Apr. 28th, 2009

seal: (Default)
My current feelings about certain broad popular cultural or even broad popular sub-cultural excretions are so filled with asperity, I'd probably do best to just eschew it all for a while.
It's clearly not healthy when I have more cynical thoughts about the fast & bi-curious than the average film reviewer who gets payed for flashing his acid reflux syndrome on page.

I'm not going to bore anyone with any film reviews, but what the hell is up with these two old corpses that suddenly have been re-vamped and polished up to appear in every other movie production:

1) The female hetero sexual alibi.

Wikisealia: A female character in a movie whose only purpose of existence is to ensure the predominate male viewership that the two male characters in charge of the storyline, are not boinking or wanting to boink each other, in spite of having all the tension, all the meaningful glances, all the punch-filled juicy comments between each other.

This is why slash was born, and these movies deserved slash, but do we really deserve these movies? and does the female sex deserve to so painfully rarely see it happen between two women?

Dudes and Dudettes, I went to see the Fast & Bi-curious because I wanted to see Michelle Rodriguez, she was prominent in the very amusing trailer, and that trailer lead me to believe that she would be having a healthy portion of the cake factor in the movie. I had no other expectation, I promise! AND THEY KILLED HER AFTER 15 MINUTES. Instead: enter two males with clenched jaws ogling each other, and one "sister" who's the hetero sexual alibi.

So not overjoyed.

2) The Omega Geek (who gets the very hott galaxies out of his league girl)

Wikisealia: The Omega Geek is a geek who is not very successful or cute, often not even that talented nor socially skilled, who gets the beauty queen in spite of all these ailments.
What makes the Omega geek unlike other geeks, in real life or on film, is that he is supposed to be impersonating a "nice guy" but no evidence of his niceness is ever provided in the story. He is however a complete pushover and continues to be so as the storyline unravels. In the universal Wikisealia Nice Guy 101 it is revealed that a primary and common trait for a truly nice guy, is that he doesn't completely judge girls by their looks, he is in fact capable of feeling interest for a girl who isn't a beauty queen and perhaps even (gasp) primarily look to personality chemistry and secondarily to looks when it comes to socializing. This doesn't mean that a nice guy primarily looks for ugly chicks, it just means that he converses with any chick that is a nice chick, whether she is ugly, plain or pretty.
The Omega Geek, per definition doesn't look at ugly or plain chicks, his glance is always to the ├╗ber-beauty, and by sheer audacity he wins the lottery over those alpha and beta males who also only look at the juiciest rack.

A supplemental category to the Omega geek is sometimes the "faux plain girl". This is a girl who is played by an actress, physically much more attractive than the lead playing the Omega Geek, but the story and everybody in it treats her as if she's plain, and thus she is modeled to fit the storyline, in spite of what the audiences eyes tells them.
However, in such recent examples as Nick and Norah's infinite playlist, Hollywood has dropped even the slightest pretense of plainifying the actress and just put together an outright gorgeous woman with an omega geek.

Okay, we all need to dream, but why the fuckety-fuck does it always have to be a male dream?
Has anyone seen an even mildly mundane looking woman put together with an attractive male on film? And don't start with that big fat greek wedding. She was actually attractive, just in a human way, and the guy was perhaps with some good will a tiny bit more attractive if you're into that sort of bloke, anyway, NOT COMPARABLE. And YES, Ellen Page is a "faux plain Jane". She is in reality an actress who's low key pretty instead of outright gorgeous. But she is, beyond doubt pretty to the point where she could do some modeling if she wanted.

Look, I managed to b-b-bore you without any film reviews!

Also, I finally decided to read Cassandra Clare's "City of Bones". I was in a benevolent mood, thinking to myself "hey, she supposedly wrote some good slash in her day, and even if I'm not that into most slash, because they write women so craptastically in it, I DID find the "Very Secret Pervy Hobbit Fancier Diaries" mildly amusing back in the day, even though I'm also irritated that so few know that Cassandra Clare, previously Cassandra Claire, actually based the whole language and idea of those writings on the mildly amusing and decently original best selling idea of Helen Fielding's Bridget Jones' Diary. In fact, had I known that the main bulk of Cassandra Claire's/Clare's best writings on the internet were pastiches of other published and famous peoples' writings, I might not have even tried to read the first installment of her "Mortal Instruments".

I do read a lot of YA books, and I've read some good and some bad ones, and there really are some fantastic writers in the YA field, so it pisses me off that such a tenuous writer as Cassandra Clare gets such a hype. The only thing that book had going was that it was an easy read. The ideas have all, with no exception been used before by better writers, and that's actually fairly okay, because in YA urban fantasy people re-hash ideas all the time, BUT, they don't try to pass them off as unique. What surprised me the most is perhaps the mediocrity of the language and how boring the characters were. All the people in the book are shallow, surface oriented sketched stereotypes, most of them are of course pretty or attractive, and the writer makes you never forget it through oversaturated descriptions. The plot, of course, is weak, since the whole point of the book(s) seems to be to describe very attractive semi-supernatural people.

I probably deserve to be disappointed because of my starry eyed hope in a person who got famous through LJ to be a really good writer, but there it is.
There probably is some truth to the back-rubbing rumor of the Sci-fi/Fantasy writing community, and it is unfortunately true that so much of it is not up to par with good writing. That doesn't mean that there isn't some really good writing in the genre, but it does mean that plenty of the writing around is not half as good as the people themselves think...and I guess RaceFail 09 on Livejournal taught us who followed it even a little, just that.

I've refrained from writing about my life and what's happening in it for a while, because I've grown superstitious with age. There are 3 things in the air, one is writing oriented (and so so very early in its phase, it really does disqualify from mentioning even), the other is job oriented and fairly minor, the third is educational and medium sized. Every single one of these three may backfire in my face any day now, and that's why I'm not writing about it yet, even though I have the urge.
I probably will write about it later, either to moan or to cavort. Sorry for being Ms. Vague McVaguerson for now.

Profile

seal: (Default)
seal

September 2011

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314 151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 29th, 2017 11:49 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios