Tag: Female Characters

‘Bachelorette’ Proves Bad People Can Make Great Characters

Kirsten Dunst, Isla Fisher, and Lizzy Caplan in Bachelorette
Written by Robin Hitchcock.
[Warning: spoilers ahead!]
When I saw The Hangover, around the time its sequel came out, I was disappointed they didn’t make the sequel the story of “meanwhile, the bride and her girlfriends had an even MORE wild adventure.” Some of us hoped we’d get something along those lines with Bridesmaids, which certainly was an enjoyable movie and huge step forward for female-focused comedies in mainstream Hollywood, but sometimes felt forced when it veered into the “shocking” territory of ladies pooping.
So three cheers for Bachelorette, which certainly stands on the shoulders of Bridesmaids, but makes it look tame in comparison. Bachelorette doesn’t just have its female characters do shocking things, it has the shocking characterizations. For once, we have a movie full of female characters allowed to be the horrifically selfish jerks that routinely populate dude comedies like The Hangover. It’s delightfully bracing.
For some, the ladies of Bachelorette will be too bitchy, or too similar to sexist stereotypes, to bear. Maid of Honor Regan (Kirsten Dunst) is a Type-A ice queen, joined by bridesmaids Gena (Lizzy Caplan), a self-centered fuck-up, and airhead Katie (Isla Fisher). All three enjoy drugs and casual sex, and all three can be jaw-droppingly mean. All are horrified that the bride Becky (Rebel Wilson) is getting married first among them, because, well, she’s fatter than they are. They still use the cruel nickname (“Pig Face”) they gave her in high school, and spend the first act showing shocking disregard for the her well-being and the success of her wedding. [Fortunately for the bride, there are other women in her bridal party lurking on the sidelines of the story, theoretically taking care of most of the wedding business while these three cause trouble].
Rebel Wilson is unfortunately not given much to do as Becky, but I really enjoyed how the movie didn’t just victimize her as the “fat friend”, subverting that dynamic by making it clear that Becky’s size is much more of an issue for her skinnier friends than it is for Becky herself.  Although Gena awkwardly jokes in her rehearsal dinner speech about meeting Becky when she was making herself vomit in the high school bathroom, it’s later revealed that Regan is actually the one with a history of bulimia. It’s made clear that Becky doesn’t tolerate strangers being cruel to her: she puts a stop to her bachelorette festivities the moment the male stripper Katie brought in calls her “Pig Face.” Becky retains her dignity, while Gena, Katie, and Regan pathetically retreat to have their own private coke-fueled hotel room bender without the bride or the other members of the bridal party.
Rebel Wilson as the bride, a well-adjusted foil for the main characters
During this party, the girls cruelly mock the size of Becky’s wedding gown, and Regan and Katie both try to climb into it. But Becky is only twice their size in their demented imaginations, so the gown rips.  The rest of the plot follows their misadventures as they attempt to fix the gown before the next morning.
Gena, Katie, and Regan never stop being selfish bitches in their quest to undo this huge wrong. A potential solution is reached when they are able to get into a bridal shop after hours and there’s another dress available in nearly Becky’s size, but it’s rejected because that dress is Regan’s favorite, and she can’t let her friend wear it instead of her. They’re also all distracted by their own romantic subplots, particularly Gena (who is paired against her former Party Down co-star Adam Scott, to the same irresistibly watchable effect).
But through all of this shocking meanness, there’s a true-to-life thread of the genuine friendship between these women. It may be hard to imagine how these characters became friends in the first place, but who didn’t build some unlikely friendships through the happenstance of high school classroom seating charts and locker assignments? And despite all their nasty behavior, it’s not hard to understand why they are still friends after all these years: Bachelorette masterfully illustrates the bond we feel with the people we’ve known the longest, even if they aren’t the closest people in our present lives. Becky and Regan will always have a bond because Becky covered up for her high school bulimia; Regan and Gena will always have a bond because Regan took Gena to get an abortion when her high school boyfriend (Scott) chickened out. In the final scenes, Regan bounces between finally putting her bitchiness to good use by chewing out Becky’s floundering florist, and saving Katie’s life after she overdoses on Xanax. Gena assures Katie’s bewildered suitor that even though he’s right that Regan is a “head case” it’s also true that “she’s a good friend.” It rings true. Regan is the kind of friend you’d never want, but you would nevertheless be grateful for if you did have her in your life.
Bachelorette has a happy ending without absolving the characters
Still, Regan, Gena, and Katie sit out Becky’s wedding ceremony, beat-down and vomit-covered on a bench, unneeded by Becky the beaming Bride. The film ends with a wedding reception coda that’s appropriately joyful, but there’s no clear-cut redemption for our troubled trio. Bachelorette strikes a delicate balance, getting us to like and root for these flawed characters without denying their shortcomings (as The Hangover and its ilk are wont to do).  It’s a rare feat for any film, and almost unheard of with a female-centric comedy.

Call for Writers: Women in Classic Literature Film Adaptations

Books provide a plethora of inspiration to Hollywood. So we’re kicking off the new year with a theme week featuring Women in Classic Literature Film Adaptations. As usual, we’re interested in exploring depictions of female characters — whether lauding empowering roles or criticizing sexist tropes — and analyzing gender.

Here are some suggested film adaptations but feel free to suggest your own:

Little Women
The Color Purple
Jane Eyre
Gone With the Wind
The House of the Spirits
Sense and Sensibility
To Kill a Mockingbird
Romeo and Juliet
Women Without Men
A Streetcar Named Desire
Wuthering Heights
Dune
Love in the Time of Cholera
Their Eyes Were Watching God 
The Great Gatsby
Dracula 
Blade Runner
Out of Africa
Raise the Red Lantern
Emma
The Lord of the Rings
Hamlet
Cry the Beloved Country
Vanity Fair
Moll Flanders 
Alice in Wonderland
The Crucible
Beloved
Tess of the D’Urbervilles
Doctor Zhivago
A Room with a View
Lolita
The Portrait of a Lady
The Good Earth
Remains of the Day
Dangerous Liasons
Age of Innocence
A Raisin in the Sun 
The Wizard of Oz
 

As a reminder, these are a few basic guidelines for guest writers on our site:
–We like most of our pieces to be 1,000 – 2,000 words, preferably with some images and links.
–Please send your piece in the text of an email, including links to all images, no later than Friday, January 18th.
–Include a 2-3 sentence bio for placement at the end of your piece.
Email us at btchflcks(at)gmail(dot)com if you’d like to contribute a review. We accept original pieces or cross-posts. 
Submit away!

The Best of 2012 (I think)

Written by Rachel Redfern.

New York Times film reviewer A.O. Scott said that 2012 was a year of Hollywood heroine worship, and he lists some fabulous movies with strong and unique female characters.

In a similar spirit I’d like to promote my top (female-centered) film and TV show of 2012.
While Turn Me On, Dammit was actually released in Norway in 2011, it wasn’t released until 2012 in the United States, which feels logical enough in posting it in a ‘Best of 2012’ list. Turn Me On, Dammit is cleverly written and hilariously and astutely portrays a young girls coming of age, specifically as she deals with her rampant teenage hormones. 
The film has sharp characters, a sex-positive message, and ultimately shows a young woman standing up for herself and her actions. The film is everything that I hope cinema continues to be, original stories with unique female characters and a positive and accurate portrayal of women. You can read my original (and far better) review of the film here.
The category of favorite feminist TV show of 2012 was a bit harder because in thinking about it, I realized that I love lots of shows, but very few should really be considered feminist friendly. So many of the amazingly well-written shows that grace my laptop screen still focus on male stories and male characters. While women obviously play a role in these TV shows (for example, Breaking Bad, Sons of Anarchy) the main protagonists and driving plot forces are still usually only men.
However, there is one show that does fulfill the criteria of strong, unique female protagonist and that is of course, Homeland. Claire Danes is Carrie Mathieson, a brilliant CIA analyst whose obsession with finding terrorists leads her to a recently returned POW who she believes has been turned.
The TV show has been lauded for Danes’ portrayal of mental illness and confident intelligence officer as she battles her way through national security and personal relationships. The show is subtle in a it’s themes of women in politics, sexuality, international affairs and familial relationships and features several prominent female characters other than Danes.
Morena Baccarin is the loyal, yet realistic POW’s wife and Amy Hargreaves as Danes’ doctor-sister and her faithful anchor during her troubles. This award-winning show is one of the best things on TV right now and Claire  Danes’ award-winning performance and provacative character is not to be missed. For a longer (and better) review, read Bitch Flicks contributor, Leigh Kolb’s, review here.

World Champion Eaters: The Paradox of the Gilmore Diet in ‘Gilmore Girls’


Guest post written by Amanda Rodriguez.

The long-running TV series The Gilmore Girls followed the lives of a single mother who got pregnant at 16 and her daughter as they live and grow in a small town. The mother and daughter duo (Lorelai& Rory) are unconventional, confident, independent, smart, capable, and fun-loving. In Lorelai’s words, “That’s because I’m not orthodox. I’m liberal with a touch of reform and a smidgen of zippity-pow.” The way in which Lorelai and Rory relate to food, however, is a complex issue that can function as a microcosmic reading of the entire show.

First of all, it’s important to establish Rory and Lorelai’s eating habits.
The Gilmore Girls like junk food.

The pair is infamous for not knowing how to cook and always ordering take-out or going out to eat. They eat burgers, pizza, or Chinese food for dinner nearly every night. For breakfast, it’s donuts, pancakes, bacon, pop tarts, or four bowls of cereal. They avoid vegetables at all costs. When they have movie nights (which is often), they stock up on a bevy of sugary snacks, including (but not limited to) Red Vines, marshmallows, cheesy puffs, potato chips, tater tots, and mallowmars. Not only that, but they drink copious quantities of coffee. Refusing to eat any sort of healthy food while indulging consistently in junk food is only half of it…
The Gilmore Girls can seriously eat.
This mother/daughter team has the capacity to consume mass quantities of food, out-eating their much larger male counterparts. They’re always up for round three or even four when the boys have thrown in the towel. In addition, they despise exercise and ridicule other women who either enjoy or feel compelled to workout.

Other characters constantly crack jokes that revolve around their disbelief surrounding the quality and quantity of the food the Gilmore Girls consume. The Gilmore Girls themselves refer to their eating habits with startling frequency. In fact, their diet is referred to in one way or another in nearly every single episode. Why is this theme so central?

Ostensibly, the way the Gilmore Girls eat is intended to be commensurate with the way in which they live their lives. Lorelai is not a traditional mother. She doesn’t grocery shop for healthy foods; nor does she prepare meals.
Lorelai’s refusal to conform to what society expects a mother to cook is symbolic of her rebellion against society’s expectations of what a mother should be. Instead, Lorelai is a hot, fast-talking, coffee guzzling, career-oriented woman whose relationship with her daughter is more like that of a friend than a parent. She encourages her daughter to think for herself and to make her own decisions. Both Lorelai and her daughter are extremely successful and well-respected with an intense emotional bond, proving that their unconventionality is not only endearing, but it works.

The pair’s notorious consumption habits act as a rejection of the notion that women must be so body obsessed that they strictly monitor their food intake, which can devolve into an unhealthy eating disorder and/or suck the enjoyment out of food and of life. These two women flaunt a freedom, self-acceptance, and pleasure-seeking attitude that are all expressed through their love of food. 
Rory (Alexis Bledel) and Lorelai (Lauren Graham) in Gilmore Girls
Rory and Lorelia embrace the lowest common denominator types of food, preferring high quantity and low quality. Though Lorelai was raised in a wealthy household, she has rejected the upper class lifestyle. When eating their weekly Friday night dinners with Lorelai’s parents (Emily & Richard Gilmore), Lorelai and Rory often have trouble eating or enjoying the gourmet delicacies that they’ve been served. This is an expression of the way in which they’ve embraced their working class status.

Unfortunately, this is where the positive interpretations of the Gilmore diet end. On the surface, eating junk food and tons of it may seem subversive in its rejection of traditional values surrounding womanhood, motherhood, and class, but it is, in truth, an enactment of the male fantasy of the beautiful, slender woman who loves to eat and doesn’t worry about her weight. Within this context, their eating habits seem more in-line with an idealized concept of womanhood rather than a dismissal of it.
Gilmore Girls

 

The most disturbing and possibly damaging facet of the Gilmore diet is that it is patently unrealistic. Yes, there are thin women out there who have naturally high metabolisms or don’t exercise or prefer junk food. The combination of all three, however, is rarer. Regardless, there is a distinction between weight and health. For example, someone can be“underweight” or at “optimum weight” and be unhealthy, while another person can be “overweight” and still be healthy. It’s hard to imagine a nutrient deficient lifestyle like the one the Gilmore Girls practice resulting in copious energy, brain power, and a healthful appearance.
If so much focus wasn’t placed on Rory and Lorelai’s diet, we could chalk all this up to the combination of “good genes” (as often claimed on the show), a cute personality quirk, and Hollywood magic. The emphasis on the Gilmore diet, however, ends up creating yet another unrealistic expectation of how women should be and look. Many women lament online that they wish they could eat like the Gilmore Girls and not gain weight. Blogger with the handle“Leah (The Kind of Weight Watcher”) even created something she calls “The Gilmore Girls Diet” where she lays out her plan to eat like the Gilmore Girls in an attempt to lose weight. Even Lauren Graham (the actress who portrays Lorelai) struggles with food, her weight, and self-confidence. Not only that, but she loves being athletic and relies on exercise to keep her body healthy and within the Hollywood ideal. This underscores the fact that the Gilmore diet isn’t even realistic for the Gilmore Girls themselves.

For countless women around the world suffering from eating disorders and unhealthy relationships with food, the Gilmore diet is another detrimental example of the paradox insisting women should be naturally thin and beautiful while not paying attention to what they eat or how they take care of their bodies. This paradox contributes to many women’s struggles with body image and self-worth. It also promotes a negative relationship with food, where some women no longer view food as simply life-sustaining sustenance, but as a huge force in life. Some may see food as an enemy to be managed or starved, or, conversely, some women may develop an emotional dependence on food so that they must indulge in order to derive comfort. All the positive facets of the Gilmore diet are washed away in the face of its reinforcement of unhealthy body and food issues.
Now consider how unconventional the Gilmore Girls really are. They’re well-dressed, slender, and typically attractive. They live in a quaint, small town that they adore. Rory receives an Ivy League Yale education. Lorelai has no mechanical or home repair skills so must always ask Luke (the local diner owner) to be her handyman. Even their eschewing of the upper class lifestyle has its limits; they often enjoy the benefits of having wealthy family (expensive gifts, education, trips, etc), and the two generally fit in quite well at Emily and Richard’s upper crusty social functions. They obsess over boys and men, and both of them seek traditional heterosexual romances that will lead to traditional marriage and a traditional family.
In the end, the Gilmore diet says the same thing the show itself is saying: Yes, the Gilmore Girls are quirky, independent, and smart. Yes, the Gilmore Girls refuse to bend to society’s ideas of how a woman should be and what should be expected of her. At heart, though, the Gilmore Girls want that traditional life, and by the end of the series, they have that traditional life. Though the Gilmore Girls claim to be nonconformist, though they take an unconventional path to get there, they end up in the same place with the same kind of traditional life as other, less rebellious TV heroines. Their diet, like their lifestyle, may seem subversive at first glance, but instead reveals itself to be another expression of their internal acceptance of ideal, traditional womanhood.

———-

Amanda Rodriguez is an environmental activist living in Asheville, North Carolina. She holds a BA from Antioch College in Yellow Springs, Ohio and an MFA in fiction writing from Queens University in Charlotte, NC. She writes all about food and drinking games on her blog Booze and Baking. Fun fact: while living in Kyoto, Japan, her house was attacked by monkeys.

Gender & Food Week: ‘James and the Giant Peach’

James and the Giant Peach
This guest post written by Libby White previously appeared at Bitch Flicks as part of our series on Animated Children’s Films and our series on Women and Gender in Musicals.

Based on the book by Roald Dahl, James and the Giant Peach has been a favorite movie of mine since childhood. After all, what kid wouldn’t love a cast of singing and dancing insects?
(Before I go into a review of the movie, I must state that I have never read the book, and do not know how closely the movie follows. Any comments I make are on the film alone, not the book.)
Directed by Henry Selick, the story revolves around a boy named James, who after the death of both parents, ends up a slave to his two cruel aunts, Sponge and Spiker. After an encounter with a strange man promising him “marvelous things,” James receives a bag of magical sprites, (crocodile tongues boiled in the skull of a dead witch for 40 days and 40 nights, the gizzard of a pig, the fingers of a young monkey, the beak of a parrot and three spoonfuls of sugar to be exact),  that inadvertently end up planting themselves within a barren peach tree. An enormous peach sprouts from the tree at contact,  which James later escapes into, turning into a claymation version of himself. Alongside a band of personified insects, the group sail across the ocean on the peach, encountering various trials as they head towards their destination in New York City.
The aunts, Sponge and Spiker, are two of the worst people to ever grace the silver screen, with their terrible abuse of young James setting the stage for the adventure ahead. They serve as the main antagonists of the story, chasing James across land and sea to recapture him.
The Aunts are horrific caretakers; starving, beating, and emotionally abusing James relentlessly. Mind you, this is a movie for children. And like in most children’s movies, the Aunts’ outward appearance reflects their inner evil. Both women are made to look terrifyingly cruel and yet simultaneously clown-like, dressed in orange-red wigs and slathered on make-up. During their first 20 minutes on screen, the two women participate in dozens of morally reprehensible practices, everything from shameless vanity to verbally attacking a woman and her children.
The fact that the villains are female does not bother me, nor that they are portrayed as greedy, selfish people. After all, women are just as capable as men of committing child abuse. However, while the style of the movie is very dark and Tim Burton-esque, I can’t help but wish that the Aunts’ appearances were not related to their evil.  Too often in the world of children’s movies a villain need only be identified by their ugly appearance, as if that is a symptom of inner ugliness. Just look at most Disney movies from the past century!
The women’s abuse of James was also very dramatic and purposeful, most likely so that the children watching the movie could understand James’ need for immediate escape. The film could have used the Aunts as an opportunity to delve into the other types of child-abuse, but instead meant to focus on the strong atmosphere of fantastical adventure. (With a story that involves death by Rhinoceros, skeleton pirates, and mechanical sharks, it is easy to understand why the people themselves are wildly unrealistic. The world itself is wildly unrealistic.) 
Transformed by the sprites themselves, James finds a group man-sized insects living within the giant peach, each with a unique personality that relates to their species. There is a smart, cultured grasshopper; a kind, nurturing ladybug; a rough-talking, comedic centipede; a neurotic, blind earthworm; a poetic, intelligent spider; and a deaf, elderly glowworm.
The spider, glowworm, and ladybug are all female, each very different and yet immensely likeable. It’s great to see several types of female personalities represented, though perhaps they are a little clichéd. Miss Spider is the typical sensual seductress, the Ladybug a doting mother-figure. The glow-worm has no real part except serving as a lantern inside the peach, and occasionally mishearing a phrase for laughs.
James: “The man said marvelous things would happen!”
Glowworm: “Did you say marvelous pigs in satin?”
Miss Spider in particular is a great female character; strong, smart, and willing to stand up for herself and those she cares about. Despite her reputation as a killer and cave-dweller, she repeatedly defends James and wards off the assumptions the other insects have made-about her.  From the moment she is introduced in her personified form, you can’t help but like her. She doesn’t take anyone’s crap.
Ladybug comes off as an older, traditional woman, complete with a flowered hat and overfilled purse. She is kindly, though strict about manners and being polite. When describing what each bug hopes to find in New York City, Ladybug is most concerned with seeing flowers and children. And while Ladybug does resemble an Aunt of mine to disturbing proportions, I felt like she had no purpose in the story other than to serve as James’ replacement mother/grandmother. While the other insects are having swashbuckling adventures and near death experiences, Ladybug is just scenery, screaming and cheering in the correct places. Which is odd, because every insect has a large amount of screen time devoted to their stories and transformation, minus the glowworm and ladybug. Both female characters. In the end, it was James, Miss Spider, Centipede, Earthworm, and Grasshopper who repeatedly saved the day. Ladybug was just there to reassure James of himself whenever fear or doubt overtook him.

Despite this unfortunate exclusion, I still would highly recommend the film to anyone who is interested. It is visually stunning, undoubtedly original, and teaches a lesson about family that is quite touching.
From a feminist perspective, my favorite thing about the film is that it doesn’t pay any attention to sex at all. At no point are the Aunts’ criticized for being a disappointment to the name of maternal women. At no point is Miss Spider treated differently because she is female. No, almost every character has an inner and outer struggle, each reaching a defining moment in the plot where they must test themselves to save those they love. Together, the insects and James form a makeshift family, each working equally with one another to build a happy life in their new home. (And the boy who plays James is too cute for words, all his emotions and inner growth come off as genuine. You can’t help but cheer for him as he finally stands up to his aunts.)
Overall, James and the Giant Peach is an excellent movie, and I would suggest it to any parent or person who likes stories of adventure and fantasy. Any warnings I would give would refer only to the dark nature of the beginning of the film, and to any people who may be afraid of giant, rampaging rhinoceroses.
———-
Libby White is a senior at the University of Tennessee, studying Marketing and Spanish full-time. Her parents were in the Navy for most of her life, so she got to see the world at a young age, and learn about cultures outside her own. Her mother in particular has had a huge influence on her, as she was a woman in the military at a time when men dominated the field. Her determination and hard-work to survive in an environment where she was not welcomed has made Libby respect the constant struggle of women today.

Weekly Feminist Film Question: Who’s Your Favorite Female Character from a Holiday Movie?

With the holiday season in full swing, we thought it would be a good time to take a look at holiday films. Most holiday films are male-centric, often revolving around dudes in crisis — It’s a Wonderful Life, A Christmas Carol and How the Grinch Stole Christmas immediately spring to mind. But what about the ladies?? So we asked you to tell us: Who’s your favorite female character from a holiday movie?

———-

Mame Dennis (Rosalind Russell) — Auntie Mame

Lucy Van Pelt (Tracy Stratford) — A Charlie Brown Christmas

Maria (Sonia Manzano) — Christmas Eve on Sesame Street

Karen (Emma Thompson) — Love Actually

Susan Walker (Natalie Wood) — Miracle on 34th Street

Jessica Riggs (Rebecca Harrell) — Prancer

Clarice (Janis Orenstein) — Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer

Jessica/Mrs. Claus (Robie Lester) — Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town

The Ghost of Christmas Present (Carol Kane) — Scrooged

Did your favorite holiday female characters make the list? Let us know in the comments!

———-

Each week we tweet a new question and then post your answers on our site by the weekend! To participate, just follow us on Twitter at @BitchFlicks and use the Twitter hashtag ‪#feministfilm.

Where ‘Ruby Sparks’ Goes Wrong

Paul Dano and Zoe Kazan in Ruby Sparks
Written by Robin Hitchcock.
I expected to either love or hate Ruby Sparks depending on where it took its premise. This premise being: sad sack writer creates a Manic Pixie Dream Girl Character named Ruby Sparks, she manifests into his real life, still influenced by what he writes about her, consequences ensue. I suspected I’d hate the movie if the creation of the woman Ruby Sparks was a happy miracle, and love it if it turned out to be a disaster, depicting the limitations of the fantasy applied to real life. 
But my feelings were more complicated than I expected. I found Ruby Sparks to be an engrossing film that was very uncomfortable to watch, like a good horror movie. But I was also left unsatisfied and disappointed by the film, wanting both a better take-down of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl trope and a better all-around movie watching experience. 
The first problem with Ruby Sparks is that it takes entirely too long to establish its premise. It’s actually a pretty simple idea for anyone hip to storytelling tropes (even if you don’t know the phrase “Manic Pixie Dream Girl,” you probably recognize one when you see one, and writers with God-like authorial power is nothing new either). While it is realistic that it would take our characters a while to accept this premise was actually happening, it’s frustrating for the audience. We’ve already accepted it before we started to watch the movie, which makes the first forty minute or so of “Yes, REALLY” rather tedious. 
I believe this first problem is a symptom of the second and most serious problem with Ruby Sparks: that the writer who creates her, Calvin, is the protagonist. Given the that film was written by a woman (Zoe Kazan, who also plays the eponymous character), co-directed by a woman (Valerie Feris, alongside Jonathan Dayton, the directing team behind Little Miss Sunshine), and centered on deconstructing an antifeminist trope, I was surprised how much sympathy I was expected to have for the man luxuriating in a hyper-real version of it. 
The Sad Sack in Need of the Love of Good Woman, the Manic Pixie Dream Girl’s counterpoint, is a sexist trope in and of itself. It’s rooted in the idea that only men are burdened by the pathos of true adulthood/personhood, that the expectation to be a Great Man is a constant yoke that women will never understand. In the case of Ruby Sparks‘s Calvin (Paul Dano), he’s suffering the terrible burden of being a literary wunderkind who hasn’t been able to follow up the Great American Novel he wrote in his early twenties.
Zoe Kazan as Ruby Sparks
Calvin’s therapist gives him a writing assignment to help with his writer’s block: write about a person who could love Calvin’s shaggy dog, Scotty, despite his flaws (guess what guys: THE DOG IS A METAPHOR FOR CALVIN! Whoaaaa!). Calvin then dreams (literally) and encounter with Ruby Sparks, a pretty, friendly, charming girl who likes Scotty even though she’s unfamiliar with the works of his namesake, F. Scott Fitzgerald. After this dream, Calvin can’t stop writing about Ruby (on a typewriter! In 2012. Ugh, he’s the worst.)
Calvin at his magical typewriter.
Cultural ignorance is only one of the many infantalizing qualities given to Ruby by Calvin: she can’t drive, she doesn’t own a computer, she “isn’t very good at life sometimes” because she forgets to pay bills and the like. Then there are the deficits in Ruby’s true personhood that aren’t by design, but by omission: Calvin writes that she is a painter, but we never see her paint, and neglects to give her a regular job, or any friends or family. The only outside relationships he gives her are memories of inadequate exes: a high school teacher she had an affair with (thus failing to get her diploma), an alcoholic, another age-inappropriate partner. All to make Calvin the more comparatively worthy. 
While this is all cutting writing on Kazan’s part, doing its work to highlight what makes the Manic Pixie Dream Girl a problematic trope, within the story of the film it comes out of Calvin, which makes him extremely unsympathetic to the audience. But it is clear we’re supposed to be rooting for him: as he swears off writing about Ruby and she becomes more and more human (and less and less interested in Calvin), we’re meant to worry for him. When he succumbs to the pressure to write her back into being the perfect girlfriend and it backfires, we aren’t supposed to fret for Ruby as she suffers extreme mood swings, but rather for their effect on Calvin. We don’t see how “Real Ruby”‘s friends react to these changes, only Calvin. We see how Calvin’s family responds to Ruby, but Ruby doesn’t have a family, because Calvin didn’t bother to write her one. 
I kept wondering if I was reading the film wrong, until the denouement  which confirmed that Calvin is meant to be the main sympathetic character. Having “released” Ruby from his magical creativity, Calvin writes a novel recounting this experience called The Girlfriend. It is met with wide acclaim, duhdoy. Then Calvin, walking Scotty, happens upon a woman in the park. A woman who looks just like Ruby. She acts a little bit more like a real person than the Ruby from Calvin’s original dream, but it’s clear Calvin still has the upper hand: she asks if they’ve met before, because he looks familiar to her, and he points her to his photo in her book jacket, as she’s reading The Girlfriend. The scene is extremely reminiscent of the end of (500) Days of Summer, where despite all the self-entitled jerkwad behavior we’ve seen the main male character go through over the course of the movie, we know he’s the one we’re supposed to be rooting for because he meets another (sorta, in this case) girl. 
This meeting should have read more like the villain in a slasher flick popping out of his grave to kill again, but it really seemed intended to be a heartwarming second chance for a lovable loser. And trying to make Calvin a sympathetic character when he’s acting more like a monster for most of the film makes Ruby Sparks fall apart. It’s not like we couldn’t have had Ruby as our primary protagonist because she’s “not real”, see Pinocchio. It’s a shame that Ruby Sparks asks us to sympathize more with Calvin than the title character, it weakens the film’s mission and makes it much less enjoyable to watch.

Weekly Feminist Film Question: Who Are Your Favorite TV Moms?

No other type of character seems to tug at our nostalgic heartstrings like TV moms. So we asked you to tell us: who are your favorite moms on television? While the answers crossed boundaries of socio-economic status, race and TV genre, the female characters named embody many similar traits — warm, intelligent, loving, educated, stern, classy, hard-working, sarcastic, ambitious, tough, funny. Our faves remind us of our own moms or for some of us, the moms we wish we had.

Oh and spoiler alert! Clair Huxtable tops almost everyone’s list as favorite TV mom. But you probably already knew that…she is pretty fabulous after all!
———-

Morticia Addams (Carolyn Jones) — The Addams Family

Dr. Miranda Bailey (Chandra Wilson) — Grey’s Anatomy

Vivian Banks (Janet Hubert-Whitten) — The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air

Lucille Bluth (Jessica Walter) — Arrested Development

Jamie Buchman (Helen Hunt) — Mad About You

Roseanne Conner (Roseanne Barr) — Roseanne

Dr. Beverly Crusher (Gates McFadden) — Star Trek: The Next Generation

Florida Evans (Esther Rolle) — Good Times

Ruth Fisher (Frances Conroy) — Six Feet Under

Lorelai Gilmore (Lauren Graham) — Gilmore Girls

Ellen Harvelle (Samantha Ferris) — Supernatural

Clair Huxtable, Esq. (Phylicia Rashad) — The Cosby Show

Elyse Keaton (Meredith Baxter-Birney) — Family Ties

Grace Kelly (Brett Butler) — Grace Under Fire

Kate McArdle (Susan Saint James) and Allie Lowell (Jane Curtin) — Kate and Allie

Marge Simpson (Julie Kavner) — The Simpsons

Dr. Lilith Sternin (Bebe Neuwirth) — Cheers, Frasier 

Hilda Suarez (Ana Ortiz) — Ugly Betty

Joyce Summers (Kristine Sutherland) — Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Tami Taylor (Connie Britton) — Friday Night Lights

Callie Torres (Sara Ramirez) — Grey’s Anatomy

Skyler White (Anna Gunn) — Breaking Bad 

Did your fave TV moms make the list? Let us know in the comments!
———-

Each week we tweet a new question and then post your answers on our site by the weekend! To participate, just follow us on Twitter at @BitchFlicks and use the Twitter hashtag ‪#feministfilm.

Weeky Feminist Film Question: What are Your Favorite Women-Centric Movies From the 80s?

Called the Decade of Greed, everything was bigger in the 80s. Excess reigned supreme. Big hair, big shoulder pads, leg warmers and off the shoulder sweatshirts. Cabbage Patch Kids, Rubik’s Cube, MTV. So we asked you to tell us: what are your favorite women-centric films of the 80s? Some of these mad us laugh, some made us cry. And still others — replete with badass heroines — helped shape how we wanted to envision ourselves.

——

9 to 5
Aliens
Bagdad Cafe
Beaches
Born in Flames
Camille Claudel
Charli
Coal Miner’s Daughter
The Color Purple
Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean
Crimes of the Heart
Desperately Seeking Susan
Dirty Dancing
Flashdance
Girls Just Wanna Have Fun
Hannah and her Sisters
Heathers
I’ve Heard the Mermaids Singing
The Journey of Natty Gann
Labyrinth
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Stains
The Legend of Billie Jean
The Little Mermaid
Moonstruck
Mystic Pizza
Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind
Pretty in Pink
The Secret of NIMH
Sex, Lies & Videotape
She’s Gotta Have It
Silkwood
Steel Magnolias
Sweetie
Teen Witch
The Terminator
Terms of Endearment
When Harry Met Sally…
Working Girl

Are your favorite female-centric 80s movies on the list? Tell us in the comments!
——

Each week we tweet a new question and then post your answers on our site each Friday! To participate, just follow us on Twitter at @BitchFlicks and use the Twitter hashtag ‪#feministfilm.

Guest Post: ‘Skyfall’: It’s M’s World, Bond Just Lives in It

M (Judi Dench) in Skyfall


Warning: Spoilers ahead!

For fifty years, James Bond movies have varied wildly in quality, but not quantities. There’s always been plenty of punching, driving, drinking, smooth-talking, and seducing. This year’s release, Skyfall, features the fetching Bérénice Lim Marlohe and a blond-mopped Javier Bardem. But director Sam Mendes has done something different with his first punt at the series. While Bond still gets up to his usual japes, he’s not the centre of the film. Instead, Mendes has made a $150 million action blockbuster about a 77-year-old woman. It is her choices, not Bond’s, that shape the fates of those around her. Dame Judi Dench’s M is Skyfall’s steely heart.
You’d need a bulldozer to excavate the sexism generated by half a century’s worth of Bonds. But in his world, M is the single authority figure and the one woman who doesn’t start thinking with her knickers the moment he smirks at her. Not that their relationship is devoid of sexual undertones. Naomie Harris is capable as the lovely field agent Eve. But she and Daniel Craig don’t have any thing like the spark that he generates with M.
Allegedly inspired by Dame Stella Rimington, Director General of Britain’s MI5 in the mid-90s, Dench made her Bond debut in1995’s Goldeneye. Pierce Brosnan’s cocky Bond was properly introduced with her withering put-down, “I think you’re a sexist misogynist dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War.” It became one of the movie’s signature lines, establishing the tone of M’s relationship with her most difficult employee.

M (Judi Dench) in Skyfall

Skyfall’s opening sequence shows us M in action. She’s directing a mission in Turkey where Bond gets shot, presumed killed, on a fluffed order from her command. He chooses to stay dead and takes off to a beach to drink and sulk. It’s only the sight of M’s office under siege that lures him back to London. MI6 has been bombed, and its director is clearly the target. M returns to her house late at night, to discover Bond has dropped in to announce his resurrection. She is grumpy, frustrated, and exhilarated by 007’s return. He’s taciturn and flippant, but it says it all that she is his first port of call. She concludes their first scene together by throwing him out, snapping “You’re not bloody sleeping here!”
Mendes has worked with Dench before, directing her onstage in The Cherry Orchard. His camera lovingly dwells on her magnificently non-Botoxed features and silver hair. Unlike most directors, he doesn’t try to hide her slight 5’1 stature. There are many shots of her framed by large empty rooms, looking like a small black-clad anchor.
M’s nemesis turns out to be Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem), a former agent of hers, presumed dead. His experience was markedly similar to Bond’s at the start of the film. Abandoned by MI6 to preserve an operation, Silva endured torture and re-emerged as the leader of a terrorist cartel. Along with Bond, he could see their sacrifice by M as testimony to her fierce loyalty to her country. Only one of them chooses to. It’s not the one with the stupid hair.

L-R: James Bond (Daniel Craig), M (Judi Dench) and Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem) in Skyfall

Silva placed his trust in M, and she – according to his warped understanding of the game – betrayed him as a protector. You’d think building yourself up as a globe trotting mercenary would satisfy his wounded pride. But he nurses a vendetta against “the old woman”. Bardem doesn’t leave much to linger in the subtext with his predatory gasps of “Mother!” He is obsessive, inescapable, and possessed of the seemingly unlimited resources available to a Bond villain. When his six foot bulk looms over her it is as grotesque and terrifying as the Queen Alien going after Newt.
It is Silva’s similarities with Bond that makes him such an effective bad guy, crowned by his fixation on M. Together they make a combative threesome that would thrill Hitchcock or Buñuel. Silva attempts to pit the two of them against each other, revealing to Bond that M lied to him about his fitness for fieldwork. It’s a critically flawed tactic. Silva assumes that because many of their strengths and weaknesses run parallel, Bond will read M’s deceit as another symbolic death blow. Bond, of course,has never been averse to telling lies to get his way.
Perhaps that’s why M’s order to shoot in Turkey ultimately brought them closer. M’s failing made her more relatable to Bond, a master of duplicity, and someone who has spent significant amounts of celluloid treating people as if they’re disposable. Skyfall shamelessly draws on the Oedipus myth. Silva and Bond are wayward sons killed by and drawn back to the maternal figure. No wonder Q always hides in the agency
basement.
As Silva closes in to MI6, there are several forces working against its leader. One of them is Gareth Mallory, Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee. After the disaster in Turkey where Bond gets shot, he summons M to gently broach the subject of dignified retirement. She tells him in so many words to suck it and promptly exits. Mallory’s left hind wearing an expression of resigned affection. It’s not so different to how M has sometimes looked at Bond.

M (Judi Dench) in Skyfall
Mallory turns out to be more chivalrous than could be expected from a policy wonk. When M’s being raked over the coals by a stroppy MP (Helen McCrory in full Medusa mode), he reclaims the floor for her rebuttal. She rewards this with a floor-clearing defence rich in Tennyson and sass. We don’t get to see the pupils of his
eyes form into little love hearts before they get rudely interrupted by Silva’s gunfire. Mallory plights his troth to M by diving in front of a bullet. He goes on to support the comprehensively unofficial plan Bond hatches with Q (Ben Whishaw) and Tanner (Rory Kinnear) to smuggle her away from London.
Bond takes M to his childhood home in Scotland, and in case anyone missed the portentous meaning, we get a short speech about orphans en route. The Skyfall of the title turns out to be the unloved manor home of his youth. There she meets Kincade (Albert Finney). He is the gameskeeper and the man who taught a young James how to shoot. Within minutes of meeting M he’s macking on her, which makes us wonder what else Bond picked up from him.
L-R: James Bond (Daniel Craig) and M (Judi Dench) in Skyfall

Finney is comparable to Rory Kinnear’s Tanner, M’s right hand in MI6. In their scenes with her they demonstrate loyalty to M – or as Kincade calls her, Emily – without question. It’s different from the give-and-take between Bond and M.
Skyfall shows us M in the field, deftly assembling DIY cluster bombs and wielding a gun. But it is only to Bond that she shows vulnerability, and vice versa. Whatever the filmmakers try to make her stand in for – Queen, Country, Mother, Lover, Rosebud – the best part of M and Bond’s relationship is what exists just beyond their mutual snarking. By the end of the film, Dench can sag into an old chair and look tired and worn, admitting to her agent that she’s made big mistakes. Together, they have half a minute of screen time to be more mortal than James Bond usually is allowed to be.
By the end of the movie, she dies in his arms. They had shared something notably missing from their interactions with the other characters: a deep abiding respect and trust. Her legacy lives on, in the form of a ceramic bulldog and another totem of  loyalty – Mallory, newly installed as M’s heir.
——
Margaret Howie cheerfully lives with her love of Robert Mitchum and her feminist sensibility in South London. Her favourite Bond is Roger Moore, because he’s the only movie star with a name that is also a bad pick-up line.

Weekly Feminist Film Question: Who Are Your Favorite Female Friendships in Film and TV?

Bromances, buddy films, buddy cop movies, — notice a theme here? Most movies about friendship are about dudes, usually white hetero dudes. Considering the sheer magnitude of films and TV series, it’s shockingly rare how often a movie or series showcases female friendships. So we asked you: Who are your favorite female friendships? We received an overwhelming response…especially from A LOT of Buffy and Parks and Rec fans! Without further adieu, here’s what you said!

——

Absolutely Fabulous –– Edina Monsoon (Jennifer Saunders) and Patsy Stone (Joanna Lumley)

Any Day Now — Rene Jackson (Lorraine Toussaint) and Mary Elizabeth “M.E.” Smith O’Brien (Annie Potts) 

Bones — Dr. Temperance “Bones” Brennan (Emily Deschanel) and Angela Montenegro (Michaela Conlin)

Buffy the Vampire Slayer — Buffy Summers (Sarah Michelle Gellar) and Willow Rosenberg (Alyson Hannigan), Buffy and Tara Maclay (Amber Benson), Tara and Dawn Summers (Michelle Trachtenberg)

Celine and Julie Go Boating — Celine (Juliet Berto) and Julie (Dominique Labourier)

Community — Annie (Alison Brie), Shirley (Yvette Nicole Brown) and Britta (Gillian Jacobs)

Daria — Daria Morgendorffer (Tracy Grandstaff) and Jane Lane (Wendy Hoopes)

Deadwood — Alma Garret (Molly Parker) and Trixie (Paula Malcomson)

A Different World — Whitley Gilbert (Jasmine Guy) and Kim Reese (Charnele Brown)

Friends — Rachel Green (Jennifer Aniston), Monica Gellar (Courtney Cox) and Phoebe Bufay (Lisa Kudrow)

Gilmore Girls — Rory Gilmore (Alexis Bledel) and Lane Kim (Keiko Agena), Lorelai Gilmore (Lauren Graham) and Sookie St. James (Melissa McCarthy)

Girl, Interrupted — Susanna Kaysen (Winona Ryder), Lisa Rowe (Angelina Jolie), Daisy Randone (Brittany Murphy), Georgina Tuskin (Clea DuVall), Polly Clark (Elisabeth Moss), Janet Webber (Angela Bettis) and Cynthia Crowley (Jillian Armenante)

Girlfriends — Joan Clayton, Esq. (Tracee Ellis Ross), Maya Wilkes (Golden Brooks), Lynn Searcy (Persia White) and Toni Childs Garrett (Jill Marie Jones)

Golden Girls — Dorothy Zbornak (Bea Arthur), Rose Nylund (Betty White), Blanche Devereaux (Rue McClanahan) and Sophia Petrillo (Estelle Getty)

Gravity Falls — Mabel Pines (Kristen Schaal), Candy Chiu (Niki Yang) and Grenda (Carl Faruolo)

Grey’s Anatomy — Christina Yang (Sandra Oh) and Meredith Grey (Ellen Pompeo)

Hannah Montana — Miley Stewart (Miley Cyrus) and Lilly Truscott (Emily Osment)

How I Met Your Mother — Robin Scherbatsky (Cobie Smulders) and Lily Aldrin (Alyson Hannigan)

Kate and Allie — Kate McArdle (Susan St. James) and Allie Lowell (Jane Curtin)

A League of their Own

Mad Men — Peggy Olson (Elisabeth Moss) and Joan Holloway Harris (Christina Hendricks)

Martin — Pam James (Tichina Arnold) and Gina Waters-Payne (Tisha Campbell)

The Mary Tyler Moore Show — Mary (Mary Tyler Moore) and Rhoda (Julie Kavner)

Me Without You — Holly (Michelle Williams/Ella Jones) and Marina (Anna Friel/Anna Popplewell)

Mystic Pizza — Kat Araujo (Annabeth Gish), Daisy Araujo (Julia Roberts) and Jojo Barbosa (Lili Taylor)

One Tree Hill — Brooke Davis (Sophia Bush), Peyton Sawyer (Hilarie Burton) and Haley James Scott (Bethany Joy Lenz)

Parks and Recreation — Leslie Knope (Amy Poehler) and Ann Perkins (Rashida Jones)

Romy and Michele’s High School Reunion — Romy White (Mira Sirvino) and Michele Weinberger (Lisa Kudrow)

Roommates — Billie (Samantha Fox), Joan Harmon (Veronica Hart), Sherry (Kelly Nichols)

Sailor Moon

Sex and the City — Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker), Samantha (Kim Cattrall), Charlotte (Kristen Davis) and Miranda (Cynthia Nixon)

Sliding Doors — Helen Quilley (Gwyneth Paltrow) and Anna (Zara Turner)

Thelma and Louise — Thelma Dickinson (Geena Davis) and Louise Sawyer (Susan Sarandon)

True Blood — Sookie Stackhouse (Anna Paquin) and Tara (Rutina Wesley)

Xena: Warrior Princess — Xena (Lucy Lawless) and Gabrielle (Renee O’Connor)
Are you fave female friends on the list? Tell us in the comments!
——

Each week we tweet a new question and then post your answers on our site each Friday! To participate, just follow us on Twitter at @BitchFlicks and use the Twitter hashtag ‪#feministfilm.

The Sun (Never) Sets on the British Empire: The Neocolonialism of ‘Skyfall’

Growing up, my little brother was an enormous James Bond fan. He rewatched the films repeatedly on video; he developed an encyclopedic knowledge of all the villains, plots, and gadgets from reading his glossy making-of books; and, in an anecdote our mother never tires of retelling, he wanted to be Bond “without the kissing.”

Thanks to his enthusiasm, and everyone else’s moderate enjoyment, each new Brosnan Bond film was cause for a Family Outing to the cinema (and we have never been big on Family Cinema Outings; our taste in films is too disparate). For me, this meant a couple hours’ quality nap time. I snoozed happily through Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough, and Die Another Day.
Me, watching a James Bond movie, 1997-2002.
Casino Royale, of course, famously upset some Bond fans who felt it was too serious, too Bourne-y, and unfaithful to the sense of fun that had always previously characterized the series. And maybe it is indeed a complete break with the rest of the franchise, because it’s the first Bond film that kept me awake for its entire (bladder-busting, 145-minute) runtime.
Bond is a British institution, and every new film is quite the cultural event back in Blighty. It’s a slightly different perspective from this side of the Atlantic, but in some ways the US is an appropriate place to be for the release of Skyfall: director Sam Mendes is a Brit, but he’s most famous for a film with “American” in the title. This latest offering turns out to be not only self-reflexive on the half-century-old Bond film franchise itself, but also a somewhat disturbing meditation on Britain’s role in the modern world.
Before I get into a geopolitical reading of the film, let’s talk feminism: this is NOT a good film for its women characters. The Craig Bond films have been weird about women in general. They don’t seem to be quite sure whether or not they want to get away from the traditional Bond treatment of women as interchangeable totty for 007’s shagging pleasure. On the one hand, Casino Royale won feminist plaudits for recapitulating Dr No‘s famous Ursula-Andress-rising-from-the-sea moment with a ripped Daniel Craig in the role of Anadyomeneeye-candy. On the other hand, Skyfall features Bond walking in on a former child sex slave in her shower, and that is objectively more squicktastic than most Bond seductions.
Even the one where he shags Honor Blackman straight.
Plus, without getting too far into spoiler territory, by the end of the film the role of women in the MI6 workplace is not exactly inspiring for one’s feminist sensibilities.
SPOILER: this is the final shot of MI6 at the end of Skyfall.
Having said all of which, the film does focus significantly on one female character. Dame Judi is of course a British icon, and – particularly in the wake of the Olympics opening ceremony stunt – it’s not a huge leap to see her M as representative of the queen (and, by extension, the UK as a whole): she’s talked about obsessively as a “little old woman” who holds people inexplicably in her thrall and power, and unfailing loyalty to her is presented as an irrational but ultimately very British characteristic.
I should make it clear that I am not a fan of monarchies, empires, or jingoism, and that my own British nationality is so compromised by my third-culture childhood that it doesn’t really have abstract, personal, emotional, or ontological relevance for me. As such, I don’t care much for the endless, usually racist and Islamophobic debates over what British identity IS or whether the Royal Family is relevant(IMO: this, and no).
However, I do think that there is a very good reason for the continuance of these discussions, and it is this: Britain has never really bothered to process the loss of its empire.
By this I mean both that Britain has failed to properly grapple with or repent for its imperial sins, and that it has not yet seriously reconsidered its place in the current global milieu. The former is the more difficult task, and I still don’t see anyone trying to do anything about it; on the contrary, imperialism, via western neoliberalism, looks to be reinscribed through the very public conversation on modern Britain’s role that has arisen in the past few years. Between the Royal wedding, the Jubilee, and the London Olympics, Britain has begun to gain something of a sense of itself in the 21stcentury, and I don’t know if that’s entirely a good thing.
The British brain. See, it does too exist.
21st-century Britishness is precarious and conflicted, but still deeply troublesome (and still, I think, built on a feeling of entitlement to control others). Skyfall beats you over the head with its theme of whether the Good Old Ways are useful in the modern world, but that’s because this is a question that has plagued Britain since at least WWII. Bond first meets young tech-savvy Q in front of Turner’s Fighting Temeraire, and the obsessive harping on the motif of Old vs. New doesn’t get any subtler, between the callbacks to Bond movies past and the, well, explicit conversations about whether the old ways are useful in the modern world.
And yet the film has a striking caginess about the real world. The London Underground hijinks almost entirely avoid evoking 7/7. The villain of the piece is a former British intelligence agent with a grievance about his mistreatment at British hands, but he’s played by Javier Bardem; and, while many of the world’s countries have legitimate grievances about their mistreatment at British hands, Spain is waaaaay down the list. Giving the villain a purely personal grievance against M allows for a paralleled symbolism: as M represents imperial Britain, so Bardem’s character represents any or all of the formerly colonized territories of the world.
The film chooses not to engage with the perspective of the colonized. Bardem’s desire for revenge on M is a Very Bad Thing, and Bond takes M “back in time” to defend her. Bear in mind that I’ve been reading M as a symbol of the British Empire, and you’ll realize that I do not love where this is going.
***Spoiler ho***
Bond loses M, but another M arises to take her place. The Union Jack still flies over London. MI6 still operates. The new M still has missions for Bond, offered in front of another painting, this time of an intact fleet of ships. The Good Old Way of territorial imperialism may be gone, but the same colonizing work can still be done – in newer, slicker, more insidious ways.
 
The top-hatted octopus-man is James Bond. Okay, it’s not a perfect metaphor.


Max Thornton blogs at Gay Christian Geek, and is slowly learning to twitter at @RainicornMax.