Chasing Amy and heteronormativity

***SPOILERS***

I can't decide whether I enjoy this film or that it makes me furious for re-enforcing the very norms that it tries to expel and explore. This is the worst of Kevin Smith's movies in my opinion. At the start it felt like an interesting bro-mance story, turned rom-com, but it quickly diverged into one pseudo-political monologue after another. It's a little "meta" that way.

The film plays out the straight male fantasy that Holden (Ben Affleck) "turns" a gay woman Alyssa into straight (or bisexual). It makes Holden very uncomfortable when he finds out that Alyssa is gay while Banky (Jason Lee) gets along well with her and they laugh about whether lesbian's can really "fuck" without penetration. Banky is clearly homophobic (for both women and men, but particularly men) and appears jealous of Alyssa from the start something that comes out in the end of the film when Holden says to Banky that he's in love with him and that explains why he's so homophobic.

At first it seems that Alyssa is the classic educational role of the lesbian/ woman, trying to explain why women don't 'need' men for sex/ love/ relationships. But their supposed "friendship" builds into a romantic friendship where Holden is clearly in love with Alyssa and he shouts at Banky when he keeps giving him shit about hanging out with her, acting like a jilted lover, but also a sad best friend. Then there comes the scene in the diner where Alyssa wants Holden to hang a painting she bought in his apartment, something that snaps in him as crossing a boundary or line of their friendship into romance. So then Holden makes a long (unrealistically) uninterrupted speech to Alyssa in the car in the rain at night about how much he loves her blah blah. She just leaves the car. When he chases her she repeatedly tells him to fuck off basically, but then in of course the true rom-com nature of the genre she kisses him and they tumble into bed, relationship and love with each other. Alyssa talks about falling in love with him and this strange mash up idea (another speech/ monologue) of unconventionality and why she doesn't rule anyone out and that's the reason she came around to loving Holden. (I also feel there must be a conscious choice to call Affleck's character Holden in reference to Holden Caulfield?!).

Of course the idea of (Holden) being the only man to turn a lesbian (Alyssa) straight comes to a crashing disaster when Banky keeps digging up dirt on her past. At first Holden says it's not true, then that it doesn't bother him and when he finally confronts Alyssa about it he admits that it bothers him. Less than the idea that men want sole sexual ownership of women (that's an all too real stereotype) what bothers me most is Alyssa's response in that she says that it was easier to "let" him believe that he was the only man she had been with sexually instead of being honest and having to repeatedly say he was the thing that she had been searching for in a person. In addition this is made worse by the fact that in being with Holden she has "adjusted" her identity and been "ostracised" by her group of friends (who Banky characterise as "man hating dykes" something the film confirms in the scene where Alyssa's friends accuse her of playing the "pronoun game" by being deliberately ambiguous and says "another one bites the dust").

But it gets worse. Holden thinks that the perfect solution to this is (said in yet another speech) with Alyssa and Banky is that they should all have sex together to basically clear the sexual tension and intimacy and explore things. Banky is relieved when Alyssa says no. Alyssa's response is spot on, she states that it is ridiculous and all the reasons why it would be a bad idea, but mostly because she only wants to be with him. Once again reinforcing the hetero-normative stereotype that only one man and one woman should be together monogamously.

While this film covers some interesting concepts and stereotypes of sexual identity and gender norms, it is ultimately a disappointment.

Guardians of the Galaxy vol. 2 (2017) and the Space Western film analysis

***SPOILERS***

Guardians of the Galaxy vol. 2 (2017) has it all, it is brilliant, funny and full of action and heart (wow that's a lot of things!). The film builds on the themes from the first film and builds it into pre existing tropes. I argue that without Star Wars (1977) and Firefly/ Serenity (2005) there would be no Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) & vol. 2 (2017). Of course the origins of this type of story go further back to the "everyday hero" but I'm more interested in how this has been applied more recently in science fiction or rather scifi fantasy (in my opinion Star Wars series are scifantasy not pure science fiction, but hey lets not split hairs!). Also importantly this film and Firefly  are comedies as well, they make fun of their own genres but in a loving way rather than a critical and judgemental way, in that delightful Gen Y fun loving special snowflake hipster post-modern way.

Ok another thing, in this film we have some major names, my favourite of which is Kurt Russell as Star-Lord's/ Peter Quill's father/ creator (can anyone say Empire Strikes Back?) Kurt Russell did the genre spoof thing back way before it was cool in Big Trouble in Little China (1986) which was a box office flop, but a cult hip once released on (remember VHS?) video. I feel like they created the Guardians movies for those who grew up in the 80s or are 80s music and movie fans (like myself).

Ok lets do a mini visual comparison of heroes. We have Star-lord (Chris Pratt) alongside Malcom Reynolds (Nathan Fillion) and of course Han Solo (Harrison Ford who played that same type of anti-hero in Bladerunner and the Indiana Jones franchise) see below. There's the Western genre colour scheme (specifically drawn attention to in Firefly as the "brown coats") and the sort of "swagger" and use of guns, specifically pistol style guns (see below) they all have a warm brown/ red tone to their coats and clothing (although Han Solo tones are darker and more black).

Star Lord 

"Mal" / Malcolm Reynolds

Han Solo

It is my argument that we wouldn't have had Guardians (1 & 2)  without Firefly and Serenity because what Joss Whedon did was show that there is humor in action as well as depth of character. And Serentiy specifically set up that large ship ensemble (ok, ok Star Trek really established that I know!).

Another strength of Guardians vol. 2 s is that the music, (something that very clearly established in the first film) hits very specific emotional notes playing on the way score and music choice plays on our heartstrings in films, particularly blockbusters. Action movie music and scoring can be way too on the nose and this just plays it to the extreme, but in a good way. Some amazing classics are in Guardians vol. 2 including some Cat Stevens, George Harrison and my favourite Fleetwood Mac's "Chain" and that's just to name a few. 

This film also works in my opinion as an origin story for Star Lord and develops his back story detailing how his dad "Ego" (Kurt Russell) was in fact a malevolent deity who is basically a disease that wants to spread throughout the universe. Russell does an amazing job in this evil role. And they did a bit of a Star Wars digital effects with the flashback by showing him all "young" from 1980 (story time) through CGI work. Thematically this storyline (aka the main storyline not the red herring that is the start of the movie) is literally about destroying your father (can anyone say Empire Strikes Back? (again!)). (The visuals on Ego's planet are stunning particularly the use of colour, but colour in the whole film is delightful and vibrant). Interestingly the film adds to this notion that it is the parents who raise you that are the important ones rather than your genetic parents. It also involves the notion of choice and identity in relation to parenthood. This is demonstrated in the relationship with Yondu vs. Ego.

One disappointing thing about this sequel is the traditional roles of gender played out between Quill and Gamora who were nemesaries in the first film (which is of course another stereotyped gender dynamic) but in this film they are more typical Rom-com or "Cheers" romantic interests which Quill refers to as the "unspoken thing" that he learnt from Earth's tv shows. I think this is a fond choice and I just make note of this change/ development of these characters rather than criticise it, but it is very literal a mother/ father or heteronormative dynamic with "baby" Groot. 

Peter and Gamora try to dance scene (above)

Baby Groot (above)

If you were a true fan and stayed for all the little extras in the credits you would have seen "teen" Groot and Quill as "dad" role yelling at him for the mess in his room. 

I also enjoyed the themes of family and the side story between the two sisters (see below).

Nebula and Gamora

On a technical I love, love, love the over the top yet technically brilliant good slow motion sequences played for dramatic and comedic effects.

OK so there's so much to analyse like additional stuff with Sylvester Stilone and Sean Gunn (as a fan of Gilmore Girls I just love him in this too!) and so much more, I feel I've barely touched on the concepts, themes, music, performances argh...but that's enough for the moment.

Eternal Sunshine of the spotless mind (2004) and the manic pixie dream girl film analysis

 

***SPOILERS***

This film is possibly my favourite film of all time. It's the perfect combination of screen writing (Charlie Kaufman), direction (Michel Gondry) and performances by Kate Winslet and Jim Carey. The premise is unique but also universal. The question of whether you'd want the option to erase a person from your memory? This film is very quirky from Kaufman's conceptual development to the great and inventive style of direction that Gondry employs using some practical and visual effects to pull it off.

The two lead actors play roles that are opposite to their usual casting. Jim Carey plat Joel a quiet, but creative guy that likes things to be "nice" much different to his loud, big roles in comedies. In contrast Kate Winslet play Clementine who is a bit "out there" wearing colourful clothes, changing hair colour all the time, swearing passionately and being impulsive in contrast to her corset wearing bonnet dramas. Both performances are stellar and believable. 

Although this is not the film that birthed the term "Manic Pixie dream girl" (hereafter MPDG) I always associate it with this film and the character Clementine. The term was first used in reference to the film Elizabeth Town (2007) in a review by Nathan Rabin.

Elizabethtown (2007)

"I defined the MPDG as a fantasy figure who “exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures.”"

"The trope of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl is a fundamentally sexist one, since it makes women seem less like autonomous, independent entities than appealing props to help mopey, sad white men self-actualize. Within that context, the phrase was useful precisely because, while still fairly flexible, it also benefited from a certain specificity. "- Nathan Rabin

 So in some ways the term became retro-actively applied to earlier films, specifically the female characters in them. For example I argue that Natalie Portaman's character is a MPDG in Garden State (2004) see the list of all the MPDG in films here. 

Garden State (2004)

But in terms of defining the MPDG in Eternal Sunshine Clementine is the perfect example while I still argue she retains enough of her own character outside the trope. In Eternal Sunshine Clementine describes herself in dialogue the basic definition of the MPDG for example "I'm never going to know moment to moment what I'm going to like" and "It might be the hair...it changes a lot". And the film relationship dynamic centers on the fact the Clementine is passionate and vocal and impulsive and how this contrast with Joel who is quiet and conservative is conflicting yet was once something that complimented each other. Clementine brought Joel out of his shell, and he was in love with the excitement of her. By definition as MPDG Clementine functioned for  Joel's development and journey. 

500 Days of Summer

I would argue that in terms of thematic references and the concept of the MPDG I think Eternal Sunshine is most similar to 500 Days of Summer (2009), In both films it is centered around a love story and the break up of the relationship. Granted the one in Eternal Sunshine occurs predominantly inside Joel's mind/ memory for most of the film whereas in 500 Days of Summer they go back and forth in time to serve the same function. Both films deal with a woman who doesn't want to belong to traditional female stereotypes and roles, however ironically this is in fact part of the function of the MPDG. 

Interetsingly in the case of Eternal Sunshine most the Clementine actuaally literally occurs only in Joels's sleeping mind while she is being erased from his memory. This element I argue is a twist on the current MPDG function. It acknowledges that people only truly exist wihtin our mind's and that through his journey, Joel learns that it is worth keeping the painful memories in order to keep the one's he loves and that learning from love is more important. However the erasure seems to have been successful when he wakes in the morning. 

The film goes full circle and returns the beginning sequence where Joel and Clementine supposedly meet for the first time which is actually on Valentines Day after Joel and Clementine have both erased each other. It is a moving concept that love prevails despite memory loss, that somehow they are drawn to each other unconsciously. 

The set design, imagery, constumes and effects all contribute to the themes around erasure of memory. Details of which can be found in the special features of the DVD with commentary and interviews with Michel Gondry. I particularly love how subtly some things start becoming white and disappearing in scenes before they change/ are erased. For instance see above the picture mug of Clementine the image on the mug going white during the scene before it's erased. And below the book spines start to go blank more and more. 

 "I'm just a fucked up girl looking for my own piece of mind, I'm not perfect".

This "speech" occurs twice in the film, firstly in Joel's memory before she is erased and then in the penultimate scene where Joel asks Clementine to "Wait, for just a while". She unknowingly repeats the speech that had been erased from her mind that she'd said to Joel when they first met. So the film goes full circle.

However Clementine's lability of mood, her impulsivity and passion could not only be stereotyped as MPDG, but also pathologised as Borderline Personality disorder. However I argue she's not there purely to serve as a "lesson" for Joel, despite her representation being primarily his own memory of her. So if we were to be literal the "real" Clementine MPDG exists only at start and end of film, but I choose to believe his memory of her is subjective but somewhat accurate. Clementine has her own journey in the film, but she also serves to give Joel the realisation of taking chances/ risks in life and to risk pain in order to feel love. And that there's a reason we should remember things that are painful, in order to grow. (Sounds cheesy but the film is well played and sincere).

At the end of the erasure sequence Clementine says "Remember me. Try your best" after Joel says there is no memory left because he walked away because he was "scared". And Clementine says "What if you stayed this time?" and the last line before he wakes is "Meet me in Montauk" which is because that's where they do in fact meet seen at the start sequence of the film. 

Interestingly one could view Kirstin Dunst's character also in this film as one of being a MPDG. She is the professional receptionist, but also subject to sexual pranks by her undefined lover  from work. But also she is in love with Howard who runs the clinic. She reads poetry and quotes in order to seem "smart" for him. But she also gets stoned, has sex and dances on the bed in her underwear. Her storyline in this film is so sad. And in a deleted scene you can hear how she decided to have an abortion after she discovered she was pregnant presumably with Howard's baby. Her storyline indicates that perhaps we are all doomed to repeat our patterns regardless of memory. At the end of the film she sends everyone their files in order to "undo" this "mistake".  

So is the MPDG a sexist, misogynistic trope of the male gaze that has been adopted by hipster culture? To be honest I think it is sexist to further make female characters mere plot devices for male journeys. But is the MPDG more or less realistic? In some ways yes and others no. The MPDG is the extreme version of a woman. It is not realistic, but accepting the "moodiness" and sensitivity of the female temperament could be subjugating or it could be subversive? Personally I love the MPDG I think women need role models in characters and films that are quirky, and fun and strong. But it continues to be disappointing that women are written in film are mere sources of drama and plot devices whether they are a 1950s house wife or a MPDG in the 2000s.

Colour me crazy a film analysis of "Griff the Invisible" (2010)

***SPOILERS***

This is a beautiful first feature for Australian director/ writer Leon Ford. Focusing on a socially awkward Griff and his relationships it is superbly shot to reflect the emotions, thoughts of Griff and the other characters and the subject matter. This film has a melancholic yet child like imaginative quality. The costume and art design is some of the best I've seen in Australian films. It is stylised in a really interesting way that focuses on Griff's world rather than placing it so obviously as Sydney, Australia. Whereas most Australian films tend to awkwardly over-emphasise location and Australian "culture". Rather this film focuses on some unique characters with their own flaws and quirks and we get to experience their emotional journey that is both sweet and heart breaking. The performances are outstanding especially for Griff played by Ryan Kwanten (True Blood) and Maeve Dermondy (Beautiful Kate) as Melody. The film also has a great supporting cast and the cinematography is a joy to watch, complimenting the tone and emotions of the characters.

Colour plays a crucial role in communicating the plot and themes of this film. They use the primary colours red, yellow and blue predominantly. Interestingly they deviate in the above image with use of green to communicate the invisible. As shown Griff becomes the mirror image or reflection of nothingness or invisibility. This can also be seen with the contrast in the yellow lemons in the bathtub scene and the follow scene where he sees the suit as invisible. See below. 

Predominantly Griff is shown as relted to the colour yellow, with his yellow raincoat of his detective persona as well as his chosen superhero costume colour. The colour yellow can often be interpreted as a colour reference to the characteristic of being a "coward". This might align with the character of Griff his "real" persona being that he is weak and bullied victim and also childlike, most like on the Aspergers/ Austism Spectrum (but also possibly fit the psychosis/ schizophrenia diagnostic criteria). 

Melody is predominantly shown as wearing red or with some sort of cardigan with flowers. Red is often a symbol of seduction, sex and desire. A colour of the passions. Melody has her own type of odd characteristics that are less clearly defined as Griff's. She is somewhat more self aware, but we grow to learn that "reality" and "growing up" isn't necessarily what makes us happy and perhaps keeping our fantasies/ delusions 'alive' are what make our lives meaningful and happy. (See below).

I love this sequence (above) because it's a perfect spoof of most Marvel/ DC comic book/ superhero movies. Very Superman and Lois Lane.  Melody is wearing red and blue. Blue appears to be the crossover colour bridging the characters together. Blue is the colour of Griff's suits, but also the universe suit she makes him and she is often seen wearing blue and yellow. Thus they are gradually visually becoming harmonious.

 

Melody is shown with blue pillow and yellow pillow/ sheets, both colours that symbolise Griff. 

 Melody is shown with a blue shirt and yellow handbag, both symbolise Griff and perfect against Griff's yellow walls.

 Melody wearing her blue coat with yellow handbag after giving Griff the universe suit. The use of colour is so repetitive and obvious that it must be significant.

In the penultimate scene Melody is framed against the red door and Griff is wearing blue shirt symbolising his "normal" or "work" persona against his true yellow walls. Both distressed and in pain their fantasy becomes reality and Melody's theory is realised and she falls through the door.

At the end Melody is delivered a package with special instructions on how to see Griff when he's invisible. He is wearing a blue jumper and the view master is yellow. Thus integrating all the colours because Melody is wearing red. All the primary colours integrate the notion that Melody and Griff can love and truly see each other as their "real" selves. It is a perfect depiction of how only people we love are the ones who really see us as "visible". It is an ongoing theme in the film explicitly to make yourself less seen ie. invisible and be less odd or unusual to avoid being bullied or judged. It is a beautiful ending to see character's embrace themselves regardless of (supposed) reality.

Return to Oz (1985) Imagination or Mental illness? Film analysis

 

***Spoilers***

This is a beautifully constructed yet disturbing "kids film". The film begins with Dorothy basically being taken to an asylum for "shock treatment" because of her "waking dreams" and because she hasn't slept the night through since the tornado. In this way the film functions as a loose sequel to the Judy Garland The Wizard of Oz. However Return to Oz is based on a combination of the books written by L. Frank Baum. 

I feel Return to Oz is similar to Labyrinth in that it is about the journey into adulthood and acceptance of reality instead of turning towards escapism into fantasy. But what this film does differently is explore the nature of madness itself. Dorothy is steadfast in her beliefs of going to Oz and throughout her journey she believes in herself. But by the end of the film she has come to the realisation that she must keep her travels to Oz a secret. An interesting notion if it were to be examined in terms of modern concepts of mental illness. For instance today Dorothy would be diagnosed with psychosis/ Schizophrenia and her trips to Oz as hallucinations. In this view the end where Ozma tells Dororthy to be quiet and she says "it was just my reflection" would be interpreted as her voices/ hallucinations as command hallucinations working against her rational mind. 

In terms of cinematography and art and prop design this movie is a cult classic. The colour schemes, puppets, use of mirrors and costumes all contribute to the themes of the film. There are obvious parallels between the "real" universe at the start of the film and "Oz". 

This character turns into the gnome king at the end of the film. This is also a Checov's gun for the character of Tic Tok the "mechanical man". Arguably Dorothy absorbs this information and becomes part of her delusions of Oz.

Tick Tok the mechanical man "does everything but live"

This random scene where another girl from the asylum later Ozma gives Dorothy a pumkin and becomes Jack Pumkin Head who was a prisoner of Mombi. Jack likes to call Dorothy "Mom" and says "even if it isn't true". At the end it's revealed that Ozma is in fact his Mom.

Hospital green aligns with the green theme in Oz.

The wheelers are the orderlies from the asylum.

At the beginning the imagery details that Dorothy is in a cage even as she escapes in the water in the storm. Her "prison" takes her to Oz much like the house takes her in the tornado to Oz in the first book/ movie. But at the end of the film the nurse/ Mombi is imprisoned literally and imagery wise.

This depiction of the headless dancing girls is a Checkov's gun that shows how Mombi keeps all the women's heads locked up and changes them. An interesting theory of mind as it appears she has the same personality but a different external "beauty". Beauty is an interesting theme in the film. Mombi with a different head says Dorothy has "A certain prettiness" but needs to be kept a few years til she can become a head for her.

Costume design is so interesting in this film, the use of colour and texture. Mombi's outfit is brilliant it reminds me of the Skeskis costumes/ robes in The Dark Crystal. The way it has sharp porcupine style feather like shards coming out of her dress gives it a dangerous vibe.  And also similar red/ purple tones instead of the greens used by everyone else in Oz.

The Dark Crystal (1982)

Finally the use of mirrors and reflections is significant because I argue that Ozma is actually the twin/ self of Dorothy trapped in Oz by Mombi. She is the child like fantasy imaginative part of Dorothy that Dorothy learns to keep to herself and "grow up" by the end of the film.

It's similar to The Matrix and Alice in Wonderland and Through the looking glass in that Ozma is trapped in the mirror and Dorothy must help her come through the mirror into Oz. Conversely Dorothy use the mirror to contact/ see Ozma when she returns to Kansas. But Ozma tells her to be quiet and not tell other people.

Arguably this film is about childhood fantasy worlds and children learning to "grow up". However one could read this film as about psychosis and delusions and learning to keep that a secret from others. And that the film is in fact about belief in your own version of reality.