That's exactly why I think it's inane to label movies like Kill Bill as feminist, when the core themes are so far south of feminism that it's laughable.
Which core themes are you referring to?
OP
Dolerman Chrysalis Form
Member
Seen
4 mos ago
Which core themes are you referring to?
Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts
Member
Seen
2 hrs ago
Movies that put feminist themes front and center, and use them in conjunction with the narrative, tone, etc. to construct a dialogue on feminism, or society's reaction to feminism. From there, it's an argument of how one defines 'feminist themes'.
I'm curious what falls under the umbrella of a feminist movie in your opinion. Like specific examples.
<Snipped quote by tex>
Which core themes are you referring to?
Based on memory, the most blaring and obvious theme of the movie is revenge. Absurdity, Justice - albeit extremely negative as with most, if not all of Tarantino's films - Brutality, selfishness, and if you really dig for it, possibly independence. But considering that the main character has been independent from the starting line, and there isn't any focus there, I don't think it garners attention or acts as an defining theme. But I haven't seen the movies in a long time, so yeah.
@Fabricant451
That's the thing, I would be hard pressed to think up many movies that I've watched and remembered that have strong feminist themes. One movie that comes to mind is Her (2013) where the female protagonist is quite literally an object that exists for the purpose to serve the main character. The way that the movie portrays their developing relationship is a much better example of feminist themes being placed front and center.
It all comes down to these AI's, the objects of the story, becoming independent after a stream of scenarios that ultimately push them away from humanity. In this example, the analogue for women is Samantha as an AI, or AI as a whole. But even here, it's hard to argue that feminist themes are the primary focus of the movie.
Although I haven't watched it, Ex-Machina, from the sound of it, sounds like a much better example considering the context of its plot.
The more I think about it, the less important feminist themes in media really are, honestly.
Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts
Member
Seen
2 hrs ago
But considering that the main character has been independent from the starting line, and there isn't any focus there, I don't think it garners attention or acts as an defining theme.
Beatrix is so not independent that Bill, the target of her revenge, literally tracks her down to murder her, her fiance, and her unborn child out of a fit of jealous rage that she loved another person.
@Fabricant451
Although I don't think that Bill's actions ever infringed on Beatrice's ability to make choices of her own volition, save for the moment when he tried to have her killed, I can see where the line's being drawn. What I don't understand is how this correlates with the tone and additional themes to construct an effective dialogue on feminism, whether it be in support, descriptive, what-have-you.
The story was never about Beatrice regaining or emphasizing her independence, it revolved around protecting her daughter. Bill's jealous attempt on her life does not make him an appropriate analogue for reasonable feminist issues. It makes him an abusive ex, a person who seeks control not because he wants to manipulate women, but because he's a vindictive douche that wants to validate his own emotions. Of course, he's shown to be in the wrong, simply because his reason for revenge was unjust.
Gender does not play a major role in the plot of Kill-Bill. The only possible thing you could relate to Tarentino's reason for making the main character a woman, is the motivation of her wanting to rescue her child. Remove the child, and suddenly everyone in the movie is a vindictive douche with shitty motivations. Suddenly, the main character is an absolute fucking moron and has no reasonable motivation to go around murdering her former colleagues. That child is the key to why Kill Bill isn't a completely stupid movie.
Although I don't think that Bill's actions ever infringed on Beatrice's ability to make choices of her own volition, save for the moment when he tried to have her killed, I can see where the line's being drawn. What I don't understand is how this correlates with the tone and additional themes to construct an effective dialogue on feminism, whether it be in support, descriptive, what-have-you.
The story was never about Beatrice regaining or emphasizing her independence, it revolved around protecting her daughter. Bill's jealous attempt on her life does not make him an appropriate analogue for reasonable feminist issues. It makes him an abusive ex, a person who seeks control not because he wants to manipulate women, but because he's a vindictive douche that wants to validate his own emotions. Of course, he's shown to be in the wrong, simply because his reason for revenge was unjust.
Gender does not play a major role in the plot of Kill-Bill. The only possible thing you could relate to Tarentino's reason for making the main character a woman, is the motivation of her wanting to rescue her child. Remove the child, and suddenly everyone in the movie is a vindictive douche with shitty motivations. Suddenly, the main character is an absolute fucking moron and has no reasonable motivation to go around murdering her former colleagues. That child is the key to why Kill Bill isn't a completely stupid movie.
Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts
Member
Seen
2 hrs ago
@Fabricant451
Although I don't think that Bill's actions ever infringed on Beatrice's ability to make choices of her own volition, save for the moment when he tried to have her killed, I can see where the line's being drawn. What I don't understand is how this correlates with the tone and additional themes to construct an effective dialogue on feminism, whether it be in support, descriptive, what-have-you.
The story was never about Beatrice regaining or emphasizing her independence, it revolved around protecting her daughter. Bill's jealous attempt on her life does not make him an appropriate analogue for reasonable feminist issues. It makes him an abusive ex, a person who seeks control not because he wants to manipulate women, but because he's a vindictive douche that wants to validate his own emotions. Of course, he's shown to be in the wrong, simply because his reason for revenge was unjust.
Gender does not play a major role in the plot of Kill-Bill. The only possible thing you could relate to Tarentino's reason for making the main character a woman, is the motivation of her wanting to rescue her child. Remove the child, and suddenly everyone in the movie is a vindictive douche with shitty motivations. Suddenly, the main character is an absolute fucking moron and has no reasonable motivation to go around murdering her former colleagues. That child is the key to why Kill Bill isn't a completely stupid movie.
The story was absolutely about Beatrix regaining her independence, it was one of the main beats of the movie. That's the entire subtext of the revenge. She will literally never be free until she kills the Deadly Vipers - Bill was still sending Elle Driver to kill Beatrix in a coma until the code of honor had him change his heart. Her motivation has nothing to do with her child. She doesn't even know her child is alive until the end. Her entire motivation is revenge and the freedom and independence that will bring her. So long as Bill and the Vipers are alive she'll never truly be free. It's arguable that it's a hollow belief given that two of them have all but retired from the life (and yet both of them still attempt to kill her) but it's the driving force of the entire movie. Yes, it's a revenge movie, but that doesn't mean that's the only interpretation.
The fact that Beatrix made the choice to leave the assassin's life behind by means of faking her death only to have Bill track her down, deem her fiance a jerk, then kill them out of a warped idea of love and sick jealousy shows that she wouldn't be free to actually live her life and make choices like getting married again until Bill was out of the picture. Even when she goes on to meet Bill in part two, his justification is less an explanation and more an attempt at manipulation how he did it out of love and heartbreak and how killing her fiance and attempting to kill her was just an overreaction.
How this whole arc of the powerful male figure holding the woman back to the point where she has to take unexpected, often drastic, measures to better her life doesn't count as feminist is baffling. That's literally been a core of feminist film theory for decades. There's no obvious "THIS IS A BLATANT ALLEGORY FOR THE WAY WOMEN ARE SEEN IN SOCIETY" because that's not the kind of movie it is, it's a revenge movie that is an homage to martial arts movies with a side of feminist themes as garnish. A movie doesn't have to specifically be or say something about feminism to be a feminist movie - hence why I said 'A feminist film is not the same thing as a film about feminism.' Kill Bill, by accident or otherwise, is a feminist film.
2x Like
OP
Dolerman Chrysalis Form
Member
Seen
4 mos ago
<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>
Based on memory, the most blaring and obvious theme of the movie is revenge. Absurdity, Justice - albeit extremely negative as with most, if not all of Tarantino's films - Brutality, selfishness, and if you really dig for it, possibly independence. But considering that the main character has been independent from the starting line, and there isn't any focus there, I don't think it garners attention or acts as an defining theme. But I haven't seen the movies in a long time, so yeah.
But none of these things, (violence, revenge, personal justice) on their own run counter current to the idea of feminism. The violence in Kill Bill, however brutal is something that male assassins and female assassins both engage with at equal conviction, its simply a means to an end, and the fact the women don't treat violence and fighting any different to the men is feminist. The same is said for these other character traits such as selfishness, these are not intrinsically non feminist or feminist things, they are neutral, the feminism comes in to how they are contextualized in regard to gender within the film.
The central theme of Kill Bill isn't feminism, but it is a feminist movie in regards to how the female characters are treated and how they act in the film.
You mentioned you don't know a lot about feminism, so in your opinion, why would violence. selfishness, justice go against feminism? I'm curious to understand your definition.
The story was never about Beatrice regaining or emphasizing her independence, it revolved around protecting her daughter.
Oh and just a plot correction there, she wasn't trying to 'protect her daughter' as she only found out her daughter was even alive in the last 20 mins of volume 2. She was killing the deadly viper gang out of personal revenge for herself and avenging her child who she assumed at that point was killed unborn after waking up from her coma.
This was the film's way of cleverly subverting the whole 'motherly instinct' trope.
1x Like
@Fabricant451
I didn't know feminist film theory was a school of study, let alone what it implies to be core themes. That's my mistake. I would still disagree with the philosophy of feminist film theory as a whole if that were the case. But I suppose that's another topic of discussion entirely.
It also seems I don't remember the movie's plot as clearly as I thought. I could have sworn that the child played a major role, and assumed so under the pretense that, if it hadn't, then the main character's motivations suddenly become absurd. And they really are, even within the context of the film. Suddenly her quest to seek out and destroy the vipers is absolutely idiotic and spiteful. I don't think for a second that any notion of 'acquiring freedom' validates her choices as a character, at that point. But then the topic of conversation changes once again.
I would have to watch the movies again to confirm, but much of what comes of it would likely be nitpicking. Regardless, I still don't see it as a feminist film, nor do I see any value to labeling it as such. It's as I mentioned earlier, I think that the aforementioned criteria being used to label it as such are inane, and unproductive.
@Dynamo Frokane
I... Disagree entirely. If themes like violence, Revenge, brutality, and Absurdity - all of which are extremely prominent in Kill Bill if I'm remembering that much correctly - do not run against the moral foundations of feminism, are you criticizing the movement as a whole? Isn't feminism, even as an ideology, about bringing women up to the same legal/social standing as men? I would say themes like this run in the exact opposite direction of feminist morals. If you would argue otherwise, I think we're in a baffling disagreement. Although I would associate themes like this with the feminist movement if I validated idiotic behavior, I don't think the movement is defined by particular forms of activism and incomprehensibly selfish morals. I think labeling these themes as neutral is extremely short sighted, and harmful. Clashing negative themes with ideas like the empowerment of women does not create a positive dialogue. They inspire a corrupt perspective. It may also be why the natural reaction to 'feminist themes' is negative, but that's another topic entirely.
Violence should be obvious. Feminism's entire tone seems to shift over the years, but generally speaking, it existed to bring women up to the same legal/social standing as men. Whether or not you can actually manufacture a nebulous and short-sighted concept like 'social equality' is besides the point. In this case, violence acts as a direct counter to the goals set in place here. Would you argue the opposite is true? Or that Violence, when paired with feminism, has no effect on the effects as a result? I'm open to hearing more on that.
Selfishness is also contradictory to the united goal that feminism seems to portray. It is a movement directed to help - at least in its early stages - all women. So in what way do selfish goals enforce this idea? Wouldn't selfish behavior, in a similar fashion to violence, run against these goals? Or would you say that feminism is in fact a selfish movement? Or again, do you think that this has no effect?
Justice is a tricky topic. Inherently, I believe that justice is idiotic. There's nothing to be gained from justice, especially when it's hard to define what justice really is. Although I wouldn't argue that this runs counter to feminist themes, I do not feel that the justice being portrayed in Kill Bill is anything remotely reasonable. It is justice built on spite and revenge. I could see the reasoning here if the main character's motivations were supported by the love of her daughter, but when you eliminate that aspect, there isn't anything pushing her forward except for the narrow desire for revenge. The only reason that the movie works then, is because of how absolutely absurd the universe is.
Clever?
I didn't know feminist film theory was a school of study, let alone what it implies to be core themes. That's my mistake. I would still disagree with the philosophy of feminist film theory as a whole if that were the case. But I suppose that's another topic of discussion entirely.
It also seems I don't remember the movie's plot as clearly as I thought. I could have sworn that the child played a major role, and assumed so under the pretense that, if it hadn't, then the main character's motivations suddenly become absurd. And they really are, even within the context of the film. Suddenly her quest to seek out and destroy the vipers is absolutely idiotic and spiteful. I don't think for a second that any notion of 'acquiring freedom' validates her choices as a character, at that point. But then the topic of conversation changes once again.
I would have to watch the movies again to confirm, but much of what comes of it would likely be nitpicking. Regardless, I still don't see it as a feminist film, nor do I see any value to labeling it as such. It's as I mentioned earlier, I think that the aforementioned criteria being used to label it as such are inane, and unproductive.
@Dynamo Frokane
But none of these things, (violence, revenge, personal justice) on their own run counter current to the idea of feminism
I... Disagree entirely. If themes like violence, Revenge, brutality, and Absurdity - all of which are extremely prominent in Kill Bill if I'm remembering that much correctly - do not run against the moral foundations of feminism, are you criticizing the movement as a whole? Isn't feminism, even as an ideology, about bringing women up to the same legal/social standing as men? I would say themes like this run in the exact opposite direction of feminist morals. If you would argue otherwise, I think we're in a baffling disagreement. Although I would associate themes like this with the feminist movement if I validated idiotic behavior, I don't think the movement is defined by particular forms of activism and incomprehensibly selfish morals. I think labeling these themes as neutral is extremely short sighted, and harmful. Clashing negative themes with ideas like the empowerment of women does not create a positive dialogue. They inspire a corrupt perspective. It may also be why the natural reaction to 'feminist themes' is negative, but that's another topic entirely.
why would violence. selfishness, justice go against feminism?
Violence should be obvious. Feminism's entire tone seems to shift over the years, but generally speaking, it existed to bring women up to the same legal/social standing as men. Whether or not you can actually manufacture a nebulous and short-sighted concept like 'social equality' is besides the point. In this case, violence acts as a direct counter to the goals set in place here. Would you argue the opposite is true? Or that Violence, when paired with feminism, has no effect on the effects as a result? I'm open to hearing more on that.
Selfishness is also contradictory to the united goal that feminism seems to portray. It is a movement directed to help - at least in its early stages - all women. So in what way do selfish goals enforce this idea? Wouldn't selfish behavior, in a similar fashion to violence, run against these goals? Or would you say that feminism is in fact a selfish movement? Or again, do you think that this has no effect?
Justice is a tricky topic. Inherently, I believe that justice is idiotic. There's nothing to be gained from justice, especially when it's hard to define what justice really is. Although I wouldn't argue that this runs counter to feminist themes, I do not feel that the justice being portrayed in Kill Bill is anything remotely reasonable. It is justice built on spite and revenge. I could see the reasoning here if the main character's motivations were supported by the love of her daughter, but when you eliminate that aspect, there isn't anything pushing her forward except for the narrow desire for revenge. The only reason that the movie works then, is because of how absolutely absurd the universe is.
This was the film's way of cleverly subverting the whole 'motherly instinct' trope.
Clever?
Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts
Member
Seen
2 hrs ago
Suddenly her quest to seek out and destroy the vipers is absolutely idiotic and spiteful. I don't think for a second that any notion of 'acquiring freedom' validates her choices as a character, at that point. But then the topic of conversation changes once again.
You're a highly trained assassin. You're pregnant with your mentor's child. You want out of the game but know that in this life the only way out is death. You fake your death, start your life anew, meet a guy, fall in love, get married. Suddenly the mentor you left behind, who loved you more than you loved him, shows up with all your assassin 'friends' to kill you, your fiance, the poor priest who is just doing his job, and the one who pulls the trigger on you is your mentor, even after telling him the baby is his. You survive. In your comatose state you're nearly killed again. You're also repeatedly raped by a nurse and he's starting to sell your comatose body for other people to rape. You wake up just before you're about to be raped again, killing both rapists.
So there you are. Highly trained but also coming out of a coma with the fresh memories being of the biggest betrayal of your life. What would you do in that situation? Go to the police and say "Hey, I'm an assassin and there's five assassins after me, send help?" Would you just accept everything that's happened to you with a shrug and go "Well at least I'm alive, on my way then?"
Her actions make sense given the character and the world the movie presents.
OP
Dolerman Chrysalis Form
Member
Seen
4 mos ago
I... Disagree entirely. If themes like violence, Revenge, brutality, and Absurdity - all of which are extremely prominent in Kill Bill if I'm remembering that much correctly - do not run against the moral foundations of feminism, are you criticizing the movement as a whole? Isn't feminism, even as an ideology, about bringing women up to the same legal/social standing as men? I would say themes like this run in the exact opposite direction of feminist morals. If you would argue otherwise, I think we're in a baffling disagreement. Although I would associate themes like this with the feminist movement if I validated idiotic behavior, I don't think the movement is defined by particular forms of activism and incomprehensibly selfish morals. I think labeling these themes as neutral is extremely short sighted, and harmful. Clashing negative themes with ideas like the empowerment of women does not create a positive dialogue. They inspire a corrupt perspective. It may also be why the natural reaction to 'feminist themes' is negative, but that's another topic entirely.
<Snipped quote>
Violence should be obvious. Feminism's entire tone seems to shift over the years, but generally speaking, it existed to bring women up to the same legal/social standing as men. Whether or not you can actually manufacture a nebulous and short-sighted concept like 'social equality' is besides the point. In this case, violence acts as a direct counter to the goals set in place here. Would you argue the opposite is true? Or that Violence, when paired with feminism, has no effect on the effects as a result? I'm open to hearing more on that.
Selfishness is also contradictory to the united goal that feminism seems to portray. It is a movement directed to help - at least in its early stages - all women. So in what way do selfish goals enforce this idea? Wouldn't selfish behavior, in a similar fashion to violence, run against these goals? Or would you say that feminism is in fact a selfish movement? Or again, do you think that this has no effect?
Justice is a tricky topic. Inherently, I believe that justice is idiotic. There's nothing to be gained from justice, especially when it's hard to define what justice really is. Although I wouldn't argue that this runs counter to feminist themes, I do not feel that the justice being portrayed in Kill Bill is anything remotely reasonable. It is justice built on spite and revenge. I could see the reasoning here if the main character's motivations were supported by the love of her daughter, but when you eliminate that aspect, there isn't anything pushing her forward except for the narrow desire for revenge. The only reason that the movie works then, is because of how absolutely absurd the universe is.
So what you're doing is conflating your personal ideas about what traits are intrinsically positive or negative with feminist representation in film. Which is making you miss the point.
We are not talking about what personality traits or action real life feminists should be using or aspiring to use, we are talking about the fact that the women in Kill Bill are largely treated and represented irrespective of their gender. It doesn't matter if taking bloody revenge is a good or a bad thing to you. A feminist movie is not a 'how to guide' for feminists.
All these traits: that you listed are neutral, they aren't intrinsically feminist or anti-feminist, they just exist in the film. Now considering the cast are all murderers for hire, these motivations and actions actually make a hell of a lot of sense in universe. Beatrix isn't portrayed as noble hero, she's vicious killer who was fucked over by her former gang of vicious killers and she is taking bloody revenge because she's mad. Why would a character as brutal as that need to be motivated by 'the love of her daughter'?
The fact that you find this 'baffling' 'inane' or 'absurd' stems from the fact that you don't really understand feminism.
1x Like
So what you're doing is conflating your personal ideas about what traits are intrinsically positive or negative with feminist representation in film.
I wouldn't use the word intrinsically here. But yes. My thought reflection on feminism and Kill Bill are... My thought processes.
we are talking about the fact that the women in Kill Bill are largely treated and represented irrespective of their gender.
Are we? I think there's been some form of miscommunication, I'm afraid. If this were the case, I would have never bothered with this conversation in the first place.
If this is the only criteria needed to mark a film feminist, then I understand where you're coming from entirely, and I would agree completely. I assumed this could have been the case early on, but I was going about this discussion as if the topic at hand had some level of depth to it. That is entirely on me.
I suppose that a massive portion of media is indeed 'feminist' by that logic then. But like I've mentioned time and time again, I think this would make the label completely pointless. But therein lies my confusion as well. I'm arguing from the standpoint that Feminist media refers to texts that actively engage in a constructive dialogue about feminism. Otherwise, what's the point of labeling something as 'feminist' media? Wouldn't that be completely redundant? Absurd? Inane? I think it would be. What's there to be gained from slapping a feminist label on everything that vaguely matches this nebulous idea of feminism? Other than brand recognition, anyways.
My criteria are stricter than yours, to put it simply. Although I could call every single movie that features a homosexual character a LGBT movie, I wouldn't, because that would be silly. In this sense, our opinions differ.
I suppose a lot of this does stem from the fact that I don't have a concrete understanding of feminism. But it's like I mentioned from the start, feminism as an ideology is largely subjective as with any form of social science. I was initially going based off of what little I understood about feminism's political goals, which are very simple are hard to confuse. I mentioned this earlier, a few times, but maybe I should have been... Clearer? This is why I took the approach I did. From that perspective, one which I maintain mind you, I don't think Kill Bill should be labeled as a feminist movie.
@Fabricant451
Her actions make sense given the character and the world the movie presents.
..S...Sure...
Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts
Member
Seen
2 hrs ago
@tex My question wasn't rhetorical. What would you do in her situation if not go after the ones who put you in that position.
@Fabricant451
Oh sorry.
I probably wouldn't walk to my almost assured death, even as a psychopathic killer. There's some sense of self preservation there, is there not? So there's my answer. Anything but a brutal rampage.
But then, I wouldn't really know that I had plot Armour, would I? It works better as a rhetorical question, because then you can deny just how absolutely insane Beatrice's decisions would be in that context. But she is insane! So I guess it doesn't matter.
The absurdity of Kill Bill's world prevent Beatrice's actions from breaking immersion, especially since she is portrayed as a completely unreasonable psycho. But that doesn't quite change the fact that how she acted was absolutely ridiculous, just as the rest of the movie is absolutely ridiculous. My point is that Beatrice is insane. She's a psychopath. That's her character, and I don't criticize the movie for making those choices. I did remember it very differently though.
Oh sorry.
I probably wouldn't walk to my almost assured death, even as a psychopathic killer. There's some sense of self preservation there, is there not? So there's my answer. Anything but a brutal rampage.
But then, I wouldn't really know that I had plot Armour, would I? It works better as a rhetorical question, because then you can deny just how absolutely insane Beatrice's decisions would be in that context. But she is insane! So I guess it doesn't matter.
The absurdity of Kill Bill's world prevent Beatrice's actions from breaking immersion, especially since she is portrayed as a completely unreasonable psycho. But that doesn't quite change the fact that how she acted was absolutely ridiculous, just as the rest of the movie is absolutely ridiculous. My point is that Beatrice is insane. She's a psychopath. That's her character, and I don't criticize the movie for making those choices. I did remember it very differently though.
Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts
Member
Seen
2 hrs ago
But she is reasonable. It's not like she goes on a spree killing. By the time she gets to O-Ren she's killed the two people that raped her and no one else. Even with O-Ren, she only kills those who are ordered to kill her - and even then she doesn't kill all of them. She spares one and though many have lost limbs they aren't dead. She even sends Sophie, the protege, to a hospital after getting the information she needed. Her actual kill count is significantly less, she doesn't even kill one of the people on her hit list because Elle got to him first.
She expresses remorse and guilt when faced with the grief her actions cause on the innocent. She's not just some gleeful killing machine, she's not taking joy in her actions. When she went up against Vernita she offered a duel at midnight specifically because she didn't want Vernita's daughter to see it - which didn't go to plan because of Vernita's actions. She is still thoroughly human and shows her feminine side as well as her assassin side. She is not unstoppable, she's flawed, emotional, and still very much motherly and considerate. She's single minded, sure, but not at the expense of her entire being. She is vulnerable as well as hardened.
She expresses remorse and guilt when faced with the grief her actions cause on the innocent. She's not just some gleeful killing machine, she's not taking joy in her actions. When she went up against Vernita she offered a duel at midnight specifically because she didn't want Vernita's daughter to see it - which didn't go to plan because of Vernita's actions. She is still thoroughly human and shows her feminine side as well as her assassin side. She is not unstoppable, she's flawed, emotional, and still very much motherly and considerate. She's single minded, sure, but not at the expense of her entire being. She is vulnerable as well as hardened.
@Fabricant451
I will attribute most inaccuracies to my terrible memory of the movie's characters and plot, which is strange, because my memories seem so vivid. I don't even remember half of the details you're referring to, including the parts where her comatose body was tossed around for sexual purposes. I'd certainly have to re-watch it in order to reaffirm my judgement, but from the sound of things, I'm not sure if I'd consider her methodical practice of murdering people to be reasonable, nor would I agree that Beatrice is at all mentally sound.
I will attribute most inaccuracies to my terrible memory of the movie's characters and plot, which is strange, because my memories seem so vivid. I don't even remember half of the details you're referring to, including the parts where her comatose body was tossed around for sexual purposes. I'd certainly have to re-watch it in order to reaffirm my judgement, but from the sound of things, I'm not sure if I'd consider her methodical practice of murdering people to be reasonable, nor would I agree that Beatrice is at all mentally sound.
Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts
Member
Seen
2 hrs ago
@Fabricant451
I will attribute most inaccuracies to my terrible memory of the movie's characters and plot, which is strange, because my memories seem so vivid. I don't even remember half of the details you're referring to, including the parts where her comatose body was tossed around for sexual purposes.
His name is Buck and he's here to fuck.
His name is Buck and he's here to fuck.
OP
Dolerman Chrysalis Form
Member
Seen
4 mos ago
I suppose that a massive portion of media is indeed 'feminist' by that logic then. But like I've mentioned time and time again, I think this would make the label completely pointless. But therein lies my confusion as well. I'm arguing from the standpoint that Feminist media refers to texts that actively engage in a constructive dialogue about feminism. Otherwise, what's the point of labeling something as 'feminist' media? Wouldn't that be completely redundant? Absurd? Inane? I think it would be. What's there to be gained from slapping a feminist label on everything that vaguely matches this nebulous idea of feminism? Other than brand recognition, anyways.
There is definitely more feminist media then there used to be. But you'd be surprised how many films/novels/comics/video games still treat females inequal to men in terms of motivation, character tropes and archetypes. Kill Bill (vol 1) was released in 2003 so a film as boldly feminist as it is was significant for it's time. So maybe there will be a day where feminist media is redundant, but we aint there yet mate. And again, it's only nebulous to you because you are unfamiliar with it, feminist representation is actually quite simple, as you even said above.
Do you know what the Bechdel test is? Are you familiar with this way of grading if a movie meets even the most basic levels of feminism?
My criteria are stricter than yours, to put it simply. Although I could call every single movie that features a homosexual character a LGBT movie, I wouldn't, because that would be silly. In this sense, our opinions differ.
No this isn't 'stricter' criteria, its just misguided. Again you are conflating a film being feminist in terms of representation of it's characters and a character within the film being a feminist by your LGBT analogy.
You could have a non-feminist film, where a character who is a feminist is present, maybe a rom-com where said character is a whiny 1 dimensional bitch who is maybe only there to antagonize a protagonist male in his desires to chase a girl or something.
Kill Bill doesn't have any explicitly feminist characters in universe, none of the women in the films are joining the women's march or talking about smashing the patriarchy. They just exist as a extremely independent respected characters with complete agency over their actions that are no motivated by their gender at all.
I suppose a lot of this does stem from the fact that I don't have a concrete understanding of feminism. But it's like I mentioned from the start, feminism as an ideology is largely subjective as with any form of social science. I was initially going based off of what little I understood about feminism's political goals, which are very simple are hard to confuse. I mentioned this earlier, a few times, but maybe I should have been... Clearer? This is why I took the approach I did. From that perspective, one which I maintain mind you, I don't think Kill Bill should be labeled as a feminist movie
There is some subjectivity in feminism and it gets very divisive the 'deeper' you want to go. Much like things like Libertarian-ism (what is 'true' freedom) etc. But the basic ideas of the ideology are very straightforward and can be applied to Kill Bill.
If we are talking about feminism as in current political movements outside of fiction and media, we can all agree that Beatrix Kiddo is not a role model for women, as far in the fact I don't women or anyone else to be taking bloody revenge with a fucking samurai sword if they feel wronged. But this is completely seperate from the discussion I was having and the points I was trying to make.
Now to be clear, you have humbly admitted you know little about feminism and holding to the fact you don't Kill Bill is feminist. But me, @Fabricant451 and the very smug @Inkarnate do know more about feminism than you.
So with all do respect 1 person's opinion on a film in regards to an ideology that they don't fully understand, isn't going to hold much weight in a debate against those who do understand it. If you don't think Kill Bill is a feminist movie down to your lack of knowledge on feminism, the only thing left to do is to learn more about it. I can only make so many arguments before I'm basically just teaching a class.
mickilennial is trying to survive
Member
Seen
12 days ago
TFW when Fabricant and Inkarnate agree with Dynamo. That's like Supervillain Team Up kinda shit.
3x Laugh
Do you know what the Bechdel test is? Are you familiar with this way of grading if a movie meets even the most basic levels of feminism?
Oh I actually do know this one! I think it's a completely reductive, and shortsighted method. As far as film analysis goes, it's an absolute joke and is not to be taken seriously.
it's only nebulous to you because you are unfamiliar with it
It is nebulous because of nonsense like the Bechdel test being taken seriously. Though I'm not sure if you implied it to be anything more that a cute litmus test, to be honest. If so, holy shit. I am familiar with basic feminist philosophy, but I am not familiar with the bias of feminist film theory, or any other 'complex' philosophies therein. The reason feminism is nebulous is not because I'm not familiar with it. It is nebulous because of how subjective it is as a social science, and how unfocused it seems in recent years. This is why it requires clarification and directness, otherwise it fails to leave an impact in conversation as anything more than a faulty line of thinking. I'm a firm believer that social science is a terribly subjective school of thought in general. Ideas are not affirmed by their own existence after all. They are affirmed through reasoning and experience, hence why argument is such a useful tool in both strengthening, and taking apart schools of thought that are grounded in seemingly complex hypotheses.
Declaring my point of view as wrong or misguided while citing feminist theory as your source is poor argumentation. I've already conceded that by your criteria, Kill Bill would in fact be a feminist film. I have now clarified, however, that I believe this criteria to be inadequate. "Feminism says otherwise" or "You don't understand feminism well enough" are not counterpoints. They are... Well, I think I've clarified that already.
Let's not even involve the fact that your knowledge and understanding of feminism is further hampered by your capacity for thought. I'm not implying that you are unintelligent, or incapable, but as with every other person on the planet, you are inclined to error and I cannot for a second give you the benefit of the doubt when you claim to have an understanding of feminist philosophy, regardless of your education. A man can read fifty books on argumentation, and still get outwitted by an unschooled hobo. Our education does not define our ability to think and understand, it's quite the opposite, really. Our ability to think and understand defines how well we will take to education. This is why I laugh at people when they bring up their social science degrees as a validation of their thoughts.
No this isn't 'stricter' criteria
Yes, it... Is? Disagree with the thought process behind it if you please, but it is in fact stricter criteria.
Again you are conflating a film being feminist in terms of representation of it's characters and a character within the film being a feminist by your LGBT analogy.
No I'm... Not? I can see how somebody would make this mistake, but you'd have to be taking my analogy very literally. The point I'm trying to make is that simplifying a particular set of themes with a label that doesn't have any substance is inane. There's no productive dialogue to be had as a result, rendering the subject moot with its redundancy, simplicity, or irrelevance.
There is some quite a lot of subjectivity in feminism and it is very divisive in general, as with all ideologies.
I just edited the quote with my beliefs, which I think are wholly accurate, mind you.
But the basic ideas of the ideology are very straightforward and can be applied to Kill Bill.
I do still disagree that the film should be labeled as 'feminist', but I will concede that the film correlates with the general idea of women being treated no differently than men. But I don't think that there's any emphasis on this. Maybe the emphasis comes from the fact that it was released in the early 2000's? Maybe the fact that the lead is female had a great deal of significance back then? I'm not sure if that's a stable argument as I'm not exactly a film buff, but it's possible. But if we hold it to today's standards, there is absolutely no way in hell it meets my expectation of a feminist text.
Now to be clear, you have humbly admitted you know little about feminism and holding to the fact you don't Kill Bill is feminist. But me, @Fabricant451 and the very smug @Inkarnate do know more about feminism than you.
So with all do respect 1 person's opinion on a film in regards to an ideology that they don't fully understand, isn't going to hold much weight in a debate against those who do understand it.
I'm afraid this is where I draw the line. This is, and I mean no ill intent with this phrase, is the most ignorant thing you've said thus far. Not because it's untrue, but because of the nature of such an assertion. An appeal to people, as well as an appeal to authority, are both outrageous fallacies. Especially considering the subjective nature - the very subjective nature of social science as a whole - which plagues the body of knowledge you're referencing. If you simply have no interest in carrying the conversation any further (I certainly don't at this point) then it's adequate to simply say so, or stop responding.
My argument as it is now (after learning that my memory of Kill Bill is in fact completely inaccurate, and that our arguments have not been entirely congruent) is more in line with how slapping the feminist Label on films with such general criteria is shallow and pointless. Despite this, I have not changed my own criteria on what a feminist movie should entail, and I would still cite several of the points I've already made to support this idea as it is.
Simply put, I have already conceded that by your definition, Kill Bill is a feminist film, but I do not agree with your criteria, as by that notion, a great deal of films could be considered 'feminist', something I also disagree with. In the same fashion, and allow me to reword this, I would not label movies that display homosexual individuals as no different than others as 'LGBT', despite the fact that this falls in line with the idea that sexuality is not to be stigmatized. Instead, in both cases, I would apply the label of 'feminist' or 'LGBT' to movies that offer an intelligent dialogue about the trends they are discussing, while referencing the aforementioned as 'movies that fall in line with X's ideals'.
I suppose to reword it, so it makes more sense:
-Movies like Kill Bill fall in line with feminist ideals, but offer no significant dialogue on feminist themes, therefore they are not Feminist texts.
-Movies like Ex Machina discuss feminist themes in depth (I'll just assume this to be the case) despite not lining up with feminist ideals (I'll assume this is also the case, even if it isn't). Therefore, it is a feminist text.
I see where you're coming from, I really do. And to an extent, I agree. But I also think that this flagrant simplification of genre, which is how I've been viewing this from the start, is harmful and wholly reductive.
I think I'm going to eject myself from this conversation at this point. You're spouting fallacies (although I'm sure you don't intend to) and constantly evading my inquiries. I lack sufficient knowledge to further extrapolate and kind of don't want to, considering. Worst of all, the topic has drifted too far from movies to warrant a discussion further in this thread.
It's been interesting. I do apologize for my tone early on. I have a bad habit of picking on people, lol.
© 2007-2024