The Fallouts are still fresher and richer

[The_Baffled_King]

33 minutes ago, InThePineways said:

the day female action heroes become believable.

"Ellen Ripley has entered the chat"

(If a film allows a slight female to unnaccountably defeat a muscular man in a test of strength, the fault lies with the quality of the writing, not the genders involved)

[temnix]

19 hours ago, The_Baffled_King said:

It's amazing sometimes how much impact a short, simple sentence can have if it's in precisely the right place. One way or another, it just seems unaccountably sad.

You are not permitted to feel sad for me. Modding has been my way of self-expression, and I could have and maybe should have chosen a different one, to be sure. But I've had a million ideas in these five years, only a fraction of which made it into my mods. You are one of the people here who never thought of this business as anything more than adjusting a well-liked old game this way and that to begin with, so you can't understand. I may have gone wrong here, but you never even started.

[InThePineways]

@The_Baffled_King Agreed, it's a matter of fighting outside your weight class. Ellen Ripley from Alien was well written.

Edited May 31, 2022 by InThePineways

[The_Baffled_King]

10 minutes ago, temnix said:

You are one of the people here who never thought of this business as anything more than adjusting a well-liked old game this way and that to begin with, so you can't understand. I may have gone wrong here, but you never even started.

You're absolutely right that I don't understand, and I wasn't claiming to, hence "one way or another" and "unaccountably"! I promise you there was no pity, and I don't presume to tell someone what they should do with 5 years of their life if I do understand them, let alone if I don't. If that was how you read it, thank you for not giving me both barrels.

For all that I may be unsure of, I am sure that you had a lot of very interesting ideas - and once you release them into the wild, then I can feel how I like about them. So there.

That last part that I quoted? Completely fair.

[The_Baffled_King]

39 minutes ago, InThePineways said:

@The_Baffled_King Agreed. It's a matter of fighting outside your weight class.

Pretty much. If the weight classes are too far apart, either recast the fighters, or tweak the rules of the fight so it plays out in a more believable way. More recently, Black Widow made for a convincing kick-arse female fighter, within the confines of her genre (I haven't seen her own film yet, mind). If ever she did a little more than she should be able to, well, Hawkeye always seemed the worse offender - and either way, it's necessary for both so they can keep up with the thunder god and what have you.

What gives me pause for thought is that action films can often be ridiculous throughout, anyway... So I guess it depends. I can 100% get behind the notion that a film of the type that we're talking about can suffer for what one might suspect to be politically correct reasons, to use the phrasing of the other poster. Fury Road? I ain't seen it.

[The_Baffled_King]

5 hours ago, Nathan82 said:

The bungie sex swing gimp with his flame thrower guitar is awesome, im glad someone finally pointed that bit out. What more do you need from a film?

I'm not sure, but that was an awesome sentence either way

[InThePineways]

@The_Baffled_King I haven't seen Black Widow, so I can't say much about it. But in general, I see a deep irony when it comes to depicting superheroes. Batman is muscular, because it "looks" right. Black Widow is soft and feminine, because it "looks" right. Why? As far as I know, Black Widow follows the same trope or archetype as Batman, that of being a skilled fighter without superpowers. I assume they perform similar stunts when fighting. So why don't they have a similar physique?

Now look at Carmen Brady, the female body builder. She's perfect for the role of a badass fighter.  I mean, just look at her. She looks like she could kick my ass. Her physique is comparable to common depictions of Batman. So why don't they pick women like her for these movies? I think it comes down to the way we naturally perceive men and women. On a deep level, Carmen Brady "looks" wrong. She "looks" unfeminine. Of course, we can be 99% sure she takes steroids, which might contribute to the unnatural look. But there it is again - It's unnatural for a woman to be this muscular, and it's only made possible by testosterone supplements and/or steroids.

So -- if we humans have a deeply ingrained perception of what it means to look like or to be a real woman, then why do we cast these dainty, pretty women in roles they wouldn't be capable of performing? I think the answer here is a little more complicated. There seems to be a notion that traditionally male social roles are more glorious than traditionally female social roles, and because we humans generally believe in treating each other fairly, we then have a tendency to assign women traditionally male roles to give them a share of the glory. We do this in real life now, too, not just in fiction, and I'm not certain this is a good thing for women (google "unhappiest people in america"; according to Psychology Today, it's middle aged female professionals w/o children, whereas men in the same position are much happier in general) .

I think the answer to this conundrum comes down to placing more importance on traditionally female social roles. After all, what job is more important than mothers raising the next generation of human beings? Maybe our lack of esteem for such things is a contributing factor to current trends, like 50% of marriages ending in divorce in the USA, and a similar ratio of children growing up in broken homes.

Long ramble. For what it's worth, i'm not particularly upset by any of this, i just think it's an interesting and possibly negative trend.

 

Edited May 31, 2022 by InThePineways

[The Artisan]

On 5/30/2022 at 3:52 PM, temnix said:

 

And with Baldur's Gate and the rest we are all way past the point when they were new to us in any degree - especially if people don't aim high to create new adventures, come up with surprising plots or mechanics. I cannot read about another red-headed scoundrel girlfriend or a dark, doomed hero. Make new magic or disappear - that's what I believe in. And no matter what people here may think about my "leaving" again and again but always staying, I will indeed do that for real soon. I gave five years of my life to modding these games.

Fuck off. Just fuck off. Get. Fucking. Real. I’ve been at this for seven years, I’ve produced more technically complex content in a week than you have your entire modding career. You know what I never thought? About how shit everyone else’s mods are and that they should be trying mine because they’re not appreciated enough. Because I don’t look at everyone else like they’re the problem. The first thing I had to come to terms with was that I can’t force my vision on others and I’m not entitled to jack shit. I don’t go around force feeding other people shit sandwiches and then whining that they just can’t appreciate the flavor profile.

You don’t like that? Door’s over there. Don’t get hit on the way out. But you’ll coming back because you will be forgotten the moment you stop slinging shit for attention and your little ego could never handle that.

Edit: by the way I’ve seen your mods. I thought your stance on prefixes was already indicative of your garbage mentality, but the fact that you do shit like use BEGIN on existing dialog files to completely override them with no consideration for other mods makes it extremely difficult for me to appreciate you attempting to shove your poorly executed vision down other peoples throats.

Edited May 31, 2022 by The Artisan

[The_Baffled_King]

4 hours ago, InThePineways said:

@The_Baffled_King I haven't seen Black Widow, so I can't say much about it. But in general, I see a deep irony when it comes to depicting superheroes. Batman is muscular, because it "looks" right. Black Widow is soft and feminine, because it "looks" right. Why? As far as I know, Black Widow follows the same trope or archetype as Batman, that of being a skilled fighter without superpowers. I assume they perform similar stunts when fighting. So why don't they have a similar physique?

Your point is generally sound, but the Black Widow/Batman comparison specifically is not. Going by the fights in the Avengers films (I meant only that I hadn't seen her eponymous film), Black Widow does fight very differently and does perform very different stunts. Case in point: an acrobatic vault at pace that leaves her thighs wrapped around the neck of her generally male adversary; she may weigh less and presumably be weaker but, by applying her weight at that particular point, and with momentum on her side, she can counteract any weight, height, or strength advantage a male adversary might generally be expected to have, sending them tumbling to the floor.

Black Widow's fighting style is based very much around agility. I don't know if it's unrealistic or not but, for the purposes of a film, I have no difficulty in believing that she can win her fights any day of the week. In contrast, Batman has his gadgets and ninja training to give him some mobility but, once in a fight, he's still a bruiser in some fancy undefined body armour who takes a lot of punches and utilizes brute strength to defeat some adversaries. For me, this comes under the category of "tweaking the rules of the fight" - here, the tweak is just that Black Widow has talents as a martial artist that Scarlett Johansson lacks.

4 hours ago, InThePineways said:

we cast these dainty, pretty women

Bit of strike through, and you've answered your own question! Scarlett Johansson is super hot. Sex sells. Films tend to conform to the male gaze. To the extent that we're talking films, nothing else matters. However, as you raise the topic of gender-based differences in the representation of female actors in fighting roles compared to male actors in fighting roles, the differences between the outfits of superheroes and superheroines is stark, and the attractiveness of the female character is usually more central to their role.

Okay, I'm dealing with the rest tersely because (a) I'm tired; and (b) let's not have two men (I'm guessing) discussing female gender roles in depth! So:

4 hours ago, InThePineways said:

[1] There seems to be a notion that traditionally male social roles are more glorious than traditionally female social roles, [2] and because we humans generally believe in treating each other fairly, we then have a tendency to assign women traditionally male roles to give them a share of the glory. [3] We do this in real life now, too, not just in fiction, [4] and I'm not certain this is a good thing for women [5] (google "unhappiest people in america"; spoiler, it's middle aged professional women w/o children, whereas men in the same position are much happier in general)

1. Yes [Edit] (society's notion, not mine) [/Edit]
2. In films? Possibly.
3. In real life? No, it isn't about sharing the glory; it's laziness of thought - equality as "women can do male stuff now" instead of "let's reimagine societal roles".
4. I agree but - as above and below - this could very well be because the approach to equality is still kinda male-centric.
5. Yes. My understanding is that this is because (to generalize across the population) women in theory get equal access to the same career types as men now, but they're still expected to do way more than 50% of the traditional housewife stuff while holding down that career, while also retaining the supposedly female-orientated tasks at work that they might have been expected to do back when they were only allowed to be secretaries and receptionists and so on [Edit] I read the above as "with children" not "w/o children". Eh, maybe what I said was still relevant. But sure, the actual text raises more questions than what I misread it as. Without knowing if the figures show correlation or causation, it's hard to know where to start. [/Edit]

4 hours ago, InThePineways said:

[1] I think the answer to this conundrum comes down to placing more importance on traditionally female social roles. [2] After all, what job is more important than mothers raising the next generation of human beings? [3] Maybe our lack of esteem for such things is a contributing factor to current trends, like 50% of marriages ending in divorce in the USA, [4] and a similar ratio of children growing up in broken homes.

1. To the extent that it means women not feeling pressured to occupy male roles? Sure. To the extent that women get more time to recover post-pregnancy? Sure. [Edit] Didn't mean to imply that there were no other areas where more importance could be placed. I suppose for me it's a question of unravelling how much of the activities traditionally associated with female social roles are in fact irreducibly female, in the sense of biology and long-term evolutionary adjustments, as opposed to more recent conveniences created by a male-dominated society. Obviously I don't know! [/Edit]
2. Parents (male, female, non-binary) raising the next generation
3. A rise in divorce rates generally correlates to greater female equality - put simply, they have the financial resources to leave relationships, which is particularly important in the context of male on female domestic violence between romantic partners. Perhaps any further rises are now due to other factors (e.g. less religiosity).
4. Sort of following on from the above: the single most important thing is love*. Get love as a child, and you'll pass it on as an adult. Without something compelling to tip the balance, a two-parent household is generally better in the simple sense that two is a larger number than one - overall there's more love available to give, and two parents to better balance work and domestics on the one hand, with childcare on the other. However, a good single parent is far better than two shit parents. [Edit] The real question is obviously how unhappy do two otherwise good parents have to be with each other before their unhappiness affects their parenting so much that it's better for the child if the parents split? I certainly can't say. [/Edit]

In conclusion: It's been a male-dominated world for many hundreds of years, with socialization into gender-specific roles. We're not doing a good job of moving on from that. However, men and women are biologically different, and that isn't meaningless. Who can say what things would look like if we did this right? Not me. [Edit] Umm, I know that there's plenty more to bear in mind beyond work/home gender roles, but I'm not going there! [/Edit]

Phew. I feel like I've just sat a test. Next time, I will stop at the Black Widow/Batman part!

*(yes, sometimes people who love their children are nevertheless dreadful parents)

Edited June 1, 2022 by The_Baffled_King
Umm, I guess it's a bit less of mess now?

[subtledoctor]

16 hours ago, InThePineways said:

pretty sure you know what he means when he says the movie is politically correct. It pushes the strong woman theme

That’s… not what “politically correct” means? 

EDIT - whoa, there's a whole nother page of this! And going even further afield! This is bonkers.

Edited June 1, 2022 by subtledoctor

[InThePineways]

@The_Baffled_King Very comprehensive reply, especially considering that I haven't even seen the movie in question, lol. You've given me a good deal to think about. I may (or may not) have a rebuttal at some later point in time.

[InThePineways]

2 hours ago, The_Baffled_King said:

I'm dealing with the rest tersely

Write in whatever manner you like. If an internet forum conversation stops being fun, there's no reason to continue it.

2 hours ago, The_Baffled_King said:

Phew. I feel like I've just sat a test

It sounds like you stopped having fun.

2 hours ago, The_Baffled_King said:

Films tend to conform to the male gaze

 

MPAA Report 2018: Women Represent 51% of Moviegoers, 47% of Ticket Buyers. Your statement might be true of action movies, however. Since Avengers and Black Widow are both action movies, let's pretend that's what you said. Your statement stands. 

 

Some of the moves in your clip from the Avengers film would require more strength than Scarlett Johansson looks capable of (wrist grab in the first few seconds), but there's a deeper current of realism in movies that makes this a moot point.

 

The crux of it is this: Are female characters in modern movies believable? Are they in any way grounded in reality (fiction's relation to reality is what gives it meaning)? We both agreed that Ellen Ripley from Alien was a well written female lead in an action movie. We disagree about Black Widow. What is different about these characters? Well, a lot, but in particular it's the archetype (i.e. a recurrent symbol or motif in literature, art, or mythology) they embody.

In Alien, the setting and circumstances are pure fiction, but there is a deeper truth to Ellen's ordeal that is older than time. She's a woman protecting herself and a child (remember the little girl she finds) from a predator. This is a reality stretching back to our pre-human ancestors, and I believe that's why this movie speaks to me. It appeals to a primordial truth.

In Black Widow, we have a badass warrior, a killer, a fighter for justice, etc.... a male role, but with the genders swapped. This isn't a reality ever experienced by human kind, except maybe in a handful of examples from modern times of female soldiers and snipers which were made possible by modern weaponry. I believe that's why Black Widow fails to kindle anything in me, and why this type of character is controversial (how many people talk trash about marvel movies?).

 

 

Edited June 1, 2022 by InThePineways

[subtledoctor]

9 hours ago, InThePineways said:

a badass warrior, a killer, a fighter for justice, etc.... a male role

I’m not sure I get it… those are all genderless descriptions. What about those things is “male?” 

Edited June 1, 2022 by subtledoctor

[Almateria]

18 hours ago, InThePineways said:

@Thacobell That scene is just a little bit over the top in stupidity. Talk about a franchise becoming a parody of itself.

Also, I'm pretty sure you know what he means when he says the movie is politically correct. It pushes the strong woman theme, even though women have half the upper body strength as men on average. Baldur's Gate is guilty of this in a less obnoxious way. The day women play in the NFL is the day female action heroes become believable.

Jesus christ.

[Almateria]

Between the original post, and the guy whose posting arc took a swerve from "Fury Road is bad" to "all women are worse than men and having a female lead role is political correctness". This thread sucks so much. Can we close this