INTRODUCTION
The 2015 summer movie season has started off with a bang, just not in the way that many people expected. The two biggest (and certainly the loudest) films so far have been Avengers: Age of Ultron and Mad Max: Fury Road. While the former's success may be as unsurprising as water being wet, it is the latter, often thought of a niche sci-fi franchise, that has been garnering a lot of the buzz. Therefore, after seeing both films, and witnessing the gender fueled outrage and discourse surrounding them; rather than just write a sociological review for each film (some great ones you can find here and here) I thought I would couple my reviews with an analysis of social uproar and "civic unrest" that these films have caused... from a socially conscious, disabled straight white (usually) cis gendered feminist (allied) male perspective.
"Spoilers."
"BLOWING UP" 'THE AVENGERS'
On May 1st (in the States) Avengers: Age of Ultron was released to huge box office numbers. Though not outperforming its predecessor both critically, or commercially; it is still a world wide hit. Yet, the film seems to lack the overall joy, and mass societal embrace that the first film received. Part of this due to the the nature of sequel [hulk]buster filmmaking.
In an early interview, after the first Avengers film was released, Director Joss Whedon was asked How he would "top" Marvel's The Avengers. he simply said "I can't". He went on to say that the only way that you move forward with such an immense franchise, is to make a smaller, more intimate film, that focuses on character and the relationships within the team. When I heard that, I got really excited. Being a Joss Whedon fan since Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I was confident that he could make a meaningful, emotionally resonant film while still having thrilling moments of action and spectacle. Unfortunately, due to producer meddling, what we got was anything but perfect. Age of Ultron is a bloated, often incoherent mess, that cripples under its own weight of advertisements for future films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU).
Avengers: Age of Ultron has a multiple viewing requirement; not for the sheer pleasure of the experience, but just to understand all of the plot threads, character motivations and (at times) dialogue that is packed into it. Upon my first viewing of the film, I became nauseous just trying to follow the initial action sequence that begins at the height of the Crescendo of the last film (tracking shot of all the Avengers fighting together). At that moment, and confirmed by the rest of the film, the dream of a "smaller" film that Whedon had envisioned (and I had hoped for) was murdered in front of me with every action set piece that was constantly "turned up to 11". I left the film not questioning whether or not it was a superior film to the original, but on whether or not I even enjoyed it.
This is basically how I felt throughout the film:
I liked the film better on viewing it a second time. During the repeat viewing, I latched on to the quieter moments in the film; the party scene was wonderful, as was everything at Hawkeye's Farmhouse. These are the sequences that give the bare bones of the smaller film I was looking for and what (I believe) Whedon wanted to initially create.
THE BLACK WIDOW PROBLEM?
One of the major issues with The Avengers franchise, and superhero teams in general, is the overall lack of representation, visibility and agency for its female characters. Overall, there are less female characters than male characters in an ensemble cast, which often requires all female viewers to (impossibly) identify with that (usually) one character. Conversely, again that (usually) one character is (impossibly) tasked to be everything for all women. In addition, female characters usually have less screen time, secondary plot lines (That is if they have a character arc at all, and are more than a walking trope.) and are often "shipped" or "fridged" (more on that later). Black Widow seems to be the epitome of a lot of these tropes for the MCU. Although she has fared better in the hands of more competent and less sexist director (i.e. Joss Whedon), the lack of Black Widow merchandise (comparative to her male counterparts) and a lack of a Black Widow feature film maintains her irrelevance to shareholders and the "Powers that Be" at Disney/Marvel.
Fandom has become so impatient for a Black Widow Solo film that one fan produce this small piece of Awesomeness:
These problems get exacerbated when during the marketing of Avengers: Age of Ultron, cast members Jeremy Renner and Chris Evans slut shame the character of Black Widow in a recent interview
Then, almost immediately,they recanted their statements. It is this behavior that illustrates the normalization of the devaluing of women in our society and, to put a finer point on it, a perfect example of The Rape Culture.
The reaction of Renner and Evans is a common one in our culture when Patriarchal norms are being challenged. Often, the women who challenge the sexist status quo are often vilified and humiliated because (some) men are socialized to believe that female agency, autonomy, and civil liberties come at the cost of masculinity. In short, they believe that female agency emasculates men. Because of this notion, the vilification of women is done through sexualization (as the above comments demonstrate) and the humiliation is done though rape. Rape is then used as a way to both discipline women, and to regain any perceived "lost" masculinity. This is ever more heightened when the (aforementioned) total lack of diversity of female characters ( as it is in Marvel films) results in the same character (Black Widow) being a champion of a certain brand of feminism, as well as a firebrand and a scapegoat. Therefore, regardless of being labeled a "feminist icon", Black Widow is also the victim of harassment and a target of hatred not only by the patriarchal rape culture, but by any social justice group who believes that her portrayal betrays the their ideology in which she has been lauded as a paragon.
THE CONTROVERSY
In addition to the general problem of too few female characters, and the distastefulness of slut shaming, the current embroiled controversy that the character of Black Widow is in the middle of stems from a "key" scene in Avengers: Age of Ultron. In that scene, Bruce (Hulk) and Natasha (Black Widow) discuss their mutual attraction and their future together. Bruce chides himself and Natasha for their feelings and "sees no future" for them because he can't have children. In response, Natasha tells Bruce about her "graduation ceremony" from The Black Widow Program, in which successful graduates are sterilized. It is at that moment that Natasha labels herself a monster. To many, this labeling was interpreted to mean that Natasha felt that she was a monster because she could not conceive. Therefore, by extension, the message is that ANY woman who can not biologically conceive should consider themselves a monster. This message, if true, is horrific and it needs to be outed as ludicrous and disgusting. While much of the internet has done that (see some of the links above) there was also the collateral damage of kicking Joss Whedon off twitter (regardless of the PR). From my Sociological perspective, I can see both sides and believe there is a double standard at play here.
First, I completely understand why some people (especially women who can't biologically conceive) could interpret the scene in the manner stated above. This would be especially hurtful if any of those people (who could conceive or not) had held up Joss as a feminist icon, or at the very least, a strong allied advocate. To that point, there has been some chatter around the internet chastising these individuals by making the point that they (the now Whedon disillusioned) did not attack well known, and openly sexist directors, like Michael Bay; getting him to quit social media like they did Whedon. The answer is simple: We expect more from our heroes than we do our villains. We expect Michael Bay to produce an incomprehensible, overblown, and bloated piece of sexist racist homophobic garbage; because that is the personality that his films have shown us. With Buffy, Angel, Firefly and to some extent Marvel's The Avengers, Joss Whedon has proven to be a great feminist ally in the past. He has this great quote a few years ago (paraphrasing):
" Everyone asks me: 'Why do you always write strong female characters.' and I say 'Because you keep asking me that question'."
Therefore, it is understandable for those who have placed Joss Whedon in their Reference Group/role model for strong male ally, that the realization of his human fallibility, that he is not the "perfect" ally, may lead to some cognitive dissonance that results in Joss being rejected by fans. This is a valid interpretation and Joss Whedon should apologize if ever met with such criticism.
Secondly, as a point of contention, and (again) as a straight white cis gendered man. I interpreted the scene differently. Given the context surrounding it. I thought the monster line did not expressively say (nor imply) that Natasha was a monster because she couldn't biologically have kids, but because that choice was taken from her in a monstrous act, in order to make her a less compassionate assassin. ( Illogical I know). In other words, Natasha's monstrosity lies not in her ability or inability to have children, but in being an Assassin and murderer. A past that was alluded to in the first Avengers film ("red in my ledger").
 |
| Skaar: Son of Hulk |
Finally, it is a bit of a hypocritical gendered double standard that many have called out Joss Whedon for vaguely implying that Black Widow's "Monster" line has anything to do with sterilization, when he has Bruce Banner plainly say "There is no future with me because I can't [biologically] have children". ( Fans of the comics know that that's not true). Bruce's clear statement of infertility (something that was again implied in the first Avengers film) implies that it results in him being a monster, or it's a product of him being a monster. NO ONE IS UP IN ARMS ABOUT THAT! Because, everyone assumes that he is a monster BECAUSE of the Hulk NOT BECAUSE HE CAN'T HAVE KIDS! Why? Because men aren't socialized to want to have children, the way women are expected to. We see men's identity existing outside of being a husband and a father while we struggle with that separation for women; even in 2015. If we are going to blame Joss Whedon for the portrayal of Natasha Romanov, we also need to blame him for the portrayal of Bruce Banner. They are both monsters, not because they can, or can not have children, but because of the lives they've ruined, and the people they've hurt (and killed).
Side Note: Was Quicksilver fridged (much in the same way many female characters are in comics) just to advance the plot and development of Scarlet Witch? If this was intentional, Bravo Whedon for playing against Tropes. If not, it is just a happy accident!
A 'MAD' 'FURY' FOR THE SENSES
Mad Max: Fury Road can only be described as beautiful insanity. George Miller returns to his seminal Dystopian epic series (that took over 15 years to produce)as he also returns to form with this adrenaline fueled chase film that is short on dialogue, but big on spectacle. Here, Miller schools everyone (even Christopher Nolan) in his ability to not only weave in CGI amidst a majority of practical effects but also by giving us a story that, while seemingly simple, is rich with character development and progressive attitudes.
In this go round, Max is played by Tom Hardy. Hardy is not a stranger to terse characters, but as Max, he is laconic. Yet, even then, his Max emotes more with a simple (half) thumbs up than Mel Gibson did in any of the previous films (which are not required viewing). The real star however is Charlize Theron as Imperator Furiosa who is attempting to escape a tyrannical warlord with his "wives" hoping to find safe passage to "the greenplace". Max is the drifter that falls in the middle of the situation and decides to help. What follows, is an orgiastic feast of colors and sounds that are so visceral; the smell of grease, exhaust and sand seemed to hang in air that you would swear they brought back smell-o-vision. . Hell, there is a guitarist who plays a guitar that doubles as a flamethrower while riding on a monster truck! No one expected Miller's vision, but we are all grateful. I am impressed with the technical brilliance of the film. However, it was not what got me excited about the film to begin with. That, I attribute to the the overall positive feminist response.
MY TYPE OF INTERSECTION
Mad Max: Fury Road first came on my Sociological radar when I saw in the promotional material that the character of Furiosa was using a piece of assisted technology (a prosthetic/robotic arm) I was really excited to see how that was going to be portrayed in the film. In short, I wasn't disappointed. Not only did I get a scene where Furiosa adeptly fights Max without the use of her prosthesis
but I also became obsessed with the modified grip she uses to be able to shoot her rifle with her robotic arm.
While not expressly stated in the film, I like to think that this modification allowed her to be the only one who could use that rifle with any kind of accuracy. Please look to this great article for a more nuanced and in-depth discussion of disability in the Mad Max series.
My Sociological interest deepened when I heard that Men's rights activists had called for a boycott of the film, calling it Feminist Propaganda.
Before I move on, we must remember:
Yet, in a way, we must thank these misguided and infuriating dirt bags. Because without their misplaced outrage, the film it would not have received its feminist support allowing more women to embrace the film (as all people should). Due to this outpouring of support, (Hysterically the opposite of what was intended) Mad Max: Fury Road is both a critical and commercial success.
THE DEBATE
Many prominent feminist and scholars have come out in support of Fury Road. Citing the female character development and overall lack of misogyny in the way women are being portrayed in the film. Each character is given a job to do and no one is damsel-ed or fridged, They also cite the way in which female strength is not only shown through typically masculine violent behavior, as with Furiosa and the Elderly bikers (characters that could be described as male characters in a female body), but also through sacrifice (Splendid using her pregnant body as a shield) and manipulation (Using the sexualization of women to bait a trap). A key scene that defines Mad Max :Fury Road as a feminist film for its supporters is when Max, recognizing Furiosa's skills with a rifle, hands the gun over to her at a crucial moment.
There is a gif for that:
This has even lead to a wonderful tumbler called Feminist Mad Max
While this support is resounding and loud. There are some in the feminist community that still see problems with the film. Instead of escaping patriarchy, they see its promotion. They believe that regardless of the intention, the film reproduces patriarchy (through the way Imorten Joe treats women) and maintains the male gaze.
An Example:
My interpretation is a bit of both. I do believe that Mad Max Fury Road is an amazing progressive film. The character of Furiosa stands on the shoulders of other great Sci-Fi characters like Elen Ripley and Sarah Connor but is even better because her motivation is not maternal. The film is also progressive because George Miller gives us more than one depiction of femininity that is valid and a atypical form of Masculinity that respects women.
 |
| This is a key Scene that shows Max as a Feminist ally. He says to Furiosa "Here is my idea, but it's your choice, You are the Leader." |
However, I am also inclined to heavily criticize our culture that interprets any depiction of women outside of the usual sexist tropes as so novel, that it is chide as feminist. Feminism is not a dirty word, it is just trying to get our culture to see women as the complex humans they are, and push for diverse representation that has been monopolized by men in popular culture. It is depressing that we are still living in a society that views the notion that women are people as something radical.
I leave you with this bit of Awesomeness:
