- Apr 5, 2020
Interesting use of phrase, "allowed to exist," but I'll get back to that.But it's a cliche that is nonetheless allowed to exist and continue.
Again, quote: In a heterosexual relationship, there is a certain assumed relationship dynamic between the participants. The man is the more "active" partner, the woman is the more "passive" partner. The man is typically the one who "leads" the relationship. He is the one who initiates things, he is the one who openly expresses desire, his actions drive the relationship forward. His body language is also typically very different.I absolutely have not.
What precise form of dominance do you think I'm talking about?
You're describing a situation where one person is in a dominant relationship. The one who "leads," the one who "initiates," the one who "openly expresses desire," etc. You're describing a situation where there's a dominant personality.
There's a fine line between "inherent" and yet claiming "baked very deeply."I literally haven't done that.
What I've talked about is a normative assumption. It is a normative assumption that is baked very deeply into the ideology of heterosexuality itself, which is why it tends to crop up in film, but which is in no way inherent to every heterosexual relationship.
Fine. I'll agree to disagree.
If they disagree, then they're going against what the first film makes clear - there's no way back to the Matrix, short of Cypher's attempt, which is a fact repeated in Matrix Online to the Cypherites, by an agent no less. That if you're unplugged, there's no way to be re-inserted. The only technicality I can name is the athelete in The Animatrix, who briefly wakes up in his pod before going back to sleep, and then gets to spend the rest of his days as a potato.The people who made the film disagree with you, but okay.
If the Wachowskis have said that the above conceit is wrong, I'll need a source.
To the above (yes, this was addressed to Gordon, but you used the same phrase for me, so I'm addressing things here):If that's true though, then again. Why is it allowed to continue? Why does not provoke even a fraction of the actual outcry that results from putting queer characters in a film? I'm perfectly willing to concede your ability to recognize this pandering for what it is. I fully believe you roll your eyes whenever this happens, just like a lot of smart people do. But not everyone is smart, and films don't have to be made for smart people to be successful. In fact, they very rarely are.
-"Allowed to continue" is an iffy phrase. If we're going to go into what's 'allowed' and what isn't in fiction, we're in iffy territory. I'm certainly not in the interest of telling people what they can and can't write, especially since I spend a good amount of time writing myself.
-There's been plenty of outcry over what you've described, so I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that there hasn't been. There's outcry everywhere, and the Internet has made that all the easier.
-As to why people have outcry over queer characters in film, there's plenty of reasons, none of them charitable. I've already mentioned on this thread the nonsensical outrage over characters like Ellie and Tracer for instance.
-Sometimes, pandering is nice, other times, that X and Y kiss at the end of Z is well done. Since we've dwelt on it, Neo and Trinity kiss at the end of the first two films, and it works (for me), because it's a romance that's earnt, is relevant to the plot, and to an extent, relevant to theme as well. If you want an example where it isn't well done, take the sex scene in the second film during the Zion rave. It's a waste of time, it's pandering, it's shot really weird, and I really have no idea what the writers were doing apart from thinking "you like sex, right?"
I've nothing against X and Y falling in love over the course of Z in of itself, it's a question as to whether it's well done or not. I can name works where it is well done, I can name works where it isn't. Sometimes I've used that trope, sometimes I haven't. Tropes and cliches aren't inherently bad IMO, it's how they're used.