Pointless feminism ruined the entire show. - The Fall (2013) Discussion

[–] Scaar_Alexander 10 years ago

I think you're overreacting when you say that it RUINED the entire show. It didn't, at least not to me. But there sure was something pretty irritating to it.

The less subtle part is when Stella and the young cop have that little chat about the killer, in the season finale (after their night together). She tells him something like "Men are afraid that women may laugh at them, but women are afraid that men may kill them, Spektor may be fascinating to you, but to me he's despicable". What she's saying, basically, is that men CAN be fascinated by serial-killers because you know, they're men, and they're totally oblivious to the TERRIBLE distress that is a woman's existence in a world of men, and they can't put themselves in women's shoes, because they're not in the same TEAM, as a matter of fact. And the annoying self-righteous look on Gillian's face at that moment doesn't help.

Writing a female character who has serious issues with men is perfectly all right, Gillian is awesome in that part. But the writer seems to take her site in the end. It's feminism at its most clueless.

___________
"If it's any consolation, fish aren't never even really alive. They're just less dead."

reply

[–] Whatlarks 10 years ago

Scaar_Alexander, while your interpretation of Gibson's line has merit, I think it's overlooking some key context - namely the extremely unsubtle behaviour on the part of Anderson, the young male cop. To get the full picture of this exchange, we need to account more for the male character's part in it.

Because what Anderson says is a blatant attack, designed to provoke. It's out of the blue and totally uncalled for. He does it because he doesn't like the power imbalance. Gibson took him to bed. Him, the junior officer.

BTW, Gibson's line about different gender fears is by the Canadian author Margaret Atwood. It's made in response to Anderson's admitting that for him "There's something fascinating about him. A strange allure," and his brazen assumption that Gibson must feel the same way, thus motivating her to sleep with him.

Gibson responds with the Atwood line. But Anderson doesn't stop to reflect on what it implies - that it's also implicating him because of his petty remark. He ignores what she's said, and continues to insist that "He might fascinate you." To which Gibson replies "I despise him with every fibre of my being."

So along with your interpretation, I think she is also informing Anderson about the source of misogyny, which provokes and drives someone like Spector, but also, at a different point on the spectrum, what motivates someone like Anderson himself to make such an offensive statement. The outrage is a woman not taking the assumption of male superiority seriously, especially in rejecting it by ridiculing it.

Thus Gibson's "annoying self-righteous look" at Anderson would be appropriate. It is a response to his crude attempt to cut down her power, tarnishing her choice to take him to bed by acting superior, a know-it-all. She resents his "theory" that she slept with him because, as he put it, she sees Spector "reflected in me somehow."

That look signals that she doesn't take Anderson's assumption of superiority seriously. With that look, she's embodying the reasoning mentioned above, "laughing" at Anderson to make the point. A visual flourish to cap the exchange.

reply

[–] Scaar_Alexander 10 years ago

Your misunderstanding of my comment is interesting. Interesting because I agree with most of what you wrote about the characters and their discussion in itself, but it doesn't contradict what I wrote, for one simple reason : what I was criticizing was the message BEHIND the writing, the motivations of the screenwriter.

Yes, what Anderson says is "a blatant attack design to provoke", and yes he doesn't like the "power imbalance"... because the writer made him say so. And I find it not subtle at all. I heard him well when he said that "there's something fascinating about Spector, a strange allure". But it's tragically dumb. What guy with more than two brain cells, let alone a cop who knows a little about these things, would say to a woman, let alone a woman who knows every horror the killer committed, that she might be "fascinated" by him ? The writer wanted a male character to say that so that his dear Gibson would answer this way. He needed a reason, however unsubtle it was, to make her look at a guy with disdain because of how insecure and wrong he was. You point out that Gibson's line about gender fears is from Margaret Atwood : isn't she one of those constructivist feminists advocates of the criminally demented gender theory ? That makes the writing even more biased in its vision of men and women's relationships. But of course, if you share the writer's or Margaret Atwood's views, you may nevertheless find the whole exchange perfectly all right.^^

___________
"If it's any consolation, fish aren't never even really alive. They're just less dead."

reply

[–] Whatlarks 10 years ago

The writer set up Anderson's motivation to say those things in an earlier exchange, in which Gibson asked him to interview Katie and gave her reasons. Now Anderson says: "When you first asked me to interview Katie Benedetto, you suggested I was like Spector. What did you mean by that?"

I think what Cubitt has done is continuously set up his heroine to provoke habitual, typically unconscious assumptions related to gender, in order to bring them to attention. He withholds enough about her that, lacking individual details, people then fall back on general assumptions related to her gender. This seems to me an effective strategy. It's not to everyone's taste, naturally.

I don't think the character has "serious issues with men" per se. I think she has serious issues with certain attitudes, which are often expressed by men. I'm inclined to agree with her - and the writer - in principle, even if I don't always like the ways she expresses that criticism.

In asking a rhetorical question about Margaret Atwood you're signalled that your mind is made up and you are not interested in reading a different view of her philosophy. I'll respect that wish, and so we'll agree to disagree.

reply

[–] Nanrad 10 years ago

The message behind the screen writer is that some guys get caught up on what they believe to be true rather than trying to see it from the perspective of a woman. Anderson saw her pursuit of Spector as having a sexual vibe to it because she slept with him and Stella let him know that due to society, she could never be attracted to him because he is a literal threat to her because of his hatred of women. That casts a light on how some men think they know women's feelings and motivations behind their actions when really, it's a projection about how they either view and/or feel about women themselves.

"And even with Will dead, the love triangle is not over."

reply

[–] Whatlarks 10 years ago

Great point, Nanrad.

reply

[–] Eva_Marrie 9 years ago

It's feminism at its most clueless.

Absolutely agree - this sort of approach gives feminism a bad name. The biggest irony is that both Gillian and show's creator previously got feminism right in a more subtle way in their previous work - on the X-files and Prime Suspect.

That's not even the most man-hating speech on the show. I find the one with between Stella and Burns in the hotel room to be the most offensive. There she actually talks about how men are just biologically inferior beings because they weren't lucky enough to be born female...

reply

[–] Scaar_Alexander 9 years ago

We meet again ! In a thread with a pretty similar topic, though. :) (don't worry, I'll answer (most of) your other messages as soon as I got enough free time on my hands)

Yes, I couldn't believe my ears when I heard some of Stella's lines during her conversation with Burns. I was like okay, that show hasn't never been subtle when it comes to the whole girl power thing, but now, they're just losing it. It was pure misandry, and I was a bit disappointed that Anderson went along with this. That may be my only beef with The Fall, but it's a considerable one, mainly because it ends up making Stella quite an unsympathetic character.

___________
- Booker, are you afraid of God ?
- No. But I'm afraid of you.

reply

[–] Eva_Marrie 9 years ago

Yeah, and as you can see, I'm not actually a raging misandrist after all! 

I was a bit disappointed that Anderson went along with this.

This was her big TV comeback after many years of doing under the radar projects so I can see why she would put up with it for career purposes, but it's still not admirable. Particularly when you remember that her Scully was a big 90s feminist icon in a much more intelligent way. It's a big height to fall from.

I was actually disappointed with this ham-fisted feminism from the opening scenes. Stella sounded so full of herself when being met in the airport that it was just stupid. She acted like she's god's gift to humanity just due of being a detective with ovaries...😠 I felt like yelling to the writers: she's not feminist, people! She's just self-absorbed!

And then it just never stopped!

reply

[–] Scaar_Alexander 9 years ago

Yeah, and as you can see, I'm not actually a raging misandrist after all!

Well, you wrote a few things that made me think so, and I won't dismiss it, but in the end, I'm willing to believe you on that. :D

Particularly when you remember that her Scully was a big 90s feminist icon in a much more intelligent way.

I have a problem with that, the feminist thing. Not feminism in general, but the tendency to see feminism every time there's a strong female character in the mix. I've never got any feminist vibe when I was watching the X-Files. Maybe because I'm an insensitive dick who don't really care about it, but also because I think it's a tad more complicated. See the definition of "feminism" in the Wiktionary : "A social theory or political movement which argues that legal and social restrictions on women must be removed in order to bring about equality of both sexes in all aspects of public and private life." I didn't see much of that while watching the show. At best, by being a well written likable and competent character, Scully could be Carter's way to say that women could be an FBI agent.

As a matter of fact, we could deduce kind of the opposite by Scully's failure to properly raise a child and keep being the agent we all know... and by the fact that giving her a child pretty much ruined her character in the last two seasons : each time her soon was involved, she turned into a hysterical ghoul whose motherhood was the only characteristic (aaaah her hysterical "my baby, my baby !", couldn't get enough of that :D). But I may be reaching. I know she wasn't the average FBI agent and that her son was half-alien. And I know that Mulder, while being a man, didn't have a social life either, so it's not so much a matter of genre as a matter of... schedule. But still. Feminism in Scully ? Nah, all I saw was a strong female character. And at the risk of sounding repetitive (I'm thinking of our other discussion), showing it shouldn't be politicized.

I was actually disappointed with this ham-fisted feminism from the opening scenes. Stella sounded so full of herself when being met in the airport that it was just stupid. She acted like she's god's gift to humanity just due of being a detective with ovaries...

Yes, the way she looked at people pissed me off half of the time. Anderson's ability to play self-righteousness ad nauseam didn't help. ^^;

___________
- Booker, are you afraid of God ?
- No. But I'm afraid of you.

reply

[–] Eva_Marrie 9 years ago

You seriously misinterpreted the things I wrote on Rectify - you need to see them in the particular regional context of the show's setting. It also helps to be familiar with the vocabulary of feminist critical theory, the code words that are not literal and not political.

Do you watch Orphan Black? Do you consider it feminist? It actually markets itself on that platform and I think that it's the only current show that gets feminism right without hammering you over the head with obnoxious girl power cliches.

I didn't bother with the X-Files past Season 6 after reading what a mess the last seasons were. The behind the scenes shenanigans of that show provided much of the feminist discussion on it: the fact that Gillian was paid half of Duchovny's salary for several seasons despite being an infinitely better actor; that she was almost fired for getting pregnant and then was given all of 10 days of maternity leave after a C-section. I suppose in some ways it's a compliment because it shows how badly the show needed her (David managed to almost sink it in just 3 eps on his own).

The X-Files had such a huge influence on the pop culture landscape that you can't help not thinking of that stuff when you look at Anderson - she almost personifies it. So watching her pompous ass of a character here (whom the show tries to sell as an oppressed feminist just sticking up for the rights of womankind) is just painful.

reply

[–] Seliny19 10 years ago

Nah you're just deluded and blinded with your agenda. As a woman watching this show there was only one conclusion I came to. EVERYONE IS A COMPLETE FVCKING MORON. The woman are stupid. The men are stupid. Hell even the KIDS are stupid. Everyone is a blithering idiot. The woman are WORSE. Sally is a dumb naive b!tch. Katie is the worse thing on the planet - a dick starved thirsty little sh!t. Gillian portrays a volatile, useless but deludes herself into thinking she's useful, cold, emotionally messed up twit. A direct reflection of Jamie Dornan's character. But think they have a purpose a grand calling so to speak with their "line of work". They don't. But they have to lie to themselves to cope. Like most humans in real life have to.

I don't know what show you were watching, but all the women on this show are complete fvcking jokes/caricatures or murder victims. This is a story about mentally, emotionally messed up, broken, and useless sh!tty adults all around. And it doesn't matter if you started this thread purely to troll people. There are millions of people like you who honestly believe in this pointless type of drivel. It's always an us vs. them type of brainwashed agenda that motivates you. When in reality people can't just watch a show like this and recognize that it's not about women vs men or feminism vs masculinity/patriarchy. Like stated above everyone on this show is fvcked up in some way or form. They're all sh!tty weak humans trying to trudge through and make sense and meaning of the infinite nothing in their lives until they succumb to death. It's a cliched show from beginning to end.

reply

[–] NomadNomadovic 10 years ago

Nah you're just deluded and blinded with your agenda.

Sweety you have your agenda it's just different than mine :) but I agree the show is stupid just as the zombie characters.

reply

[–] Pumpyjones 10 years ago

Not all of the guys were weak. Emmett Scanlan's character was great - and his faux pas of trying to shield his partner was annoying, but the intent wasn't malicious. It's hard for me to navigate what to do in a post feminist world. He probably grew up with parents who indoctrinated him with the laws of chivalry. The female cop could have been nicer in explaining her gripe.

I didn't think Merlin (I can't remember who the actor is or what his character's name is, so I'm going with Merlin) was a bad guy. He offended challenged Stella, but did defer to her when she cut him off. He was a little jealous, but I could see why? Stella was a little obsessed with Paul, and any smart person would have put two-and-two together at some point.

Stella's boss who kept leering at her whenever he thought she was getting laid was tedious and really invasive. Stop giving her the side-eye! She's an forty-something adult.

Paul was a very complex character, who was a serial killer, but not a cliche or cardboard cut-out. He felt real, so I don't look at his characterization as a way of slamming guys.

I wanted to punch the creepy head constable in the nose, but Stella got there first. How much creepier can one guy be? He would have been fired twenty times over for the disgusting sexual harassment he always foists upon her. (Am I the only one who cringed when he tried to explain her affect on men, particularly him? Ick).

The thug husband who beats up his wife is a stereotype, and probably the closest thing to having a truly evil man for the sake of him being 'evil' and male.

reply

[–] blackbriar246 10 years ago

I didn't see much feminism really. Just realistic characters. Most people are flawed. Stella is very competent at what she does, but she's also not a very nice person.

There are a lot of female victims because Paul killed women. I didn't really see men being stomped on in this show. And this coming from someone who doesn't like feminism and hated The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

reply

[–] fede_4488 10 years ago

Oh, I didn't know that there was a rule that says you should portray every man as a good hard working father/husband/son, etc.
I guess that men being the hero of the story on 90% of every movie made since the the beggining, made you believe that you can't write men as bad people who do bad things. Or secondary characters.

So much misogynist bullsh.t. No wonder you have to beg Hollywood to make movies with strong female main characters.

I bet you're one of MRA douchebags who complained about Mad Max: Fury Road.

reply

[–] NomadNomadovic 10 years ago

Oh, I didn't know that there was a rule that says you should portray every man as a good hard working father/husband/son, etc.

There is no rule but that would feel much real than this crap.

I guess that men being the hero of the story on 90% of every movie made since the the beggining, made you believe that you can't write men as bad people who do bad things. Or secondary characters.

Keep guessing.

So much misogynist bullsh.t. No wonder you have to beg Hollywood to make movies with strong female main characters.

Yes movies not real life events.

I bet you're one of MRA douchebags who complained about Mad Max: Fury Road.

And you are a dumbcow!

reply

[–] Alice-Morgan 9 years ago

My favorite thing about shows with strong and capable female characters is how insecure it makes men like you. You feel so insulted and insecure you have to come running to rant about it on IMDb, I've noticed this with other users in other boards. Poor little men...
Selina? Selina Kyle, you're fired! And Bruce Wayne, why are you dressed up like Batman?

reply

[–] NomadNomadovic 9 years ago

My favorite thing about shows with strong and capable female characters is how insecure it makes men like you.

How does it make me insecure? Ripley, Scully and Sarah Connor were strong Stella is man hating dumb woman.

You feel so insulted and insecure you have to come running to rant about it on IMDb,

No you are wrong, I am criticizing the melodramatic content and poor writing of the show, it's an art form and like every other art form when it's presented on a public platform it's open for insults, joke and even ridicule,

I've noticed this with other users in other boards. Poor little men...

Wow some one as high and might as you have time to go through my posting history.

Poor little men...

Learn to talk properly "strong woman" you are being racist and insulting, but it's ok to insult men right! even moderators side with, cause my reply would be deleted, but I would say this:

None of your pointless garbage answered the qeustion I posted, you are just a annoyed little school girl who likes vague trash "HANNIBAL" you re angry that crap got cancelled 

reply

[–] Alice-Morgan 9 years ago

How does it make me insecure?

You made a post to complain about it in a general way, makes you sound very insecure

Wow some one as high and might as you have time to go through my posting history.

Lol, I didn't went through your posting history and I never said I did, re-read my post

Did you just say
" Learn to talk properly" Followed by "You are being racist" ?  I can't stop laughing now, thanks for the laugh.

School girl? Was that supposed to be offending? If so you failed bro.
As for Hannibal, no I like where it ended, and don't wish another season.

After this post anyone can see you are an insecure little man that has no clue of what he is talking about

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] zpconn 9 years ago

I definitely wouldn't go so far as to say it ruined the show. I'm male and quite liked the show overall.

However, there was always something about the show, nagging in the back of my mind, and I think this post basically put words to it. This show is almost offputtingly negative towards men. Even seemingly good male characters like Burns are eventually reduced to potential rapists, when he drunkenly tries to force himself on Gibson.

I love the show's willingness to create strong female characters, but it's not a zero sum game. One needn't *also* make every male character some sort of violent psychopath.

reply

[–] rochambeau-934-616003 9 years ago

Just finished episode 3 of season 1 and sadly I have to agree.

I was hoping it wouldn't be a trend but after just 3 episodes it is definitely apparent that there is a gender bias in the writing that plays no role in telling the story.

The bias is so transparent/one dimensional that it makes just about every aspect of the "story" predictable and therefore uninteresting.

The only part of the story I'm even remotely interested in is the relationship between Spector and his daughter (and the source of her night terrors) but based on the sledgehammer approach to everything else I'm afraid that will be just as obvious/in-your-face as the rest of the show.

reply