For now, feminists will have to be satisfied with gnashing their teeth over the rank misogyny of a TV show that portrays a woman entirely owned by a man, to whom she refers to as “master.”
Category Archives: Movies and Documentaries
The producer’s name, Gerald R. Molen, looked familiar to me. Sure enough, here is his recent missive over at Big Hollywood: “Oscar-winning Producer of ‘Schindler’s List’ Slams Obama, Salutes Breitbart.”
I wonder if it will be widely released, or more limited like Atlas Shrugged?
Please, do go and vote for them, as well as Jenny Erikson, Michelle Malkin, or any others you fancy. You can vote for as many as you like, once every day.
The contest features bloggers from both sides of the political spectrum, and frankly . . . the right side could use a little help at the minute. Perhaps us right-wing-extremist-mommy types are too busy with shootin’ practice and doomsday-prepping to frequent the Circle of Moms. I dunno.
Oh, and it’s not too late to nominate additional blogs, although they will of course be handicapped with fewer days to garner votes. Hmm, I’ve got somebody in mind. Time to go!
UPDATE: Well shoot. Missy S, Zilla, and AHLondon: I fully intended to nominate you guys, but the site wants emails, first names, and some other info. I wasn’t sure if you’d approve, or (in some cases) what your first name is. So please get over there and add yourself to the list. Add yourself right this minute!
Absorbent and yellow and porous is he . . .
If nautical nonsense be something you wish . . .
Then drop on the deck and flop like a fish!
Or . . . maybe not. Study: SpongeBob Causes Attention Problem in Kids.
Tartar sauce! If that’s true, we’re in trouble in this house. My kids weren’t just raised on SpongeBob, they were steeped in it:
Must so many people insist on conducting studies of dubious utility? Holy fish paste, I bet we can just skip the scientific studies and stipulate that TV is not generally not good for human grey matter. We could probably even agree that the more “frenzied” fare is worse than calmer stuff.
But why, pray tell, does the study target SpongeBob specifically, while the contrasted educational show is generic: “a truncated episode of a realistic Public Broadcasting Service cartoon about a typical US preschool-aged boy?”
Furthermore, why is PBS featured as the purveyor of highbrow, educational stuff? Don’t they know that PBS is responsible for introducing poor, helpless, innocent preschool children to . . . Boohbah?!? (I dare the uninitiated to click the YouTube link and watch. The whole. Thing. Triple dog dare.)
Are Squidward’s tenticle-prints all over this so-called study? Or is a larger evil behind the libel . . .
But seriously now. Like most shows, SpongeBob has lived past its expiration date. The new stuff is sadly unfunny. Yet, who can deny the comedic genius of episodes like Shanghaied, Frankendoodle, and Idiot Box? How about Hooky, Life of Crime, or No Free Rides?
We don’t see many Grown-Up Movies in the theater anymore, mostly because most of them stink. You end up wishing you had skipped the movie and gone home after dinner.
Our kind hostess here in Memphis offered to mind the boys, though, and you can’t look that gift horse in the mouth. You pick a movie and go.
We picked Super 8. It was awesome. Go see it.
Super 8 is about a very angry E.T.
Think original Alien, in which folks get picked off by The Very Scary Thing, combined with E.T., in which kids help a poor alien find his way home.
This combo works. Best movie I’ve seen in years. Impeccable thriller pacing meets in-depth character development, falls in love, and has a baby. The baby is Super 8.
Plus, comic relief is sprinkled throughout, which means that folks who don’t like the intensity of thrillers can catch their breath. So even if sci-fi thrillers aren’t normally your thing, go see it.
Requisite objective criticism: Yeah, yeah, an Air Force guy is The Bad Guy. You won’t like this movie if that offends you.
See you fine folks in Kansas.
The People’s Republic of China. I don’t give ‘em much thought. But China keeps popping up lately, so I’m gonna share this stuff in a really shoddy, stream-of-consciousness-style post.
China Item #1: My older is building a model of The Great Wall for Multicultural Day at school. Someone Who Shall Remain Nameless had this to say: “Well, who’s making the model of the forced labor camps?”
Yeah, yeah, I know. But I mean, you know. The Great Wall is one of the wonders of the world, so there’s no harm in learning about it. Actually, more’s the harm in the way a school will micromanage your time by dictating that your child accomplish time-intensive, yet mostly-useless projects which cannot be completed without serious parental intervention.
I could write a book on the harm in that.
Turns out that The Great Wall was mostly accomplished through forced labor anyway, so . . . our son is making the model of a forced labor camp.
China Item #2: Via Pileus comes news that the Chinese government recently restricted the use of time travel on TV shows. I guess they won’t be showing Back to the Future on Chinese TV anytime soon . . .
Although this type of “guideline” might have prevented some of the worst Star Trek plots from surfacing, you gotta wonder what the Orwellian Chinese State Administration for Radio, Film & Television was thinking on this one.
Obviously, they were thinking about how much they hate that weird time loop thing that inevitably occurs in a time travel plot–you know, the past ends up as contingent on the future as the future is on the past, and your linear-minded brain just has to deal with it.
The experts and the central planners will sort out an economy quite nicely, will they not?
This may be a pointless exercise, for the simple reason that if you are reading this post, you have probably already read the posts I’m about to link. Heck, there is a significant statistical chance that you authored of one of ‘em.
Ah well, nevermind. I’ll go ahead anyway.
Fleecy has knocked one out of the park. Before I send you over to read it, here’s a quick quote:
“are we, because of the overtly politically correct nature of our society, blindly sticking our heads in the sand hoping our leaders will get rid of the icky terrorists?”
Well, yes. But this is what happens when a culture backs away from its moral high ground. Read the rest here.
Now. If you have time after Fleecy’s post, go to Puma By Design and watch a video debate between Pakistani-Muslim-turned-Bollywood-actress Veena Malik and some god-awful mufti. My heart ached as I listened to Ms. Malik. It must be terribly hard to reconcile an instinctually kind, soft heart with the religion upon which you were raised, when that religion is Islam.
These two posts, when taken together, add a real depth to the wisdom they both have to offer. Kind of like when you combine jelly belly bean flavors.
Finally, if you haven’t seen Missy’s latest shopping adventure, please do. Very entertaining.
Mom recently reminded me of a time long past, when youthful Linda was sure she would never want children. (It’s funny, how one gets amnesia regarding opinions long discarded.) That same day, I read Lynn’s latest post, which happens to be about feminism.
The combination of these two things awoke the memory of what a feminist I used to be.
That got me thinking: what are the feminists up to, now that we are all equal and stuff? (The ones that aren’t regretting their liberated past, at any rate.) So I googled, and randomly chose among the results.
In a sea of search engine results, marketing is key. And who can pass up a charmingly named website?
Not me. Thus, onto Bitch Magazine I clicked to discover a video about Tropes v. Women.
Admittedly, the website and video are much less, well, bitchy than the name implies. Still, the video is astonishingly serious about a very silly topic: “The Manic Pixie Dream Girl.”
The what? Apparently, this is a coined term for a common trope: a “bubbly, shallow cinematic creature that exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life.”
Oh, okay: Who’s That Girl.
Well. That is offensive.
“Women are not here for your inspiration, celebration, or to coax you out of your troubles. You might not know this, but we are full and complete human beings with our own troubles, interests, and creative endeavors.”
Uh, okay. The idea that us LAY-dees have our own troubles and interests is fair enough. Why we cannot also inspire men is beyond me, though.
“The Manic Pixie perpetuates the myth of women as caregivers at our very core: that we can go fix these lonely sad men so that they can go fix the world.”
I dunno. Sounds like a pretty good arrangement, if you ask me. I devote myself to a man, and he does all the hard sh*t. Sign me up!
Wait a minute, I already signed up.
It might not be such a myth, this notion of women as caregivers at their core. Not that it matters. The whole “feminism” subject is irrelevant. These films are not targeted toward the male audience. They are chick flicks. Emotional porn. For women.
The female character is shallow because the movie is aimed toward female viewers. The “Manic Pixie” is nothing more than a bare framework that the female viewer can use to insert herself into the fantasy of Saving The Hot and Muscular Tortured Soul.
I shouldn’t need to point out this fact: tortured souls are awesome. Gals love danger, but need security. The tortured soul provides both!
So . . . it’s comical, really, to watch a feminist complain about a subset of the chick flick genre, because of its shallow portrayal of women. The women are shallow because they aren’t the reason you’re watching, Ms. Silly.
And if you aren’t interested in watching, then welcome to my club: Chicks Who Hate Chick Flicks.
Personally, I blame Steven Spielberg for this aversion. When your first crush, at the tender age of ten, is a guy with a whip, how can these wimpy chick flick heroes compete?