I think DjangoUnchained
is a pretty good intentional example this.
Despite the obvious cultural baggage it's made clear the Django's motivation is to rescue his wife broomhilda at all costs and not fight the evils of the era as you might expect. This is highlighted in a scene where he allows another slave to be brutally ripped apart by dogs to preserve his cover, an act that horrifies his otherwise jaded Bounty Hunter partner.
edited 10th Mar '13 1:45:32 AM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupidThe usual justification I see is that whatever killed once is likely to kill again and thus presents a continuous threat. Entirely possible that's the reason vengeance is an emotional response. Particularly when it's an "out of the blue" action.
I think we're drifting off male/female roles to some degree.
Fight smart, not fair.Sorry I didn't answer your question until now. Basically, yes. The rescuee doesn't have to be a female, but I find that a lot of fiction places a male in the rescuer role while the female is in the rescuee role. Damsel in Distress is an interesting and surprisingly complex trope for what it says about both men and women and the social constructs related to their moral and legal aptitude. Like I said, I enjoy a good, cheap action flick with a standard revenge plot and a hot lady who needs to be saved, but the prominence of this type of storytelling speaks volumes of how we perceive women's sense of agency and competence as well as how we view men in the eyes of morality and the law. The trope isn't inherently bad. Tropes Are Not Bad, afterall, but how they are used reflects upon your worldview as a writer.
Many male characters who go on a bloody rampage to save their female love interest are often violating some sort of law or moral code that had been established in the framework of the setting. Castlevaina: Lament of Innocence is a cool example. The protagonist loses his beloved while away on the Crusade, and he must give up his sword and shield in order to come back to Europe and rescue her because his chivalric code forbids him from using his standard weapons in an unsanctioned conflict. This is an interesting twist on how the Belmonts acquired the family whip, but it also indicates that violating a code, virtue or law is often the galvanizing force for the hero. This appears as a plot device mainly because we romanticize the idea of love that knows no bounds. The idea of a man pursuing his wife despite threats of unemployment, exile or physical danger is an old trope that appeals to our sentimental aspirations.
Abandoning a moral or legal code, as a plot device, doesn't have to be romantic or sexual, either. The whole driving force of Tears Of The Sun is that the SEAL Team explicitly violates an order to retrieve the doctor and no one else. Their attempt to safely escort the other civilians was an emotional plea directed toward the audience, but an action like that in real life would have led to serious legal and professional repercussions for the entire team, especially the commander. Of course, if they hadn't escorted those people, the movie would have been much shorter and arguably less exciting.
As for the rescuee, this is one of the reasons why, if handled well, Badass Damsel can be really fun to watch, play or read. In analyzing gender roles, we often inadvertently operate in extremes to reconcile sexism, and there are times when a character who should be incapable of escaping her captors somehow does so in a totally implausible fashion. This leads to a poorly executed attempt to convey some sort of feminist message to the audience. When the trope is handled more carefully, you get female characters (and some captured males) who do what they can to escape within their sphere of knowledge and expertise. In a Bond movie, Judy Dench's character is imprisoned. M is a middle-aged intelligence administrator who probably hasn't worked as a field operative in several years, if ever. However, she uses her knowledge as a spy to construct a makeshift communications device with nearby objects. This was very impressive because it gave us some hints at M's history as a covert operative while also keeping her physical and mental aptitude within a believable realm.
In fact, I'd suggest that numerous female characters in the Bond universe are quite adept in their relative areas of expertise. It's been hit-or-miss with some Bond girls over the years, but I think people underrate how progressive the Bond movies and books can be in their treatment of women. Some Bond girls are a bit dated in how they portray feminist values, particularly female capability. A few female Bond girls are just plain offensive, especially some of the villains. Some other Bond girls from the older movies are better-written and more competent than some of the female action movie characters that have surfaced in the past two years. Ian Flemmings wasn't the only director to cultivate or modernize the "action women" we've come to expect, but it looks to me that a good chunk of those characters such as Black Widow of The Avengers can trace their roots to Bond girls. Even if it's coincidental, it's worth noting that female Bond characters gained popularity at a time when the Cold War had a sort of exciting danger to it, perhaps even a sexy danger. Combine that with the feminist revolutions of the 60s and innovations made in contraceptives, and you end up with that Bond-style female archetype.
edited 14th Mar '13 12:12:18 AM by Aprilla
One of my favorite twists on the Damsel in Distress is Teegra from Fire and Ice.
I'm a huge fan of Franzetta because I think he is a good example of how you can have a sexual character who is still powerful and intriguing, not just eye candy.
But Teegra, even while pretty much naked, still is anything but helpless. She's smart, strong, and even diplomatic as much as possible. I adore her depiction.
Take that in contrast to Buttercup from Princess Bride. Buttercup is completely clothed, presented as intellegent, but can't even throw her man his sword when he's being mauled by a giant rat.
A good middle ground to this would probably be Danielle from Ever After.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - AszurI'm not sure you can project a standardized money making venture as a values assessment. That type of story is very easy to convince executives to sign off on, so it's going to wind up more prevalent. The more expensive individual ventures are, the more they're going to resemble each other to try and stay viable.
Fight smart, not fair.I find Badass Princess very hard to bring off successfully. Most examples I've seen have been Anvilicious as hell. The thing about a princess as a character is that she's generally part of a period. And any period involving princesses, no matter what time or place (although it's generally Medieval Europe) comes with a set of gender roles. Which means that having a princess engaged in a lot of physical combat (which, in most works, is as far as "badass" gets) makes no sense within that context. Most writers, meanwhile, don't have the finesse necessary to bring off a badass character within the restrictive feminine gender role any historical princess would've dealt with.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.Or because they refuse to expand on what constitues a Princess.
Hittities, Scythians, Aztecs, Dasas, Moguls, and other civilizations had some pretty badass princesses, especially the Scythians. But most people don't touch these areas because they aren't considered marketable. (Which sucks because there are some damn good stories and material from these cultures.)
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - AszurThis is true. You can have an alien space princess from a Proud Warrior Race who is a Badass Princess because it's her traditional role.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickBut if you say "Princess," people are automatically going to think of something like Princess Peach. Now, you can disabuse them of that notion, by crafting a world where "Princess" means something totally different. But at that point, you have to ask "Is it really that necessary to use the word princess?" Why not just make up another title?
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.
Daughter-Heir?
I've seen more than enough fiction now that plays with the tropes of royalty in different ways that when I hear a character is a princess, I don't immediately jump to the association with frilly girlishness. Just that she's a potential heir to a throne. Or possibly just the leader of principality
I don't automatically associate the title of "Prince" with Prince Charming either.
edited 20th Mar '13 5:23:25 PM by Oroboro
People will only keep thinking that unless you give them something else to think of.
Consider how Prince of Persia handled the idea of a Princess. No surprise she was from the same region that gave a few of the cultures I mentioned above.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - AszurI've read books where characters were both 'traditional' Western princesses (daughter of the ruler, heir to the throne, wears fancy dresses, marries for politics etc) and could also fight. You don't have to completely reinvent the role of princess.
edited 20th Mar '13 5:35:08 PM by LoniJay
Be not afraid...Most of our Princess Tropes and images of the middle ages are pretty much completely fictional anyway, with little basis in history. When fantasy does the Middle Ages Monarchy thing, it's usually not based on actual history, but instead based on other stories that have done it that way.
edited 20th Mar '13 6:11:51 PM by Oroboro
But then you've made the princess into a set of tropes already, no? So what's the point of constantly trying to subvert the classic princess by making her a badass princess?
I guess what I'm trying to ask is: Why do you need so many princesses at all?
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.We don't have that many really. Technically with the millions if not billions of stories out there we don't have a lot of anything.
Disney is the one mainstream media outlet that seems to cater to the Prince and Princess genre but come on. They specialize in Grimm-based fairy tales.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - AszurSaw Oz The Great And Powerful today, while it was pretty good I can definitely see where jezebel is coming from with their complaints about the depiction of the female characters.
The story is a Prequel to the original 1939 Wizard of Oz and depicts how the Fortuneteller made it to The Magical land of Oz and manage to trick and charm people into thinking he's a powerful wizard. Eventually taking the throne of Emerald city.
While this is a interesting concept, where is fails is it's depiction of the three original witches.
Their characterisation is -to put it bluntly- fucking awfull.
For all their own magical abilities and family rivalries their actions and motivation revolves entirely around the male lead. Even after they work out he is a phoney. It doesn't help that Beauty Equals Goodness is played dead straight.
While this would have been forgivable in a original fantasy franchise. The fact it's female characters have less agency then a film made 70 years ago says a lot about the state of Modern Hollywood.
(Oz The Great And Powerfull Is A Major Step Back For Witches And Women
).
In good news the Tomb Raider 2013 game got glowing reviews
for it's more grounded and realistic depiction of it's iconic female protagonist. Lara is no longer the hardened killer Action Hero as in early games, but a more believable human character just trying to survive.
This depowered 'gritty' direction had the potential to destroy what little positive qualities the character had left (especially regarding the thankfully unsustained rumours of Lara Croft been explicitly sexually threatened) but apparently the developers finally got it right.
edited 21st Mar '13 4:46:01 AM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupidMeh. I wasn't really fond of the new Lara.
The main reason is that the game was, mostly in the beginning, more about things happening to her than her doing things. After about the 400th time that Lara fell off a cliff, tumbled down a slope, tripped over something, got stabbed by something, etc, I was just like "YES, I GET IT! SHE'S A SCARED, CONFUSED WHITE WOMAN! CAN WE PLEASE GET TO THE PART WHERE I CAN JUMPKICK A COUGAR?!"

Well if the people getting killed are enemies anyway, then I can see it being easily acceptable in the course of saving someone(PJ's off plenty of people when they pop in to perform a rescue under fire)
Vengeance is rather hard to justify, and is also deeply personal, thus in my opinion not really justifiable as it's an emotional response. Doesn't mean I always disagree with it though.