The Big Picture: You Are Wrong About Sucker Punch, Part Two

[Alex Scholtz]

The problem with trying to lampoon an ignorant group of people with satire is that they often misunderstand this satire as a tacit approval of their thoughts and actions. If these people could be reached through clever appeals, logic, or humor, I doubt there would be any Chris Browns or Michael Fassbenders in the world.

Unfortunately, they can't because people that think its okay to hurt or dehumanize other people usually aren't particularly intelligent, or they willfully neglect to use their intellect because of the benefits they reap from their male privilege.

Sucker Punch, however lofty its intentions, only served as a big budget reinforcement of sexism precisely because its "feminist message" was hidden beneath layers of subtext and film school artistic mumbo-jumbo.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

You Are Wrong About Sucker Punch, Part Two

Spoilers abound in this week's finale to Bob's retrospective on Sucker Punch.

Watch Video

I sit with most of what you said, even liked it because of most that, but there's something in the ending you might have overlooked. Even taking the idea that all of the ideas here are feminist in nature, and that the potential fourth wave has to see the third wave fail before it can get it's feet, there's something some would call out--it is only through the help of the kind man that she has any hope, and some could (and have) said that this was an idea in the film that women can't do it alone.

Whether or not this is a bad thing, a good thing, true, or false is up to the person, however. You could take it either as a "women need to get men on their side against other men" stance, or a "even as an equal, we still need men, so we're not equal" one. That he shows up continuously as a guiding figure only strengthens the argument, that women always need the help of men. That was the argument I didn't have a refutation for.

 

[Jegsimmons]

all i can say is, that movie bob is a bit of a genius and Jack Snyder may be one as well.

 

[mfeff]

This seems close to the concept known as hypoagency, specifically female hypoagency; simple "one agency" when in a situation with many agents/actors/people.

I am eternally thankful to you for finding this video.

It really opened my eyes as to the reasons behind...well, pretty much EVERYTHING that has been happening in the past few months/years regarding women in movies/games.

I wasted so much time and effort in these forums battling it out against females who were heavily into topics such as Sexism in Gaming and Tropes vs Women - I kept saying so much stuff but I never truly understood the root of the message I was trying to get across.
I failed to see the ultimate reason behind why certain females around the internet have been acting in such a way.

I was actually aware of female hypoagency (had read some stuff about it) but I knew that mentioning it in arguments would get the females even angrier, and at the time it sounded more like a theory than anything solid.

But the lady in that video opened my eyes with in-depth explanations and irrefutable proof. I will no longer need to battle or argue with females in these forums (and other forums) because...the whole topic is more or less irrelevant and pointless to begin with, I know the underlying root of the female subconcious and why they act the way they act!

WOOT.

Hey your welcome, glad you got something out of it. To be clear hypoagency is not a theory that is exclusive to gender. It is simply a strategy that one may expect to see with "agents" that are in one way or another weaker and are weighing the cost/benefit of direct/indirect action in a situation.

That is, chosen such as in a game, subconscious such as in a threatening situation, or as a manifested phenomena of biological evolution, that is, because it is.

Manipulation and deceit require tremendous caloric resources to pull off, so what we tend to see, "I think", is a long term strategic pay-off or increased efficiency at executing a hypoagent program. Thing is this stuff really isn't all that new, almost all the analytic psychologist and evolutionary biologist have been discussing it in one form or another longer than steam. Buddhist philosophy discussed it quite openly and as early as 500~400 B.C.

It's a difficult subject for most due to the consequences of utility and the additional pressures which it places on a situation. There are many "feedback" loops that present themselves in these studies.

See, if someone your debating perceives that they are being challenged on the subject it undermines the hypoagency paradigm, and as such, the conversation may become or escalate to an emotional level quite quickly. This may be explained as the person utilizing hypoagency to a greater degree to further manipulate the object (person they are debating) into changing his or her tune to suit the hypo-agent's goals.

That is to say that exposing the manipulation and indirectness of the person to that person often encourages that person to "do it more", not "less". A synonym for the hypoagent is simply one who is "self centered". That is, only recognizes the validity of the one self and likely reduces all other external selves into "objects" to be manipulated to make that "self center" more comfortable.

It's pretty straight forward. Not worth arguing about really.

On the topic of the video game and media stuff, I say what I have always said since day 1.

You don't like something, learn to write software and make your own game. Feel free to borrow all my books on C++ and compilers... here is a stack of mathematics books all the way up to multivariate differential calculus. Enjoy!

That is to say, I seek to "empower" people to become self determinate movers in life, and discourage people from trying to manipulate others into "doing" things that suit them specifically. This is specifically what the video addresses, the inherent fallacy of large segments of the feminist movement. The mis-attribution of agency.

Who is supposed to be doing the work? You and I probably a lot a like... I'll help someone do something but I won't be cajoled into being someone else's pack mule so it's more convenient on them... I got a wife.

I call it the Jimmy Carter principle.

Keep it simple. Nutnfancy.

 

[imagremlin]

Never saw the film in the first place. This deconstruction probably was more enjoyable for me than the film itself would have been.

Bravo Bob.

Will probably get to see it at some point, although my wife is unlikely to believe me when I tell her is not for the hot chicks.

 

[MrBaskerville]

But this doesn´t really change the fact that the movie was incredibly boring and poorly written/acted . Personally i don´t know anyone who hated this movie because of sexism, only people who hated it because it didn´t work on various levels. Because of that i find it hard to see the point in these videos, but that´s just me and my opinion ofcourse. If everyone explicitly hated it because of sexism, then it would make sense to me.

 

[RTK1576]

Some of this analysis comes off more like "liking the message, then trying to save the messenger when no one else does." The movie, in my humble opinion, just didn't work, and so while the message might be one that should be addressed, it needed a better story than this.

And Sucker Punch's ending makes no sense. Even after your analysis, it just doesn't make sense from either a story-telling vantage point or an arthouse messaging standpoint. Seriously, focusing a story on one character for nine-tenths of the movie and then proclaiming "not this character's story?" That's not a twist. That's just stupid.

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

On the topic of the video game and media stuff, I say what I have always said since day 1.

You don't like something, learn to write software and make your own game. Feel free to borrow all my books on C++ and compilers... here is a stack of mathematics books all the way up to multivariate differential calculus. Enjoy!

That is to say, I seek to "empower" people to become self determinate movers in life, and discourage people from trying to manipulate others into "doing" things that suit them specifically. This is specifically what the video addresses, the inherent fallacy of large segments of the feminist movement. The mis-attribution of agency.

Who is supposed to be doing the work? You and I probably a lot a like... I'll help someone do something but I won't be cajoled into being someone else's pack mule so it's more convenient on them... I got a wife.

I call it the Jimmy Carter principle.

Keep it simple. Nutnfancy.

It's incredible, I have been saying the same thing since the very beginning - but sadly I wasn't able to properly word my stuff and was constantly bashed by females
The discussions went something like this:
> Me: Something like 80-95% of game development teams consist of males, therefore they make what they know best - the male mindset.
> Females: Because corporations don't want women in their teams, society normals discourage women from taking interest in programming and game design. Males need to stop being sexist jerks.
> Me: Women are often treated harshly when they enter male-dominated areas (such as an eSports event) because it's human tendency for the strong to prey on the weak, for the majority to pick on the minority.
> Females: So what? Males need to stop being sexist jerks and be more welcoming and accepting to females, females shouldn't have to "prove" how good they are at gaming to enter gaming circles.
> Me: Women need to drive themselves into game development, women need to drive themselves to attend gaming conventions/events/tournaments (which consist of pretty much nothing but males aged 15-35) and prove to the industry that they exist, that they make up a big chunk of the consumer base.
> Females: Women don't attend gaming conventions/events/tournaments because males are always sexist jerks towards them. And we don't need to prove anything. Males just need to stop being such dicks, and then everything will be alright.
> Me: But that's not a SOLUTION, it will never happen! Guys in Call of Duty won't stop being dicks to the rare girl player who shows up on her own, it's all about harsh competition and trash-talking! They KNOW you'll get offended when they make sexist jokes towards you, that's why they're doing it, to demoralize you.
> Females: Yeah, and they need to stop that. They need to stop acting so immature.
> Me: So what's your solution?
> Females: You guys need to stop being dicks.
> Me: ...........

And the argument just keeps going back and forth endlessly until the females just say "Tippy, you're just a sexist jerk." And I try to say "but I'm on your side, I WANT to see more women drive themselves forward into game development and gaming circles! I'm just saying that instead of asking males to roll out the red carpet for you, it's YOU who needs to do the work!"

But it's too late, I have now been dismissed as a "dick who feels sexism is right".

Whoa I took this way off topic.

Anyway, I personally liked Sucker Punch. No, not for it's mind-blowing depth (as claimed by Bob) but...well, because it's about girls smashing monsters. I felt the story/plot was shallow, but that was my first time watching it. Maybe it's something you need to watch a few more times to "get" it

 

[RedDeadFred]

I have to agree with Bob. if this film was supposed to deliver a message of some sort, then why did "nobody" get it? It was just poor delivery.

If the movie was actually well made and enjoyable to watch, then people might have gotten it as the satire it was supposed to be and not just another clone shitty action movies with big breasts and terrible story telling.

Captha: Better Call Saul. SO MUCH FUCKING WIN!!!!

 

[PurePareidolia]

Yeah, that is the movie they wanted to make, but the fact they sacrificed basic narrative coherence to do so means that isn't the message the movie ended up with.

It should not be that hard to make a movie criticizing false empowerment if you have a character designed to do that - Make Sweet Pea's outfits pragmatic and show the benefit of it. It's a metaphorical mindscape - make Sweet Pea the tank of the group because she's wearing armour, while the others actually end up beaten and bruised for running around in schoolgirl outfits. Tell us her name, play up the differences between her less-flashy, more human style. her dialogue indicates her dance is "personal" so use the dream layer that is a direct metaphor for dancing to characterize her and make her human. Zack Snyder wrote a deconstruction and paid only lip service to the actual deconstructing in favour of more titilation and nonsense.

In addition to that, cut back to the real world from time to time in between action scenes for two reasons. One: Show us the dancing/thievery that the action scene is a metaphor for, and two: show us the actual stakes involved. If the fantasy corresponds to differnt things happening in the real world, show us them happening and baby Doll reacting to them. If the guy looks to be snapping out of it, show us her noticing and improvising a new move, then the corresponding hero moment in the dream sequence. It may sound like it's destroying the point of the metaphor but the fact the entire fight scene takes place in a dream world means that it inherently lacks tension. The scene needs tension to be dramatically effective and that comes from what they're actually doing - stealing something important.

Also, keep the character's consistent - The Bus driver is apparently a figment of Baby Doll's imagination, which means at some level she put "his" plan together. Meaning she's smarter than she gives herself credit for because of severe guilt and depression for killing her sister. Make that a character arc. Have Sweet pea consistently tell her she can be more than what she is. Reinforce the idea that she's a negative role model by having the positive one point it out and try to help. Have her actually say "I didn't think this up, the old man did" pointing out the supposedly empowered character is still just doing what a man says and doesn't understand her own potential.

Lastly, have Baby Doll, who spend the entire movie trying to become first a prostitute, then a vegetable* escape. The protagonist wins when their values are accepted and validated. Like it or not, that's Baby Doll in the movie - she succeeds in both her goals, even at great cost. But if the protagonist is really Sweet Pea as the movie says, then her values - actual empowerment should win the day by allowing Baby Doll to defeat the bad guy without just making herself too vapid to be raped. What that means is that even though the title of main character nominally switched over, the movie still endorses Baby Doll - the bad role model - as it's protagonist because her actions, even though they were wrong, are what saved the day in the end. Regardless of authorial intent, the movie contradicts its own premise by portraying all the titillation and shallowness as good and necessary for actual strong woman to succeed.

and THAT is why it's a mysogynistic movie. It's plot actively negates its own premise and treats faux-empowerment as more important than actual empowerment, which it considers ineffectual and whiny. I mean, it's misanthropic in general, but the overall point of the movie was to make a statement about female empowerment, which it screwed up and said the opposite thing.



*She hears her dad and the orderly discussing the lobotomy and how much trouble they could be in if they were discovered very early on. The movie could've ended in five minutes if she'd given the matron the heads up at any point in the film. Also her go to escapist fantasy is a brothel. I don't understand why, but she seems to have wanted everything that happened to her.

 

[Darth_Payn]

I'm not sure what's worst: having a movie pretty much call me an asshole, or (assuming Bob is correct in his assessment of the film's intentions) the fact that I totally deserved it...

Hey now, don't think like that. Zack Snyder's probably the true asshole for calling his audience the assholes for DARING to like the stuff he put into his movie.
I think the other things to hate about Sucker Punch is that, as poorly characterized as they were, we wanted the girls to escape, and only the "bitchy" one did. That last minute protagonist switch at the end was just dick-slap.

It's telling that the least trampy of the girls is the one you consider a *****.

Well, she kind of sounded like one oin the clip Bob put in today's video, like yelling at Baby Doll for her "dancing" and calling the escape plan stupid, thus Bob calling Sweet Pea "Captain Bringdown". Showing some more of her interacting with her sister Rocket would have countered that.

And these girls' names STILL make no sense!

 

[carpathic]

It was the lobotomy that did me in on this film.

I could put up with the crap, odd story and everything else - but seriously lobotomy...you cannot take that shit back.

Le Yike!

 

[Jobbie]

umm, am i the only one who watched this movie for the hot looking chicks and bad ass action sequences?

 

[Arcane Azmadi]

The end of this movie blew me away. It was, as the title probably intended from the start, a complete sucker punch that I did NOT see coming. It shook me to the core. I'm not sure if I liked it, but the reveal that the "real heroine" of the movie was Sweet Pea all along forced me to completely reevaluate everything I'd known and understood from practically the beginning of the movie.

'Never meant to change my opinion'? Then you might want to change the title of your video, Bob.

No, he shouldn't. He didn't want to change your OPINION of the film, only your UNDERSTANDING of it. If you didn't like the movie, he's not saying you're wrong. But if you dismissed it as a shallow, mysognistic male-gaze leer-fest then you ARE wrong about that.

 

[AbstractStream]

I actually liked this two part explanation. I agree on various points and I love the movie Sucker Punch, with or without the message(s). Nice job, Bob.

 

[cervie]

I can appreciate the mental gymnastics it took to come up with all that, Bob, but its all quite lost on the typical brain dead movie goer on a saturday night as you're well aware.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

such a shame i couldnt bare to watch the film all the way through. maybe if i had messages to look out for it'd have held my interest, but i doubt it. i fely myself getting dumber as i watched

 

[RTR]

I'll take a movie that tries hard but stumbles along the way than a movie that doesn't try at all.

Oh certainly, but the minor thing of there being actually -good- movies does still relegate this to the bad movies department - especially as this didn't so much as "miss the landing", but faceplanted into the concrete at 300 miles an hour.

Part of the reason why I'm a supporter of this movie is that it really is that odd to see a movie tackling such tricky subject matter and it may take a long time before a mainstream(ish) movie takes it on again. It may take even longer for a movie that truly nails it.

 

[Biodeamon]

Basically i just bioled down the plot to if some japanese anime writer clinical depression made inception.

captcha:"that's what she said" seriously captcha? seriously?