Comments on: AWFJ Women On Film - The Week in Women, June 5, 2009 - MaryAnn Johanson http://awfj.org/2009/06/05/awfj-women-on-film-the-week-in-women-june-5-2009-maryann-johanson/ Thu, 17 May 2012 07:20:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: MaryAnn http://awfj.org/2009/06/05/awfj-women-on-film-the-week-in-women-june-5-2009-maryann-johanson/#comment-7397 MaryAnn Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:50:09 +0000 http://awfj.org/?p=3294#comment-7397 It's interesting, Jacob, that you characterize Wall-E and "bumbling" and "goofball." I don't see this at all. "He" *is* competent and task-driven! Look at how he's been fulfilling his programmed mandate for who knows how many hundreds of years! I also find it very dispiriting that the closest thing you can imagine to a "goofy" female character is a "slutty girlfriend." Is Lucille Ball a "slutty girlfriend"? (Okay, that's a very old example, I admit.) Is Reese Witherspoon in *Legally Blond* a "slutty girlfriend"? How about Missi Pyle in *Galaxy Quest*? (Okay, even that's 10 years old.) How about Anna Friel and Kristin Chenowith in *Pushing Daisies*? How about Rachel Weisz in *The Brothers Bloom*? How could *Wall-E* NOT be the same if the "genders" were reversed if the protagonists do not actually have gender? I'm glad your eyes are opening, Jacob. But try opening them a little more... :-> It’s interesting, Jacob, that you characterize Wall-E and “bumbling” and “goofball.” I don’t see this at all. “He” *is* competent and task-driven! Look at how he’s been fulfilling his programmed mandate for who knows how many hundreds of years!

I also find it very dispiriting that the closest thing you can imagine to a “goofy” female character is a “slutty girlfriend.” Is Lucille Ball a “slutty girlfriend”? (Okay, that’s a very old example, I admit.) Is Reese Witherspoon in *Legally Blond* a “slutty girlfriend”? How about Missi Pyle in *Galaxy Quest*? (Okay, even that’s 10 years old.) How about Anna Friel and Kristin Chenowith in *Pushing Daisies*? How about Rachel Weisz in *The Brothers Bloom*?

How could *Wall-E* NOT be the same if the “genders” were reversed if the protagonists do not actually have gender?

I’m glad your eyes are opening, Jacob. But try opening them a little more… :->

]]> By: Jacob http://awfj.org/2009/06/05/awfj-women-on-film-the-week-in-women-june-5-2009-maryann-johanson/#comment-7387 Jacob Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:17:23 +0000 http://awfj.org/?p=3294#comment-7387 Okay--that makes a lot more sense now. I think I see your point: What if EVE had been the bumbling protagonist of the film, and Wall-E had been the competent, task driven robot sent to case out earth? Hmm...I wasn't thinking about this when I posted earlier. I'm finding it difficult to imagine this switch actually taking place, which is probably quite revealing in itself. Consider a god-like male being that descends to earth, and a rather goofy female character who falls in love with him. Feminist critics would probably savage it :) But would the ability to appear as a goofball actually be a good thing for a female character? (The closest thing we have to that in most movies is probably the Slutty Girlfriend...) The real question, I think, is whether the affect of Wall-E would be the same if the gender roles were reversed. The answer, of course, is: I have no idea. Probably not. Thanks again for the explanation. I don't think I ever really understood the male gaze properly before just now... Okay–that makes a lot more sense now. I think I see your point: What if EVE had been the bumbling protagonist of the film, and Wall-E had been the competent, task driven robot sent to case out earth?

Hmm…I wasn’t thinking about this when I posted earlier. I’m finding it difficult to imagine this switch actually taking place, which is probably quite revealing in itself. Consider a god-like male being that descends to earth, and a rather goofy female character who falls in love with him. Feminist critics would probably savage it :) But would the ability to appear as a goofball actually be a good thing for a female character? (The closest thing we have to that in most movies is probably the Slutty Girlfriend…)

The real question, I think, is whether the affect of Wall-E would be the same if the gender roles were reversed. The answer, of course, is: I have no idea. Probably not.

Thanks again for the explanation. I don’t think I ever really understood the male gaze properly before just now…

]]> By: MaryAnn Johanson http://awfj.org/2009/06/05/awfj-women-on-film-the-week-in-women-june-5-2009-maryann-johanson/#comment-7384 MaryAnn Johanson Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:27:43 +0000 http://awfj.org/?p=3294#comment-7384 You both make some interesting points, and yes, Matt, I *have* seen the film. But you're still not quite getting what I'm saying, in a couple of ways. Why is *Wall-E* not called *Eve*? How can Eve be "probably the strongest female in the history of animated films" if "she" is a genderless machine? What is not goddess-like about blowing up tankers in annoyance? And is it possible that I could be wrong about *Wall-E* without it being the result of "feminist bullshit" or a beatdown by "the feminist movement"? Is it possible for you to discuss this movie and what I wrote about it without appearing to suggest that "feminism" is at fault?<p> For what it's worth, <a href="http://www.flickfilosopher.com/blog/2008/06/walle_review.html" rel="nofollow">I love the film</a> -- it was my best movie of 2008. But whatever occurs in the film -- and however we interpret what happens -- it is still *about* the robot designated male, not *about* the robot designated female. We're seeing everything through Wall-E's eyes, from "his" perspective, which is why Eve appears goddless-like and perfect: that's how Wall-E sees Eve. The movie is still *about* Wall-E motivated to do what he does because of Eve, in the grand scale. You both make some interesting points, and yes, Matt, I *have* seen the film. But you’re still not quite getting what I’m saying, in a couple of ways. Why is *Wall-E* not called *Eve*? How can Eve be “probably the strongest female in the history of animated films” if “she” is a genderless machine? What is not goddess-like about blowing up tankers in annoyance? And is it possible that I could be wrong about *Wall-E* without it being the result of “feminist bullshit” or a beatdown by “the feminist movement”? Is it possible for you to discuss this movie and what I wrote about it without appearing to suggest that “feminism” is at fault?

For what it’s worth, I love the film — it was my best movie of 2008. But whatever occurs in the film — and however we interpret what happens — it is still *about* the robot designated male, not *about* the robot designated female. We’re seeing everything through Wall-E’s eyes, from “his” perspective, which is why Eve appears goddless-like and perfect: that’s how Wall-E sees Eve. The movie is still *about* Wall-E motivated to do what he does because of Eve, in the grand scale.

]]> By: Jacob http://awfj.org/2009/06/05/awfj-women-on-film-the-week-in-women-june-5-2009-maryann-johanson/#comment-7383 Jacob Sun, 07 Jun 2009 23:10:41 +0000 http://awfj.org/?p=3294#comment-7383 I was about to rant about WALL-E, but the comment above quite nicely summed up my views on the subject. EVE is far from being a static character, and despite her Apple-like appearance, she is far from goddess-like: remember the scene when she blows up the tankers in annoyance? Remember how she gradually shifts from her task to protecting Wall-E, eventually abandoning the "directive" in order to save him? EVE is a remarkable and strong character, and she deserves to the celebrated, not beaten down, by the feminist momevment. I was about to rant about WALL-E, but the comment above quite nicely summed up my views on the subject. EVE is far from being a static character, and despite her Apple-like appearance, she is far from goddess-like: remember the scene when she blows up the tankers in annoyance? Remember how she gradually shifts from her task to protecting Wall-E, eventually abandoning the “directive” in order to save him? EVE is a remarkable and strong character, and she deserves to the celebrated, not beaten down, by the feminist momevment.

]]> By: Matt http://awfj.org/2009/06/05/awfj-women-on-film-the-week-in-women-june-5-2009-maryann-johanson/#comment-7380 Matt Sun, 07 Jun 2009 17:56:45 +0000 http://awfj.org/?p=3294#comment-7380 "and of course it was the genderless machine deemed male who was permitted a journey of self-discovery while the genderless machine deemed female who was perfect and beautiful and goddesslike and hence unrequiring of change." You didn't even watch WALL-E, did you? EVE starts out task-oriented and relatively emotionless. She meets WALL-E and slowly begins to develop her robotic personality. As she continued her journey WALL-E, who IS the one that remained relatively unchanged, began to change her with his sweet innocence and love. Eventually she is ready to shun her job in order to help save WALL-E's life, but WALL-E, unchanged and still caring only about her, insists that she complete her task. So how, pray tell, is EVE the one that doesn't change? This wannabe feminist bullshit is nothing but rhetoric and uneducated crap. Watch the films you're talking about and actually pay attention. EVE is probably the strongest female in the history of animated films and she is the one who makes a journey just as much as the humans and the other bots in the film. If anything WALL-E is the catalyst for change, not the one who is changing. “and of course it was the genderless machine deemed male who was permitted a journey of self-discovery while the genderless machine deemed female who was perfect and beautiful and goddesslike and hence unrequiring of change.”

You didn’t even watch WALL-E, did you? EVE starts out task-oriented and relatively emotionless. She meets WALL-E and slowly begins to develop her robotic personality. As she continued her journey WALL-E, who IS the one that remained relatively unchanged, began to change her with his sweet innocence and love. Eventually she is ready to shun her job in order to help save WALL-E’s life, but WALL-E, unchanged and still caring only about her, insists that she complete her task.

So how, pray tell, is EVE the one that doesn’t change? This wannabe feminist bullshit is nothing but rhetoric and uneducated crap. Watch the films you’re talking about and actually pay attention. EVE is probably the strongest female in the history of animated films and she is the one who makes a journey just as much as the humans and the other bots in the film. If anything WALL-E is the catalyst for change, not the one who is changing.

]]>