Swedish Cinemas Launch New Film Rating for Female Representation - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Chernobyl426;42784586]But we aren't discussing critique in philosophy. We are discussing critique of films based on the bechdel test. I get the point you are trying to make, but I think we're on two different boats on what we're talking about as criticism right now.[/QUOTE] no i think its very relevant because the statement here was "criticism for the sake of criticism". the bechdel test isnt about giving feedback because it's irrelevant and pointless as an idea unless its part of a larger deconstruction and critique of a work. it is criticism for the sake of criticism. that's ultimately my problem with this anyway. saying "oh this fails or passes the bechdel test" doesn't lend itself to anything, it's a non sequitur.

[QUOTE=thisispain;42784597]no i think its very relevant because the statement here was "criticism for the sake of criticism". the bechdel test isnt about giving feedback because it's irrelevant and pointless as an idea unless its part of a large deconstruction and critique of a work. it is criticism for the sake of criticism.[/QUOTE] The bechdel test can fall under both categories. It is both criticism of individual films, as well as a critique of the overall film industry. Either way, it has its flaws.

If I ever become a movie writer, I'm going to deliberately include a scene where two women meet in a cafe and introduce themselves to each other by their names, before talking about the Bechdel test and that the only reason that particular scene exists is so the movie could trick Swedish feminists. It would end with the waiter coming along and interrupting them, asking the women how to finish the sketch before a man walks in and interrupts them. It zoom out to a group of Swedish feminists on a sofa with the Swedish flag on the wall behind them, watching the movie on their tv. They would saying that they are going to complain about the movie, sending angry letters in Swedish to the writer, whom unfortunately, cannot read Swedish.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42784524]lol i can't speak for thisispain's credentials but he seems to speak with education and understanding. i may not agree with him all the time but the dude is pretty well educated and knows his shit.[/QUOTE] *snicker*

[QUOTE=Chernobyl426;42784620]The bechdel test can fall under both categories. It is both criticism of individual films, as well as a critique of the overall film industry. Either way, it has its flaws.[/QUOTE] would you call a hammer flawed because it can't cut a board? the bechdel test has uses, but like every tool, it will seem useless if you try to apply it to the wrong task. if you expect your hammer to cut a board then maybe you have a misconception of what the hammer is designed to do.

[img]http://www.filmsquish.com/guts/files/images/Henry%20Fonda.jpg[/img] Rated R

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42784682]would you call a hammer flawed because it can't cut a board? the bechdel test has uses, but like every tool, it will seem useless if you try to apply it to the wrong task. if you expect your hammer to cut a board then maybe you have a misconception of what the hammer is designed to do.[/QUOTE] The bechdel test isn't just the hammer, the bechdel test is the person fucking up the use of the hammer. When the movie fails to get an A because it doesn't qualify in women interactions, it's a biased system. An example being military movies which rarely have women in them outside of a few short scenes. Using it to judge the industry as a whole? I can understand that. Grading individual movies with it? It doesn't work as well.

[QUOTE=Chernobyl426;42784721]The bechdel test isn't just the hammer, the bechdel test is the person fucking up the use of the hammer. When the movie fails to get an A because it doesn't qualify in women interactions, it's a biased system. An example being military movies which rarely have women in them outside of a few short scenes. Using it to judge the industry as a whole? I can understand that. Grading individual movies with it? It doesn't work as well.[/QUOTE] no the bechdel test is the hammer and this particular rating system is someone trying to apply the hammer. it is no fault of the hammer or the person who designed the hammer if people try to use it to cut boards and fail.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42784727]no the bechdel test is the hammer and this particular rating system is someone trying to apply the hammer. it is no fault of the hammer of the person who designed the hammer if people try to use it to cut boards and fail.[/QUOTE] I apologize, I didn't reread what I put. I agree with you.

I'm not gonna argue for either side but just to state a fact. This rule only came to be as a joke in a comic strip: [IMG]http://phwampfler.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/bechdel-rule.jpg[/IMG]

It is more like the person hammering the board is the rating system, and the hammer is the test. One out of three times it'll hit the nail (or the other way around, or 50/50, depends on how many films have what type of plot), the other two times it'll hit the board and end up damaging it. It isn't intentional, and the point will still get across for the films that are shit, but some films will get unfairly rated or criticized based on something that has absolutely no impact on the quality of its plot whatsoever. It can even skewer a viewer's perception of the film.

[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;42784801]It is more like the person hammering the board is the rating system, and the hammer is the test. One out of three times it'll hit the nail (or the other way around, or 50/50, depends on how many films have what type of plot), the other two times it'll hit the board and end up damaging it. It isn't intentional, and the point will still get across for the films that are shit, but some films will get unfairly rated or criticized based on something that has absolutely no impact on the quality of its plot whatsoever. It can even skewer a viewer's perception of the film.[/QUOTE] i don't think that analogy stands because the bechdel test was never designed to analyze individual movies as far as i know.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42784814]i don't think that analogy stands because the bechdel test was never designed to analyze individual movies as far as i know.[/QUOTE] But it is being used by cinemas as a rating for individual movies, and by extension a criticism point of individual films.

you are using the tool for an application it wasn't designed to do. it could be used to give an "at a glance" indication(which should be followed up with actual analysis), and it can be used to show a trend in a larger collection of films, but it is structured in a way that is too simple and too vague to be a comprehensive tool for rating a film. [editline]7th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=U.S.S.R;42784821]But it is being used by cinemas as a rating for individual movies, and by extension a criticism point of individual films.[/QUOTE] which is like using a hammer to cut a board. it's not designed for that task. [editline]7th November 2013[/editline] but now i think i am literally being a pedant.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;42784833]you are using the tool for an application it wasn't designed to do. it could be used to give an "at a glance" indication(which should be followed up with actual analysis), and it can be used to show a trend in a larger collection of films, but it is structured in a way that is too simple and too vague to be a comprehensive tool for rating a film.[/QUOTE] The point is that regardless of what the test is meant for, the [i]cinemas[/i] are using it as a rating for individual films. Even if they state that it doesn't say anything about the quality of the film, it still deducts from the overall rating if it fails the test, and viewers can still be influenced into having a negative opinion about the film based on that overall rating. If this was done as a survey which left the ratings to the critics and withheld the names of the films that failed the test, it'd be better. They could post the results in theatres all around. [editline]7th November 2013[/editline] It is being improperly used by the very people who put it in place by having it effect the overall rating of individual films.

I think this is a test only really interesting at a statistical level to show a trend, and that writers shouldn't shoehorn female characters into a story where it might not fit just to pass this. Of course, 9 times out of 10 it wouldn't hurt the story to add another female character.

[QUOTE=SleepyAl;42784903]I think this is a test only really interesting at a statistical level to show a trend, and that writers shouldn't shoehorn female characters into a story where it might not fit just to pass this. Of course, 9 times out of 10 it wouldn't hurt the story to add another female character.[/QUOTE] Writers shoehorning in female characters can end up like the disaster that was the soldier woman from Polis in Last Light, though that was mostly the fault of the writers being shitty with how they handled her rather than the shoehorning itself. [editline]7th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;42784833]which is like using a hammer to cut a board. it's not designed for that task. [editline]7th November 2013[/editline] but now i think i am literally being a pedant.[/QUOTE] So then we both agree that the cinemas are using the test incorrectly? I get it now, sorry.

[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;42784916]Writers shoehorning in female characters can end up like the disaster[/QUOTE] Shoehorning anything in will probably lead to disaster.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;42784938]Shoehorning anything in will probably lead to disaster.[/QUOTE] Maybe not if they work really hard to make it flow naturally with the rest of the film, but then that stops really being shoehorning and more like "making a worthwhile addition to the film at an abrupt point". The Polis woman was basically a stock character personality. "Badass woman who softens to you and melts for you and the things." [editline]7th November 2013[/editline] I was once writing this sci-fi thing where the different arts and even the values they held were able to physically manifest in some way, going from the absolutely abstract to the absolutely physical in some weird metaphysical process. And then I was like, "needs more black people". And then there was a black guy who worked as a member of a government faction dedicated to hunting down rogue producers. He was the most grounded person in the entire story since while most of his coworkers and superiors and such were dealing with outlandish fantastical abstract things and nothing else, he had to deal with racism and his family's poverty problems (because neo-1920/30/40/60/70/80-American style society and the associated issues) on top of all that. He even broke the fourth wall by questioning the strange nature of the bullshit happening around him while groveling about his more "real" problems. And it worked. Shoehorning can work sometimes, rarely.

Hold up, the Harry Potter movies didn't pass the test? ... but I am pretty sure that movie has buttload of female characters that talk about things that are not men. Did it fail on the "talk to each other" part?

[QUOTE=Zuimzado;42785348]Hold up, the Harry Potter movies didn't pass the test? ... but I am pretty sure that movie has buttload of female characters that talk about things that are not men. Did it fail on the "talk to each other" part?[/QUOTE] Failed to credit them as a main character or something like that, I think.

The Witcher 2 passes this test :v:

[QUOTE=Virtanen;42785579]The Witcher 2 passes this test :v:[/QUOTE] I wouldn't call Witcher sexist per se, it just have lots of prostitutes but the female characters are quite competent.

[QUOTE=Jack Trades;42785615]I wouldn't call Witcher sexist per se, it just have lots of prostitutes but the female characters are quite competent.[/QUOTE] The way female characters are written in The Witcher 2 is sexist as fuck mind you, I don't mean all of The Witcher material is written like that, the first game for example wasn't sexist in the slightest and I haven't read the books so I can't speak for those, but The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings specifically is pretty damn sexist.

Fuck this garbage. It's a fucking story you shouldn't need to include anything you don't want to when writing a story. So, what's next in order to have your movie script approved by polite society your going to have to add one character of every race, religion, and sexual orientation? Get the fuck over yourself feminists the entire fucking world is not about you all the time.

this is totally not the right approach jfc why isn't the media taking a closer inspection of the industry and difficulties women face as creative professionals instead i mean if there's more women creating content then representation isn't a big deal right

its amusing how the bechdel test annoys so many people, women represent 51% of the world population, yet the fact, that shitloads of movies fail a simple test that requires that. 1 - It has to have at least two women in it, 2 - who talk to each other, 3 - about something besides a man. should be pretty eyebrow raising.

[QUOTE=Virtanen;42785644]The way female characters are written in The Witcher 2 is sexist as fuck mind you, I don't mean all of The Witcher material is written like that, the first game for example wasn't sexist in the slightest and I haven't read the books so I can't speak for those, but The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings specifically is pretty damn sexist.[/QUOTE] uh, I must have missed that

I'm kind of curious as to what context the "not talking about a man" thing falls into, do they mean the Sex in The City all sat in a cafe talking about their boyfriends or do they mean in general just mentioning any man what so ever?

[QUOTE=Virtanen;42785644]The way female characters are written in The Witcher 2 is sexist as fuck mind you, I don't mean all of The Witcher material is written like that, the first game for example wasn't sexist in the slightest and I haven't read the books so I can't speak for those, but The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings specifically is pretty damn sexist.[/QUOTE] It takes place in a Medieval male dominated society, unless you believe its the Sorceressess that hold all the strings.