Game of Thrones – Page 3

Controversy is Coming for ‘Game of Thrones’

Here’s the thing–for all of its controversy (which isn’t hurting the show’s viewership, I’m sure), people are still connecting to this show and are connecting to the terrible, senseless, often difficult situations that they have to struggle through. ‘Game of Thrones’ offers us, and its characters, no clear way out of mess, no neatly tied up episode endings, hell, even the most devoted fans can only speculate on the series’ ending. This show hosts both the unknown future and the sadly familiar past of familial dysfunction and bad romantic choices.

Written by Rachel Redfern.

The aftermath of the Purple Wedding and the start of all the controversy

The hot button topic the past two weeks has undeniably been the intense scenes of sexual violence in Game of Thrones. Out of this controversy came a few questions for me:

HBO is known for its gratuity, why are people suddenly so concerned now?
What is different about these scenes that’s making people uncomfortable? Or is just the larger viewership of Game of Thrones that brings a wider range of audiences, maybe some un-used to HBO’s in-your-face nudity and violence?
Are these scenes necessary? What role do they play in the lives of the characters and the plot?

Many were angry that Jamie’s role had been changed in his rape of Cersei since in the books it is consensual sex; in changing the scene, what were the producers trying to demonstrate with his character? Is it a reminder that despite his honorable changes, this is still the man who pushed a child out of a window? Or was it building a plot point that Jamie is a man consumed by Cersei, who now realizes that he must move on from the “love of a hateful woman”?

This past week, there was even more sexual violence at Crastor’s keep, when it is implied and shown that women are raped, and the possible raping of Meera. This entire scene doesn’t happen at all in the books, and I wondered about its plot and character purposes? Was it only there to show that Bran may now enter the minds of humans as he uses Hodor to save himself, Jojen and Meera?

And of course at the end, the killing of the rapists by the victim–always a problematic issue, but one that resurfaces frequently in discussions of sexual assault and trauma.

When we show graphic and violent images we hear the constant refrain “is it gratuitous”–in other words, what purpose is it serving? For me, the scene between Jamie and Cersei, while not true to the books, seemed true to Jamie and Cersei’s character and relationship so I felt that the scene served a purpose. However, in this last scene, I found it hard to justify the violence that was played out and the amount of violence that was implied on every level, especially since its only purpose was highlight Jon Snow as the grand and righteous (albeit pouty) hero who delivers the sweet young girl from a horrible fate and deals out retribution for his past crimes. Noticeably the last minute saving of Meera felt contrived.

Jojen and Meera prior to capture by heathens.

I understand the concerns about utilizing sexual assault as a shock factor exploitation mechanism to amp up the viewership on an already shocking show. And HBO isn’t a perfect network with perfect directors (and neither is George R.R. Martin’s source material a perfect work of fiction).

However, I do think it interesting that so many viewers, mainstream and those who already followed HBO and cable TV, have been drawn to the show in unheard of numbers. This show, with all of its darkness and disturbing scenes, has pulled in a staunch fan base from my 17-year-old brother, my conscientious feminist friends, and even my deeply conservative father—in what can only be a tribute to the themes and the masterful storytelling that Game of Thrones is portraying. As Maureen Ryan of The Huffington Post said in an interview, “Game of Thrones possesses ‘an incredible ability to make you care about people who really have done terrible things — repeatedly, it’s done that, and I think that’s its great strength.’

With such a large committed audience, obviously we’re connecting on a incredible level to this show. But why?

Anne Rice, beloved author of Interview With A Vampire and prominent voice in the arts community, actually spoke out about the recent controversy, saying Game of Thrones is a fantasy series, and can we not explore the dark and the light boldly in our fiction and fantasies? Isn’t art the very place for such exploration? And isn’t HBO known for its boldness in this regard? I remember deeply disturbing scenes in Carnivale, and in The Sopranos. I value the daring of HBO and the daring of Game of Thrones. This from an author who is by no means shy with her own portrayals of sexuality and even created a three-part BDSM erotic novel retelling the fairytale of Sleeping Beauty.

The disturbing scene of Jamie's betrayal. — The disturbing scene of Jamie’s betrayal.

Here’s the thing–for all of its controversy (which isn’t hurting the show’s viewership, I’m sure), people are still connecting to this show and are connecting to the terrible, senseless, often difficult situations that they have to struggle through. Game of Thrones offers us, and its characters, no clear way out of mess, no neatly tied up episode endings, hell, even the most devoted fans can only speculate on the series’ ending. This show hosts both the unknown future and the sadly familiar past of familial dysfunction and bad romantic choices.

In the end, with or without controversy, compelling stories that are acknowledging sexual assault, that recognize the deep horror in violence, seem a necessary outlet for human fantasy—both dark and light.

As George R.R. Martin stated (in regard to the recent scenes): “To omit them from a narrative centered on war and power would have been fundamentally false and dishonest,” he continued, “and would have undermined one of the themes of the books: that the true horrors of human history derive not from orcs and Dark Lords, but from ourselves.”

___________________________________________

Rachel is a traveler and teacher who spent the last few years living in Asia. Now back in her native California, she focuses on writing about media, culture, and feminism. While a big fan of campy 80s movies and eccentric sci-fi, she’s become a cable acolyte, spending most of her time watching HBO, AMC, and Showtime. For good stories about lions and bungee jumping, as well as rants about sexism and slow drivers, follow her on Twitter at @RachelRedfern2

Recap: Season 4 Episode 2 of ‘Game of Thrones’ – The Lion and The Rose

Overall I thought the episode was excellent and I can’t wait to see the next one. One of my favourite things about ‘GoT’ is theorising about who might make what moves next.

This is a recap therefore there are ALL THE SPOILERS

Please note that I recap from the point of view of not having read most of the books.

The episode The Lion and the Rose opens with something that has sadly become a Game of Thrones staple – gratuitous violence against women to prove just how terrible a male character is. It’s not like they spent half of last season showing us just how terrible that character is you know, since we have been treated to him flaying and castrating someone. Apparently that wasn’t enough. Now you have to watch as Ramsay and one of his ladies, Myranda hunt a girl with dogs and arrows. The scene was gross and gratuitous and ends with the girl being ripped apart by dogs off screen. It could be argued that the scene serves to illustrate that Ramsay is not the only sick and twisted one in the Bolton household, but I am unconvinced.

Lord Bolton is similarly unimpressed with Ramsay’s sadistic tendencies and makes no bones about telling him so indicating that Theon was more valuable whole as a hostage. He puts Ramsay back in his place as a bastard reminding him that is name is Snow, not Bolton and that he has taken liberties he was not entitled to. However Lord Bolton sees things a little differently after Ramsay displays the unhesitating obedience of the thing called Reek that was formerly Theon Greyjoy by having him shave him – giving Reek ample opportunity to kill him, something Reek cannot do even when he finds out about the murder of Robb Stark. Bolton is impressed with the information Ramsay has managed to glean from Reek and gives him the opportunity to redeem himself by riding out to capture a vital Northern base Mount Cailin. Also of note is the man who chopped of Jaime Lannister’s hand, Locke is quite chummy with Ramsay.

Speaking of said Lannister, Jaime is unsurprisingly having trouble adjusting to not being the warrior he once was. It is nice to see a depiction of a character dealing with a sudden disability in a realistic way. Too often all we see in pop culture is the unrelenting positivity and determination of the newly disabled to succeed so that they can be inspirations to all of us currently able bodied folk. Depression is a normal reaction to suddenly having to figure out how to work with the body you have rather than the one you used to and it is really nice to see that on a mainstream television show. I also thought it was interesting how he says that he can fight with his left hand but that his instincts as a swordsman are all off with it, illustrating that rehabilitation is about more than just learning how to use the left hand in the way he used the right. .Jaime believes his reputation as Kingslayer puts him at risk in King’s Landing if he cannot defend himself the way he was once able to so Tyrion lends him Bronn to help him train to be as proficient with his left hand as he once was with his right.

Tyrion is only at the beginning of what will turn out to be a really really bad day. Varys “The Spider” informs him that Shae’s comings and goings from his rooms have been spotted and that Tywin has promised to behead the next whore he finds him with. Tyrion comes to the grim realisation that he can no longer protect Shae in King’s Landing. His speech to her ending their relationship, to convince her to get on the ship he has prepared to take her to the safety of a comfortable life is a piece of masterful acting by Peter Dinklage. It captures his grim determination to ensure Shae thinks he is as vile as possible to ensure that she will leave while simultaneously being unable to hide the love for her that seeps out from behind his eyes. We never actually see Shae leave, so I wouldn’t be surprised if she turns up again although Bronn swears to Tyrion that she has definitely departed.

Today is the wedding of Joffrey to Margaery Tyrell and that means another strenuous social occasion for the more marginalised members of the Lannister household. Joffrey continues to needle Sansa wherever possible with references to the murder of her father and brother. The Pièce de résistance is a mock war of the seven kingdoms by a theatre troupe made up of little people that manages to insult not just Tyrion and Sansa but anyone who was ever fond of Renly Baratheon. Tyrion’s continued refusal to play ball goads Joffrey into ever increasing demonstrations of his superiority, the last of which is to force Tyrion to act as his cupbearer and bring him a glass of wine. This is apparently a fatal mistake as not long after Joffrey expires, bleeding from the eyeballs and choking. It is quite a satisfying death for a character that has been rather one dimensionally vile. The culprit may not have been poisoned wine but the wedding pie which happened to have some dead doves in it. Or maybe it had something to do with the quest for the perfect necklace for the bride to be to wear. Such a juicy mystery! At the moment my money is on Lady Olenna, she is sufficiently crafty and well connected to pull of such a plot. The accusation that fell upon Tyrion also provided the opportunity to quietly spirit away Sansa.

Aside from the main event of the wedding there were some interesting side notes. Lady Olenna and Tywin Lannister have a conversation that brushes on a number of things 1) The Tyrells are very wealthy and 2) that the Kingdom is still in debt to the iron bank which is likely to come a calling soon. I cannot get enough of Lady Olenna; she is sharp, hilarious and always always gives as good as she gets.

Cersei Lannister, the woman who nearly had it all, what most woman in Westeros can apparently only dream of, real power over her own life and the lives of others, has watched it all slip from her fingers before it was even quite hers. Jaime is no longer the man she once loved although she will probably engineer the demise of any woman who goes near him. Her son who she hoped to influence turned out to be a socio-path and instead of marrying the biddable Sansa he will take the formidable Margaery Tyrell as his wife. She is reduced to enforcing her will on Maester Pycelle to have the left-over food from the wedding fed to the dogs instead of the poor to assuage her growing fears regarding the loss of her position as Queen Regent. She and Oberyn Martell also engage in some extremely cutting banter that reminds us of the cultural differences between the Dorinish and the fact that her only daughter is in the keeping of the Dornish who luckily frown upon the rape and murder of innocents as much as they here in King’s Landing look down upon the low born.

Elsewhere it is revealed that Bran can move in out of his wolf, Summer’s consciousness at will and that he must go North. He has a vision that seems to imply that his powers are connected to the weirwood heart trees in the Godswoods.

Overall I thought the episode was excellent and I can’t wait to see the next one. One of my favourite things about GoT is theorising about who might make what moves next. At this point anything could happen. I expect the Tyrells will endeavour to secure their position and an alliance with the Martells seems like it could be an option. It has not escaped my attention that the show has killed off it’s most horrible character only to replace him with someone perhaps even more terrible in Ramsay Snow. I am also not very hopeful that Tyrion will survive the aftermath of Joffrey’s death as usually as the show giveth it taketh away.

Gaayathri Nair is currently living and writing in Auckland, New Zealand. You can find more of her work at her blog A Human Story and tweet her @A_Gaayathri.

‘Game of Thrones’: The Meta-Feminist Arc of Daenerys Targaryen

The journey of Daenerys Targaryen is a prototype for female liberation, one that charts women’s emancipation over the centuries and encourages us to push harder and dream bigger for even more freedom now.

Written by Amanda Rodriguez
Spoiler Alert
Trigger warning: discussion of rape

The incredibly popular HBO TV series Game of Thrones is off and running as Season 4 gets under way, and as the devoted fan that I am, I’ve been thinking an inordinate amount about this show, in particular the character arc of one Daenerys Stormborn of House Targaryen, Queen of the Andals and the First Men, Khaleesi of the Great Grass Sea, Breaker of Chains, and Mother of Dragons (now that is a title). As I’m steadfastly staying behind the TV series in my reading of George R.R. Martin‘s ongoing book series, A Song of Ice and Fire, I don’t know what’s in store for Daenerys in the pages beyond the TV show. However, I see the journey of Daenerys Targaryen as a prototype for female liberation, one that charts women’s emancipation over the centuries and encourages us to push harder and dream bigger for even more freedom now.

Daenerys begins her life as property.

Cruel brother Viserys sells his sister for an army

Daenerys is a quiet, dreamy youth who has been physically, mentally, and sexually abused by her brother, Viserys, who sells her to Khal Drogo to buy an army of Dothraki. Her ownership then transfers to Drogo who repeatedly rapes her before Daenerys learns to assert herself and manipulate his desires.

Not really the wedding night every girl dreams of

It’s important to note that HBO chose to alter Daenerys’ wedding night by having Drogo rape her, using her as property. Martin’s book A Game of Thrones, depicts her wedding night as a sexual awakening and a revelation for Daenerys about the power of her desire and sexuality. This change from book to screen has several implications, and not all of them are good since it solidifies the racist depiction of the Dothraki as unfathomable savages and kicks off the show’s penchant for the sexual degradation of women. However, it’s hard to realistically imagine a child bride with Daenerys’ disposition enjoying her stranger-husband’s advances, and the TV version of Daenerys’ arc then shows us how she (like so very many women) must overcome the repeated violation of her body (in her case, by both brother and husband).

Like her sexual abuse, Daenerys must overcome many obstacles on her heroine’s journey for self-actualization.

"I do not have a gentle heart." - Daenerys Targaryen — “I do not have a gentle heart.” – Daenerys Targaryen

Our Khaleesi faces the death of her husband, brother, and child, the loss of most of her khalasar, starvation, and desperation along with many deaths in the Red Waste.

Our young Khaleesi faces starvation and loss in The Red Waste

Like the mythical heroine that she is, though, Daenerys’ struggles make her stronger. She ignores the protests of those who either don’t believe in her or who underestimate the magnitude of her power. She trusts her instincts and is reborn from her husband’s funeral pyre where she is thought to have burned. Instead she emerges The Mother of Dragons with her hatched dragons suckling at her breast. In her Bitch Flicks review, In Game of Thrones the Mother of Dragons is Taking Down the Patriarchy, Megan Kearns says, “Dany becomes the metaphorical phoenix rising from the ashes, purging the last vestiges of her former timidity to transition into her life as a powerful leader.” Yes. Symbolically, Daenerys has faced many trials by fire, and she is unbowed and unbroken by them. Not only that, but Daenerys and NOT her brother Viserys is the trueborn heir imbued with magical abilities and, perhaps, a destiny. Her story tells women that only each of us can know our own minds and our true worth, and it is much greater than our patriarchal society can imagine.

Daenerys proves that fire truly "cannot kill a dragon." — Daenerys proves that fire truly “cannot kill a dragon.”

The theme recurs of Daenerys having to constantly prove that she is a fit leader, that she knows what she’s doing, and that she can be ruthless when necessary. Her youth and femaleness make others underestimate her, including her own retinue (Jorah gets more than one tongue lashing for his continual doubts about her and her “gentle heart”). But Khaleesi proves herself again and again: in Qarth when she pits her magic against that of the warlocks, in Astapor when she outwits the chauvinistic slaver and acquires an army eight thousand strong of the renowned Unsullied warriors, and in Yunkai when she quietly liberates the slave city from its masters.

The liberation of slaves is the next step in Daenerys evolution as a feminist leader. Once acquiring the Unsullied, she immediately frees them and asks them each to make the personal choice to follow her. When she drops the whip that signifies her ownership of the Unsullied, I said aloud, “Fuck yeah!” Not only that, but in Yunkai, the former slaves rally around Daenerys, their liberator, and call her Mysha, meaning “mother.”

The freed slaves name Daenerys mysha meaning "mother" — The freed slaves name Daenerys Mysha meaning “mother”

Now, it is deeply problematic that Daenerys is a white savior figure to all these enslaved and impoverished brown people. It’s condescending and (ironically) paternalistic. However, the trajectory of Daenerys’ development as a feminist guide for the liberation and empowerment of women holds true because what is most important is that Daenerys cannot abide slavery and oppression. She embodies the civil rights quote, “No one is free when others are oppressed.” This means that Daenerys will not rest just because she has become a queen with an army. Though poorly (and racistly) executed, Daenerys embodies intersectionality because she believes that everyone deserves equality and freedom of choice regardless of life circumstances or the type of oppression that they face.

In fact, I like to think that Daenerys even inspired Emilia Clarke, the actress who portrays her to take a feminist stance when at the end of Season 3, Clarke stood up to HBO (one of the most powerful networks on the planet) and refused to do anymore nude scenes for Game of Thrones. Talk about a meta-feminist empowerment arc!

Daenerys and Drogon menace Yunkai slavelords

As someone who hasn’t finished the books, I ask myself, “What’s next for Daenerys?” I see Season 4 as her opportunity to grow as a leader, learning how to balance her personal quest for the Iron Throne with the will of the people she has liberated. She will, of course, falter along the way because, hey, this is Game of Thrones, and a series of wins can only result in some kind of tragedy or personal failings. Fact. Though she will undoubtedly make mistakes, I suspect Daenerys will overcome any newfound challenges, as she has done before. Just as all women must when we struggle to be so many things to so many people while holding true to our own goals and values.

Take What is Mine Game of Thrones — Maybe hubris will get in Daenerys’ way?

The ultimate question now becomes, “Who in the game of thrones is fit to rule?” All of the others with claims to the throne have had at least one major flaw: Robb Stark was too much his father’s son, valuing honor above all else (and is now dead); Stannis Baratheon is a charisma-less, rigid man with a chip on his shoulder and a dubious moral compass in the form of Melisandre; Mance Rayder will be lucky if he can even wrangle his own army and get beyond The Wall, Balon Greyjoy is powerless inland, and Joffrey Baratheon/Lannister is an evil fuck who everyone despises (and is now dead). Though others will undoubtedly enter the high stakes fray, Daenerys is without compare. Not only does she have dragons, she has proven her abilities time and time again. Most importantly, her liberation of slaves is a testament to her righteousness, her cunning, and her ability to evolve beyond outdated modes of rulership (not to mention that she’d be the first woman to ever sit on the Iron Throne in the history of Westeros). Jorah Mormont said it best:

“You have a good claim: a title, a birthright. But you have something more than that: you may cover it up and deny it, but you have a gentle heart. You would not only be respected and feared; you would be loved. Someone who can rule and should rule. Centuries come and go without a person like that coming into the world.”

***Please no book spoilers in the comments!***

Bitch Flicks writer and editor 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.

Friendship and Loneliness in ‘The Station Agent’

I can remember hearing about a study which found many people use the characters on their favorite television shows as surrogate “friends.” I wonder what those same researchers would make of our post-Televison-Without-Pity cultural landscape, in which a endless stream of writer analyses–sometimes accompanied by roundtable discussions–dissects every detail of every episode of popular television shows, making up a big chunk of the internet. If online effluvia is an indicator, many viewers now spend more time thinking about characters on TV than they possibly could about their real-life friends and maybe even their own partners, family members and selves. We spend so much time thrilling to drug dealing, beheadings, poisonings, secret identities, sudden, improbable career success, zombies, and vampires that we decry as “boring” the few series that have realistically explored issues that are more likely to affect us day-to-day: relationships, work and friendship.

Independent films are much more likely to explore these themes than the latest hit series on cable. But even those of us impatient with the contrivances of yet another Sunday night saga have to admit this so-called “Golden Age of Television” has given meaty roles and great acclaim to actors (and to a much smaller number of actresses) who have previously done excellent but not widely seen work in independent films.

Peter Dinklage, who plays Tyrion Lannister on Game of Thrones (and has won several awards, including the Emmy and Golden Globe for the role and may very well win more) first came to my attention with his starring role in 2003’s The Station Agent (which is now streaming on Netflix) from writer-director Tom McCarthy . The cast is a who’s who of indie actors who have become more well-known through a variety of roles: Bobby Cannavale (from Boardwalk Empire), Patricia Clarkson (from Saturday Night Live‘s “Motherlovers”), a post-Dawson’s Creek but pre-Oscar nomination Michelle Williams and even, in a small role, John Slattery, years before Mad Men. But The Station Agent isn’t one of those curiosities in which a great cast with promising material becomes a mess, but the much rarer occurrence of excellent actors in a film which knows exactly how to make the best use of them.

Dinklage plays Fin, who lives in the building next to the model train shop in which he works. His boss, Henry (Paul Benjamin), a much older man, is his near-constant companion: he lives in the building as well, and they not only work together but eat lunch together, smoke together on the roof and roll their eyes in unison at the obsessives who gather in the shop after hours to watch homemade films of trains.

The boss is the first person we see defend Fin from the stares and harassment he receives. A teenager at the shop counter looks at Fin as if he were a ghost and Fin’s boss, with an edge in his voice, asks the young man, “You forget something?”

When Fin walks on the street or goes into a supermarket we see people taunt him with “jokes” or stare and then, not quite out of earshot, comment to each other about his appearance. The resolute, straight-ahead gaze that Fin adopts in these situations will be familiar to many girls and women (of every size) who also dare to walk unaccompanied in public.

When Fin’s boss drops dead in the shop, Fin is out of a job and an apartment– and finds out that he’s inherited an abandoned rural railroad depot his boss never informed him about. The estate lawyer tells Fin “I’ve seen you around… You’re one of those memorable people.” He continues that he’s been to the town where the depot is located and “there’s nothing out there: nothing” which appeals to Fin in a way the lawyer could never understand, but we in the audience do.

ClarksonStation-agent — Patricia Clarkson as Olivia

With a suitcase in hand Fin walks on the train tracks (which, in real life, no one should ever do. A train recently killed a woman on the tracks at a movie location) to the station and despite its state of disrepair makes a home for himself inside. After spending his first night there, he meets and buys a café con leche from Joe (Cannavale) the chatty, nosy, relentlessly social man subbing for his sick father as the proprietor of a food truck near the depot.

Joe’s efforts to engage Fin first in conversation and then in friendship are never ending: he’s like the person in seventh grade who decided to be your friend without consulting you first, sitting next to you in class, talking to you, asking to hang out until, because of your own inertia and exhaustion you finally did become friends. Joe even enlists wary, solitary Olivia (Clarkson) as part of the clique: he cooks meals for the three of them at his truck or at her waterfront home. Finn and Olivia first meet when she almost runs him over–twice–as he walks along the woodland road. Later she brings a bottle of bourbon to the depot as an apology. When they are drinking, she asks how he acquired the depot and he tells her that his friend died three weeks ago leaving the place to him.

She responds, “My son, Sam, died two years ago,” then immediately shuts her eyes and asks, “Would you mind not looking at me right now?” Fin, who often wishes not to be seen himself, complies with her request, directing his gaze elsewhere.

Clarkson was the queen of indie film for a time starting with High Art and, in a body of outstanding work, Olivia is one of her best performances: skittish, kind and something of a fuck up all at once. Cannavale makes Joe’s neediness charming, growing on us, the way Joe’s puppy-like presence grows on Fin–and Olivia. But this film is Dinklage’s and its greatness resides as much in his handsome, expressive face as it does in its spare, exacting script. Fin is a man who thinks he will be better off keeping other people out of his life and psyche and then finds they creep in anyway, like sunlight through cracks in a roof. When he is without Olivia and Joe, he is surprised that he misses their company. He also, in spite of himself, befriends the little girl (Raven Goodwin) who plays by the depot.

Joe, Olivia and Fin — Joe, Olivia, and Fin

The Station Agent is one of the few films that not only focuses on a disabled protagonist without condescension: it also doesn’t pretend non-disabled people behave better than they do–and unlike some other indie films doesn’t portray its small town as more tolerant and welcoming than the city. Although Olivia and Joe, the little girl and the town librarian (Williams) are good to Fin, and–in spite of Joe’s sometimes prying questions–they all treat him as a person, plenty of other townspeople, including Williams’ on-again, off-again boyfriend, the patrons at the town bar, at least one child at the little girl’s school and the woman behind the counter at the convenience store, treat him as a joke and sideshow oddity. The woman at the store even takes his picture, without his permission, as he shops. The film is also unusual among independent films–especially one that takes place mostly in a small town–in the matter-of-fact diversity of its cast: Fin’s boss is Black, as is the little girl, and Joe is Latino (Cannavale often plays Italian Americans, but is half Cuban).

McCarthy went on to make other stellar, independent films, the most recent of which was Win Win with Paul Giamatti and Amy Ryan and his next release is a movie starring Adam Sandler–which could either be very good for Sandler or very bad for McCarthy. But The Station Agent, his first film, is a bracing mixture of melancholy and uplift which deserves to be seen over and over again.

[youtube_sc url=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTGUP0JK1cU”]

___________________________________________________

Ren Jender is a queer writer-performer/producer putting a film together. Her writing has appeared in The Toast, xoJane, and the Feminist Wire. You can follow her on Twitter @renjender.

Bitch Flicks’ Weekly Picks

Check out what we’ve been reading this week–and let us know what you’ve been reading/writing in the comments!

What Women-Led Movies Can Do for Hollywood by Stephanie Hallett at Ms. blog

Why Didn’t CBS Choose a Person of Color or a Woman to Replace David Letterman? by Tanya Steele at Shadow and Act

“Strong Female Character” Comic at Gyno-Star

New documentary: Mexican women incarcerated for “homicide” after aborting gain their freedom by Katie at Feministing

The Lego Movie Makers Pledge to Do Better on Female Characters in Sequel by Susana Polo at The Mary Sue

Tina, Amy, and the Female F-ckup: A Filmography by Molly Lambert at Grantland

Julianne Nicholson on August: Osage County, Masters of Sex, and Aging in Hollywood by Laura Berger at Women and Hollywood

In Mainstream Media, Polyamory is Getting Attention by Erica Thomas at Bitch Media

Daenerys Targaryen is Back to “Save the Coloureds” Tour De #GameofThrones 2014 by Shane Thomas at Media Diversified

What have you been reading/writing this week? Tell us in the comments!

Recap: Season 4 Episode 1 of ‘Game of Thrones’

Daenerys has struggled so much to come into her own as both a Queen and a person it would be tragic for her aspirations to be upended by a juvenile love triangle storyline. That said it could be interesting for her to develop a romance with someone who respects her for who she is and is willing to be a real partner to her. Later on in the episode it seems as though Daario is coming out ahead when he presents Daenerys a bouquet of flowers that she initially reacts bemusedly scornfully to until he tells her the uses of each plant and pontificates on the fact that in order to rule a land one must first know it/understand it. Daenerys takes the lesson with good grace.

This is a recap therefore there are ALL THE SPOILERS

Please note that I recap from the point of view of not having read most of the books.

Sunday night’s premiere episode of season four of Game of Thrones got the season off to a promising start. The episode opened with heavy-handed symbolism with Tywin Lannister having Ned Stark’s great sword melted down and re-worked into two smaller swords. The scene ends with him tossing the wolf skin scabbard onto the fire to be consumed by flame. The message is clear; the destruction of the Starks is complete.

Next up, we are introduced to a new player in the politics of the realm, the Martells from Dorne. Tyrion is sent to greet the Dornish lords, and it is pretty clear that 1) they don’t like the Lannisters and 2) Tyrion’s position is still very precarious.

We find that the missing Martell, Prince Oberyn, has made his way to Littlefinger’s brothel where he was happily picking out sex workers with his lover (another chance for totally gratuitous female nudity) until he happened to hear some Lannisters singing “The Rains of Castamere”. Oberyn stabs one in the wrist after he insults him, but Tyrion arrives and manages to somewhat defuse the situation, allowing the Lannisters to leave with their lives and most of their limbs intact.

Oberyn’s introduction serves to educate us on a number of levels. In all of five minutes, we learn that the prince is forthright to a fault, a man who takes his pleasures seriously while also not being someone to trifle with. His introduction also provides us with much useful plot exposition when Tyrion asks him why he has come to King’s Landing. Oberyn happily provides a long-winded explanation that can perhaps be summarized as “you bastards killed my sister, now you’re going to get what’s coming to you.” His particular grudge seems to be focused on Gregor, ‘The Mountain’ Clegane and Tywin Lannister, but I presume he will happily exterminate anyone who gets in his way. One thing is clear, Prince Oberyn is definitely a character to watch. He also happens to fill the void left by the Starks when it comes to man candy.

Catching up with Daenerys, we are introduced to a hinted-at love triangle between her, (a newly re-cast) Daario Noharis and Grey Worm. They keep her waiting because they are playing a game to settle who gets to ride with her, and she punishes them by banishing them both to the back of the Unsullied train. As is often the case, Daenerys is able to show good judgement in balancing their affection for her with maintaining her authority as their Queen. However there are definite hints that things are going to turn ugly between Daario and Grey Worm before long. I really hope the show doesn’t get bogged down in that particular storyline. Daenerys has struggled so much to come into her own as both a Queen and a person. It would be tragic for her aspirations to be upended by a juvenile love triangle storyline. That said, it could be interesting for her to develop a romance with someone who respects her for who she is and is willing to be a real partner to her. Later on in the episode it seems as though Daario is coming out ahead when he presents Daenerys a bouquet of flowers that she initially reacts bemusedly scornfully to until he tells her the uses of each plant and pontificates on the fact that in order to rule a land one must first know it/understand it. Daenerys takes the lesson with good grace.

Lest a single episode pass without a reminder that Daenerys is the white savior to save them all, we are treated to the gory sight of a dead slave girl hammered to a mile marker pointing the direction to Meereen. Apparently there are 163 of these grisly things in case you might happen to think Meereen was a town worth visiting. Daenerys specifically requests to see each of the dead girls before they are buried. I like Daenerys, but it is really hard to get the terrible, terrible final scene of last season out of my head. She really needs to go save some people who aren’t brown already. To be fair, the slaves of Meereen could be white, but I doubt it.

Back at King’s Landing, things are still not going so great for Tyrian. Sansa is in mourning for her family and won’t eat or talk much to her Lannister husband. Tyrion does his best to comfort her and show that he’s not a bad guy and that she must do the best she can to keep on keeping on. Sansa, with her characteristic diplomacy, tells him to shut up in the most roundabout way possible – by saying that she is going to the Godswood because it is the only place where no one tries to talk to her. Generally, I think that Sansa is not really given enough credit for her ability to manage the terrifying intrigue and uncertainty and King’s Landing. We might not like how she does things, but you have to give her credit for how she has conducted herself in what are truly horrible circumstances. Shae is unhappy with what she perceives to be growing affection from Tyrion towards Sansa and takes the risk of going to his rooms to seduce him. It looks like the risk is going to end badly for one or both of them because Shae was snapped leaving his rooms by one of Cersei’s little spies.

Elsewhere in King’s Landing, Jaimie is surprised to find things have changed more than he ever could have thought while he was away. Cersei rejects his advances with a chilling “You took too long.” She may also have developed a drinking problem and has had mysterious symptoms that Qyburn has treated her for. Could the cooling in Cersei’s affections for Jamie signal that she is no longer interested in playing the games of court? Has Tywin’s indifference and Joffrey’s sociopathic tendencies finally broken her? It is difficult to reconcile this Cersei who drinks and lurks in the shadows with the Cersei who in season two smacked down Littlfinger by displaying her control of the King’s Guard, rebuffing his claims that knowledge is power with the line “Power is power.” Jamie continues to wonder what it was exactly he came back for when he is ridiculed by Joffrey and harassed by Brienne to remember his promise to Catelyn Stark to keep her daughters safe.

At The Wall, we learn that the Wildling alliance is perhaps a little tense and some of them (the Thenns) like to eat people. It also appears that Ygritte is a better shot than anyone ever thought and has let Jon Snow live on purpose. Jon on the other hand is facing an inquisition for his questionable decision in killing Qhorin Halfhand and joining the invading army. There is a lot of silly posturing. Reason wins the day, and Maester Aemon clears him to return to the watch.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the episode was Arya. She clearly lost her innocence a long time ago, but now we seem to be witnessing her lose her humanity as she becomes a creature of vengeance. The Hound tells her that he plans to sell her to her aunt Lysa in The Vale as she complains to him about not having a horse. They come across an inn, and Arya manages to instigate a brawl after she recognizes Polliver, one of Gregor Clegane’s men who murdered her friend Lommy with her own sword, Needle. What follows is quite chilling as Arya recites word for word what Polliver said as he killed Lommy. The look on her face after she stabs Polliver in the throat can only be described as glee.

Overall the episode got me very excited for the coming season; the episode was paced excellently and opened up a lot of intrigue. I would be really happy if they could stop beating us over the head with how awesome and savior-y Daenerys is. This episode has a comparatively low female nudity rating, but it was still there and completely gratuitous. It is interesting how the guys only seem to get naked for really important moments, but we are treated to bare breasts at every opportunity possible. Oh well, I live in hope that the show grows up from its initial TITS AND BLOOD!!!!!!! style of catching people’s attention.

Gaayathri Nair is currently living and writing in Auckland, New Zealand. You can find more of her work at her blog A Human Story and tweet her @A_Gaayathri.

The Strong, Detached Female Leads in ‘Bones’ and ‘The Tunnel’

'Bones' & 'The Tunnel' Posters — *Bones* and *The Tunnel* Posters

True confession: I love the emerging trope of strong, detached female leads in procedural crime shows. Temperance “Bones” Brennan, internationally acclaimed forensic anthropologist, from the TV show Bones was a seminal figure in this movement, and Elise Wasserman, workaholic, brilliant police officer from The Tunnel is a more recent iteration. (The Tunnel is the French/British remake of the Danish/Swedish series The Bridge. The Bridge has also been remade for American audiences as a US/Mexico TV crime drama.)

Though Bones is a kind of cheesy show (and getting cheesier and boring-er all the time), I have long loved Emily Deschanel‘s characterization of the logical, methodical scientist who solves crimes alongside her more emotional, intuitive male FBI partner, Seeley Booth. When we first meet Brennan, she is not only the leading forensic anthropologist in her field, but she is a physically capable women who’s an expert in martial arts and good with a gun. She also has a pragmatic attitude towards relationships and sex, often comparing both to animal and tribal cultures throughout the world and throughout history to explain human tendencies. Love, Brennan explains, is a chemical process in the brain and not the romanticized notion in which her partner, Booth, believes.

Bones: She's a badass in a labcoat — Bones: She’s a badass in a labcoat

I also immediately liked the stone-faced Elise from The Tunnel with her calm rationale, her unwillingness to lie, and her dedication to solving homicides. Though difficult to work with, everyone respects Elise’s abilities as a detective (much like Brennan). Also like Brennan, Elise views sex as a practical necessity. She prefers to be alone, isn’t seeking companionship, and doesn’t become emotionally attached to her sex partners. She even tells her partner, Karl Roebuck (a more empathetic character for Stephen Dillane than his Stannis Baratheon of Game of Thrones fame), that her current lover wants her to change and that she doesn’t want to change.

Though I love this strong, intensely logical female lead character trope, it also raises some questions for me. I like the idea of reversing traditional gender roles by making the female lead the analytical one and the male lead the emotional one, but I wonder if, in a way, this is an attempt at the masculinization of the shows’ female characters? These characters literally have their emotions and their ability to express their emotions almost completely removed. Why did the writers think it was necessary to remove the emotions of its female characters in order to make them logical? This isn’t Star Trek; Brennan and Elise aren’t Vulcans. This subtly promotes the idea that logic and emotions are mutually exclusive, even part of a binary opposition. In particular, this dichotomy suggests that a women who is in touch with her emotions cannot possibly be rational, too. As women are so often associated with emotion, is muting Brennan and Elise’s emotions an attempt to make them more masculinely rational?

Elise hard at work, eschewing sleep and a social life for her job

Interestingly enough, over the many seasons of Bones, the writers are actually changing Brennan, making her more readily emotional, quicker to cry or acknowledge her love, her fear, her sadness. At the same time, they have systematically made her more “feminine” by having her suddenly wanting many of the trappings of the traditional female role that she once dismissed (having a baby, cohabitating, and getting married, in particular). Brennen also seems to have forgotten her martial arts skills, is in need of frequent rescues, and no longer uses her gun. Not only that, but they gave her an unexplained supernatural experience that defies her atheism and points to the existence of a higher power. All these things undermine her identity and have slowly rewritten her into less of that subversive, independent female powerhouse role.

Another thing that gives me pause is that both Brennan and Elise are…abrasive. To strangers, they can come off as rude, insensitive, and self-important. Both women are, though, strikingly beautiful. Emily Deschanel brings her stark blue eyes and sexy, husky voice to the characterization of Brennan.

Brennan is a detached scientist when it comes to bones, but does the fact that she's a looker make her more likable? — Brennan is the perennial detached scientist, but she’s a looker.

Even though they try to make Clémence Poésy look disheveled as Elise and maybe they’re attempting to make her seem plain because she’s not obviously made-up, but she’s model gorgeous.

Messy hair and combat boots add to Elise's allure in 'The Tunnel' — Messy hair and combat boots add to Elise’s allure in *The Tunnel*

This makes me question whether or not audiences would like these women and find their quirks so endearing if they weren’t so beautiful? Or, maybe, audiences might like them, but would studios trust audiences to like these unusual women if they weren’t knockout stunning…since pretty much all women on TV are required to meet a specific standard of beauty no matter what their personality may be?

Now, it’s my theory that both Brennan and Elise are most likely somewhere on the autism spectrum. Both women have trouble understanding the humor of others, reading the social or emotional cues of others, and observing social niceties.

A Joan of Arc joke is completely lost on Elise.

I love that their communities are accepting and inclusive, that these women lead productive, successful lives, and their capability is rarely questioned. But why aren’t we talking about it? Why aren’t these shows acknowledging the truth about who these women are, the challenges they face, and the multifaceted nature of their triumphs? By not talking about it, these shows not only deny the identity and experiences of these women but also those of autism spectrum viewers and their community members. Announcing that your lead character is part of an underrepresented, marginalized group is a hugely important step in de-stigmatizing and giving a voice to that group.

Let Brennan be the superheroine she was meant to be!

Despite my speculations on the institutional sexism and shortcomings of the creators of Brennan from Bones and Elise from The Tunnel, I dig these women. They’re both smart, ambitious, unique, highly moral, and compassionate women who are fantastic role models for their female audience members (in spite of the apparent taming of Brennan through marriage and child rearing). I wish the shows were doing a few things differently…more better-ly, but all in all, Brennan and Elise are great characters who I love to watch, which says to me that both shows are doing something very, very right.

——-

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.

Sex Workers Are Disposable on ‘Game of Thrones’

When we are introduced to Ros, she is working in Winterfell but as war approaches she decides to try her luck in King’s Landing expressing the view that if all the men leave for war there is not going to be much for her in Winterfell. Once there she goes from being “just a sex worker” to getting involved in the politics of the realm by becoming the right hand woman of Little Finger and subsequently double crossing him by becoming an agent for Varys. However despite her many interesting qualities and potential for interesting storylines, Ros basically exists for one reason to provide exposition regarding male characters on the show while naked. She is sexposition personified.

While Game of Thrones is frequently problematic, one of the things it does well is having a wide range of interesting female characters. Despite this, there are some women on the show who fall into the roles that are normally reserved for women on film and television; that is, to tell us things about dudes. This is particularly true of the female sex workers on the show. A perfect example of this is Ros. Interestingly, Ros is a character that does not exist in the books. She is an invention of the television show’s writers and producers. It is likely that she takes the place of two other sex worker characters who are women of colour.

Ros is the first sex worker we see on Game of Thrones. She is masterfully acted by Esme Bianco who does wonderful things with the limited material she is given. Her portrayal of Ros allows us to view her as intelligent, witty, ambitious, and pragmatic. At first Ros manages to avoid most of the traditional sex worker tropes that exist such as the disposable sex worker and the hooker with the heart of gold. She makes no apologies for being a sex worker and does not consider herself to be a tragic victim of her circumstances. She is simply making money in the most efficient way she knows how.

The very first time we see her she is entertaining Tyrion Lannister at the Winterfell brothel. Their interaction serves to inform us that Tyrion is both famous for being a philanderer and generally a good hearted person who is nice to people who exist on the margins despite his great wealth and power. Next up there is Theon Greyjoy Ros helps reveal to us as the audience a number of things about him. Firstly, that he has a chip on his shoulder about his status in Winterfell. Secondly he is basically a hostage living with the Starks because of his father’s traitorous actions. She helps to reveal his particular insecurities as well as expose some of his backstory, all without any clothes on – handy. In fact Ros basically spends the entirety of season one with her clothes off allowing men to tell her things about themselves. Littlefinger gets to fill in some back story while she is naked on screen. Joffrey reminds us of just how evil he is (again) by forcing Ros to brutally beat her friend and fellow sex worker when Tyrion buys a night with them for Joffrey as a present. On and on it goes.

The saddest part about Ros is that while she mostly exists as a plot device, there was always potential there for her to develop as a character. She had many traits that would have made her very interesting to watch as the story unfolded. However that is not to be, because those who make the decisions decided that Ros had outlived her usefulness. She had proven just how terrible Little Finger and Joffery were and the final flourish was her death. Ros turned out to be a disposable sex worker after all and the way that she is killed off proves it.

It was her compassion for Sansa Stark that is Ros’ downfall. She tells Varys details that only she could know about Littlefinger’s plans for her and despite Varys promising to protect her he finds out and she ends up dead. Her death is graphic and horrifying. We do not see her die, we are just treated to a vision of her corpse as Littlefinger tells Varys that one of his investments had betrayed him and therefore had to be disposed of. We are treated to a vision of Ros tied to Joffery’s bed, semi clothed with arrows piercing her body including her genitals. The camera lingers over the gory details. The idea is clear, as we look at Ros’ ravaged body we are meant to think about Littlefinger and what a horrible person he is. Ros’ death is a simply a footnote in the stories of the great men who she fucks.

Interestingly, Esme Bianco mentioned in an interview that she argued for having less nude scenes so that she could have cool costumes like the other characters on the show. Perhaps due to her self-advocacy, her character ended up with no nude scenes in season three, and it seemed as though she was very much on the verge of becoming a proper character, one that is fully realized and has their own plot. Before that could actually happen, she was killed off as if she didn’t matter at all.

There are many things I enjoy about Game of Thrones, but there are perhaps just as many things that I find problematic within it; their treatment of Ros is definitely one of them. The excuses that Game of Thrones is set in both an extremely patriarchal and extremely violent culture do not fly. I think they are cop-outs. The show has beaten us over the head with the evilness of Joffrey and Littlefinger. I personally feel that the scene where he takes Ros aside when she starts crying in front of one of her clients after the baby of her friend is killed in front of her, is much more chilling than the gruesome horror of her death. Subtlety is obviously not something the show is interested in. At the end of the day, the Game of Thrones treatment of Ros simply reinforces dominant societal narratives about sex workers, i.e. that their humanity is unimportant and that it is a dangerous occupation that women should know better than to take up. This is disappointing from a show that is often progressive in the way that it handles female characters.

Gaayathri Nair is a writer currently located in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, although this is set to change soon. She is the child of diaspora two times over and is passionate about all forms of social justice. She likes to travel and prefers television to movies; however, she feels a strange compulsion to watch all movies that have fish-eating people in them, no matter how terrible they are. She has a Bachelor’s degree in Political Studies from the University of Auckland and she has spent her formative years working at various types of feminist organizations from the community to the regional in both New Zealand and around Asia. Her work has been featured around the feminist blogosphere including Flyover Feminism, Feministe, and Leftstream as well as in United Nations and NGO publications. You can find more of her work at her blog A Human Story and tweet her @A_Gaayathri.

HBO’s Dark Comedy of Geriatrics and the Nurses Who Love Them In ‘Getting On’

But Laurie Metcalf hammering a nail into the wall with a gynecologist’s ducklips thingy is priceless, as is a confused patient’s eyes clearing as Niecy Nash holds her hand. Here is perhaps where the show’s delicate balance between comedy and compassion becomes most apparent; the understaffed nurses are, at times, ridiculous in their adherence to bureaucracy and hospital politics, but they, and the patients they serve, are also given moments of generosity and human connection.

Written by Rachel Redfern

[youtube_sc url=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhGQxLFS_P4″]

It is a wide wonderful world filled with HBO. My love for the brilliantly gritty channel has grown exponentially the past three years, starting with the toe-curling, cherry-popping of my innocence that was True Blood and from there, it took over my computer screen in a way I never knew was possible: Game of Thrones, The Sopranos, Girls, Deadwood, The Wire, Veep and we haven’t even mentioned their miniseries yet.

And for every person who protests against the channel’s, hmm, illuminating use of sex and violence (and perhaps not entirely unjustly—there were a few scenes in Game of Thrones that made Quentin Tarantino raise an eyebrow) can it be denied that going back to a network show after a satisfying three-day binge of cable, feels lackluster and overly clean without the free-flowing use of the F-word?

Therefore, I give you Getting On, the latest British show to make its way across the pond in a cabled retelling, leaving us asking, is it a show ahead of its time?

Getting On is a dark comedy from creators Mark Olsen and Will Scheffer (Big Love) following the daily trials of the beleaguered Billy Barnes Extended Care Unit. There, we meet its aging female patients–ambitious director of medicine Jenna James, Laurie Metcalf (Roseanne), kiss-up head nurse Dawn, Alex Borstein (Family Guy), empathetic nurse DiDi, Niecy Nash (Reno 911), and neurotic supervisor Patsy, Mel Rodriguez (Community).

Three comediennes: Laurie Metcalf, Alex Borstein, and Niecy Nash

Obviously, the setting is a bit unusual, and potentially disturbing; some are concerned about the show trivializing a difficult time of life and the rigors of hospital work. Yet, death happens to everyone, so in the same way that we can all relate to the subject matter, it also makes us, at best, a bit uncomfortable, and for some, possibly a painful reminder of someone they’ve lost.

Which makes the whole comedy setting seem so insanely inappropriate, but perhaps brilliant at the same time? I mean, at least ER had hot doctors and a lot of people who made it out alive; you get the sense with Getting On that there won’t be that many George Clooneys and even less chance that the fountain of youth will appear in the final season.

getting on1 — DiDi (Niecy Nash), our hero.

However, will Getting On resonate with an older audience? The original British version never made it past the third season, but I’m hopeful, as the show has some incredible dialogue and fantastic acting.

And besides its unusual setting, the show sports three main female characters (all middle-aged) taking care of elderly women. Basically, Getting On defies every statistic about women in Hollywood by single-handedly employing almost every woman over the age of 40 located in Los Angeles: women with wrinkles, saggy boobs, and poorly executed fashion choices; women of color, women with money, women without it; foul women, funny women, fantastic women. I even loved episode two’s racist, homophobic grandma that kept throwing up on everyone and then throwing things at everyone.

While the show isn’t perfect, it’s boldly treading into off-limits territory (or at least boldly following in the footsteps of it British predecessor) and exposing both funny and profound elements of growing old.

Now, let’s hope that the show isn’t cut off while still in its prime.

10 Fascinating Female TV Characters Who Are Often Overlooked

Written by Rachel Redfern

As a spin-off from last week’s discussion about the female characters and the rise of the male anti-hero on TV, I thought that today I would point ten of the most interesting female characters on television within the past ten years (although I’m sure there are many more out there), many of whom are only side characters and might have been passed over.

Note, this is not about the most bad-ass female characters, or even the ones I would consider to be role models (though some are); this is about the most interesting female characters. Just as it can be limiting to find male characters as always the knight in shining armor, or the action hero superstar (hence the darker, more varied male characters on television), I think it can be the same for women since they are often placed into their own boxes.

So here it is, ten female characters that I find unique and fascinating, and unfortunately, often overlooked (please add any more you think of in the comments).

Katee Sackhoff as Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica

Starbuck (Katee Sackhoff)

Starbuck was a man in the original Battlestar Galactica series and Ronald Moore’s decision to revamp the character into a woman for the remake was pretty traumatic; Sackhoff even reported that she had death threats after the casting decision had been made. However, Starbuck quickly became a show favorite and with good reason. Starbuck is one of the most diverse female characters on TV, ever.

She smoked cigars and drank to excess, got into a lot of fights, struggled with commitment, but loved her husband and friends deeply. She was fearless and talented as a pilot, but conversely sensitive to music and painting because of her relationship with her absent father.

Moore gave her a pretty intense back story as well, showing the physical and mental abuse that her mother submitted her to as a child, and her struggles with pain, having children, and the intense developments her character was subjected to.

Robin Weigert as Calamity Jane and Kim Dickens as Joanie Stubbs in Deadwood

Calamity Jane (Robin Weigert) and Joanie Stubbs (Kim Dickens)

Deadwood has a few strong and interesting women, but Calamity Jane and Joanie Stubbs and their relationship have often been overlooked.

Robin Weigert was masterful as the blustering, loyal, drunk Calamity Jane, managing to display both bravado and a deep frailty. Weigert consistently portrayed Jane’s insecurities and sadness, effectively showing her as a sensitive and lonely outcast.

Joanie Stubbs (Kim Dickens) was an elegant whore who has spent her whole life under the physical and sexual control of men, first her father, then her unstable and dangerous boss, Cy Tolliver. But Joanie’s search for freedom and escape from her past life became very painful and difficult to survive and understand her own place in the Deadwood camp.

The fact that the two women, both on the fringes of acceptable society, both damaged and distraught, find each other and develop a strong friendship (with it growing into a possible romantic one) was a beautiful subplot for the show.

Julia Louis-Dreyfuss as Selina Meyer in Veep

Selina Meyer (Julia Louis-Dreyfuss)

Selina Meyer (Julia Louis Dreyfuss) from HBO’s Veep is intensely unlikable, and I love that. She’s selfish and oblivious, whiny and incompetent (the perfect politician) and treats her employees and staff horribly.

But there is something very important about such unrelatable and unlikable characters–not all women in the world are pleasant, but despite her flaws, Selina is a deeply human character in a competitive world.

Yunjin Kim as Sun Kwon in Lost

Sun Kwon (Yunjin Kim)

Sun, at least in the beginning of Lost, seemed to be a minor character, one whose sad smile and soft voice suggested a submissive and lackluster personality being pushed around by her husband. Of course, that wasn’t the case, and it became apparent through later episodes that she was a strong, intelligent, forceful character, willing to do what was needed in order to survive.

Sun’s character and backstory provided a fabulous look into how humans change, seeing her first as the sweet, naïve bride, then the angry, bitter woman desperate for her freedom, and finally as a strong survivor in later seasons.

Maggie Siff as Tara Knowles in Sons of Anarchy

Tara Knowles (Maggie Siff)

Gemma, the great matriarch of the Sons of Anarchy clan, often gets most of the attention, and she is an amazing character: strong, fierce, and dangerous. But I also find Tara, Jax’s wife, to be complicated and compelling character. As opposed to Gemma, whose whole life has been the motorcycle club, Tara is a respected young surgeon attempting to raise her children in a normalized environment.

But then she changes and starts to exhibit a darker side, a change that heralds in her own deep conflicts with her healing career but destructive personal life. In season five she takes a wrench to another woman for possibly endangering her husband; a few episodes later she’s performing delicate surgery on an infant.

Liza Weil as Paris Geller in Gilmore Girls

Paris Geller (Liza Weil)

Gilmore Girls is sometimes dismissed as being light entertainment, an opinion that does a disservice to a snappy show with amazing dialogue and clever, quirky characters.

One of these characters being of course, the hyper-intelligent, aggressive, irrepressible, intense Paris Geller. Originally, Paris was only intended for a few episodes in the first season, but quickly grew into a main character because of the unique perspective that her personality offered to the show.

Paris’ character, that of an elitist academic loaded with money, quick temper, and fast-talking, clever comebacks, can’t really be found in any other show. She was a mashup of brilliance and so many neuroses and problems that it’s almost overwhelming, but also funny and sad.

The truth is, women like her, passionate, intense and bossy, are often completely hated and overly stereotyped, whereas Gilmore Girls managed to present her as a lovable and competent women, albeit with a few idiosyncrasies.

Rutina Wesley as Tara Thornton in True Blood

Tara Thornton (Rutina Wesley)

Sookie gets all the attention in True Blood, both on- and off-screen. Which is a shame, because Tara Thornton, Sookie’s best friend from childhood is an angsty, wisecracking southern girl who always took the show to the next level.

Intelligent and well-read, but dealing with her mother’s alcoholism (and intense religiosity) and poverty, makes Tara full of emotional issues and anger, but also passionately loyal. Tara is astute and honest and not afraid to tell other characters when they’re being stupid. The world probably needs a lot more people like her.

Natalie Dormer as Margaery Tyrell in Game of Thrones

Margaery Tyrell (Natalie Dormer)

The rich world of Game of Thrones has several noteworthy women–so many in fact, that some of the minor, but equally interesting female characters, can get passed over. For example, Margaery Tyrell (most prominent in the third and last season) is actually far more dynamic in the TV show than in the books, and much more unique.

Margaery is an incredible politician; she’s manipulative, cold, ambitious, charismatic and astute. I love how each action is carefully planned out, revealing a methodical and calculating nature, one that is far more dangerous than Cersei (I think) because of her ability to control her temper.

I love a good ambitious character; powerful women who aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty fascinate me. In fact, I would argue that Margaery Tyrell is a born leader, one with an innate understanding of politics and power.

Vote for Margaery?

January Jones as Bretty Francis Draper in Mad Men

Betty Francis Draper (January Jones)

Mad Men’s women are incredibly varied, from sexy, confident Joan, to naïve, talented Peggy, but often pushed to the side is Don’s beautiful and bitter ex-wife. Mad Men’s portrayal of her obvious loneliness, and her (deserving) anger over Don’s behavior is incredibly sad, but also poignant.

Rather than sugarcoating her character and painting her as a distressed angel, Betty builds upon the difficulties that pushed her way, and her flawed decisions are thrown in with attempts to pull her life together.

Sometimes redemption is hard; so is pulling yourself out of cycles of pain and resentment. Betty is therefore complex and interesting, incredibly frail and static, but also unbending and aggressive in her life choices.

Nicolette Sheridan as Edit Britt in Desperate Housewives

Edie Britt (Nicolette Sheridan)

Desperate Housewives‘ Edie is probably no one’s role model, and at first she seems like the perfect stereotype of a wealthy, self-absorbed, boy-crazy blonde. She sleeps with everyone, has multiple affairs, and has no qualms about manipulating people.

However, she was also hilarious, clever, and often incredibly honest and realistic. She made no bones about who she was or her actions, and more than once was the voice of reason.

And sometimes, there’s nothing wrong with being a little selfish.

Rachel Redfern has an MA in English literature, where she conducted research on modern American literature and film and its intersection; however, she spends most of her time watching HBO shows, traveling, and blogging and reading about feminism.

The Golden Age of Television: Boys Only

Written by Rachel Redfern

The rise of the anti-hero has most TV and media reviewers heralding the past ten years as revolutionary, a “golden age of television.”

And I think it’s true, great television seems to be popping out of the seams of my TV and an ever-expanding “To Watch” list on my desk. In fact, looking at the recent figures for big summer blockbusters (most of which seem to have failed miserably) some (myself included) are wondering if Hollywood studios might be fading into the shadows of networks such as AMC and HBO.

TV, because of its much longer time allowances (12-20 hours of viewing per season) and recently-improved watching options (Hulu, Netflix, DVD releases and, let’s face it, illegal streaming and downloading) seem to create far more interesting characters and way more space for subtle scheming and intrigue in their plot lines. Increasingly, Hollywood opts for a bigger explosion to counteract its total lack of originality and character development.

So, in a word, I would argue yes, I find higher quality entertainment and better stories about life and humanity in television than I do at the movies.

But I don’t see many women in these shows either.

Some of Brett Martin’s “Difficult Men”

GQ writer Brett Martin’s new book Difficult Men: Behind the Scenes of a Creative Revolution from ‘The Sopranos’ and ‘The Wire’ to ‘Mad Men’ and ‘Breaking Bad’ is all about the fabulously conflicted male characters springing up in television: Walter White, Don Draper, Al Swearengen and the others that are the front men for this great revolution. And writing about these complex male characters is important, but the book’s content reveals one of the major flaws within this golden age–where are all the conflicted, complex women and the TV shows that center on their lives?

I can think of only two (please add to this list though in the comments if you can think of any more): Homeland and Weeds, although Game of Thrones has several interesting female characters running around. (It perhaps has one of the better ratios of compelling female and male characters.)

Claire Danes as Carrie Mathison in Homeland

I’m not sure that blaming the producers and writers of these shows is going to get us anywhere because the problem is obviously much deeper than that, and it begs the question, why aren’t women’s stories interesting to producers and writers? Why aren’t female protagonists fascinating and complex?

Do audiences consider stories with female protagonists un-relatable? Uninteresting? Too unbelievable? Or does this lack merely reflect life in that there aren’t any women doing enough “complex” and “darkly-human” things to model the character after?

I don’t believe any of that is true, but that doesn’t change the amount of women headlining an AMC show. In thinking about my favorite shows, I can only think of a few female characters that I would consider unique and groundbreaking. Consider Breaking Bad: while Skyler is an interesting enough character, she’s far less compelling (and obviously secondary) to the character development that Walt is showcasing, often being seen as no more than a “nag” or “hen-pecking shrew” to many viewers (not this one). In fact, the backlash against Skyler (Anna Gunn) has been so intense (consider the meme below as a common example of how the internet seems to view the poor woman) that Gilligan actually addressed the problem in a recent interview.

One of the nicer internet memes for Skyler White (Anna Gunn)

However, as a whole, with the story centering on and following a female protagonist, the number is proportionately small.

So ladies, either we are far too flat and boring to be on TV, or as it has been for so long, our stories and interactions are still being undervalued. Therefore, we should set some goals for ourselves: be marvelously interesting (sarcasm) and (more importantly) continue to write, produce, direct and support more TV shows about women–because I don’t see many others doing it for us.