Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
Nah no one says she's a failure cause she doesn't have kids. I guess people are getting that cause it's like, her one personality trait. She's lucky to get one tho - Chris Pratt didn't get any! ;P
So there's this scene where Pratt jokes about her not being able to relate to wanting sex. That's the level of sexism in the movie (it's also the scene Joss Whedon singled out as being horribly outdated and sexist...)
Nah no one says she's a failure cause she doesn't have kids. I guess people are getting that cause it's like, her one personality trait. She's lucky to get one tho - Chris Pratt didn't get any! ;P
So there's this scene where Pratt jokes about her not being able to relate to wanting sex. That's the level of sexism in the movie (it's also the scene Joss Whedon singled out as being horribly outdated and sexist...)
They don't say she is a failure, but her sister's like goes "Don't use mom's line on me!" "I wouldn't use them if they didn't work." "You're right, you'll make such a good mother when you have kids!"
"If I have kids."
"When"
Combining that with Pratt's line above, and the jungle scene, and the part about the kids flocking to Pratt even after she saved him is just...uncomfortable.
I just felt uncomfortable the entire movie watching her character. Like I said, it would have actually been amazing if the point of the movie was to somehow comment on women in corporate jobs, and how they can never win- either they focus on their career and get criticized for not wanting kids, or they have kids and get criticized for abandoning their career.
Except, like all of the other themes in this movie, this reading is incredibly charitable and I don't think any of this was intended (like the accidental theme of consumer desires)
Family always has been a recurring theme between all jpmovies. In JP Grant started out hating kids and ends up finding a soft spot for them. In LW Malcolm was divorced and bonded with his stowaway kid that needed attention. In JP3 the Kirby's were divorced but bonded together to safe their kid and fall back into love. In JW it happened to be a female character running with the theme on their own and now its (part) of the reason the movie portrayal of this is sexist?
I get the heels are a problem, but come on, people. It's an oversight that should have been addressed, but I would call it bad writing, not sexism.
It's mostly all about JP1, because this movie was trying to recreate that feeling, without the director knowing anything about why Spielberg did what he did. The difference is that Grant wasn't treated as somehow incomplete in his life, he wasn't treated as if he had made all of the wrong decisions in his life, his priorities in life just changed due to what happened in the movie. Everyone in JW is treating Claire like a freak because apparently yeah, she's accomplished so much she basically runs a multimillion dollar company, but she doesn't have kids or a family so how can she possibly be fulfilled in anything? What has she done in her life that she can be proud of? It's the same shit that's been heaped upon people like Justice Kagan. And if you don't remember that, well, that's not because that shit didn't happen.
I think you need to watch the movie again because nobody is doing any of this in it
Her sister literally told her she was gonna have kids herself despite not wanting to.
Literally while she's getting a divorce
And that's literally the only person who mentions it. And it is literally the only time in the movie it is brought up. And the movie literally never touches on it again.
Other than the fact that you're wrong on this point (see above), how many times does a movie have to unaccountedly force a gender-coded message upon a character (and the audience) for it to be a problem? Is there a threshold or quota? If so, what's the number? Is there a formula relative to the running time? Give us the deets, brosef.
Hey, how about calm down? It's not sexist to bring up something one time. It's not like it was a central theme of the movie. The movie never brings it up again, no Owen does not bring it up. Her subordinates do not bring it up, and her boss does not bring it up, either. They bring up her family, and that it wasn't right to pawn them off on someone else. They do not bring up how she totes has to have kids because she's got ovaries. You are seeing sexism here where there is no sexism. I've already said there are absolutely problematic things happening in the movie with her character, but this is not one of them.
She gets it for all sides to varying degrees. With Owen he wants her to loosen up and stop being a prude, Masrani feels the same way but with the park itself, she gets told she's a sell-out repeatedly by that male employee asshole (who she barely scolds), the female staffer passively stays out conversations like this rather than back up her boss, the kids hero woship Owen even when they don't know anything about him - after they saw her save his life from a homicidal dinosaur and the first scene she's with the kids is being an apathetic asshole who only cares about business. What's disappointing is that she is a strong character buried underneath yet she rarely gets the chance to show it and it makes me wonder how she got the position since being a boss of a multi-million dollar company for x years isn't for wallflowers. Its reasonable why she wasn't too snappy with her sister and Masrani, why is she letting everyone else push her around?
This non-dinosaur stuff makes a bunch more sense if you theorize that they're all loose ends set up for a sequel
Cause even though claire and the kids get a lot of crap no lesson is learned; it's all put on hold once the movie actually starts. In Jurassic world 2, the completely unresolved B plots will be free to be resolved in expected and unexpected ways
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Posts
So there's this scene where Pratt jokes about her not being able to relate to wanting sex. That's the level of sexism in the movie (it's also the scene Joss Whedon singled out as being horribly outdated and sexist...)
They don't say she is a failure, but her sister's like goes "Don't use mom's line on me!" "I wouldn't use them if they didn't work." "You're right, you'll make such a good mother when you have kids!"
"If I have kids."
"When"
Combining that with Pratt's line above, and the jungle scene, and the part about the kids flocking to Pratt even after she saved him is just...uncomfortable.
I just felt uncomfortable the entire movie watching her character. Like I said, it would have actually been amazing if the point of the movie was to somehow comment on women in corporate jobs, and how they can never win- either they focus on their career and get criticized for not wanting kids, or they have kids and get criticized for abandoning their career.
Except, like all of the other themes in this movie, this reading is incredibly charitable and I don't think any of this was intended (like the accidental theme of consumer desires)
Not that I remember.
Cause even though claire and the kids get a lot of crap no lesson is learned; it's all put on hold once the movie actually starts. In Jurassic world 2, the completely unresolved B plots will be free to be resolved in expected and unexpected ways
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.