Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

I don't know, I blame bad moods.

[Vector]

Because we've had a number of movies recently with only one female character, but where viewers didn't feel that feeling, you know the "man I'm being left out" feeling that's so common for women--and yet it didn't pass the Bechdel test, which is usually a pretty good rule of thumb for feeling/no feeling (no pass/pass respectively).  So they wrote a new test, trying to figure out exactly what it was about these new presentations that triggered/didn't trigger that feeling.

And, in this case, it's that we have a character, Mako Mori, who is the only female character in the film with appreciable lines and who we are left feeling is... not a character written based on her femaleness, the package of sexist crap that routinely follows female characters, but on something else.  And, in this case, we don't feel like she's a token because her story is about herself, her desires, and Stacker is just the obstacle she needs to get around in order to get what she wants.

[Neonivek]

I am kind of curious as to how many movies and shows pass the "Neutral Bechdel test"

[Rolan7]

No results found for "neutral bechdel test"

Wouldn't it just be the union of movies that pass the Bechdel test and the reverse Bechdel test?

[Neonivek]

No results found for "neutral bechdel test"

Wouldn't it just be the union of movies that pass the Bechdel test and the reverse Bechdel test?

No because a Bechdel test can still be passed if two women talk about either themselves or another woman.

This is how many pass a test where two characters talk about someone other then another character and excludes asides.

[Vector]

Someone other than another character?

Well, pretty much any spy movie will have them talking about the president of the US, I guess, and he's usually not a character, either.

[Neonivek]

Someone other than another character?

Well, pretty much any spy movie will have them talking about the president of the US, I guess, and he's usually not a character, either.

It needs to be a conversation that is NOT about a person. period.

Since if two women spoke and the conversation was about a male president who isn't a character... It would fail.

The Neutral Bechdel Test is a conversation between two or more characters who are not talking about another person, even if that person is themselves.

[Vector]

Yeah, you said "someone" up there so I just wanted to check.

[Mephansteras]

Someone other than another character?

Well, pretty much any spy movie will have them talking about the president of the US, I guess, and he's usually not a character, either.

It needs to be a conversation that is NOT about a person. period.

Since if two women spoke and the conversation was about a male president who isn't a character... It would fail.

The Neutral Bechdel Test is a conversation between two or more characters who are not talking about another person, even if that person is themselves.

Why would such a test be useful? Other than to have a test that many, many movies would succeed on. (Any movie that had two people talk about a song, or a car, or the weather, or whatever would succeed.)

[Neonivek]

Why would such a test be useful?

Curiosity and quality of character depth.

Remember the Bechdel test is not to see if "women are being represented" but rather to see their depth.

So I wonder how much media has the depth of concerns outside the immediate plot.

[alexandertnt]

I thought the Bechdel test was set up to demonstrate blatent gender bias across the movie industry as a whole, by putting in conditions that seeem like most things should satisfy, but come as a shock when they dont. i.e. its supposed to demonstrate that gender bias exists.

I dont think its a very accurate way to measure character depth.

[Neonivek]

I thought the Bechdel test was set up to demonstrate blatent gender bias across the movie industry as a whole, by putting in conditions that seeem like most things should satisfy, but come as a shock when they dont. i.e. its supposed to demonstrate that gender bias exists.

I dont think its a very accurate way to measure character depth.

The thing is the "So easy to satisfy" is a bit of a myth in my opinion.

As it requires you to have a scene with two characters speaking to each other about something that is usually not plot related, or it requires you to isolate two characters. Just by having the plot revolve around a male character you can make it impossible to pass the Bechdel Test and the Neutral Bechdel Test (as I have unfortunately have seen). Some cannot succeed just by having not enough characters and no conversations to speak of. Some will never succeed because they never isolate their characters.

If you want to be as specific as possible...

The Bechdel test was created as a joke as a sort of "Take that" against movies in a sort of comical style. It was later adopted into its current form.

Though that is a bit like saying the true source of April Fools day. It doesn't really apply anymore.

Suffice it to say it isn't really about "ease of success" as that is mostly an illusion so much as how frequent women are used, how much character they are allowed, and what is the depth of their concerns.

I dont think its a very accurate way to measure character depth

It isn't an accurate way to demonstrate blatent gender bias either. A lot of movies that show strong and deep female characters outright fail this test. As well how to apply the test is not clear as well, it is easy to pass things by being very specific or fail them by being abstract. I've seen people say "Sex in the City" fails, and yet that is only because all their conversations are just preludes into talking about men.

But to explain this one is easy. In a movie what is a woman's concern? Is it about something other then a man? congratulations!

--

I may want to amend the Neutral Bechdel Test to also exclude "talking about the main plot"

Now That certainly runs down the list.

[Willfor]

We can work on character depth tests when Hollywood can comply with the simplest test we can give them in half the movies that come out in a year. Baby steps, people.

As it requires you to have a scene with two characters speaking to each other about something that is usually not plot related

No, we want them talking about the plot, unless you're radically misunderstanding what's going on here. That is what would indicate some form of equality here, because if you have two women on screen talking about something that isn't the poorly done romantic subplot with the "lead male", that is a step in the right direction. It means that the woman are involved enough in the plot to, you know, be involved in what the movie is actually about.

[Neonivek]

And how many plots don't revolve around a character or are fulfilled through a character?

That is why I gave the Neutral test. Without an amendment I'd estimate 30% of movies fail. With it I suspect 70% do.

Heck Princess and the Frog doesn't pass the Neutral Bechdel Test... there isn't a single conversation that isn't about another character (Nor... does it pass the Bechdel Test oddly enough)

That is what would indicate some form of equality here, because if you have two women on screen talking about something that isn't the poorly done romantic subplot with the "lead male", that is a step in the right direction.

To me that is a mistake in thinking. That ISN'T what they are preventing.

They are preventing women basically being used in movies as a sort of mirror for the male characters. Such as she talking about how she is worried that her husband won't make it.

Basically about whether the female character has a story of her own linked into this larger plot or if she is just an actor in a man's story.

[Willfor]

Because it's completely impossible for two women to talk about the actions that they plan to take to sneak into the enemy bunker. That would just be silly.