Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Owasso_Landman t1_j6ilnnk wrote

Reply to comment by OfferOk8555 in Garden State. And Zach in general. by BatmanMK1989

Yes and the guy who coined the phrase regrets it and wishes he hasn’t ever talked about it.

5

OfferOk8555 t1_j6irlsz wrote

Interesting, like in what context?

Like he came up with the concept to fetishize said type of person? And then regretted cause dudes on the internet are weird and took it too far??

Or like he came up with it to critique what he saw as a new flawed character archetype in movies but thinks the criticism is over used or improperly used?

Or something else?

3

Creeping_Death_89 t1_j6kfywk wrote

Per the article:

>the term was coined in 2007 by The Onion's "A.V Club" film critic Nathan Rabin, who found it grating, as he believed it to be the result of Wish-Fulfillment from stir-crazy writers. He explicitly compared it to the Magical Negro, in that a Manic Pixie Dream Girl exists to help the protagonist achieve happiness without ever seeking any independent goals herself. Rabin would later disown the term, because instead of creating awareness of the "lack of independent goals in female characters", the concept was misunderstood as a condemnation of ALL quirky and fun female characters.

8

OfferOk8555 t1_j6kj92d wrote

Lolol that fact that people came to that conclusion from that criticism is so goddamn lame…. I completely agree with the criticism as far as wish fulfillment goes but the fact that people missed that mark that hard is embarrassing

1

Owasso_Landman t1_j6izjp1 wrote

Essentially, he came up with the idea for a very, very specific type of character and now every wannabe film critic uses it to describe and undermine every female character.

6

gggh5 t1_j6j5vl0 wrote

The Bechdel Test has entered the chat

5

WiserStudent557 t1_j6j3haw wrote

I see this a lot. People come up with an observation that isn’t wrong but people pretend it’s a complete eye opener and all media must now be assessed though that (one) lens so things are still inaccurate (lol) but consistent to a certain angle/take

Makes me think a bit of how Malcolm Gladwell is mostly fluff on top of common sense but the fluff is what really engages readers

3