What? You dont want the RoboCop remake (which I dont blame you for), but you're giving a maybe to Transformers 4? I havent been paying any mind to the news around T4, but is there something big I dont know? Is Bay not directing it?
It becomes a little more serious when you consider that the real world does have a history of trying to force gay people to be straight, from camps where they're indoctrinated and encouraged to "pray the gay away" to straight-up raping them, there's also a difference between having a ridiculous fantasy and shouting it to the world through mass-media, potentially influencing people into thinking that sort of thing is okay.QtheMuse said:Also if your a straight male who hasn't thought about turning a lesbian straight then obviously you should just leave your man card at the door. All it is, is a harmless fantasy and people should just get over taking sexuality so damn serious.
I blame poor paint by numbers script writing. They wanted to add a tough self reliant female character but had to use the hackneyed old chestnut of potential sexual tension and romance to titillate the audience. Note to screen writers, if the character really is a tough self reliant female who has established a place in the pecking order of a team of violent bounty hunters, the matter of her sexuality never need be brought up. But no they decided to go with the old stand by and claim she was a lesbian. So once again we get the stereotype that the only way a female character can be considered tough is by becoming one of the boys. Brilliant message, did a 12 year old write this script?.leviadragon99 said:Huh... well the "fucking her straight" thing is pretty repulsive, if it weren't for that I might've considered watching this as popcorn fare...
Nobody wants to read comics about married superheroes. Or at least that's the impression I took away from the industry-wide back-flips when it comes to continuity on the subject. Maybe they're misapplying lessons that they learned from selling comic books to a straight male audience to an altogether different audience.DVS BSTrD said:"Fucked Straight" Still better then how they handled Batwoman's Marriage.
Like I mentioned earlier, nowhere is the phrase "fucking her straight" ever used in the actual movie. Riddick merely makes a few lewd comments and then grabs her ass at the end. BTW, I don;t recall her sexual orientation even being mentioned in front of Riddick. There's also the small matter of the merc who attempts to rape her, but nooooooo, a couple of lewd comments is just sooooo much worse.leviadragon99 said:Huh... well the "fucking her straight" thing is pretty repulsive, if it weren't for that I might've considered watching this as popcorn fare...
To be fair to the movie, though I've not seen it yet, from what Bob was saying, I don't think that Riddick actually does this, more that he threatens to do so as part of his "morally ambiguous barbarian badass asshole" shtick. I feel like Bob would be up in arms if he actually did change her sexuality through sheer machismo. Instead he was just disappointed by the film's use of the idea. If I'm wrong then let me know, but it alters whether or not the movie just makes a somewhat clumsy use of a trope, or actually is a little repugnant.trty00 said:If group of people still faces hatred, persecution, and violence based on some childish notion of morality or tradition, which gay and lesbian people do, it's just crass and insensitive to have a 2013 movie with the 'screw you straight' trope. It's homophobic and basically implies that a woman can't not be totally uninterested in sex with a man. 'Lesbians? Pah, those don't exist! All women want "The D" at the end of the day.QtheMuse said:Everyone faces different types of persecution in different parts of the world. I have had sex with women who claimed they were lesbian and then they said they were bisexual. I guess I am a horrible man.trty00 said:If by 'harmless fantasy' you mean: 'something that not only bellitles the life choices of a group of people who still face extreme persecution in parts of the world, but makes their sexuality seem like something that can be fucked out,' it is indeed a 'harmless fantasy.'
I'm not here to debate your life experiences, I'm talking about how a particular narrative element looks in a 2013 film. In this case, dated and inappropriate.
This person gets it.TheMadDoctorsCat said:The problem with that logic is that Riddick, who wasn't the protagonist in the movie, was a deeply ambiguous character. You didn't know until the very end what he would be willing to do - or even what he'd WANT to do - in that situation. That was the main source of tension within the movie.
Two movies later, do you think they'd be able to recreate that? I haven't seen "Riddick" and probably won't, but I don't hold out much hope. And it's not as though MovieBob has given it a stunning recommendation to convince me otherwise.