Diversity and Representation in Media

Yeah, 'I've opened your cryopod early you so we can live together in wedded Stockholm Syndrome because I was lonely' blows through the Meet Cute barrier and into 'Frankenstein takes a bride' territory by quite some ways. All this could have been avoided if they just had her wake up on her own, caused by the whatever glitch had his pod activate early.

edited 16th Dec '16 11:07:13 AM by Unsung

Yeah, not even Chris Pratt can make that plot look any less creepy.

Of course the eventual reveal of what he did is the third act couple splitting twist.

To be honest, I think most standard romcom plots have some manner of unintentional creep factor/other shady stuff to them. Can't imagine why.

(not being sarcastic, I literally do not know)

edited 16th Dec '16 11:07:30 AM by Pseudopartition

Relationships and love are complicated things and boiling them into narratives that both fit into two hours and are exciting enough to be worth seeing does that.

Not a comment on the state of romantic comedies, but I actually wonder if Passengers was originally supposed to a more serious, less romantic psychological sci-fi story about the toll of loneliness and the fallibility of human beings— starting out deceptively romantic but deliberately taking a dark twist— but somewhere along the way, some bright young studio executive decided that what audiences would really flock to was a boilerplate romantic comedy plot but in space. I don't know if that's in any way true, but I wonder.

I HATE you've got Mail....let's put this together: in this movie the guy has a relationship with a woman whose livelihood he is currently ruining per mail. So far, so good. But then he figures out the truth before she does and continues said relationship, thus using her trust to manipulate her. And the great solution for destroying the book shop her mother built and she loves with all her heart is to put her into a generic shopping centre so that she is in future his employee. But hey, she is still allowed to draw in customer with her loving personality.

Yeah, I really hate that movie. Not as much as Maleficient, because it at least doesn't ruin anything I love, but on the scale of creepy love stories which are sold to us as romances, this one is pretty high up.

There's that, and the fact that they simply reflect the values a lot of society has, many of which are bad. I haven't exactly seen many romcoms but if they're like any other genre of movie the same general problems apply, i.e that they're more interested in giving the audience Wish-Fulfillment and escapism than anything else.

A lot of the truths about relationships and love are pretty uncomfortable so it's not particularly likely you'd find them in a romcom.

The only romance movie I can comfortably watch nowadays are break-up movies, those with dramatic elements to them or deconstructions like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Blue Valentine or (500) Days of Summer.

edited 16th Dec '16 1:26:54 PM by shatterstar

A big problem behind a lot of romcom movies is that they tend to treat the declaration of "I love you" as though it is the finish line. It ain't. In an analogy of attempting a cross-country road trip, it equals turning the keys in the ignition.

This thereby hinders sequel stories, via writers not knowing how to build meaningfully off the relationship and resorting to trying to break them up so they can do the "falling in love" stories all over again.

It's kind of the same problem like with settings that put the world/the galaxy/universe in peril over and over again, rather than smaller stories building off of the results of the first climactic event.

edited 16th Dec '16 1:36:59 PM by Tuckerscreator

H.E.R. was pretty good too.

Her was creepy and disturbing. It's basically the idea of a rich guy sleeping with his secretary taken to its farthest possible extent - the only person this guy can manage to form a relationship with is an AI who is specifically designed to serve him, who is literally designed to fit his personality. Relationships are about give and take, but he doesn't have to give anything because she exists to serve his interests and desires. It's an utterly immature relationship; he never needs to consider her interests and desires, to adapt himself to her, because she is automatically perfectly adapted to him. It's the Stepford Wives, except for meeting emotional needs rather than housecleaning.

I like concept the ending, with her developing beyond human-style consciousness, but the idea that the relationship should be regarded as in any way romantic disturbed me.

I don't think Her is a romcom. It was a movie designed to make the spectator think, and I reeeeeally doubt most romcoms want to challenge the viewer's beliefs.

I don't think you're necessarily supposed to assume the relationship the main character has with the AI is healthy or good really, in fact it broke down in a way that showed that it wasn't healthy and the main character had a lot of emotional problems that destroyed his first marriage. His ex-wife even calls him out on that.

edited 16th Dec '16 6:27:39 PM by Draghinazzo

On the Doctor Strange subject again, an incident between Margaret Cho and Tilda Swinton occurred to which I link the story here.

You know...kind of a dick move of Cho. First she reveals a conversation which was supposed to be private on public TV, then she goes and complains about feeling like a "House Asian" even though Tilda Swinton went through great pains to explain that she doesn't want to be a bother and that it is okay if she doesn't answer her. I mean, judging by the letter Tilda apparently got caught totally unaware by the controversy and was looking for someone outside of the Marvel realm who might be able to explain the situation to her from a different perspective. If Cho felt used by this, why did she respond to this? Other than later using the opportunity to betray the trust put in her for a cheap news story.....

Margaret Cho's a comedian with a deliberately abrasive, provocative style. Maybe it's uncomfortable to be put in the position of oppressor because of past people with your skin tone's actions, but other people of different colours are definitely still putting up with the power structures of that past, so a little discomfort while this all gets sorted out doesn't seem like too much to ask. There's a difference between 'this made me feel weirdly like I was a person whose only defining trait is their Asian-ness' and 'Tilda Swinton is super-racist' that tends to get drowned out in all the noise.

I don't know why this conversation needed to be private— I don't see anything particularly damning about it to Tilda Swinton— but if you wanted to have a private conversation about racial politics, maybe emailing a woman you've never met halfway around the world isn't the place to start. That's what can seem somewhat condescending— I have never felt the need to contact you before, but as I am your fan and famous I wonder if you'd condense this complex, volatile issue into something digest-size for me? If you really have no other, closer friends who are Asian (and living in the Scottish Highlands, there's no real foul in saying you don't), maybe do something about that? And because that does take time to strike up a friendship, maybe acknowledge (to yourself) that you don't have a lot of experience with this matter and accept that there'll be some growing pains while you learn.

As ever, the problem we keep coming back to is the media reporting this as if it's some condemnation of Swinton's character or acting ability, and it's not. It's not even saying she intended any disrespect or condescension— I'm sure she didn't. It's just an awkward position to be put in: "Hello, person I don't know! You're Asian, please tell me about this Asian thing, love Tilda."

I mean, yes, Cho is an important figure in discussions about Asian representation in media. But if I wanted to know more about Catholic doctrine, I might open up Wikipedia or pick up a book before going to talk to a local priest, rather than emailing, say, the Archbishop of Los Angeles.

I don't think it's the fact that Cho was complaining that was the problem, it's the fact that she lied about the exchange and misrepresented what Swinton said to present her as far more racist than she comes across in the emails. Like, if Cho had just said "Swinton asked me to explain the issue to her and I thought it was patronizing" it would be fine, but claiming that Swinton had been demanding and they'd had a drawn out, secret fight where Swinton used the "Asian friends" card and dismissed all her concerns just makes it seem like she's deliberately trying to demonize her.

edited 17th Dec '16 11:32:59 AM by IniuriaTalis

Little bit yeah.

I mean I'm still not defending the film, but Cho did misrepresent the truth.

rather than emailing, say, the Archbishop of Los Angeles.

I would.

Yeah, it's not a perfect comparison with the Archbishop, since he literally does speak for the Catholic community and wants to proselytize on their behalf. I'm just saying I wouldn't have that be both my start and end point.

I've listened to the Tigerbelly podcast and read the emails released, and it doesn't seem like a fight from those emails, but I can see how it might be a frustrating conversation. The dig against Swinton is maybe a little unfair, and Cho might have wanted to play up the drama a little bit in the podcast (I don't think she expected the emails to be released, but I also don't think she was expecting this many screens on her little anecdote). Even so, I think most of my points above still hold, and that if the controversy garners attention for the issue, it was probably worth it.

edited 17th Dec '16 3:52:15 PM by Unsung

Why should this conversation to be public? Honestly, if I have a question and ask someone for help I wouldn't want this conversation to be public later on either. Especially not if I were a celebrity and very aware that everything I say might be used against me.

Point is, Tilda asked for help and requested this conversation to be confidential. Cho had the option to not reply, to say "yeah, sorry, I don't feel comfortable about this or about keeping this under wraps" but instead she had an overall friendly chat with Tilda Swinton and then went and made it public. While also spreading word about a project in which Tilda is involved which perhaps doesn't want this kind of attention at this point.

To me it looks like Cho was very aware that Marvel is the hottest game in town and that she could get some attention for herself, not the actual issue at hand, by playing the victim card. Because she was oh so demeaned by someone asking for her opinion and perspective and then was nice enough to point out a project to her, which might do some good for representation. What angers me about this if that if Tilda Swinton hadn't released those Mails, she would have been painted like an insensitive and racist d...

edited 17th Dec '16 1:45:27 PM by Swanpride

I doubt Cho was expecting this much attention when she told this story on a podcast with a fairly small (albeit devoted) audience. And she really doesn't paint Swinton in all that bad a light during the cast itself— it's the way it's being reported that's generating the majority of the controversy here.

As always, being a little bit racist isn't the end of the world. We're all products of our environment. Judging by her response to the press, I don't think Cho wanted to make this issue about Swinton or herself, but as long as it's actually getting some attention, she's not going to back off what she said in the emails either. It sucks that there will be people who call Swinton a racist, because it sounds like her intentions here were good, but I think that's down to the whole 5-minute media cycle blowing Margaret Cho's comments out of proportion for the sake of more clicks while the topic is hot.

edited 17th Dec '16 2:11:50 PM by Unsung

Oh, come on, she can't be that naïve. Everyone who follows the internet (which she obviously does, or she wouldn't have been able to explain the controversy to Tilda Swinton) knows that you just have to mention anything about the MCU and it will create a bunch of click-bait articles in seconds.

Not every person on the internet is famous enough to expect the internet to latch onto every word they say, and it really is a pretty innocuous story the way she tells it. It's 2-3 minutes out of an hour of podcast, and it's not like she sought some major media outlet to give this expose on her email conversation with Swinton. It's a casual conversation between two comedians, they make a few jokes about it, they move on. It's being reported like they really rip into Swinton and call her out, but it's actually pretty tame, I thought.

Look, let's agree to disagree. Talking about something even though you have promised confidence is one of my berserk buttons. Hell, I feel terrible when I accidentally reveal something which was supposed to be secret and I wasn't aware about it, but the idea of revealing something which was told to me in confidence in the media is something I would never do and never forgive. It is such a betrayal of trust.