The films we get are watered down or ruined by an increasingly harsh regime of representation, but the greater effect is what we don't see: the many works that simply cannot be made for this reason. Helps to be Christopher Nolan; would a less profitable director get to make this film? How soon until no one can make it?
Social justice deems three or more whites gathering unmolested a conspiracy in itself; feminism deems the same for men. Black violence is why we can't have nice things. Female resentment is why we can't have guy things. That's not quite how the New Yorker would put it, but:
But my main issue with Dunkirk is that it's so clearly designed for men to man-out over. And look, it's not like I need every movie to have "strong female leads." Wonder Woman can probably tide me over for at least a year, and I understand that this war was dominated by brave male soldiers. I get that. But the packaging of the film, the general vibe, and the tenor of the people applauding it just screams "men-only"—and specifically seems to cater to a certain type of very pretentious man who would love nothing more than to explain to me why I'm wrong about not liking it. If this movie were a dating profile pic, it would be a swole guy at the gym who also goes to Harvard. If it was a drink it would be Stumptown coffee. If it was one of your friends, it would be the one who starts his sentences with "I get what you're saying, but..."As Al Bundy, in his hard-earned wisdom, explained years ago, nothing drives women madder than the thought of you having fun without them. Worst of all is the thought they aren't even on your mind. This, along with Sailer's Law of Female Journalism, is what feminism is really All About.
No comments:
Post a Comment