Okay I’m literally halfway through this movie and I had to stop because this fucking scene. It wasn’t that the acting was horrible or the tropes were played out to a fucking T, it’s this fight scene between Chuck and Raleigh that pissed me off to no fucking end. Time and time again we have movies that portray women as no nonsense fighters (Mako Mori ladies and gentlemen) who have some weakness (lost in the drift, got it). However, this woman who can obviously defend herself has to have her honor defended from a complete macho jackass who has just called her a “bitch” who needs to get put back on her leash (true, would make anyone angry). This plays out in ALMOST EVERY FILM. I could literally tell you what happens in this cookie cutter fight in my fucking sleep. 1. Jackass insults chick. 2. Chick does nothing. 3. Honorable man steps up and throws first hit, usually a quick hit to the face, then demands Jackass apologizes. 4. Jackass refuses to apologize and the to super butch men fight like crazy while Chick stands and fucking watches. She doesn’t even try to stop them (if she didn’t want them fighting about her fucking honor) even though she’s already beaten one of them in a fight, no does she try to defend herself or tell the Honorable man that she can “handle it herself, thank you very much” and then proceed to do whatever she fucking wants to Jackass.
It just fucking frustrates me that I can literally give you a play by play of this goddamn repetitive scene in every fucking movie. Stop. Watching men fight over women’s honor is getting super fucking old. Chuck your ass back to the romantic poetry of the Middle Ages and leave the decisions up to the people who actually got insulted.
This. And I don’t understand the Hunnam (Is that his name?) love. He is SO BORING. God damn, I am so tired of blonde, blue/green eyed muscled American dudes. I am SO NOT ATTRACTED TO THAT. I couldn’t give a shit if he was in the movie or not.
This movie, for me, was all about Mako and Stacker Pentecost.
For the 8,000th time, what exactly would Mako kicking Chuck’s ass here accomplish? Other than demonstrating she’s Little Miss Tough Asian Ninja Chick? Which would be so great, yeah, let’s have the Asian Chick run around beating up everyone, that’s not excellent character development.
This scene is NOT ABOUT MAKO.
We already know Mako could kick Chuck’s ass. She actually steps forward to do it and Raleigh stops her. They’re in enough trouble with Pentecost already at that point. We’ve already seen Mako win a physical fight against Raleigh (who is a much better fighter than Chuck). Why do we need to see her beat up someone else? Just to prove she’s “tough”? I’m so sick of people talking about Mako like she’s passive. I don’t know what exactly they want, Mako to turn into Lara Croft? Is she just supposed to fight everyone? Is she supposed to grab Raleigh and take Gipsy Danger out for a joyride or something to prove she’s defying Pentecost? Because things work out so well for people who ignore Pentecost’s orders.
And there is no conflict between Chuck and Mako. We’ve never seen them interact until now. And Chuck isn’t speaking to her, he’s speaking to Raleigh. He’s looking for the button to press to get Raleigh to snap. This scene is a continuation of the conflict that’s been going on between Chuck and Raleigh since Raleigh first set foot into the Shatterdome.
This scene is about Raleigh’s character. Chuck goads him and goads him and Raleigh refuses to take the bait. No matter how Chuck insults Raleigh to his face, Raleigh doesn’t respond. UNTIL Chuck drags Raleigh’s co-pilot into it. (And let’s not forget, Raleigh’s been alone for five years and sure he could never connect with another person genuinely until he meets Mako, then Pentecost refuses to let Raleigh be her co-pilot until the last minute, then the Drift goes to hell and Raleigh’s standing there terrified that the first connection he’s made since Yancy died is about to be taken away for good.)
So Chuck insults Raleigh’s co-pilot and Raleigh beats the shit out of him with almost no effort. It’s this scene that demonstrates that Chuck has been completely stupid and underestimated Raleigh by about a thousand miles. Chuck is supposedly the best Jaeger pilot alive at this point, and Raleigh hands him his ass without breaking a sweat. And Chuck still doesn’t learn, because even after Raleigh forces him into submission, he gets up and tries to keep fighting despite his father and Pentecost being there.
Raleigh used to be Chuck. He used to be young and think he was invincible. He used to be a cocky son of a bitch with something to prove to the world. He’s not that guy any more, so he knows what Chuck is doing, why he’s doing it, and he takes as much as he can take until he teaches Chuck a lesson he badly needs about underestimating people. And he emphasizes, with the repeated demands that Chuck apologize, that Raleigh isn’t doing this because he’s offended on his own behalf. He’s telling Chuck “I don’t care about your opinion of me, because I can break you in half any time I want, but you don’t insult my co-pilot.”
Mako, for her part, is not involved in this conflict between these two. It’s also not about her or her honor. And she’s standing there ready to dive in if her co-pilot needs her.
If you think any of the characters in this movie are boring or undeveloped, you’re not paying close enough attention.
And FWIW, Charlie Hunnam isn’t American, he’s British (which explains the rather weird accent).
Martin’s willingness to deconstruct tropes has, I think, been greatly exaggerated by fans who haven’t actually read very many novels (or history books). What Martin really does is confuse us and disorient us so that we don’t expect what are actually totally conventional narrative maneuvers.
In the larger structure of ASOIAF as a whole, Ned’s death is not only non-subversive, it’s exactly what we should predict. Four of the major points-of-views are of his children. He is the wise father whose death will be the motivating factor for his children to grow up and avenge him. This is not an unusual type of character – Duke Leto from Dune springs to mind as the closest analogue, but they seem pretty innumerable to me. What Martin actually does is trick us into not realizing that Ned is fulfilling this standard trope by instead structuring AGOT as a murder mystery, with Ned as the detective. The detective doesn’t get killed! But that’s just a screen for what’s actually going on.
Martin accentuates his disorientation of us by hiding his intentions from us for as long as possible. So even after Ned’s coup fails and he is in prison, he holds out what seems like a very plausible hope that Ned will survive and be sent to the Wall. The thing is, that in terms of standard narrative expectations, of course Ned has to die. Martin disorients us by making us think the standard narrative device isn’t going to happen, and then makes it happen anyway, and in the cruelest and most painful way possible. But I don’t think Martin actually subverts many traditional narrative tropes at all."
So keep saying it. We need to know who to avoid.
She wrote him as a believable (albeit magical) character. Real life people generally don’t work like this: “blah blah blah oh yeah I’m gay blah blah blah did I tell you I’m gay?”
Yeah, she could have hinted at it by throwing in a past boyfriend (though that would be really out of nowhere unless she replaced a character here or there which, in fairness, would work pretty much just as well) or having someone mention it in passing or something, but she didn’t. Because usually sexuality doesn’t come up in conversation unless you make it come up in conversation.
And no. I’m not saying it from the perspective of a straight person. Literally, unless someone has specifically been talking about sexuality, I’ve never felt the need to turn around to people and say “hey, I went out with this girl, did I tell you I’m pansexual? Because I am.” And how did you find this fact out? Because you brought it up in conversation.
People don’t just run around shouting about how they’re bisexual or gay or lesbian or asexual or anything else. No one does that. It’s not what people - realistically - do. Why should it be any different in a book?
See, being gay (or, more accurately, not being straight) isn’t a personality trait. Dumbledore is a believable but eccentric character. Eccentricity is a personality trait, so it was brought up. It was hinted at. Gay isn’t. So it wasn’t. Because you need to go out of the way to point it out. And, to be entirely honest, if J.K. wrote in “Dumbledore’s gay and no one cares, isn’t that great?!” I’d feel so patronised. I don’t care who’s genitalia he goes for (if any) or if people couldn’t give less of a shit. It’s patonising to go out of the way to point out that “ooh magical land where no one cares because you’re such a good wizard!”
And besides, the Harry Potter series got enough stick from rabid crazies who were convinced they were evil because ERMAHGERD WIZERDZ! There’d be mass book burnings if she pointed out that the headmaster of this EEEEEEVIL wizard school was also gay. I’d rather she just not point it out than watch the backlash from some ignorant fucks.
So yeah. Sorry, but it is good she didn’t point out that he’s gay. The fact no one pointed it out shows they didn’t mind/care about him being gay. No one pointed him out as ‘the gay Hogwarts Headmaster’ because he was just ‘the Hogwarts Headmaster’ to them. If you want a world in which people don’t care who you slip into bed with (and if you don’t then there’s something very wrong with you because I don’t know why anyone should care) then you shouldn’t react with hostility when someone writes a world were people’s reaction to sexuality is pretty much “ok, so?” You need to accept when someone writes a fictional world with a positive attitude towards sexuality with characters who, you know, don’t make a huge song and dance out of who another character wants to fuck.
But here are some people for whom sexuality came up in conversation - this is off the top of my head: Fred Weasley, George Weasley, Ron Weasley, Harry Potter, Hermione Granger, Viktor Krum, Cedric Diggory, Cho Chang, Remus Lupin, Nymphadora Tonks, Lavender Brown, Molly Weasley, Arthur Weasley, James Potter, Lily Potter, Severus Snape, Merope Gaunt. There are thousands of words about canon heterosexual relationships, but literally zero about any queer people at all.
Here’s how to write homosexual characters:
Dean started to dash off to Transfiguration, but thought better of it and planted a kiss on Seamus’s cheek before quite sauntering down the second-floor corridor
Here’s how to write bisexual characters:
Parvati waved goodbye to Lavender and grabbed another toast soldier.
'Cor, Patil, how're you going with her without getting your face snogged off?' Ron grumbled.
Parvati fixed Ron with a stare. ‘You know, Weasley, she calms down rather a lot if you pay any sort of attention to her.’
Here’s how to write asexual characters:
'So, Luna,' stammered Neville, running a hand through his hair in an attempt to sound suave, 'are any suitors knocking down your door?'
'Impossible,' she replied after a pause, 'the anti-Horklump charms should prevent that. Besides, I've never seen anyone I find attractive, so unless they're knocking for cuddles and their names begin with 'Gin' or 'Nev', it's a fool's errand.' She blinked twice, airily, before casting a glance at an increasingly pink Longbottom.
Here’s how to write trans characters:
'I was just so excited when the letter came addressed to “Hermione” instead of to my grandfather's dreadful old name. Somehow Hogwarts just KNEW!'
Here’s how to write bigender characters:
'It's “Ms” today, actually,' interjected Charlie.
'Ms Weasley,' Filch continued, 'it is wholly inappropriate to be carrying live newts inside the castle proper without a regulation case.'
I could do more, but you probably get the point - that far more effort has been expended establishing characters in Harry Potter as heterosexual than would ever have to be expended establishing queer characters. We were cheated with Dumbledore. Retroactively, extratextually establishing him as gay is the bare minimum that Rowling could have done with her series.
Addressing two of feraldash’s points directly:
- if you can’t tell the difference between SHOUTING that you’re pansexual and indicating that you’re pansexual through context clues, you really need to go back to middle school. It is incredibly patronizing to reduce concerns about an utter lack of queer representation to a straw man argument that no one was shouting it from the rooftops.
- Firstly, the vast majority of people protesting Harry Potter for depictions of wizards are neither rabid nor crazy, they’re just Christian. If you are a Christian, you need to own up to the trash that was spawned by the same holy texts and theology that spawned you, and you need to pick that trash up. If you are an atheist, shame on you for conflating mental illness and religiosity. Go sit in the shame cube. If you’re something else, go sit in your own religion’s shame cube.
Secondly, there were ALREADY LITERAL BOOK BURNINGS. It couldn’t get significantly worse than it already was. And if a) fear of imagined backlash or b) concern about not selling an additional 4 million copies or something are preventing you from including explicit queer characters, I hope you beach yourself on the curb every time you try to parallel park.
Anyway, your response indicates that you didn’t actually read the OP at ALL. 1/10, horrible post.
reblogging this again because of the awesome commentary by freezepeachinspector
Now THIS is how you can write in casual moments for characters to have queer representation, without worrying of making the character all about them being queer themselves.
When Ironborn raid other lands, they kidnap individuals and make them their servants or Thralls. In Ironborn society Thralls are the lowest in regards to social class and ever since Aegon the Conqueror landed, the Ironborn believe that they have become the very thing they look down upon. This is why they yearn for independence, because they do not wish to live under the Iron Throne’s rule. Asha learned that the only way for their land to prosper is by making allies out of those from the Mainland who wish to see the Crown’s destruction, too.
What makes Asha Greyjoy the perfect candidate to be the Iron Isles’ High Queen is that she’s completely aware of the vexed cultures that Westeros and the Ironborn have. Yet, she can work within them and can keep an appropriate balance between her own beliefs and what is expected of her. Asha knows how the Game is played and her diplomatic prowess is a weapon that many refuse to acknowledge, but that only makes her all the more dangerous."
#i’ve basically been saying this for the last few years #asha sees the flaws not only in her own culture but in the cultures of others #and the thing about her is she knows you don’t go in swinging your axe and telling people how to behave #you can’t instigate change and peace trying to force cultural norms #especially when your gender is stacked against you and the people around you have been #jacking off to their awful traditions for years #asha grejoy is a diplomat above all else #a warrior yes #but she’s possibly the most capable and valuable diplomat in the entire series #and her great talent is to change the world from the inside out
just remember that had voldemort picked neville to kill instead of harry and nevile was the boy who lived/the chosen one if neville had that lightening bolt scar severus snape would still be a death eater
it’s not like he thought being a death eater was wrong — it wasn’t until something directly affected him did he reconsider and idk about you but that is not my definition of “bravery” in the slightest
everytime grrm talks about the five yr gap he mentions arya. i mean
George mentioned that he felt really silly about that planned 5 year jump. He imagined it originally going something like Jon sitting on the Wall going “Well, it’s been 5 fairly quiet years since I’ve been Lord Commander. But I’m starting to think that’ll pick up now…” and realized that the adults wouldn’t wait in their plot lines for Arya to hit puberty. [x]
He said the five-year hiatus is as dead as his plan to finish the series in a trilogy. While he would like to skip ahead to age the children (esp. Bran and Arya), he feels the back-story is too interesting and important. He needs to focus on their development. [x]
l i k e
It worked for characters like Arya and Dany but not so much for the adults or those who had a lot of action coming… “If a twelve-year old has to conquer the world, then so be it.” [x]
But what I soon discovered — and I struggled with this for a year — [the gap] worked well with some characters like Arya — who at end the of Storm of Swords has taken off for Braavos. You can come back five years later, and she has had five years of training and all that. [x]
#from all the bad choices the movies made #not giving this friendship the importance it deserved is number one by a mile #LEMME TELL YOU ABOUT SOME CANON THINGS ABOUT HARRY AND RON FOR A SECOND #Ron is the person Harry would miss the most in the world should something happen to him #Ron was just ELEVEN YEARS OLD when he decided not to go home for xmas #because Harry would be lonely #Ron completely opened his house and shared his family AND EVERYTHING ELSE HE OWNED WITH HARRY #Harry could barely function when he had that horrible fight with Ron that led to him leaving #HE COULD BARELY FUNCTION #LIKE OK REMEMBER THAT PART OF THE BOOK WHEN HARRY WAS TRYING TO FIND THE SWORD #AND IT WAS ALL COMPLICATED AND IT WAS DARK AND HE WAS ALONE AND SO TIRED #AND WHEN RON CAME BACK HE WAS SO HAPPY THAT SAME PATH SEEMED LIKE NOTHING TO HIM #AND RON #Ok Ron was jealous of Harry yes #but first of all CUT HIM SOME SLACK #he comes from a large family where he was always supposed to wear his brother’s handmedowns #almost never had anything new just his own #and then he becomes best friends with the most famous person in the world #wouldn’t YOU be jealous??? #but even if Ron was jealous he NEVER EVER EVER let his jealousy ruin his friendship with Harry #because it’s the most important thing #TO BOTH OF THEM #the MOST #IMPORTANT #BROTHERS IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD #YOU ROBBED ME OF THE MOST AMAZING FRIENDSHIP MOVIES #I DEMAND YOU FIX IT SOMEHOW
This scene interests me on a lot of levels. (The most superficial being that I love seeing men terrified and crawling on the ground, so, win there)
But this scene is funny to me because Newt does the classic thing that people (mostly women) do in horror movies, where they break a heel or fall over or something when running from a monster, and instead of getting back up and sprinting, they do this. I think it’s always a ridiculous trope, because survival instincts take over in a situation like this and really you’d get up and sprint. But what if there’s a reason for it here?
In the novelization, it’s explicit when Newt meets Otachi that he’s still ghost-drifting with her, still partially thinking with/for/like her. What if the same thing is going on here? What if the reason he doesn’t even appear to trip so much as throw himself down onto the ground and then crawl around like this is because that’s how Baby Otachi moves? You’ll notice in that first gif that Newt goes down at exactly the same time as Baby Otachi does, and then his crawling on all fours closely echoes what the kaiju is doing behind him.
When he turns over in the final gif, it’s like an assertion of some part of him through the foreign impulses in his brain—he may be down and crawling like the monster, but he’s at least going to look at it and see that it’s not him.
Disney vs. 7 early fairytales
The 1812 version of Snow White is even worse when you consider that the girl was only seven years old in the tale (plus her unconscious body ended up being carted around by the prince until one of his servants accidentally woke her up). Also, in The Little Mermaid, the mermaid’s unable to speak because she had her tongue cut out >__<
But I’d love to see faithful adaptations of the original tales. Especially Bluebeard. We need a Bluebeard adaptation.
Actually, the original-original pre-Grimm Brothers’ stories that were passed around Europe via oral tradition are nowhere near as violent as the Grimm’s made them. Cinderella’s stepsisters were never ugly and kept their eyes, Snow White’s mother was not even a villain (instead a group of bandits were), and instead of spending the whole story napping Sleeping Beauty outwitted a dangerous bandit leader, wouldn’t let him sleep with her, and saved herself.
The original oral stories were radically changed by the Brothers Grimm to fit their personal and political beliefs. Most notably, they often added in female characters solely for the purpose of making them evil villains and took away most of the heroines’ agency and intelligence. Both brothers belonged to a small fanatical sect of Catholicism that vilified women because of the idea of Original Sin and Wilhelm in particular had a particularly deep hatred of women. The Grimms were actually pretty horrible people. Those cannibalistic queens and ugly stepsisters and the mass amount of violence against women didn’t exist until the Grimms wanted them to. Their ideas stuck so soundly though that we now assume they were in the original tales and that these terrible characters and ideas come out of some perceived barbaric Old World culture. But in truth they’re really the Grimms’ weird obsession with hating women showing through. The original oral folklore focused on the heroes’ and heroines’ good deeds and used them as ways to teach cultural norms and a society’s rules and encouraged girls to be quick-witted and street-savvy instead of passive princesses, and the Grimms promptly stripped that all away.
"Grimms Bad Girls and Bold Boys" by Ruth Bottingheimer is an excellent book on this