Humour me, and let’s just think for a moment about using a male critic’s guidelines in order to bury female-created content under a mountain of off-hand snark masquerading as genuine cineaste dialogue.

And if there was a kernel of feminist thought in the initial MPDG discussion (i.e. the notion that male writer/directors were creating unrealistic characters), the point-blank dismissal of any eccentric female characters as MPDGs has dissolved into something closer to, at worst, sexism, and at best, incredibly lazy cultural commentary.

Here’s an example: before Valerie Faris and Jonathon Dayton’s Ruby Sparks had even been released - i.e. based on the trailer alone - blogs were ablaze with the notion that it was the “ultimate Manic Pixie Dream Girl” film and, thus, worthy of little more than derision (and certainly not ticket sales).

(I am reminded of writer and former Man Booker Prize judge Rick Gekoski’s observation that, in the era of the blogosphere, “the notion that some opinions are better than others - fairer, deeper and more cogent - seems to be slipping from our grasp”.)

In the lazy obsession with qualifying films by their apparent tropes, the hair-trigger dismissal of MPDGs has, I think, directly contributed to the slating of films written and directed by women. And the non-stop slating of films written and directed by women directly leads to Hollywood producers saying, “You know what? That one film written/directed by a woman this year didn’t go so well, so we’re going to pass.”

(If you think the sudden glut of “raunchy” comedies with female leads isn’t linked to studios’ having waited to see how Bridesmaids went, I also have some flying pigs you may be interested in purchasing.)

clambistro:

I’ve had it with your shitty need to dismiss female characters and the female filmmakers who write/direct them. 

The problem with Manic Pixie dream girls

(via clambistro)

• Tagged:tropes sexism film clem bastow manic pixie dream girls criticism representation manic pixie dream girl
• Noted: 113 notes