Every time some guy (and here the term isn’t gender-neutral, it always does, in fact mean men) slams the Twilight phenomenon, I always felt like wincing just a little bit.
Not because I like the books, or it expresses an inmost fantasy of mine or something…in all honesty I read the first book on a plane to Toronto and I was amazed at how fast I forgot it afterward, like most mystery paperbacks. It was harmless, and expressed a common fantasy: the desire to be won over by someone with a possessive and slightly sinister affection. If you get your self-worth from other people adoring you, that’s very powerful.
As readers of this blog will probably know, Edward is too femmie for my tastes anyway, humorless, cynical and vain, he reminds me of a particularly (in retrospect) assholish boyfriend from Williamsburg. While some may see my dating a psedointellectual hipster from Brooklyn as the height of crappy judgment, all I have to say in my defense is that it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Rather, the reason I wince when men slam Twilight is because of the “unfortunate implications” in slamming a mostly female fantasy. I save any and all accusations of sexism for very rare occasions, for when I’m absolutely sure. Here, I’m absolutely sure: there’s a double-standard at work. A goofy female fantasy is seen as fluffy and embarrassing, but goofy male fantasies of virility and macho fighting do not receive criticism for precisely this reason.
Twilight is intimately associated with the female gender. I remember reading a few articles on computer science that bemoaned how few women were going into the field. The article sarcastically asked, “hey, why not put up a few Twilight posters in comp labs?”
(Incidentally, I always thought the problem with comp sci departments is their inability to creatively rebrand. Most biochemistry and genetics departments have been reborn with sexier-sounding names like “systems biology” and “molecular genetics and microbiology.” I can understand trying to get away from reminding people of the nightmarish Organic Chemistry, but still. And don’t ever call an MLS a degree in Library Science – they prefer Information Science, which considering the emphasis on database management over a physical building, that’s not a bad idea.)
You hate Twilight? Okay, fine, I hate James Bond. (Well, except maybe Pierce Brosnan. What a good looking piece of man.) The James Bond movies are the male version of Twilight: an embarrassingly immature fantasy.
Incidentally, it’s worth noting I was actually quite surprised to see a picture of Stephanie Meyer, who was considerably less fat than I was expecting. I guess her soul is fat.
There was one incredible element of the Twilight phenom: the gift of Taylor Lautner, who is one of the most beautiful men at the movies in a very, very long time, and who the directors have the good sense to keep shirtless all the time. Bella says, on first seeing him, “wow, you got buff!”
I can’t seriously believe she’d choose anybody over him. Just sayin’ is all.
4 comments:
Yet another thought provoking post. I'd expect no less from you.
I've tried reading Twilight and couldn't even get to the actual vampire stuff. I was bored by the characters and the voice of the protagonist felt false. As for the movie, I was bored by the trailer and I think Robert Pattinson is genuinely frightening. He really looks like a vampire in the worst way.
But you're right that men have a tendency to slam female fantasies. It's wrong but please understand--and I think you already do understand--that the stock female fantasy never jives with men just as stock male fantasies never jive with women. We just want different things. I think more effort can be made to blend the two together to make entertainment palatable to everyone but it might come out bland.
BTW: Pierce Brosnan? Really? It's either Sean Connery or Daniel Craig for me. Sean for the old school and Daniel for the hot-banging-body and the intesity of his Bond portrayal.
One more thing: So what is your favorite mainstream female fantasy?
Yachi -
But you're right that men have a tendency to slam female fantasies. It's wrong but please understand--and I think you already do understand--that the stock female fantasy never jives with men just as stock male fantasies never jive with women. We just want different things. I think more effort can be made to blend the two together to make entertainment palatable to everyone but it might come out bland.
I don't know if that's true in all cases.
For instance, it's often stereotyped that men like action and adventure and women like soap opera, but it's been my experience that, given the proper circumstances, men can get really invested in things like love triangle stories, and women enjoy action adventure pictures...perhaps I'm not the best example, but you've probably seen me on this blog talk about how much I love Thundercats, Tarzan, Errol Flynn movies, and Lord of the Rings.
The one "guy" movie I can't really stand, the male version of the Twilight phenomenon, is "Top Gun." Seriously, the first time I saw that film I thought it was just a really elaborate parody of some kind that I just wasn't getting the joke...it was so oblivious to itself that I seriously thought Leni Riefenstahl made it.
It was an embarassingly guy-ish fantasy: rebellion against authority figures, submissive women, and of course, vehicles.
Why something like "Top Gun" escapes scrutiny whereas lots of guys go after "Twilight" is exactly the point of this blog entry.
BTW: Pierce Brosnan? Really? It's either Sean Connery or Daniel Craig for me. Sean for the old school and Daniel for the hot-banging-body and the intensity of his Bond portrayal.
Brosnan is a beautiful man...I've always liked the "dark Irish," blackhaired and so on, like Dylan McDermott and Dr. McDreamy.
Sean Connery was something else. I haven't seen any of his Bond movies, but I remember watching him sing in "Darby O'Gill and the Little People." He was trying his best to be family-friendly, but he was so "dirty" and sexy somehow...it was like watching a porn star play Snow White.
I like that Connery's so upfront about wearing a toupee. This should be a lesson to Shatner: nobody really cares if you wear a piece. The only reason people are so hung up on Shatner is because he denies it constantly.
As for the new guy, he has an obvious streak of intensity, as you say - sudden violence. He was perfect as the 'attack dog' in "Munich" that never had moral qualms about what they did. I've always thought Danny Craig was a much better villain than hero.
Yachi -
One more thing: So what is your favorite mainstream female fantasy?
Well, very few of my fantasies are really mainstream!
But I do have a soft spot for the common female fantasy of leaving a boring or domineering husband for a mysterious, adventurous aggressive giggolo type. That very seldom works out in real life, of course, something that many women my age have yet to learn.
I also like the fantasy of the alpha dog male, a big competent guy, someone like Batman, that keeps you protected and safe. I dislike admitting that I have this fantasy because:
1) It implies I'd prefer to be taken care of, which is untrue for someone as independent as me;
2) It makes people think I have Daddy issues, which couldn't be further from the truth.
Hmmm, I'm not sure you understand why guys dislike Twilight, or at least why every guy I've spoken with has disliked it! First off, and this is all based upon the movies, as I haven't read the books.
*) So far, no guy I've talked to has ever understood how Edward vs. Jacob could even be in question. If we had to, we'd all side with Jacob. He seems to be the only person in the movies, and I'm including Bella too, who seems to actually be alive. He's warm, he's a hot werewolf, and Taylor knows his martial arts stuff, as his amazing intro to his Saturday Night Live hosting stint showed.
*) From a guy's perspective, Edward has no positive characteristics. Being a pretty boy doesn't help, his lack of any emotion, his moping, it all rubs us the wrong way.
*) Actually, why don't Edward and Jacob just get together instead of choosing Bella? Why would anyone choose Bella, a girl who seems as dead inside as a vampire, who sulks and always walks around with a sneer that makes you want to smack her, not sympathize with her in any way. Actually, let's cut Edward out as well and all the werewolf boys can make out with each other. Mmmm...
*) The acting is as bad as the Star Wars Prequels. The dialog isn't great, but it's probably better than the recent Star Wars movies. I'd almost think Robert Patterson incapable of acting, yet he was decent playing Cedric in the Goblet of Fire.
*) The Twilight movie series is probably the worst offender of 'the creative cinematographer.' The look of this series is HORRIBLE. I don't care if it's supposed to be about vampires, everything doesn't have to be bland and washed out. I wish the color folks of movies these days would just try to shoot and grade things straight rather than have every scene's color reflect the mood of the characters. The -ability- to digitally grade every frame has been so misused, I'm not sure it's resulted in film progress. Sure, it looked great in Lord of the Rings and the Matrix (basically about when it was a new tool to be experimented with), but ever since then it's become a bigger and bigger hammer to wield. Not every movie looks terrible.
So.. mmm, yeah. Am I leaving anything out?
Post a Comment