While searching for something else I ran across this old post that didn't get seen by many people.
While searching for something else I ran across this old post that didn't get seen by many people.
Read it, ignore it, comment or don't - it really doesn't matter anymore.
Originally shared by Jason ON
The other day, in my exuberance, I posted an article about Spider-Man coming to the MCU via an agreement between Sony Pictures and Marvel Entertainment.
Yay for us all! Right?
Apparently not. Brandon Sergent came to my post to declare the first Spider-Man movie, directed by Sam Raimi and starring everyone's favorite Peter Parker, Tobey Maguire, to be a rollercoaster of misogynistic fantasy.
Now, I will admit that the first (and second, and third) Spider-Man movies didn't really portray any strong female characters, that Mary Jane Watson wasn't characterized properly and that aunt May and Ben were portrayed as much older than they should have been, but misogynistic?
Was the MJ character stereotyped as the damsel in distress? Absolutely. But, for thousands of years women have been the catalyst for male heroes. This is nothing new.
Notwithstanding, the Spider-Man movies were based off of Spider-Man comics which were written in the 60s, by men for young men. Superman saved the damsel Lois Lane, Batman had Vickie Vale, the Hulk had Betty Ross (Banner) and so forth.
Were/ are such stories juvenile and simplistic? Absolutely, but that was the era and those were the sentiments of "funny books."
For the movies to stay true to the original content, yes, women were going to be the damsels in distress. In Tim Burton's Batmans we had Vickie Vale and Selena Kyle both needing saved; in the Superman franchise we had Lois Lane; Daredevil tried to save Elektra even though she was her own force of arms and the Punisher's motivation was not being able to save his wife and kids.
That's just the nature of the beast. Did the more recent films create better female supporting roles? Absolutely. The Dark Knight Rises' Selena Kyle didn't need Batman to save her (she needed Bruce Wayne to erase her history); Gwen Stacey acted on her own; Lois Lane... well, Lois Lane still needed saving. And I think we can all agree, Black Widow doesn't need anyone.
As for Spider-Man which ushered in the modern superhero cinematic era, the question is: was it misogynistic?
No.
I don't have the time or willpower right now to go through step-by-step and debunk Brandon Sergent's blog post about the movie, so I'll summarize quickly:
1 Yes, for those of us men who are heterosexual, women can be a defining force in our lives. That includes geeky kids who are superheroes to be. They can make us change our behavior, stand when we'd rather sit and be strong when we'd rather not. We see this behavior in RomComs, books, television, etc. When a story needs to be kept under two hours, a love interest is always a good catalyst to move the hero's journey along.
2 Mary Jane Watson is not dressed like a porn star or slut. She's dressed like a teenage girl. She's a 19 year old (at the time of filming) playing a high school senior (17ish). I'm not sure how this is pedophile candy. Especially when Tobey Maguire, 25 at filming, was playing a person of the same age. Same with James Franco. Aside from Willem Dafoe's leering during that one scene, which was supposed to make the audience think he's a creep, there's nothing even remotely inappropriate about Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane Watson (aside from bad casting and scripting).
3 Obviously Brandon has never had a loving female role model in his life. When Aunt May tells Peter that Ben would have been proud of him, she wasn't pressuring him, she was reassuring him. It wasn't this so-called pressure that causes Peter Parker to don his red and blues and swing about town, it's knowing that he could have done more, should have done more, that he can do more to prevent other people from feeling his pain. Guilt is the heart and soul of Spider-Man's motivation, not pressure.
4 There is a small montage of "opinions on the street" in Spider-Man. A construction worker, a woman with a dog, a 'punk' woman and others. Aside from a little comedy, there were no hidden misogynist messages here, no matter what Brandon states. NYC is one of the most diverse cities on this planet, there are going to be different takes on Spider-Man and this little montage is supposed to represent those people. Spider-Man could be a woman the lady with the dog says. Yes, he could. That's the appeal of Spider-Man - anyone could be under the costume. Black, Latino, young, old, female or male. Remember, at the time of that montage, Spider-Man hadn't made his public "debut" yet. No one knew who or what he was.
I'm not going to go further with my rebuttal of Brandon's blog post other than to say he's way off the mark.
OP, if you made it this far and care: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JasonON/posts/D6jmdtQfPjY
http://underlore.com/movie-dissection-spiderman/
Read it, ignore it, comment or don't - it really doesn't matter anymore.
Originally shared by Jason ON
The other day, in my exuberance, I posted an article about Spider-Man coming to the MCU via an agreement between Sony Pictures and Marvel Entertainment.
Yay for us all! Right?
Apparently not. Brandon Sergent came to my post to declare the first Spider-Man movie, directed by Sam Raimi and starring everyone's favorite Peter Parker, Tobey Maguire, to be a rollercoaster of misogynistic fantasy.
Now, I will admit that the first (and second, and third) Spider-Man movies didn't really portray any strong female characters, that Mary Jane Watson wasn't characterized properly and that aunt May and Ben were portrayed as much older than they should have been, but misogynistic?
Was the MJ character stereotyped as the damsel in distress? Absolutely. But, for thousands of years women have been the catalyst for male heroes. This is nothing new.
Notwithstanding, the Spider-Man movies were based off of Spider-Man comics which were written in the 60s, by men for young men. Superman saved the damsel Lois Lane, Batman had Vickie Vale, the Hulk had Betty Ross (Banner) and so forth.
Were/ are such stories juvenile and simplistic? Absolutely, but that was the era and those were the sentiments of "funny books."
For the movies to stay true to the original content, yes, women were going to be the damsels in distress. In Tim Burton's Batmans we had Vickie Vale and Selena Kyle both needing saved; in the Superman franchise we had Lois Lane; Daredevil tried to save Elektra even though she was her own force of arms and the Punisher's motivation was not being able to save his wife and kids.
That's just the nature of the beast. Did the more recent films create better female supporting roles? Absolutely. The Dark Knight Rises' Selena Kyle didn't need Batman to save her (she needed Bruce Wayne to erase her history); Gwen Stacey acted on her own; Lois Lane... well, Lois Lane still needed saving. And I think we can all agree, Black Widow doesn't need anyone.
As for Spider-Man which ushered in the modern superhero cinematic era, the question is: was it misogynistic?
No.
I don't have the time or willpower right now to go through step-by-step and debunk Brandon Sergent's blog post about the movie, so I'll summarize quickly:
1 Yes, for those of us men who are heterosexual, women can be a defining force in our lives. That includes geeky kids who are superheroes to be. They can make us change our behavior, stand when we'd rather sit and be strong when we'd rather not. We see this behavior in RomComs, books, television, etc. When a story needs to be kept under two hours, a love interest is always a good catalyst to move the hero's journey along.
2 Mary Jane Watson is not dressed like a porn star or slut. She's dressed like a teenage girl. She's a 19 year old (at the time of filming) playing a high school senior (17ish). I'm not sure how this is pedophile candy. Especially when Tobey Maguire, 25 at filming, was playing a person of the same age. Same with James Franco. Aside from Willem Dafoe's leering during that one scene, which was supposed to make the audience think he's a creep, there's nothing even remotely inappropriate about Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane Watson (aside from bad casting and scripting).
3 Obviously Brandon has never had a loving female role model in his life. When Aunt May tells Peter that Ben would have been proud of him, she wasn't pressuring him, she was reassuring him. It wasn't this so-called pressure that causes Peter Parker to don his red and blues and swing about town, it's knowing that he could have done more, should have done more, that he can do more to prevent other people from feeling his pain. Guilt is the heart and soul of Spider-Man's motivation, not pressure.
4 There is a small montage of "opinions on the street" in Spider-Man. A construction worker, a woman with a dog, a 'punk' woman and others. Aside from a little comedy, there were no hidden misogynist messages here, no matter what Brandon states. NYC is one of the most diverse cities on this planet, there are going to be different takes on Spider-Man and this little montage is supposed to represent those people. Spider-Man could be a woman the lady with the dog says. Yes, he could. That's the appeal of Spider-Man - anyone could be under the costume. Black, Latino, young, old, female or male. Remember, at the time of that montage, Spider-Man hadn't made his public "debut" yet. No one knew who or what he was.
I'm not going to go further with my rebuttal of Brandon's blog post other than to say he's way off the mark.
OP, if you made it this far and care: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JasonON/posts/D6jmdtQfPjY
http://underlore.com/movie-dissection-spiderman/
Comments