality in the books that it's hilarious. But since everything is internal, JLaw doesn't have much to work with, since Katniss is stoic on the outside.
Also the writer of the Hunger Games also wrote for Clarissa Explains It All

>>87929475
JLaw must not have much to work with with every character she plays, then

>>87926211
Wait, some take this serious?
If this dont aply, i think the movie isnt hard to see this to begin with.

>>87924256
Because the Disney fandom is so fuckhuge and Disney animations are so prominent and influential.

A certain percentage of people are inevitably crazy and retarded. The larger and more popular (non-niche) a fandom is, the more retards you'll inevitably find, making noise and drawing attention to themselves.

>>87924596
>Everything has to be black or white, because we don't understand anything more complex than that
>I could go on.
This is honestly something that's bugging me too

>>87925009
You can use the reverse bechdel test.

Are there two named male characters in the film, and do they at some point interact and talk about something that's not a woman or a woman's actions?

>>87928827
You don't understand what "strong female character" means at all, do you

File: tumblr_majiz6CdCJ1qcgnxeo1_1280.jpg (305KB, 798x1181px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 798x1181px

>>87928827

File: menda15.png (298KB, 647x276px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 647x276px

>>87930101
If all the praise for Rey is any indication, the opposition doesn't, either.
Characters like Sarah Connor and Ripley still teetered on the "believably strong character in this setting who is also a woman" level.
They were thrown in head over heels into a world of crap and they learned to cope with it. Some things weren't easy to cope with, so they suffer believable breakdowns.
What people now want are unbelievably strong and talented woman characters that hardly ever stumble on their way to victory and never ever need help from anyone but themselves.

>>87928827
there are quite a few 'strong' female characters around, the thing is that what makes them well written is also what makes them sort of invisible. For instance it only recently occurred to me that the mc of Arrival is a well written and intelligent woman yet I have seen no huge amount of prise for the movie from feminist sources. This is because the movie doesn't go out of its way to make people think 'yeah you go girl!' which is almost as bad as a female character being an arbitrary romance target.

>>87924256
The Bechdel test is horribly flawed because if the protagonist is a man, then there's a high chance it won't meet the requirements because the girl character will either be talking to someone else ABOUT the hero of the story or otherwise to him directly. The test fails to take into consideration supporting characters, sidekicks, mentors, or any of that other shit and instead just makes it seem like an entire gender isn't getting any roles when what's really happening is that they aren't getting many protagonist roles. But even if they do, it can still fail the test because the test is shit.

Like, you could argue that Zootopia BARELY passes since the only other female characters besides Judy are her mother and Bellwether. But Judy is an amazing character, so it doesn't need to pass the test because who fucking cares, she's great.

>>87924620
The bechdel test is a literal joke.
Yes.
Literally.

>>87930140
Yeh Rey is a Mary Sue more than a real "strong female character".

But still it doesn't change the fact that when people are talking about whether or not a character is strong or weak, it doesn't reference their actual ability to deal punishment or beat their enemies, it references whether or not they are a well-written character with a believable, interesting, (even relatable) personality and depth or if they're a cardboard cutout with the personality of a rock

>>87930152
yeah there should be a 'universal bechdel test'

so for instance if it is common in a film for characters to pass the bechdel test but not others of a particular denomination then its an indicator that that film is either poorly written or halfheartedly pandering to someone. Obviously thing are more important than that, you wouldn't expect a film like the Hurt Locker to pass the bechdel test for women but there's literally nothing wrong with that based on the setting of he movie

>>87930101
Ripley and Sarah Connor are the EPITOME of strong female characters. They get put through the ringer, abused and thrown around by monsters and come out on top. Go to Hell if you think they're anything but.

>>87930140
>What people now want are unbelievably strong and talented woman characters that hardly ever stumble on their way to victory and never ever need help from anyone but themselves.

This sounds more like a power fantasy every time I read it.

>>87930101
Personally I think the best definition I've ever seen for what a strong female character is was one I read here of all places. It went something like
>A strong female character is an idealized version of the individual speaker in that moment
SFC's are basically self inserts/projections by another name

>>87930197
You still don't understand what "strong female character" means though

>>87930144
Arrival's out?

>>87930152
>The Bechdel test is horribly flawed
/thread
Go to bed everyone.

>>87928827
i don't usually call people autistic, but this level of misunderstanding is very common amongst autistic people

>>87930197
Only guys have power fantasies because in this narrative only they ever have power. Which never made sense to me but then I'm a guy so yeah.
Personally I think the Galbrush copypasta is spot on.

>>87930207
yeah, and it's really fucking good

>>87930206
I don't give a shit.

I want to be entertained. I pay money to have a good time, not to pretend I'm walking into film school every time just to shit on people with "elitist views".

Do you know what I think your fuck-damned SFC is?

It's a scenario where, regardless of argument, the woman comes out on top. There's your fucking "strong female character". I don't give a shit.

You got Alice from Resident Evil shitting it up - and you sure as Hell can't blame males for that. Jovovich's writing her own fucking character. It's a scenario where there is a no-lose situation regardless of stance. Keep pretending you're worth a damn and being elitist. I'm sure you can brag about it with your friends at the Chocklit Shoppe or over Skype.

File: 1455164591616.jpg (71KB, 615x409px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 615x409px

>>87930184
I know. Hence I pulled Ripley and Sarah out of the folder. They start out as normal women, get to see some shit and grow. They are badasses by the end. But they're not, by any definition of the word, sane. Yet since the audience was there to witness what caused this, they still stay relatable. You admire them for their inner strength, even though they may falter, you admire them for how they used whatever the things at hand to overcome their enemies.
That's also why I hate it when people say that Rey is what Leia should've been. They completely overlook how clever Leia can be. Smuggling the plans out, shooting that forest scout when he thought they were surrendering, crafting a bounty hunter's identity for herself, to eneter Jaba's palace, choking the fat snail...
But yeah obviously she should've beaten Vader into submission the moment he pointed his finger at her.

>>87930246
Yes, so exactly like I've been saying, you have zero idea what people mean by "strong female character" but keep embarrassing yourself by running your mouth anyway like an utter retard.

Thanks for proving my point, I guess

>>87930247
if anything Leia is what Rey should have been. Rey was easily the worst part of that movie, the most interesting character is the villain for fuck sake becasue he struggles with tasks put in front of him and clearly has some kind of internal bullshit going on from his past

>>87930260
It's pretty obvious that you'd say that no matter what definition anyone gave because of how unnecessarily evasive you're being.

>>87930262
Exactly.

>>87930247
And Rey is upsetting because she is, essentially, a huge waste of potential. The idea of a scavenger who's tough and knows how to fight and is resourceful because of the world she grew up in is passable. She could have been relatable, have real flaws, be a rounded, real character. But then she INSTANTLY becomes some sort of force messiah who's better than Kylo Ren without any training within seconds or something, and it's all downhill from there.

She'd have needed some flaws or such to balance out all the skills she picked up at Jakku, but instead she slips into unbearable full-on Mary Sue territory; she's pretty, she's witty, she's kind, she's good at fucking everything you can think of, everyone loves her, the General just instantly becomes best gal pals with this nobody as soon as she shows up because she's so important. I get that it's Star Wars and they want her to be the messianic character who brings back the force or whatever, but she should have some flaws to seem human.

>>87930246
Alice was alright. The Resident Evil movie franchie is over the top shlock. I like seeing Milla kicking ass in that scenario. The problem is when such a character bleeds into genres where its not appropriate and forces a tonal break.
It's like Last Action Hero, except played straight.

>>87930260
So what IS a "strong fucking female character". What is it?

As far as I know, a strong male character is George Bailey; Maximus Decimus Meridius; Rick Blaine; fricking Deckard.

How the fuck should a woman be any different from any of those save for being a woman? You put a woman in those roles and you have your damn SFC. But no, we have a damn society that refuses to put women into any suffering for growth - the only examples I know from the top of my fucking head other than those two I mentioned before is Scarlett from GWTW and maybe the cast of Golden Girls.

So please, kind sir, in your infinite wisdom and 4 years of film school and popcorn snobbery, explain yourself. You're insistent on calling me autistic, so please just let it all out and explain to the damn class what exactly IS a Strong Female Character.

>people still take the bechdel scam seriously
The heck? That shit is insultingly stupid because no matter what the criteria don't amount to shit porn movies pass the beshdel test. Barbie planing her next trip at malibu's mall pass the test. Fucking harem anime pass the beshdel test.
That shit was invented to bitch and that's it, because it neither makes things good nor bad. People try to defend it like the IQ, saying that it's just "an idea" but the IQ purpose, aka showing low scores make you retarded, works (and the "high IQ is intelligence" was never part of it). But Beshdel doesn't work, neither if you valid or invalid it. So fuck it.

>>87930267
>damage control on full power

Just accept that you got triggered and ran your mouth on a topic without understanding what you're talking about.

It's embarassing as fuck but it happened and the best thing for you know is to cut your losses and shut the fuck up and maybe learn from the discussion other anons are having in this thread

>>87930292
>Alice is alright
>There are people who think this
What bizarro universe do you hail from, faggot?

>>87930288
it's even worse when people try to point out 'waaaaahhh but Luke blew up the death star in the first film!'

they conveniently forget how much of a fuckup Luke was for almost the entire fucking series, he could barely use a lightsabre, repeatedly got fucked up by various villains and to have his much more competent friends bail him out multiple times

>>87930297
>film school
>Look ma, I'm projecting
How about you read the thread instead of getting this assblasted and agitated


>>87930184

>>87930308
Man, I just like me some Milla midriff. Alice is meant to be over the top. No-one can take RE movies seriously. Even the games grow more shlocky the longer you stare at the concepts they represent. And that's fine. It's not fine when over the top characters enter more level settings and still function in their over the top way while no-one in-universe acknowledges this. Hence, Last Action Hero played straight.

>>87930297
Well there was also a remake of It's a Wonderful Life where Cher played the George Bailey character, does that count?

>>87930218
Wait, only people with power have power fantasies? Wouldn't the people without power be more likely to fantasise about having it and sticking it to the people who actually have power?

>>87930321
>>is a Mary Sue more than a real "strong female character".
congrats, you proved his point, you don't know what "strong character" are, since you arbitrarily use derogatory terms when you don't like them personally. If it all boild down to your little snowflake judgement, then you admit it doesn't exist.

>>87930310
This. I sincerely doubt we're going to see Rey get a hand cut off even though it's practically a franchise tradition.

>>87930310
>how much of a fuckup Luke was for almost the entire fucking series
Yes, exactly. Luke was well-written because he was such a naive dumb fuckup for a long while. It's not like he was THE CHOSEN ONE from the beginning, all wit and snark and single-handedly showing people how to do their jobs they've been training and doing for decades despite having no training while also fighting off the local lightsabre master with one hand after watching other people train for a bit, or something like that.

I could have accepted Rey being at this powerlevel at the 3rd movie, or something. But within the first movie, with zero experience or training? It's too much, it distances her. Or maybe they could have had her display incredible natural aptitude, but lack the finesse of control as a result of zero training or understanding. You know, she tries to mind control someone but accidentally fries their brain because she has no idea what she's doing or such

>>87930305
That was the first time I responded to you.
This will be the last

>>87930339
Anon you're so mad you're not writing coherently. Chill.

>>87930338
See, there's your problem right there. You're expecting the arguments of these people to make sense when logic was never part of their equation.

>>87930247
Though to be fair it's not like male action heroes are particularly sane either, Rambo is a PTSD afflicted veteran, the Terminator is literally an emotionless robot, John McClaine is an alcoholic and workaholic who drove his wife away, and you could argue that anybody who is as willing to use violence to solve their problems as any given action hero is certainly not all that well adjusted even if they don't have a specific mental problem.

>>87930370
>Being this embarrassed
Next time anon, just check your post, scroll down, and hit "delete post". You won't have to try to damage control so hard and act like you were just pretending to be retarded all along.

>>87930322
>Milla midriff
Okay, I'm sorry. That's a good reason.

>>87930339
Milla Jovovich even called the Black Widow style of action hero the modern SFC so I don't even know where the Hell he's coming from.

>>87924256
Kys, OP

>>87930370
Or maybe you should learn to read. Once again, the world doesn't revolve around your little fragile feelings. "I don't get it" doesn't make my point invalid, it just means you admit being stupid.

>>87930374
>Terminator is an emotionless robot
You take that back right now, man. You take it back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfZYo3EVyuY

>>87930374
See, there's my point.
Also
>The Terminator
>Hero
Kyle Reese was the male protag of T1 and an antisocial wreck himself.
T-800 in T2 learns to feel.

>>87930353
Lor San Tekka got a saber across the chest and just fell over.
Kylo Ren got a saber across the face and he still had a head after that.
Disney sabers are on stun setting.

>>87924256
Rapunzel mom´s kinda hot, isn´t she?!?

>>87924256
>passive aggressive, abusive women are a n offensive stereotype
Not offensive if it's true. Granted they make up 90% of third wave feminism.

>>87924256
Because it's mostly young women and they're retarded.

File: tumblr_mi5u3bXSCB1qe8we7o1_1280.jpg (466KB, 1280x1343px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 1280x1343px

>>87925537
Too bad there isn't an entire genre based around flawed, interesting female characters interacting with each other. That would be a good thing.

>>87930403
>>87930427
Ok, the Terminator has emotions if you switch his emotions on like a bloody light switch, the point is that he is not a mentally healthy person by human standards. And I could go on; Snake Plisskin is a misanthropic, antisocial criminal who probably also has PTSD, Rowdy Roddy Piper's character in They Live was a schizophrenic drifter who could have easily hallucinated the whole thing, McCready from The Thing certainly has a massive case of PTSD by the end of the movie, and that's just John Carpenter movies.

>>87930548
Thanks again for proving my point that these are superior, more interesting, more relatable characters.

>>87930522
Pic not related?

File: tumblr_my7qnds7tt1rwpj7mo1_500.gif (990KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

990KB, 500x375px

>>87930655
What are you even asking? Have you watched it or not?

File: The_Rule.jpg (180KB, 635x856px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 635x856px

For all three of you wondering, this is the comic the Bechdel test originated from.

For the record, this was from 1985.

>>87925255
And it is a fucking joke in a comic strip with a lot of comedy.

>>87924256
but they are in opposition because one of them is fucking evil...and for the first half of the movie they have a friendly mother-daughter relationship, not like they're girlfriends who talk about boys and makeup...and the male protagonist plays second fiddle to Rapunzel...and he's the only male character who isn't comic relief?

what in the name of, I say, what in the name of fuck?

>>87928457
Not anywhere close as bland and overrated as Frozen though
I feel the same way and Frozen still makes Tangled look like a masterpiece

>>87924620
>Films like Alien don't put women in a favorable light.
What did you mean by this?

>>87930163
But it's the "Ha ha ha... Wait a minute" variety.

>>87931317
It doesn't aim at specific targets, anon. There are going to be a whole heap of exceptions.

In fact, if you look at the original comic, >>87931121 Alien is mentioned by name

>>87924620
>tfw keijo passes the bechdel test

File: the rarest thing in the internet.png (672KB, 807x611px) Image search: [Google]

672KB, 807x611px

>>87925629

So why exactly is the Bechdel test a bad thing?

>>87932128
Back to >>>/tumblr/

>>87932128
It's not a "bad thing", but using it to decide whether or not a movie is good enough to watch is.

A movie set in the vietnam war is unlikely to have major women characters, for instance. This means it will fail the Bechdel test. That doesn't mean it is a bad movie or unworthy of watching. Within the context of the movie it would be unrealistic to have plenty of women around.

If you look at its origination >>87931121 you can see it is a jab at hyper masculine movies that were coming out at the time. Look at the posters behind them. It's not something that should be used as a serious yardstick

>>87932128
It is not an standard of quality nor representation of women in media.
But a lot of people use like it is.

File: 1478294589487.png (358KB, 552x543px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 552x543px

>>87932062

File: ed1de44992c0011be0aa10a60465f007.jpg (1MB, 1173x1765px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1173x1765px

>>87930297
"Strong female character" has two definitions, in my mind at least. Like The Bride from Kill Bill. Every character Michelle Rodriguez plays. Samus Aran, Chun-Li from the vidya. Wonder Woman & Captain Marvel from comics, etc.

But there's also the definition of "strong female character" that means someone who feels authentic. This female character is someone who has agency, genuine vulnerability, and typically has a narrative that makes their worldview valid to the same degree as any male character. I'm talking about Dana Scully from X-Files. I'm talking about Beatrice Ushiromiya from Umineko. I'm talking about Hermione Granger from Harry Potter. These are the characters that show that you're not valuable just because you're physically strong and can fight. You're valuable because of your views, feelings, and work ethic. And you're a still a flawed character on top of that.

What are Wonder Woman's flaws? How about Chun-Li's? See where I'm going with this? A "strong female character" to me is a well-written female character that guys AND girls can like because they feel like an authentic person, warts and all. Lara Croft is technically a "strong female character" but as an actual good female character she's shit.

>>87932531
>How about Chun-Li's?
She cannot tolerate Tuesdays

File: MBISON.jpg (279KB, 1080x500px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1080x500px

>>87932611
Well played, Anon. Well played.

>>87932531
And THIS is what the current Hollywood views of what make a Strong Female Character are according to the views of Ricky fucking Hollywood.

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/movies/resident-evil-milla-jovovich-on-zombies-and-strong-women/#/0

https://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2014/07/31/on-lucy-feminism-and-the-strong-female-character/

http://www.thesociologicalcinema.com/blog/the-myth-of-the-strong-female-lead

WHICH WAS WHAT I WAS GETTING AT.

You call me autistic and you can't even God damn read into the context of what I'm talking about. Why the fuck do you think I brought up Ripley, Scarlet and Connor? Go to Hell, you rude fuck. I hope you got people around you to make you feel superior about because you clearly just want to get your damn rocks off by turning your nose.

>>87932272
>>87932432
Cool cool. I'm in a creative writing club with a bunch of tumblrina's who are saying that it's necessary for a story to be good. Most of my story focuses on male characters though so it makes it kind of difficult to use the Bechdel test.

>>87930321
>Look ma, I'm projecting
I ain't in this fight but that is always a lousy riposte showing you've run out of gas on your argument.

>>87932671
Look if you're gonna get into a disagreement with them, try to explain that

>It is a good system when used on a group of movies, as it shows whether or not women are being represented. For individual movies you need to look at the context of the story because sometimes it would just not make sense.

For example if you wanna look at "major movies in the last 5 years", the Bechdel test is good because you can see how many have women representation in them.

But if you're gonna say a movie like that Mars one there's no way you can really apply the test to that - it's nearly a one-man show. I haven't actually seen it but I assume it fails

Sorry if I am rambling, I have not slept

>>87924256
>Why are so many Disney fans retarded?

Disney also makes Star Wars and Marvel. They exist as a factory to produce retards.

>>87932655
Calm your tits, dude. All I'm trying to say is that female characters don't have to punch people through walls and "always come out on top" to be good. Posting about Milla Jovovich enjoying playing Alice is asinine because she's basically having fun with a role her husband is directing her in. That's not "the standard" for female characters because one woman enjoys doing it. Action scenes are fun. Anyone would enjoy that fucking role.

You said " strong female characters are characters who always come out on top". Scarlet O'Hara fails by your own definition even though you cited her as a strong female character. So which is it?

>>87932085
If a girl character actually had a big nose and a dorky looking face like Guybrush with all of those qualities listed in that post, I guarantee girls would flock to that fucking game. The reason nobody does it isn't because "girls wouldn't like it", it's because she wouldn't be hot anymore.

>>87933234
You'd be surprised at how fine with things most girls are. Even if you kept her cute, any girl who enjoys adventure games is gonna enjoy it.

It's just dickhead critics, and they'll slam whatever they feel like regardless of what the actual audience thinks.

A porn film could past that test have a gang bang with two women involved talking about there day and there job as men are fucking them

>>87926065
I liked Katniss in the first book for not being a perfect female character: she was a judgmental bitch who only cared about herself and her sister, and that was fine.

Then the other two books came along and showed that she was supposed to be seen as a good guy and nearly every other character honest-to-god considered her selfless and special. Which is giving her way too much credit when played as straight as the book did.

>>87933266
unfortunately no one want to sponsor a company that gets slandered by dickhead critics, so they have you by the balls

>>87924620
most women are awful
>oh god its almost like art imitates life

>>87924620
>The Bechdel test is just a demonstration about how many series still don't put women in a favorable light.
Except it doesn't demonstrate that at all. It demonstrate nothing. you can make porn that passes it, you can make masterpieces that don't. It has no value. "women in favorable light" isn't defined by 2 bitches talking together about the fashion or the latest pepe meme.

>>87924620
>>87935059

it's meant to demonstrate how little mainstream movies/culture care about writing women in movies.

>>87930152
>The Bechdel test is horribly flawed because if the protagonist is a man, then there's a high chance it won't meet the requirements because the girl character will either be talking to someone else ABOUT the hero of the story or otherwise to him directly
That's the point of the test. The majority of movies star men, and even ones that star women are often romances that center around the men they romance. Making an allowance for movies that star men absolutely misses the point - the flaw doesn't lay with the test if the majority of movies fail it, because there are so comparatively few movies that fail the reverse.

File: Sausage-Party_poster_goldposter_com_1-540x800.jpg (68KB, 539x800px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 539x800px

this movie passed the bechdel test, does it make it any better? no

>>87935088
it doesn't demonstrate that at all. It doesn't work, the criteria is arbitrary thus the test is not acceptable.

>>87935243
>, because there are so comparatively few movies that fail the reverse.
this is wrong.

>>87935511
I doubt that. A significant majority of movies star men and have male supporting characters and villains, and while romance is common it's secondary to the main plot most of the time.

>>87933128
Read. Fucking. Context.

I named Scarlet with 2 others. WHO did I mention, you proud piece of shit?

You call me autistic but you fail to understand context in any suite or manner here. If I'm autistic you must be some kind of polar bear hoarder with acne and a fuck-damned empty theatre to project yourself onto. I'm done with you, loser. Go and brag on your blog about how "cool" you are.

Fucking loser.