MovieChat Forums > Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023) Discussion > We want manly male protagonists and femi...

We want manly male protagonists and feminine female companions of theirs

posted 2 years ago by lolkatz (498)
70 replies | jump to latest

Yes, "we," i.e., the men and women of the world yearn for the handsome, charismatic male leads, accompanied by womanly females. The latter can be smart and resourceful, but nevertheless tender and womanly.

Take Marion Ravenwood in Raiders, for example. She is a strong-willed woman able to take care of herself. But, she is beautiful and feminine at the same time. More specifically, her whole arc is that she starts off as a bit tomboyish tough girl, but her reunion with Indy turns her back into a cuddly, tender woman, without sacrificing her intellect and integrity.

Because, there's nothing wrong about being a woman that falls in love with the hero. And there's nothing wrong about the hero being THE hero of the movie: Confronting the forces of antagonism and, having overcome all the difficulties, taking matters into his own hands and saving the world!

What Cathleen Kennedy is doing is not funny anymore. It's no longer a woke-calling thing. She is truly both devastating cultural legacies AND wreaking financial havoc. The Dial is going to fail. This means she won't be able to cover anywhere near the $300M that was the movie's proclaimed budget, let alone the $700-900M when marketing costs, distribution rights, back-end deals are included. The movie will leave hundreds of millions of losses in its wake. Will studios continue keeping up with her?

[–] Aries (871) 2 years ago

LOL @ all the estrogen-reeking Soyjack leftist simps having a meltdown over the OP's post, which is 100% correct.

Feminists like Kathleen Kennedy are too dumb to realize that no amount of social engineering and propaganda will make humans go against their nature and switch roles (then again, if they weren't dumb, they wouldn't be feminists / leftists in the first place, but I digress...). All they do is manage to sway the mentally weak part of the populace, who'll swallow any drivel and become compliant NPCs who parrot the narrative and think it's a valid argument.

Nothing wrong with having strong female characters, as long as they are well written and made to use resources available to them to even the playing field and get a win over stronger antagonists. Good examples of this are Ripley (who uses the loader to overpower and defeat the much stronger alien queen) and Sarah Conner (who uses guns to protect herself from the murderous robot trying to kill her).

Instead, the feminist writers (most of whom are angry, untalented activists posing as (inept) writers) ascribe masculine traits to these female characters to make them appear "strong and empowered" (eye roll) and make them do physically impossible tasks, such as making a 120 lb woman beat up a bunch of henchmen and portraying Mary Sues who are automatically better at everything than their male counterparts who are older, stronger, more experienced and wiser. They go through no character development and only end up being a nauseating, smug and insufferable woman that most people dislike (Captain Marvel, Phoebe Waller Bridge's character from this movie etc.)

People are getting sick of the female empowerment trope (esp. when it's made at the expense of males, who are always shown to be weaker, dumb, stupid and incompetent) and that's why all these productions such as the all female Ghostbusters bomb at the box office despite all the ridiculous cries of misogyny and sexism.

[–] Kowalski (79077) 2 years ago

DUDE...YOU NEED TO LOG OFF THE INTERNET AND GIVE YOUR MOM A HUG.

[–] Aries (871) 2 years ago

"Log off the internet", says the man with 36K+ posts.

Anyway, would rather hug YOUR mom :D

[–] Kowalski (79077) 2 years ago

YOUR MOM LOVES YOU.

[–] maul (1666) 2 years ago

This was a banger of a post - why is it that these people always want to apply masculine attributes as the default for "strong" female characters? They almost seem to have a dislike for femininity (misogynistic, much).

Ripley and Sarah Connor shot guns and flamethrowers, but they weren't badass or masculine for the sake of it. Or arrogant. They were smart survivors, and in the sequels, mothers protecting their children.

[–] Aries (871) 2 years ago

why is it that these people always want to apply masculine attributes as the default for "strong" female characters?

Because they're too stupid to realize the hypocrisy that they covet the same traits they despise in men, which will never befit women and will, in fact, lessen their uniqueness, appeal and worth. Modern day Feminism (which is an offshoot of leftism, which is, in turn, the political facet of collectivism) appeals mostly to the less intelligent among women, who lack confidence and are grossly misinformed, thinking that men and women have the same strengths & weaknesses, and must compete against one another (male feminists are even worse, but that's a topic for another day).

But we don't - we have different strengths that make us complement one another, as nature intended. Women's strengths aren't physical in nature (never mind the statistically insignificant bunch of them that are elite athletes, who are physically more powerful than the average man) - they are mental and emotional. A heroine like Joan of Arc isn't admired and celebrated because she could beat people up like Steven Seagal does in his movies, but because she exhibited courage and inspired the people around her.

Same goes for characters like Ripley and Sarah Connor. Modern day, man-hating 3rd & 4th wave feminist pursuits are nothing more than hateful, foolish political movements that can never stand up to logic and reason. They appeal to insecure women who think men's display of power & strength comes at the cost of women's and is used as a crutch by journalists and political players to advance their own insidious agendas. Which is why any of its display in the visual arts like movies & TV shows or people's behaviors is jarring to behold and revolting to anyone with common sense and decency.

[–] ExTechOp (2770) 2 years ago

Anytime any movie features a minority and/or woman in any role at ALL, you snowflakes start whining about woke-ism

Newsflash, crybabies, movies have had women and minorities for a LOOOOONG time, sometimes even in lead roles

It's only now that y'all get triggered by it

stop being such delicate prairie flowers and grow a pair why doncha

[–] pjl69 (2647) 2 years ago

What is the reason for the recent increase in deaf people and sign language in movies and TV series? Kong vs Godzilla had them, Sicario 2 had them and the last seasons of The Walking Dead had them. And every time they felt as forced additions.

[–] maul (1666) 2 years ago

Don't forget The Last of Us show - where they specifically made one of the characters deaf, when he wasn't in the source material.

The virtue signalling game is constantly in motion, ever searching for new things to latch onto ("we have deaf representation... please clap").