To be honest it's not particularly a fair assessment though, I only know 3 people of either sex who went to see it, and no none of the men who went to see it are gay, and yes 2 of them went with their girlfriends to see it, but still enjoyed it.
Do we hate Harry Potter and Twilight?
- Thread starter Extrocomp
- Start date
Ah, I missed that, even took me a minute to work it out after you pointed it out. Guess I'm slow today.^ He's poking fun at how you phrased your Sex and the City statement.
^ He's poking fun at how you phrased your Sex and the City statement.
Yep.
I'm sure some men did enjoy it, but I can counter any anecdotal evidence of such with my own experience.
I was in Marble Arch Odeon to see Indiana Jones the night S&tC came out. I had to wait several minutes before going in because the woman using the only working ticket machine was printing off ten or so tickets. She even apologised to me for the wait and joked that she bet I wasn't going to see the same film as her and her many friends.
There were no men queueing to get in, either before I went in to see Indy or afterwards when I was on the way out. I even joked on here when I got home that every single woman in London was there that night and anyone looking for a hook up in London that night would probably be out of luck.
Compare that to my experiences with simiarly popular films where the cinemas were packed full on opening Friday. The Dark Knight at the Odeon Leicester Square was sold out, but was roughly 50/50 between men and women. Star Trek at the Empire Leicester Square was sold out, 50/50 again.
The women there didn't seem to be there because they'd been dragged along by their boyfriends. In both cases there were groups of women there apparently on their own.
Just as a disclaimer - I wasn't actually attempting to insult gay men there. My distaste for the way men are presented in the media isn't limited to heterosexual variety.
Recent aversion to wearing shirts? I think you should go back to the begining and count how often Mr Connery's hairy chest was on show...quite a lot if I recall correctly.
And the 'Bond's equal' thing is clearly a fallacy designed to make it seem there's more appeal to a female audience. Interesting that the majority of those equals (with the exception of Jinx) relied on being saved at the end of the film by Moore/Brosnan/Craig? Even in DAD 007 saves Jinx from death twice (from the laser and from drowning in the ice palace) I don't see how this feeds into any femmenist agenda? In effect it's saying "Hey girls, you can be as tough or strong as you like but guess what, at the end of the day even if you're Michelle Yeoh you'll be relying on Pierce Brosnan in the end." Possibly the only equal he's had in those mentioned films was Pam Bouvier--and even she was rediced to a weeping wreck at the end because she didn't think James loved her
I adore Tracy, but there are some elements of her relationship with 007 that are distrubing, the main one being her simpering acceptance that he was ok to go off shagging his way round the world. That didn't sit right with the rest of her character IMO. She was one of the best Bond girls though, and clearly (almost) the only woman Bond ever loved as far as I'm concerned. I saw almost because I actually don't think Kara is far behind her in the 'ordinary girl caught up in Bond's world' kind of way.
Don't get me started on Vesper "what do you see in me, James?" Lynd!
And Bond isn't rich, he's a civil servant for god's sake! (Although I wouldn't mind seeing his expenses!)
Is it wrong that I really enjoyed Mama Mia? I don't see anything wrong with enjoying the odd chick flick? Hell I own both Bridget Jones' DVDs . My DVD collection is eccelctic to say the least!
I'm comfortable with my film watching. Some days I like to see Rene Zellwegger being a klutz, another day I like watching zombies rampaging through a shopping mall, the next day I might want to enjoy Arnie letting Sully go before wiping out an entire army!
Which is a hell of a lot better than the current incarnation's chest waxing. Back in the old movies, when Bond took his shirt off it was because he was getting changed or was about to have sex or was getting a massage.
Now, Bond appears in tiny trunks on a beach and poses while the camera lingers on him.
And the 'Bond's equal' thing is clearly a fallacy designed to make it seem there's more appeal to a female audience. Interesting that the majority of those equals (with the exception of Jinx) relied on being saved at the end of the film by Moore/Brosnan/Craig? Even in DAD 007 saves Jinx from death twice (from the laser and from drowning in the ice palace) I don't see how this feeds into any femmenist agenda? In effect it's saying "Hey girls, you can be as tough or strong as you like but guess what, at the end of the day even if you're Michelle Yeoh you'll be relying on Pierce Brosnan in the end." Possibly the only equal he's had in those mentioned films was Pam Bouvier--and even she was rediced to a weeping wreck at the end because she didn't think James loved her
I was referring to the promotion for the films, not the content of the films themselves. It's notable that each time they've presented Bond having a female "equal" as a new thing that they just came up with.
Kara was okay, but Tracy is the greatest "Bond girl" of them all as far as I'm concerned. Remember, at the time Bond slept with women to get what he needed from them. That's why they all disappear at the end of the film, because he used them to get what he needed and moved on.
Tracy, if necessary, might have accepted that because she knew that when it came down to it, it was her he came home to. In fact, Bond marries her and is preparing to retire at the end so he wouldn't have needed to sleep with her.
Fast forward to Casino Royale. Casino Royale just stops and then we get 45 minutes of mindless, unsexy romantic drivel as Bond recouperates.
I'm still wondering what the answer to that question was.
I always got the impression that his salary really wasn't all that important to him.
Is it wrong that I really enjoyed Mama Mia? I don't see anything wrong with enjoying the odd chick flick? Hell I own both Bridget Jones' DVDs . My DVD collection is eccelctic to say the least!
At no point have I said that there's anything wrong with a man enjoying a film aimed at women. All I am saying is that you are not the target audience and that there are many elements present in films aimed at women that put many men off with no attempt made to address that.
^ He's poking fun at how you phrased your Sex and the City statement.
Yep.
I'm sure some men did enjoy it, but I can counter any anecdotal evidence of such with my own experience.
I was in Marble Arch Odeon to see Indiana Jones the night S&tC came out. I had to wait several minutes before going in because the woman using the only working ticket machine was printing off ten or so tickets. She even apologised to me for the wait and joked that she bet I wasn't going to see the same film as her and her many friends.
There were no men queueing to get in, either before I went in to see Indy or afterwards when I was on the way out. I even joked on here when I got home that every single woman in London was there that night and anyone looking for a hook up in London that night would probably be out of luck.
Compare that to my experiences with simiarly popular films where the cinemas were packed full on opening Friday. The Dark Knight at the Odeon Leicester Square was sold out, but was roughly 50/50 between men and women. Star Trek at the Empire Leicester Square was sold out, 50/50 again.
The women there didn't seem to be there because they'd been dragged along by their boyfriends. In both cases there were groups of women there apparently on their own.
Just as a disclaimer - I wasn't actually attempting to insult gay men there. My distaste for the way men are presented in the media isn't limited to heterosexual variety.
I'm not disputing that, the 2 guys who went with the girlfriends both told me they were practically the only men in the cinema, but they both enjoyed it. Which was my point, you said men don't watch these films because they make an informed choice about them being awful, but some men do watch and enjoy them. And I would argue for any film to be as popular as Sex & The City or Mamma Mia! they had to appeal to more than just their core audience. In the same way Star Trek or The Dark Knight did. Maybe not to the same extent, and there may not have been the "pandering" but nonetheless there must have been some appeal there.
And I agree with Starkers, I enjoy the occasional chick flick, kid flick or teen flick, and I don't see a problem with that.
But I do see where you're coming from because we've discussed these things in other threads, and there is a double standard in these things, but it's the same double standard as Affirmative Action, it's not right but it is basically combating something that is just there because it's always been there.
And how repulsed and disgusted does society react to sexualizing young girls? If there were crowds of middle-aged men lining up to see a movie with scantly clad barely-legal or underaged girls in people would freak out and cry about the fall of civilization.
Yet it's perfectly OK for women to lust after barely-legal scantly dressed young men? It's a double standard.
That just reflects a popularity for dark, serious, angsty stories. While it's true Craig has had his deliberate sex symbol moments (he's given a scene in Casino Royale coming out of the water that is a deliberate inversion of Dr. No); and the same is probably true of Wolverine, this is a tend towards, as Lapis put it, male melodrama. You may not like it but that doesn't mean it doesn't appeal to a male audience - people had been demanding a darker, more tortured Batman for years. I'd think Casino Royale is the most overtly masculine Bond we've got in years, perhaps ever - there's a brittle edge to Craig's performance that previous Bonds didn't have. It's Bond post-Fight Club, if you want to see it that way.
Besides, Schwarzenegger and his counterpart Stallone were not unknown for prancing about in little-to-no-clothing. I wonder if the Rocky series enjoys any cross appeal for that?
I enjoy watching attractive women in revealing costumes beat people up, yes. It's not that they have ersatz male appeal, though they've often been accused of having ersatz feminism.
As for the realism - Batman. Christian Bale has done many things in the past two films it's probably not possible for him to do, like gliding and moving swiftly while wearing so much goddamn armour. Comic book movies, even gritty Nolan ones, are about fantasy and escapism, no?
Further, this strikes me as a false dichotomy. Wolverine is compromised as a male hero because of his sex appeal; but that can't compromise Catwoman.
As to the Mary Sue point, I figure Nolan and crew could handle Catwoman well. Rachel Dawes never came off as a Mary Sue or any other cliched strong woman type, even if she also failed to register as a human being.
Being aroused by teenagers may be wrong, but it's not pedophilia. Come now.
And Kirsten Stewart is a very attractive young woman. That doesn't make Twilight any less of a female fantasy. Besides, on TV we might have shows like King of Queens, where a fat, ugly man is married to a woman who isn't fat or ugly, but the reverse is seldom true.
So have I, just not one who sits in his Penthouse crying about being Batman.
As for Craig, as I've said the camera lingers on him as he poses. That is the fundamental difference between a guy just not wearing a shirt and pandering to the female audience - who did indeed fall for it hook, line and sinker.
A post-Fight Club Bond, if anyone had actually listened to the movie, wouldn't have quite so much product placement for a start.
A post-Fight Club Bond wouldn't be quite so upset about Vesper either. Why ? Because the other message Fight Club tries to get across is that you do not need a woman to be happy. Having a woman in your life does not complete you any more than having a complete set of Ikea furniture does.
Again, context. It's the difference between a guy walking around in the showers at the gym or a guy standing on a stage in front of a group of women.
Feminism being about women physically injuring men is a little bit on the nose, don't you think ?
Sure, but his unusual abilities are explained by equipment. A similarly trained woman using the same equipment would be no problem for me.
Catwoman is a bad example. She purposefully takes advantage of her appearance and the effect she has on men, just like Bond always has used his ability with women. No problem there.
I'm more inclined to compare Wolverine or Batman to someone like Power Girl who is the subject of frequent criticism for the way she dresses. We supposedly devalue her by seeing her as an attractive woman as well as seeing her as a superhero.
Dawes didn't, no, but there are certain characters who are doomed to be portrayed that way no matter what you do. Catwoman is one, Wonder Woman is another.
And as for Catwoman being a hero, you'd have to talk to Zatanna about that.
No, you're right, it's just rape when they actually go through with it.
Do not get me started on that. The dumb, lazy and fat stereotype is just another part of the offensive way men are treated in the media.
I didn't argue that. I was observing that nevertheless this is a very male Bond - consider the opening sequence, for example, where his cool, restrained masculinity is underscored by brutal, casual violence. This is a far cry of the lighter Bond fare of Moore or Brosnan, and definitely darker than Connery ever took the character. Filmic Bond has never had to literally test his testicular fortitude, either. This is what I mean by a post-Fight Club Bond.
How is this necessarily feminism? I've already intimiated it's what I want to see, no? That male audiences like pretty girls and action is known; and it is not an always untrue corrollary that some of us like pretty girls who are doing the action. There can be a feminist slant on it, naturally, but it's hardly essential.
They could go that angle with Catwoman.
You mean that comic book character you linked me once? I'd never heard of her until then, but it is true my knowledge of American comic franchises is limited to their filmic incarnations (and even then it's sketchy.)
And one can criticise all one wants; scantily-clad women in action films do very much not appear to be something going away any time soon, for the rather obvious reason that they're part of the successful formula.
And since the article in question showed panels from a comic book with a rather preposterous fourth-wall argument about how feminist Power Girl's costume is by forcing people to look at her breasts (or something like that), she doesn't look like much of a banner child of anything, other than - in that case, certainly - idiotic writing.
I'd disagree. I really enjoyed the Pfieffer Catwoman. This is chiefly why I'd want to see the character again.
I read somewhere that Wonder Woman's creator admits he had his fetishes in mind when creating the character, and Superdickery has a whole catalogue of pages devoted to her being subjected to humiliating capture that's uncommon for male heroes, so...
Ah, but the tendency to show fat, ugly men who get attractive wives is definitely interesting - if anything, they're having it both ways, ridiculing them and using them as a vehicle for fantasy simultaneously. Hollywood will never take a stand if it can take two more.
Hence, again, the feminist/sexy world of the ass-kicking girl.
Well I think what you're saying is that they were subtler about it in the Connery era. An awful lot of women have always liked Bond films, especially Connery ones...and I don't think it was neccesarily about the DB5 fitted with machine guns. There's only one real reason Connery got his shirt off
Which is no different to 'X is a new kind of Bond Villain, or Y is Bond's deadliest foe' It's just advertising blurb.
Ouch the its ok because he comes home to me cliche is terrible. I do not know a single woman who woulsd put up with that. clearly a lot of women do but that doesn't make it remotely right.
I dunno, I always got the impression that he was ok without being wealthy. Most of the clothes/gadgets etc come courtesy of work. Certainly I doubt he's a Bruce Wayne type.
I do see the point you're making, there are specific chick flicks but many guy flicks seem to have an element designed to attract women, but maybe that comes down to something as simple as the fact that guys will go to the cinema more often whilst girls need encouragement
I don't blame women for finding Connery of that era attractive, or even Daniel Craig now. I'm not criticising women for having a sex drive, far from it. If anything, the world would be a better place if they were more honest with themselves.
I'm just saying that if you are going to pander, admit that you are pandering. Don't wrap it up as feminism or empowerment or any such bullshit because it doesn't wash.
Which is designed to get female bums on seats. It's sad how often people seem to fall for it.
It's not the same as cheating. Ultimately, sex is a tool James Bond uses to get information. The spouses and partners of pornographic actors and actresses or even prostitutes often make the same compromise. He retired to make Tracy happy, at no point was he willing to make the same choice for anyone until Vesper came along, but in my view she was not as strong a character as Tracy and she certainly wasn't played by an actress anywhere near as talented. Ignoring gender issues and all that stuff for a second, Tracy is the benchmark for Bond Girls. Nobody before or since measures up.
I do see the point you're making, there are specific chick flicks but many guy flicks seem to have an element designed to attract women, but maybe that comes down to something as simple as the fact that guys will go to the cinema more often whilst girls need encouragement
The only type of film I can think of that could be called the equivalent of a romantic comedy is the old fashioned horror film, though Halloween changed the genre in some respects. The old idea that you took your girlfriend along, she'd get scared and then you'd "protect" her and she'd reward you that protection. Whether or not that worked, I don't know, but now it's usually the lead actress that survives your average horror movie anyway. Jamie Lee Curtis blew that one for us.
There is an unfortunate trend towards linking female empowerment with violence against men, as if that's the only way a woman can be powerful, so we get movies packed with unrealistic nonsense.
Catwoman using advanced technology to assist her in her career as a master cat burglar would not be a problem for me at all. Catwoman beating Batman in a fair fight, which is undoubtably what would happen in the first act, would be.
Power Girl is symbolic of an issue some commentators have with the way women in comic books are drawn. Women are often drawn with overly large breasts supported by impossibly narrow waists. Power Girl is the best example because her breasts are huge even by comic book standards and her costume seems designed to drawn attention to them. It is possibly the number one source of criticism facing comic books today.
My argument is that if we can see male heroes like Bond or Wolverine in a obviously posed position, showing off their male sexual characterisitics as no problem at all then the arguments against Power Girl and her ilk (and she is by no means the only character) are rendered moot.
Wonder Woman's creator enjoyed seeing women in rope bondage. He only wrote Wonder Woman, nobody else, so what he would have done with anyone else is a matter of pure guesswork. I'm guessing that he probably didn't do the same to Superman or anyone else simply because he wasn't gay.
Note that this isn't necessarily him portraying Wonder Woman as submissive. Bondage gets lumped in with the larger BDSM world but is often just as much about enjoying how women (or men!) look when physically restrained. It can be no different to enjoying seeing a woman in lingerie, a swimsuit, a short skirt or the kind of skintight outfit Catwoman would wear. Depending on the tie, Bondage has a way of emphasising and shaping parts of the body that make them more visually appealing to some people.
Why?
Batman may be the very assertive male fantasy, but his guy-ness need not intrisinically ensure he's invulnerable to any female fantasy characters. Realism doesn't come into it because, as I've observed, the basic actions he engages in implicitly require the sort of superhuman strength he doesn't in fact posess.
But it is portraying her as a sex object and essentially a male fantasy. Which is fine, and my point, that a male fantasy can include strong female characters. I assume Power Girl, likewise, kicks ass on occasion or she wouldn't be much of a superhero, no?
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
^ He's poking fun at how you phrased your Sex and the City statement.
Yep.
I'm sure some men did enjoy it, but I can counter any anecdotal evidence of such with my own experience.
I was in Marble Arch Odeon to see Indiana Jones the night S&tC came out. I had to wait several minutes before going in because the woman using the only working ticket machine was printing off ten or so tickets. She even apologised to me for the wait and joked that she bet I wasn't going to see the same film as her and her many friends.
There were no men queueing to get in, either before I went in to see Indy or afterwards when I was on the way out. I even joked on here when I got home that every single woman in London was there that night and anyone looking for a hook up in London that night would probably be out of luck.
Compare that to my experiences with simiarly popular films where the cinemas were packed full on opening Friday. The Dark Knight at the Odeon Leicester Square was sold out, but was roughly 50/50 between men and women. Star Trek at the Empire Leicester Square was sold out, 50/50 again.
The women there didn't seem to be there because they'd been dragged along by their boyfriends. In both cases there were groups of women there apparently on their own.
Just as a disclaimer - I wasn't actually attempting to insult gay men there. My distaste for the way men are presented in the media isn't limited to heterosexual variety.
Just to compare notes from a fellow Trekfan from Canada who also saw Indiana Jones & The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull at the same time Sex & The City came out in theaters (I was seeing Indiana Jones for the second time), were most of the women in costume as Carrie & her friends?
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
Or, you can look at it as a confirmation that an ugly fat man can get a woman if he's secure in himself and has good humor and a good heart-much in the same way Marty in Marty gets Clara in the end even though he's the ugly fat man. (BTW, as a guy, I don't think Kevin James is ugly. In fact, his character is a nice, easygoing guy compared to his beautiful wife who is always such a social climber.)
Which came about partly because women were tired of the women as victim trope.
Marty isn't real.
Sure, there are much uglier people in real life, but he's definitely ugly enough to count. Not exactly the face and physique of a male model, here.
It's basic storytelling. You have to establish the villain as a threat early on. If Batman just beats her the first time they meet then she's not much of a threat.
It's the same reason the Empire stamps on the rebels in the first act of The Empire Strikes Back, it reestablishes them as a threat.
In this case, however, Batman is supposed to be one of the finest hand to hand combatants in the entire world. Even if Catwoman is also on the list (which she isn't, she can hold her own but she's not in Bats' league), the difference becomes one of physical strength which is one she can't win.
Power Girl is Supergirl's counterpart from an alternate universe. She's a Kryptonian with all the benefits under a yellow sun that brings. So yes, she kicks ass and I have no problem with her doing so because she has superpowers.
Do not misunderstand me here, this is Hermiod you're talking with - I'm this board's biggest Ms. Marvel fan. She has superpowers and kicks butt too, and I buy her titular comic book every month to read about her doing it.
The problem is not with women with superpowers. It's ordinary women who somehow manage to beat men twice their size in fair fights when it's just not realistic. Remember Kira beating up that Cardassian guard when she was weeks away from giving birth ? Remember Starbuck not being killed in that boxing match with Apollo ? Remember Echo fighting Ballard in the Chinese restaurant ? It comes to something when a woman who made a good living out of playing that sort of character, Cynthia Rothrock, says such scenes are dumb and unrealistic.
Just to compare notes from a fellow Trekfan from Canada who also saw Indiana Jones & The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull at the same time Sex & The City came out in theaters (I was seeing Indiana Jones for the second time), were most of the women in costume as Carrie & her friends?
I admit I haven't seen a lot of that show, but the characters strike me as somewhat vain, self-absorbed, obsessed with fashion and shoes and more than a little selfish (oh, and they're size queens which is an unforgiveable trait). Do women really want to be like that ? I find that really sad. I can't speak for my entire gender here, but to me none of those traits are attractive.
Similar threads
