| mZuzek said: I don't get why it's so difficult for so many men to get invested in the story of a female character. A lot of my favorite characters are female. The first two Alien films were great largely because of how awesome Ripley was, Sigourney Weaver's performance in the second movie especially was amazing. Furiosa stole the show in the latest Mad Max movie to the point she got her own film, which despite flopping at the box office was fucking awesome too. Hell even if we look at superhero stuff, my favorite character from Spider-Verse (one of the few great superhero movies of the last few years) is probably Gwen. Look, I'll be the first to admit I cringed super hard when I heard the "X-Women" line from Dark Phoenix. But the problem with that line, honestly isn't so much the line by itself, but rather that it makes no sense in context. If there had been a precedent in the series (or even in just this movie itself) of the women always being the ones who save the men's asses, it'd make a bit more sense for her to say that, but there isn't. If Mystique had a history of feeling prejudiced against for her gender or was the kind of character to get really fired up about social issues, then maybe it'd make a bit more sense, but she doesn't. That line came out of nowhere and felt so forced and out of place. That's bad writing, and it clearly came from an agenda the studio is trying to push. The problem isn't in having females/people of color/gays/trans/literally-anything-that-isn't-a-white-straight-cis-male in movies. The problem isn't even having that message in the movie. The problem is when studios, in an attempt to appeal to all audiences, decide to shoehorn in lines like that instead of actually having the writers incorporate those messages in the script. So like I kinda get the anger from the anti-woke crowd, there's a lot of bad writing going on in big studio movies, especially Disney movies lately, but like... grow a backbone, man. If a movie sucks, it sucks. Move on. Dark Phoenix sucked, and so did that line. But it didn't suck (solely) because of that line, it was just a bad movie. I've moved on. |
Great take, I agree with this. The main issue I have with modern productions is that they're not organic; plot devices and dialogue, and entire characters, are there simply because someone wants them to be there. Self-inserts, overly narrow messaging, productions that end up as vessels for the creator's own sensibilities and opinions, anachronistic language or traits in fantasy settings etc. to appear inclusive. It all boils down to the same issue - writers have forgotten that part of a proper creative process is decoupling yourself from the work itself and letting it become its own entity. You breathe life into the creation, but let it stretch its legs and arms and explore on its own, it will take you where it should be - not where you feel that you need it to be.
Great characterization and writing transcends (pun somewhat intended) gender, sexuality, or portrayed convictions. It speaks to something universal, something we can gather around and share, at least some, takes and understanding on and around. For instance, I think the vast majority of readers would agree that the society and outlooks portrayed in "1984" is undesirable at almost any cost and in any form, regardless of where one stands on the political spectrum.
"Things were better before" is a saying with at least a grain of truth to it, storytelling needs to go back to basics. Organic settings, characters, and situations unfolding and developing in natural sequence and arcs - not in a predetermined direction set only because the writer needs it to for personal reasons. Expressions, outlooks, descriptions, all these things change with time, and that's good and welcome, but there needs to be some form of principal rule underneath. Otherwise, almost all works become a form of lecture, autobiography, or utopian pining disguises as entertainment.
I started writing at around age fifteen, and wasn't very good, on a technical level at least. I had these scenes, characters, and cool sequences in my mind, and ended up throwing myself headlong into narration with the express purpose of just showing off these ideas and moments. I ended up constructing everything around these concepts, with the results being piss-poor. In my later years, I've flipped the process, deciding on a theme and setting first, and then populating it based on various factors (culture, climate etc.) - with the overall theme in mind, of course. What happens is that characters are where they are because it makes sense in the setting and situation, what they say to each other makes sense in the moment and given the circumstances. And, most importantly; how I feel about any of the above has less effect. The whole process improved further when I dialed in on a hybrid plotter/pantser structure for my stories (I tend to overthink and over-plan things).
