FinalGirl

I think this trope could use a discussion as I'm not sure if a TRS topic is warranted yet, but Final Girl is showing a lot of shoehorned or inconsistent usage.

From the description:

That would seem to limit this to the archetype as it appears in Slasher Movies, the female survivor of some Ax-Crazy madman on account of her purported wholesomeness. Yet "Final Girl" seems to be shoehorned for any case where a woman is the only survivor (or just the last survivor, getting killed before the end credits as well), even when that work is not a Slasher or sometimes not even a horror.

A lot of examples are also using shoehorned language, such as "It is debatable if Psycho (1960) truly has a Final Girl" or "[Carrie is] another imperfect example". Then there are examples like Alien (a sci-fi horror film, but not a slasher; in fact, the Trope Codifier Halloween (1978) had only come out a few months before), the Night Of The Living Dead remake (a Zombie Apocalypse film with no "reactionary" killer nemesis to oppose the Final Girl), Cube (horror movies about people trapped in labyrinthine mazes) Gravity (a sci-fi survival drama), The Ruins and Deep Blue Sea (movies about killer plants and sharks, respectively). The entire "Subversions, aversions and parodies" section, which takes up about half the page, in general straddles the line between genuine Playing with a Trope and Not An Example.

So what is Final Girl? It's codified in Slasher Movies, but a lot of tropers seem to try to apply it to every situation where a woman is the last person of a Dwindling Party, regardless what genre they're in or how it plays out.

edited 31st Jan '15 10:53:04 AM by Morgenthaler

The trope is a horror archetype from what I know. The pure heroine who survives the end of the horror film. I would limit it to that kind of work.

I concur with Septimus.

This is one of those tropes that is being used far more widely than it should be; it's not just any "female survivor", it's a horror archetype, and should only be listed in horror works and works which borrow a number of the horror conventions

I'm not sure if most horror examples outside of the Slasher Movie subgenre even fit. Primarily because most examples that are facing a monster or some other non-Serial Killer enemy (zombies, aliens, killer cars, whatever), if they even fit this trope's perception of "conservative womanhood" (more on that below), are lacking the whole contrast between the Final Girl and the "morally regressive" (killing teenagers for drugs or sex and such) killer.

An added problem, especially with more recent horror works (I take 1996 as the cut-off point due to the release of Scream starting a Postmodernism phase) is that the lack of clarity which criteria are necessary to qualify as a Final Girl means that the girl can fit essentially none of the criteria aside from her gender—or sometimes not even that (The Grey, The Evil Dead (1981), Devil). Laurie Strode from the original Halloween would be an obvious fit because it's a Trope Codifier for the genre; she's shy and less socially outgoing than her friends, doesn't party or do drugs, and is the only survivor of Michael's rampage. Sidney from the later Scream (1996) is an interesting example because she's from a work where everyone is Genre Savvy, making her at least a subverted lampshade since she survives the movie after having had sex—with the killer! There's also Sarah Connor from the original The Terminator; despite that movie being a sci-fi slasher film, and Sarah appearing more reserved than her roommate and that person's boyfriend, later has sex in the film with Kyle Reese but still survives. Is she a Final Girl? With the current usage stretched so far I can't tell.

edited 3rd Feb '15 9:32:45 AM by Morgenthaler

To tell the truth, I've never seen a contrast between the "final girl" and the killer as essential. The one between the "final survivor" (not all final survivors are girls; Prom Night (1980) has a Final Boy) and the other people who are disposed of by the killer is far more important.

Pretty much. The contrast between (most) potential survivors and the killer is so large that the contrast specifically between the Final Girl and the killer isn't significantly different from any of the victims' contrast to the killer.

On the other hand, if you compare the Final Girl to the victims, those differences stand out far more, since those are the largest differences and thus create a noticeable contrast. Those differences also answer the question of why that character is the one to survive, compared to the others. Comparing to the killer doesn't make sense for that purpose.

Well, that would certainly give a more workable definition—I'd hate to cut a whole bunch of good examples because of misuse in other areas.

I think that there are then three dimensions to this:

• The Final Girl's gender, which is usually female. We've already deemed that Final Boy is legitimate use, although male examples are probably more prone to being shoehorned in.
• The character's reserved attitude vs that of their outgoing friends/other targets of the monster/killer.
• Being the only/last survivor of the monster. They don't necessarily have to survive, but it should come down to some sort of showdown with the villain.

As you guys stated, I also think it's the last one where most misuse happens because people want to apply the trope name literally to any girl who doesn't fit #2 but is the Sole Survivor of a Dwindling Party. But leaving aside lampshades like Scream for the moment, where do we draw the line between calling someone who fits #2 initially but then defies Death By Sex or Death By Drugs a Subversion or Not An Example?

edited 6th Feb '15 5:48:51 AM by Morgenthaler

If the Final Girl is set up as being wholesome and at the end revealed to be not so wholesome, I call subversion. If it's right from the get-go I would call shoehorning.

I also agree that it's not necessarily a gender specific trope but that male examples need closer scrutiny.

When was the last time that the lone survivor in a horror film was a guy?

^ Prom Night (1980).

The Cabin in the Woods (2012) has a Final Girl and Final Boy.

Final Girl is a singular trope; it doesn't incorporate the idea of couples, unless they were each independently trying to survive their own horror stories. Also, if we define Final Girl as "lone survivor of a horror movie", then it's not really a trope and more of an observation. Clearly if the movie is not going to be a Kill Em All, it needs a survivor. If the survivor count happens to be one, that's not a trope any more than if it's two or three.

There must be some recognizable pattern, with narrative intent, to make the trope distinct. If there is a pattern (it's always one person, and almost always a female, and usually with certain moral properties), then expanding it to more than one survivor is shoehorning. At best it's a subversion and usually it's just an aversion.

edited 6th Feb '15 7:53:46 AM by Fighteer

Yeah, it's a convention - the only survivor of the horror story is a wholesome female.

And also the killer takes an uncharacteristically long time to stalk and murder this last person despite having shown no such hesitation earlier in the film and attacks them with uncharacteristic inefficiency, giving them the opportunity to turn the tables when they should have no chance at all. This is all the more preposterous because the Final Girl usually has no noteworthy physical combat skills.

One could presume that the killer is taking the time to savor the terror of this last helpless victim, but clearly they have never watched or read any similar stories in which the hesitation of the villain creates his downfall, even if this is a sequel and it happened to them the last time.

edited 6th Feb '15 8:02:00 AM by Fighteer

The Cabin in the Woods is also another Scream-like case where they discuss and invoke the trope in regards to the wholesome Final Girl—who turns out to be far less wholesome than the Dumb Blonde who gets a Death By Sex fate—but there's not a Final Boy, since that person is a stoner. It just subverts the Sorting Algorithm of Mortality if anything.

edited 6th Feb '15 8:07:56 AM by Morgenthaler

I think we're now clear on the nature of this trope; what it needs now is clean-up. Can this thread be moved to TRS or one of the Projects forums, please?

Moved to Short Term.

Thank you. Now, to get started:

• Played out in Anastasia (1997), in which the evil Rasputin curses the Romanov family whom he feels betrayed him and aids in a revolt that ultimately kills the entire family except Anastasia, who manages to escape with her life but is now an amnesiac who calls herself 'Anya'. Once he finds out that Anastasia is alive, Rasputin vows to kill the last Romanov to fulfill his dark purpose.

Uses the trope name literally in relation to the Romanov family. It's not a horror film, Anya is not exceptionally reserved, there are no drunk teens to contrast her with.

• Alien (1979) does this. And it should be noted that every role in the film was written as gender neutral (which is probably why everyone just used their last names for the whole film), so it could have easily been a Final Guy instead.
  • It's a common misconception that all of the subsequent Alien movies followed suit; in reality, there were other survivors in the second and fourth movies, and Ripley actually dies in the third.
  • Prometheus (2012): Shaw, sort of: David also survives of a fashion, although in a state of Bishop-like discombobulation thanks to an Engineer.

Literal uses. Ripley is butch and chain-smokes in the original, partly because of the gender neutrality of the original script; the sequel really uses Vasquez Always Dies, while the original inverts Vasquez Always Dies with Lambert dying and Ripley surviving. Shaw is another literal example who doesn't fit "reserved attitude".

• Played straight in the original cut of Deep Blue Sea, but averted in the finished cut, because test audiences found the female lead to be obnoxious and self-centered. The Plucky Comic Relief survived in her place. It should be noted that in both a shark wrangler - halfway between Action Hero and Action Survivor - also lives.

Clear misuse. Two characters (guy and guy) survive in the finished film, and she doesn't fit the reserved criteria.

• Identity subverts this in multiple ways: the character set up as the Final Girl was a prostitute, thus subverting the virgin-and-pure side of things. We then find out one of the other characters believed to have died was actually still alive. Said character, who was actually the killer, returns to finish the Final Girl off. Furthermore, the Final Girl, the character that killed her and all of the other characters who didn't make it were actually the multiple personalities of a serial killer, and the whole thing was being played out in his mind. The "killing" of the characters was his real-life attempt to integrate. So when you get down to it, there's really no Final Girl at all, and no person at the motel ever really died.

That's not a subversion, that's not using it in the first place.

• Since there are no women among the survivors (or even passengers) of the crashed plane in The Grey, it's pretty obvious that there will not be a final girl. Liam Neeson's character becomes the last survivor before meeting a Bolivian Army Ending (he does manage to kill the alpha wolf before dying, though).

Haven't seen this, but Neeson's character is obviously a middle-aged Sole Survivor of a male-only group of survivors trapped in the Alaskan wilderness. I doubt there's any use of "reserved personality" here.

• While Frontier(s) technically has two final girls, neither fit the wholesome image of the final girl (at least by association). Yasmine is pregnant member of a group of thieves, and Eva is a kind but obedient member of the cannibalistic family that's killed Yasmine's companions.

Non-use.

• Gravity (2013) does this as well, though it is important to note that the film is a pure survival thriller with no real antagonist in sight.

Literal use. There are only three characters in this whole film, and she's just the Sole Survivor.

edited 1st Mar '15 3:35:34 AM by Morgenthaler

Delete all these examples. None of them look good enough, here.

I think an aspect to consider is how the trope has evolved over time. Starting in the 70s/early 80s, the trope really was simplistic... it literally was the last female character that confronts the killer at the end of a horror film and this character did fit many of the 'pure' characteristics listed on the trope page. These characters were oftentimes the sole survivor of these sort of films, as well... which fit with a lot of the darker-toned endings of a classic era in horror cinema. However, starting in the 80s, we saw a lot more couples surviving. We see a lot more bittersweet/happier endings (at least compared to the dark 70s) that make more people survive horror films than simply the final girl (who is 95% of the time the main character in the movie).

Yet, despite the number of survivors, the trope remains very real in the minds of horror fans. How are some of these examples truly examples? It's because Tropes Are Flexible. As I understand it now, the final girl is a propped up female character who we the viewers are set up to identify with. The important note to keep in mind is that said character confronts 'the killer' at the end of the film. Even by these standards, non-horror characters like Sarah Connor and Anastasia could easily qualify even if they're missing some 'Laurie Strode' qualities or do have a love interest surving alongside them. I think a lot more fans would call Julie James (IKWYDLS) a final girl than not even if Ray survived with her. Why? Because she's the main protagonist and easily is the investigative consciousness in her two films.

BTW - I added a lot of examples, some may not entirely fit as described, many being the result of crosswicking since fans put the Final Girl tag on film pages. As for the subversions/parodies/aversions section, I'm not entirely sold on that section of the article. I disagree with several of the examples listed, but I don't like to change what other people bring to the article because perhaps they understand the trope differently than I do...?

A suggestion I can bring forward is that a good editing of the main article could do wonders to clear much of the confusion up.

edited 20th Jun '15 4:49:27 AM by DeeJay

I would agree that the Final Girl trope has generally fallen out of favor over the years or evolved into a different form as audiences have become acquainted with the familiar horror tropes (especially post-Scream). There are, however, still far too many examples that use the trope in the most literal (and shoehorned) sense possible. At this point it's pretty much a Dead Horse Trope that goes back and forth between straight use, lampshades, subversions, and any other possible permutation. We should definitely check the rest of the examples for possible misuse, but the "aversions" really need to go. They're not examples, and if they're particularely telegraphed and then avoided it's a subversion, not an aversion.

I've noticed a similar progression with Black Dude Dies First. As cast diversity has increased over the years, the number of listed "aversions" on any given work page now outnumber the straight uses. Generally, unless that character happens to be a Token Minority that's not noteworthy as an example. Again, subversions, lampshades, or complete inversions should be fair game.

I would not, however, support a rewrite of Final Girl to allow for more misuse. Although by now we've come to a clear definition ("Wholesome girl/sometimes boy who confronts the killer at the end"), there is clearly still a lot of confusion among editors what makes examples fit the trope or not. I think categorizing the permutations might make it clearer.

Funny thing is, I actually thought of this trope more of an Undead Horse Trope just because it's that sort of trope that does not die. It lives on in the minds of horror fans. The thing is, the final girl of decades ago is so different from the final girl now. And right now, the trope page talks pretty exclusively about the final girls of decades ago and not nearly enough about how it's changed.

I guess what I truly meant was adding more to the description that what is given to show how the trope has evolved over time. Minor 'character' subversions starting showing up in the 80s, but the revolutionary final girl started in the 90s with Buffy the Vampire Slayer and especially Scream's Sidney. Would these changes signify a new sub-trope? I personally wouldn't think so. I'll explain why in a little bit.

Before explaining though, I have to get it out of the way. As good as the tropes description is as it stands, it's still not perfect. It's well-written but it's missing quite a bit of key points in Carol Clover's "final girl" theory, the most notable being:

1) Phallic Appropriation - The final girl oftentimes picks up a weapon to defend herself with, whatever that weapon may be. It's her way of masculinizing herself against a (typically) masculine threat.

2) Shared History with the Killer - This one speaks for itself. Not as pertinent to this discussion, but some of it helps determine which character tends to fall into this final girl role.

3) Investigative Consciousness - This one is a biggie. The page makes note that the final girl is more resourceful than her peers, but it doesn't note that the character is oftentimes the first to notice something is wrong and tends to be the only one who investigates her situation while her friends are unaware of the danger they're in, unable to do anything about it, or already dead. That's where a lot of the confusion seems to be in regards to the examples. It's forgotten that the final girl is more than just the last character to confront the killer... she really is the key point of identification of the film and we as viewers are supposed to be set up to see the story unfold as 'she' does. And that happens all the way to the climax of the film.

I agree about deleting the aversions, but certain examples guilty of shoehorning may be more Ur Examples (Black Christmas, TCM, Psycho... many fans of the genre would call these characters final girls even if they're not the wholesome image of 'Laurie Strode' - they're final girls before their time, really). With other works that are not bonafide slasher works, the 'literal-use' final girls still act as the key point of identification that the final girl is supposed to be for the viewers (Alien's Ripley - I even read that they considered casting a male in this role to prevent this theory from being applied but decided that having a female heroine was the right course of action). Ultimately, the trope has origins in slashers, but it's a trope that can be fluid across genres so long as the character is the moral consciousness of the film and confronts some sort of entity at the end. It's about what the character is for the viewer and that needs to be addressed if we are to stay true to Clover's theory, which seems to be the foundation of this page.

Anyway, these are just my thoughts on the subject. Take them for what you will. :)

edited 20th Jun '15 3:51:22 PM by DeeJay

The Cabin in the Woods is interesting in regards to the Final Girl. It first attempts to Invoke the trope and lampshades it to hell and back, only to subvert it when the fool turns out to be still alive. It then deconstructs the whole idea of it in real time for the audience, only for the newly Genre Savvy girl to outright defy it when she decides to kill the world instead.

It plays with the trope so hard it's basically silly string by the time the film is done, and it manages this because it's so self aware.

edited 11th Aug '15 5:36:43 PM by shimaspawn

This topic seems to have kinda run dry a bit as many of us were focused on the image/caption. With that issue done with, I do think we have the next monstrous task of cleaning up the page and examples. Yeah, I know....

I do think the biggest problem with the page as it stands right now is that subversion/aversion/parodies section. In fact, I kind of don't see much of a point of this section much at all. If you really clean up that area in particular and remove the non-examples/aversions/shoehornings, how many are truly going to be left?

Other considerations:

- We need to establish how flexible this trope can be. Many non-slasher works have a final girl that confronts the murderous menace at the end of the work, but are these final girls not examples because their films aren't technically slashers?

- Can the main article, which is serviceable as is (don't get me wrong), make note that the final girl is the audience's point of identification? This is an essential component to Clover's theory and it doesn't get mentioned at all.

- If we clean up this page, we may have to remove the tag from several works pages since a lot of people list this as a trope of those pages, often as no-context examples.

- Given the amount of misuse, we may have to consider adding "Not to be confused with Sole Survivor" since this also seems to contribute so much of the confusion over its use/non-use.

edited 23rd Aug '15 3:52:39 PM by DeeJay

Yeah, let's get sorting out the bad stuff from the good started. There's a Wiki Sandbox up and running that we can use for that. I've cut the examples mentioned in 18, with the exception of Alien as one of several possible cases of Unbuilt Trope.

I wouldn't advise cutting the bottom section entirely, there do seem to be a lot of valid examples that can be merged into the main section.

- In other Horror or thriller works possibly, anything else I would say it's shoehorning a Sole Survivor who happens to be female.

- I would support adding the audience identification clause.

- Given the misuse, I'd be fine with cutting any Zero Context Examples.

- Good idea. Additionally, the "aversions" part from "This trope has seen a growing number of subversions, aversions, and parodies in recent years" needs to be cut. It's just advocating listing non-examples.

For the Sole Survivor thing, one thing I've noticed is that people seem to be confused about the Final Girl's supposed fate, thinking that it's an "aversion" or "subversion" if they die anyway. Given that the only required part of the trope is that they must confront the killer by the end, not survive it, this is just straight use.

edited 24th Aug '15 9:22:03 AM by Morgenthaler