Never watched Suffragette so I can't comment on that.

Trust me, it's a feminist movie.

<Snipped quote by Mara>

Trust me, it's a feminist movie.

Yeah, but is it a bad feminist movie?

<Snipped quote by Ruby>

But...why?

<Snipped quote by tex>

Will Smith is a good actor, if anything hes underrated. He's just insanely popular which is a whole different category.

Will Smith's acting wasnt the issue with the film. Pretty much everything else, including his character was.

Also the narrative on racism wasnt stereotypical as much as it was just bizarre amd poorly handled. Itd be a lot less offensive if it was even a little more subtle, but then this guy made suicide squad, so what can you do?

Will Smith, interesting enough story because it was universe building--and I just kinda like attempts at that. One of the reason I'm a gamer.

<Snipped quote by Fabricant451>

Yeah, but is it a bad feminist movie?

Depends on who you ask. The answer is no, but some would say yes because...you know...it's British.

My thoughts on Bright:

I seem to be the minority on this one, but I suppose that’s bound to happen. There’s no accounting for taste, after all.

By all appearances, Bright seems like an awkward and strange film for Netflix to put a lot of faith behind. With all of the star power provided and the film being self-aware enough to know exactly what type of movie it is, Bright seems redeemable in a sort of pulp entertainment sort of fashion and for me, that is exactly what I get out of it.

Landis’ script is well-devised, albeit clichéd with stereotypical analogues as he plunges his audience straight-first into a setting with as minimal exposition as possible and as such the audience isn’t led to understand how the world came to be. This is a device that works well enough in fiction, though it does make us ask questions that we may never get tangible answers to. We see that the world of Bright is fantastical and whimsical, albeit as gray-toned as our own, where atypical high fantasy races live amongst humans as if they’ve evolved alongside them. It’s not a bad approach and for the more esoteric of us it feels like a film that is set in the early Shadowrun universe, or Rifts, or even a modern composition of Dungeons & Dragons.

Interesting setting aside, I must concede that most of the characters come off as almost skeletal outside of the exception of Will Smith’s character, Daryl Ward, but that is because we’ve seen the character played out before. Ward ends up being a familiar amalgamation of Denzel Washington’s character from Training Day and Will Smith’s character from Men in Black. We don’t really peel back the depth of our two protagonists outside of slight glimpses and it really works against connecting with these characters. Even in an action-fantasy film with comedic overtones, we, the audience, should be able to immerse and connect beyond blazing special effects and choreographed gunplay. This is one of two areas where Bright fails as a film for me.

For some, those clichés and skeletal characterizations will be the nail in the coffin. For others, it can be overlooked to enjoy where the film takes the narrative and how the actors in the film do their best to make it serviceable. Though, for those not really interested in the dungeonpunk concepts of fantastical hierarchies and the dangers of magical McGuffins, it’s probably best to be avoided.

As for me? I’m obviously more in the former category. I find Bright as delightfully cliché and fun to the point I enjoyed throughout my initial viewing. It’s probably not the film I wish it was, but for what I got it is a fun ride.

<Snipped quote by Mara>

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

I am also curious about whatever the hell nebulous idea of feminsm you're talking about.

Who are you referring to?

Suffragette

Kill Bill is a feminist movie.
Ex-Machina is a film that heavily explores feminist themes (almost exclusively).
Suffragette is a biopic about a period of history associated with feminism.
Ghostbusters is a gender swapped remake promoting female leads, now whether or not that is a feminist agenda movie is sort of up for discussion. But atm I think the term feminist agenda movie is a bit of a meme.

I honestly don't know anymore. Most of what I see of movies now are brief clips segmented into reviews or unrelated videos as a meme. Movies like Kill Bill aren't really feminist to me, more just female empowerment, which I see as a separate thing to feminism. In my eyes, feminism has always been about rights, because it's easier to change laws than it is to change stubborn people's perception about people with tits.

Wouldn't you agree that movies (a very powerful form of media). Is part of the process of changing people's stubborn opinions about women?

I agree with you that a good movie with a theme, rarely has to be in your face about it's message because it can be about something without taking you away from the story. This is the difference between a clever film about racism (Pleasantville) and a ham-fisted idiotic film about racism (Bright).

Kill Bill is almost so effortlessly feminist, that it doesn't even need to promote the fact that it is. It doesn't explain to you why these women are all super independent, extremely powerful, and are able to lead and make decisions on their own accord. It just presents them to you and expects you to accept it. And because its such a well made film you never question it.

I've only been exposed to the whole social justice stuff for a couple years, so my idea of feminism is pretty stunted and a product of being around a bigoted grandad my whole life. I'm too young and dumb to be able to form my own opinions, I just spit out fragments of other people's opinions in a string of words..

Let's not forget Anti-SJW youtubers with cartoon avatars who make a living from sophistry and lonely insecure men who build an identity around it in discord.

Yeah I mean self awareness is good, feminism isnt a bad thing and it's not apposed to men's rights advocacy either (at least it shouldn't be). Not all gamers are sexist, and not liking a bad game with a lot of inclusion in it like Mass Effect Andromeda doesn't make you a sexist. But if your issue with the game (and every other game) is women characters being pushed down your throat, then you might be a sexist.

I could go on and on, but this isn't really the thread to talk about games.

EDIT: Bonus meme, if I had a positive view of Bright then @Inkarnate would have disliked it.

@Dynamo Frokane

Initially both of you. But Mara's pointed out that she's not familiar with Feminist theory, so now it's only you. Especially when you're saying things like:

Kill Bill is a feminist movie.

Through a certain scope, sure, you could argue that the themes in Kill-Bill are feminist. But your argument would be flimsy and superficial, as the political definition of feminism is fairly subjective depending on who you're asking, just like with any political body. When people start throwing subjective labels on films that are already entirely subjective with an objective nature in their assertion, it's extremely irritating. What bothers me about it is how inane the idea of labeling a movie like kill Bill as a feminist picture really is. I don't believe for a second that a movie about a woman seeking brutal vengeance on an organization that wronged her severely, while working under a director who had little regard for her life, is a feminist feature. I don't think there was any Authorial intent - which is largely irrelevant mind you - from Quinton, I don't think there's any political backing to that the notion, and I certainly don't think that any competent feminists would like to identify their movement with a movie about a woman brutally murdering people for her independence. I think that would be short sighted and fucked up, in its entirety. But hey, if you're trying to criticize Feminism by using Kill Bill as an example, you're not only exercising a prejudice against the politics, but you're disregarding the core theories of feminism, all of which have nothing to do with the movie at large. If Kill Bill was a feminist movie, it would emphasize some level of restraint in its absurdity. Or would you say the film is a satire? Because I sure as hell wouldn't.

Kill Bill is almost so effortlessly feminist, that it doesn't even need to promote the fact that it is. It doesn't explain to you why these women are all super independent, extremely powerful, and are able to lead and make decisions on their own accord. It just presents them to you and expects you to accept it.

This isn't a feminist theory, it's a single feminist ideal that could be applied to a metric fuck-ton of female leads nowadays. Using metrics like this to measure whether a movie is feminist or not is an extremely poor choice. It's too general, and it implies a nebulous spectrum that generalizes feminism to the point where the 'sub genre' becomes completely fucking pointless. If Kill Bill is a feminist movie, what's the central theme? If you're passionate enough - angry enough - you can be independent? You should be aggressive as a woman? Trusting people is stupid? Swords are cool? Where's the Pathos that feminism wants to be associated with? Kill-Bill is a great movie, but it's an absolutely fucking terrible example of feminist ideals, and should not be seen as such, especially considering its genre and tone. Jesus Christ, man.

The themes you're likely referring to have much less to do with feminism, and far more to do with the environments found in abusive relationships. I haven't seen Kill Bill in a decade though, so I don't recall the movie as clearly as I should.

I'm not sure what you think feminism or feminist themes really are, or just how liberal you are in applying your ideas to media, but they don't apply to every single movie with female leads, or those that emphasize the empowerment of women. To assert such is nonsense. Feminism is a political body that often gets associated with progressive themes more often than it should, because it was a successful progressive movement once upon a time. But I can see why so many people are confused, and immediately label everything with any shred of female empowerment as 'feminist' when it fucking isn't. I wish people would stop reducing the movement to such a simple subset of superficial definitions just because feminism has been over-saturated with idiots along with most other social justice movements.

Suffragette is the closest thing to a 'feminist movie' I've been shown based on the summary alone. It is quite literally a movie that frames first wave feminist struggles. Whether or not it does so in a positive fashion, I can't say. I haven't watched it and I'm not particularly interested in the subject matter. First wave feminism is self explanatory and the political movement has become just as vapid as every other political label on the 'I can't think for myself' aile lately. The likelihood of conversing with a self proclaimed Feminist that knows what they're talking about is just as low as coming across a democrat or a republican that doesn't just parrot media outlets.

And...

whether or not that is a feminist agenda movie is sort of up for discussion

Unless one knows exactly what the political feminist agenda is, which I highly doubt, it's very likely that referring to the feminist agenda is a meme. There are also no feminist agenda movies, so to speak. Some movies may line up with the feminist Agenda, but to claim that there's any political influence there is quite silly.

Or maybe there really are signs of the feminist agenda poisoning movies after all. Maybe there's also mind control drugs in our drinking water, chem-trails over our heads, and bugs in our bedrooms.

_{Illuminati 5ever death to America alla-hoo ackbar.}

EDIT: Bonus meme, if I had a positive view of Bright then @Inkarnate would have disliked it.

No, not at all, lol.

Through a certain scope, sure, you could argue that the themes in Kill-Bill are feminist. But your argument would be flimsy and superficial, as the political definition of feminism is fairly subjective depending on who you're asking, just like with any political body. When people start throwing subjective labels on films that are already entirely subjective with an objective nature in their assertion, it's extremely irritating. What bothers me about it is how inane the idea of labeling a movie like kill Bill as a feminist picture really is. I don't believe for a second that a movie about a woman seeking brutal vengeance on an organization that wronged her severely, while working under a director who had little regard for her life, is a feminist feature. I don't think there was any Authorial intent - which is largely irrelevant mind you - from Quinton, I don't think there's any political backing to that the notion, and I certainly don't think that any competent feminists would like to identify their movement with a movie about a woman brutally murdering people for her independence. I think that would be short sighted and fucked up, in its entirety. But hey, if you're trying to criticize Feminism by using Kill Bill as an example, you're not only exercising a prejudice against the politics, but you're disregarding the core theories of feminism, all of which have nothing to do with the movie at large. If Kill Bill was a feminist movie, it would emphasize some level of restraint in its absurdity. Or would you say the film is a satire? Because I sure as hell wouldn't.

You keep bringing up brutal murder as if it's relevant. I can only come to the conclusion that you are conflating what you personally think feminists like and don't like and what a feminist theme is.

Also Quentin having an explicitly feminist or non feminist agenda is also irrelevant. He could have made it feminist by accident for all I care, but that does not change the content of the film or characters.

I agree with you that Kill Bill only explores some aspects of feminism and not all of them, and yes feminism does differ in different schools of thought, but the basic idea of raising women status up to that of men's is very prevalent in Kill Bill at least as far in the context of most blockbuster movies. There are no typical 'hollywood female' roles in this film, all the characters behave independently of their gender. The fact that main characters are female are barely ever brought up. They are treated and portrayed as equally as men would be without being boiled down to simple character tropes including 'love interest' or 'bitchy friend'.

The only aspect of ' male control' you could say is Bill as the 'director' of her life. But it's explicitly stated in Vol 2 is that she chose the life of the assassin specifically because she gets a thrill from traveling over the world and killing people for money. She was also in love with Bill because they had that in common. The moment she realized she was pregnant she chose to leave the life on her own accord without giving a single shit what Bill wanted and started a new life. His scorn for losing her in that manner is what lead to the events of the film. Again, whether intentional or not, those ARE feminist themes.

Feminism is an ideology first, then a movement, both of which have obvious political implications but I'm not sure about categorizing feminism as a 'political body' any more than I would categorize 'men's issues' or 'egalitarianism' as a political body. Suffragette first and foremost a biopic about feminism, it obviously has the topic of feminism, but that on its own isn't the same as having a feminist story or exploring feminist themes.

A good comparison is the film Lincoln, it's about the Civil War but we wouldn't call it a 'War Movie' because the topic of the film and the narrative are two different things.

Also Django Unchained has slavery as a topic, but it's a Western, not a 'Slave Movie' like 12 years a slave or birth of a nation would be.

And you need to tone down the aggressive and overly confrontational language, we are just talking about films here. If you are passionate about feminism, great. Try to express yourself in a slightly more civil way or we can go to the political thread.

You keep bringing up brutal murder as if it's relevant.

It... It is... The brutality and sheer aggression of the main character's actions, even outside of the simple act of murder, is a significant part of her characterization, and by extension, the plot of the movie. It may even be one of the sole impacts on the movie's tone. To deny something like this is to completely disregard a significant portion of the movie's themes, characterization, plot, and tone. I believe this is called cherry picking.

Quentin having an explicitly feminist or non feminist agenda is also irrelevant.

I know. I said that already. Although I did misspell his name, to be fair.

Whether intentional or not, those ARE feminist themes.

I could just say 'no they're not' and be done with it, but I want to hear your reasoning behind this as I'm genuinely curious. Why are they feminist themes? What exactly makes them feminist themes to you? Why do you correlate these themes with feminism, instead of confidence, independence, or love, for example? Is it that you think those are also feminist themes simply because they refer to women? They're not, if that helps. To assert that would be kind of sexist, and sort of defeats the purpose of feminism entirely, imo.

I also find it strange that you would assert this ad hominem-

I can only come to the conclusion that you are conflating what you personally think feminists like and don't like and what a feminist theme is.

Only to make an outrageous claim like this straight afterwards.

Feminism is an ideology first, then a movement, both of which have obvious political implications but I'm not sure about categorizing feminism as a 'political body' any more than I would categorize 'men's issues' or 'egalitarianism' as a political body.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but feminism's origins stem from political activism. It was a movement centered around women's rights, and should still be considered a political body. To disregard this is just factually wrong. If one can categorize democrats as a political body, despite the vast majority of self-identifying democrats demonstrating behavior that does not line up with the party's goals or theories, then they should also recognize the feminist movement as thus. You cannot disregard the body of knowledge the feminism originates from, otherwise you doom the movement to being redundant and pointless. Which, honestly, I think is the case now. The movement has become largely redundant and pointless, but that doesn't mean that people should disregard its central theories and generalize it. That's just ill mannered and dishonest. From an argumentative standpoint, you are not addressing feminism as it should be addressed. You are addressing generalized rhetoric, which would in fact be conflating what you personally think with feminist theory. If I am in fact doing this as well, which I believe I am not, that would make your earlier assertion hypocritical at best.

Suffragette first and foremost a biopic about feminism, it obviously has the topic of feminism, but that on its own isn't the same as having a feminist story or exploring feminist themes

This makes no sense. You are quite literally saying that a movie that theoretically embodies first wave feminism in its entirety with due accuracy is not a feminist movie. That makes no sense. That is completely absurd. I don't think you have any grounds to claim that I'm conflating my personal beliefs on feminism with actual feminist philosophies, when you are clearly demonstrating a severe lack of education on the topic. I will be the first to admit that I am not particularly learned on feminist philosophy, but I don't think I'm ignorant of the core beliefs behind the political movement.

I'm also having trouble understanding your perception of Genre, topic, and themes. I hope you don't take offense to this, but I think you may be confusing these ideas.

it obviously has the topic of feminism, but that on its own isn't the same as having a feminist story or exploring feminist themes.

Here, you clearly differentiate between 'topic' and 'theme'. Since 'feminist' seems to also be a 'genre' from your perspective (and mine), you additionally differentiate between 'topic' and 'genre' as well. And then...

Also Django Unchained has slavery as a topic, but it's a Western, not a 'Slave Movie' like 12 years a slave or birth of a nation would be.

...you claim that topic and genre are the same, but different, but... Also the same?

If a movie that directly shows what slavery was like is considered a 'slave movie', which isn't exactly the genre I would first associate with it, then why isn't 'Suffragette' a 'feminist' movie when it accurately depicts first wave feminist actions and ideals? What is your thought process here? I'm confused as to what it is you're saying, exactly. Your understanding of Topic, Genre, Themes, and Feminism seems to be a little off. But maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say?

aggressive and overly confrontational language,

Haha, what? Is it because I swore a couple times? Fuck, man.

passionate about feminism.

HAHA, WHAT?

I'm just confronting your ideas on the films being discussed. I'm curious to see if you can somehow rationalize the way that you think, so that I can better understand your perspective, and perhaps learn from it. If you don't want to try and validate your thoughts, simply dismiss my arguments and disregard me.

<Snipped quote>

It... It is... The brutality and sheer aggression of the main character's actions, even outside of the simple act of murder, is a significant part of her characterization, and by extension, the plot of the movie. It may even be one of the sole impacts on the movie's tone. To deny something like this is to completely disregard a significant portion of the movie's themes, characterization, plot, and tone. I believe this is called cherry picking.

And what the hell does any of that have to do with feminism? What exactly is it's relevance to women or men?

Again you said 'no self respecting feminist' what exactly is the conflict here?

I also find it strange that you would assert this ad hominem-

Which shows you don't understand the meaning of ad hominem

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but feminism's origins stem from political activism. It was a movement centered around women's rights, and should still be considered a political body

No, its origins are in philosophy from Classical Liberal thinkers like Jeremy Bentham the term feminism was coined by Charles Fourier in 1837. The significant feminist movements came after the ideology.

I don't know what you mean by 'political body' there is no American Feminist Political Party so you comparing them to the Democratic party is just bizarre. If you're saying that feminism as a movement that has an effect and is affected by politics then, you are pointing out what can be applied to most 'movements'.

This makes no sense. You are quite literally saying that a movie that theoretically embodies first wave feminism in its entirety with due accuracy is not a feminist movie. That makes no sense. That is completely absurd. I don't think you have any grounds to claim that I'm conflating my personal beliefs on feminism with actual feminist philosophies, when you are clearly demonstrating a severe lack of education on the topic. I will be the first to admit that I am not particularly learned on feminist philosophy, but I don't think I'm ignorant of the core beliefs behind the political movement.

You saying that things are nonsensical and absurd a lot of times doesn't actually strengthen your argument, but here we go..

You are using strange terms like saying the film 'embodies' feminism. I don't know what that means. The film is ABOUT the suffragette feminist movement in England yes. In the same way Lincoln is about the Presidency during the civil war, but does it 'embody' the subject matter. I'll be clear, Suffragette is a move about a feminist movie, and has characters and a plot about the activists in that movement which are feminists. But that is just setting and characters, themes of the film are separate. Now does suffragette have feminist themes? Yes probably but not the same ones that are explored in Ex-Machina or presented in Kill Bill. All these things are separate.

So to be clear

Suffragette:
Setting: England During Suffragette Era
Genre: Political Drama/Historical Biopic
Topic: The Struggles and Rise of the first Feminist Movement

Kill Bill:
Setting: Modern Asia and America
Genre: Kung-Fu Exploitation Revenge Movie
Topic: The Destruction of an Assassins guild by a former member.

Ex-Machina
Setting: Near Future Silicon Valley America
Genre: Sci-Fi Psychological Thriller
Topic: The application of the Turing Test to a Android

Now where the themes of the movie come in is the plot what actually happens in the movie? Feminism is a movement but its also an ideology. While Suffragette is a historical look at one of the founding movements of feminism. Kill Bill and Ex Machina explore parts of feminist ideology though the actual stories. And yes having a strong female lead IS feminism if the female is being portrayed and treated no different to how a man would be treated in terms of narrative. Note that narrative treatment is not the same as the actual character's treatment in-universe.

If a movie that directly shows what slavery was like is considered a 'slave movie',

So let me be clear, I don't think 'slave' is a genre. I'm using the term loosely to define movies that depict slavery as apposed to movies that are intrinsically about slavery in its narrative.

Now it's not the perfect comparison for feminism because slavery isn't an ideology in the same way, its a historical practice. But to make the point that Django Unchained is really a western story about a rescue of a loved one. The fact that the main character is a former slave is important but its just the 'backdrop' to a lot of bounty hunting and character motivation.

12 years a slave's entire focus is about the experience of being a slave. There is no love interest, there is no real 'main villain' its a story entirely about the personal journey of someone trying to live as a slave and everything that happens around him as a result of the institution of slavery. This is why I would say this is fitting of the 'Slave Movie' label even though the genre would technically be 'Historical Drama'.

Haha, what? Is it because I swore a couple times? Fuck, man.

No because your tone is overly dismissive and comes across like an angry rant, like you are personally shocked that anyone would even make the arguments that I'm making. Now obviously you have plausible deniability of your intent, but considering you are on a website for creative writing, I would hope your understanding of tone is similar enough to mine to see how that comes across.

Your constant dismissing my opinions as inane also implies that arent really trying to discuss as much as you are to dismiss, which is fine if you want to just joust, but I actually happen to find this conversation interesting and want to keep it in the realm of an exchange rather than a back and forth of gotchas.

Ive seen you debate with others and it's rarely in this tone, so I can only conclude that this is because feminism is an important issue to you.

You can do better than a gif, Gowi.

Say something passive aggressive in an eloquent sentence or two, like you're supposed to.

it was going so well

Not to stoke the flames but Tarantino might not be an out and out feminist director (and given the wake of the whole Weinstein thing his methods are kinda...questionable at best) but several of his movies have clear feminist and female empowering themes and that goes as far back to Jackie Brown and even post Kill Bill with Death Proof and the A plot of Inglorious Basterds. To deny Kill Bill as having feminist themes is like denying I Spit On Your Grave because the lead character gets raped.

Women seeking independence and a break from typical norms is as much part of feminist film as revenge or violence. As far back as La Souriante Madame Beudet, a short film where a woman plots to have her husband kill himself, women seeking revenge on the men/women who have slighted them has been part of feminist film. Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore is a feminist film just as much as Thelma and Louise. A feminist film is not the same thing as a film about feminism.

The argument can and still is made that typical 'female is wronged, seeks revenge' isn't a feminist film because it's not in line with feminist values and at that point it's like fighting over calling it a shovel or a spade.

Feminist movies don't just mean "the main character is a woman" otherwise every romcom is a feminist movie. Ghostbusters 2016 was only a 'feminist movie' because the filmmakers rode that train hard to their detriment, the movie itself wasn't dealing with overtly feminist themes and the reason people in the movie didn't take the characters seriously wasn't because of their gender. Just as an example.

Again you said 'no self respecting feminist'

Did I? I don't recall using any language indicative of such, and that's certainly not a direct quote. Where did I say or imply that?

And what the hell does any of that have to do with feminism?

Nothing at all. Therein lies my point, that being that labeling Kill Bill as a 'feminist' movie is inane. If the central themes are so comprehensive and overwhelming, how could one associate this movie with feminist ideals based on one hyperbole of independence?

Which shows you don't understand the meaning of ad hominem

_{Haha, whatever you say, chief.}

No, its origins are in philosophy from Classical Liberal thinkers like Jeremy Bentham the term feminism was coined by Charles Fourier in 1837. The significant feminist movements came after the ideology.

I don't know what you mean by 'political body' there is no American Feminist Political Party so you comparing them to the Democratic party is just bizarre. If you're saying that feminism as a movement that has an effect and is affected by politics then, you are pointing out what can be applied to most 'movements'.

I actually didn't know that, apologies.

Feminism most certainly had a political body in the first wave movements, and it can be argued that some groups still act to push for political changes today. Core political feminist themes - those that can be taken seriously anyways, and those which I'm referring to - specifically deal with raising women to be on equal lawful standing with men. There's nothing bizarre about taking two groups who's members demonstrate the exact same trends and argue that there need to be changes in government policy, whether it's aiding women, men, homosexuals, or whatever.

you are pointing out what can be applied to most 'movements'.

Y..Yes. I am. Any movement or group(body) that has a political goal, is a political movement.

There's a lot of confusion that most face when attributing the feminist 'genre' to media, I think. If you consider the vast and nebulous array of feminist ideology, whether political or not, nearly anything featuring female leads can be considered 'feminist'. But then, wouldn't the definition lose purpose? That's exactly why I think it's inane to label movies like Kill Bill as feminist, when the core themes are so far south of feminism that it's laughable. It would be similar to coining Django unchained as a movie about 'slavery'. Django is absolutely riddled with themes about slavery but as you've mentioned, it isn't the main focus of the movie. But it's still very pertinent. Slavery motivates the character. Does feminism motivate Kill Bill's protagonist? I'd argue no, but if you can expand on:

I want to hear your reasoning behind this as I'm genuinely curious. Why are they feminist themes? What exactly makes them feminist themes to you? Why do you correlate these themes with feminism, instead of confidence, independence, or love, for example?

I'd be glad to hear your perspective. I'm still a little confused on what exactly you believe, or what you're arguing, when you're conceding to points like this:

...does suffragette have feminist themes? Yes probably...

By your own words, you would define it as a feminist film, right? That's essentially the argument you're making for Kill Bill, isn't it? Or am I misunderstanding you? Or could it be that you're picking and choosing the feminist themes that match your own understanding of of the topic?

You could argue that I'm doing the same thing, but I prefer to narrow the scope of what I'm referring to, as not to avoid making a flimsy argument based on conjecture. This is why I chose to use the political definitions of feminist goals/ideology. It's the only somewhat objective metric that I can refer to, as there are clear goals and philosophies to draw from. If I had to phrase it as an argument: feminist philosophy in regards to politics is more trustworthy than feminist ideology based on a nebulous conglomerate established over the course of 100 years. Though I would like to point out once again, that I am not rightly educated on feminist politics. I merely believe that differentiating between politics and the ideology behind those politics is important, and a good way to eliminate a lot of subjective integers.

The most I'd concede to is that some of Kill Bill's themes can be correlated with vague feminist ideologies. But I still believe that an argument should be made to defend this, in this case. You cannot simply state that the themes are 'feminist' based on an interpretation of a school of thought that is as conflicted and unclear as the feminist ideology, without also defending your interpretation. I'm mostly challenging the idea that 'kill bill is a feminist movie' because I still think that's an absurd notion. Are you arguing that the main character is a feminist? Or holds feminist ideals? Or that the subtext of the movie promotes feminist ideals? How so? Why? Is that more important than the other themes presented in the movie? Does that correlate with the tone? Does the narrative present it as such? How?

you are personally shocked that anyone would even make the arguments that I'm making.

I wouldn't say shocked, but I do think a lot of your arguments are based on your perspective and opinions alone. While there's nothing inherently wrong with that, it inherently weakens a position, and will ultimately corrode an argument with bias. It's also a habit that promotes the stagnation of ideas.

Your constant dismissing my opinions as inane

Opinions are like rocks. Everybody can have one, but they're totally worthless until you turn them into a house or a well, unless you want to bludgeon people to death with them. I confront them because I'm curious to see your reaction. Will you build a house? Or just start throwing them at me?

Ive seen you debate with others and it's rarely in this tone, so I can only conclude that this is because feminism is an important issue to you.

Is it? I'm fairly certain that I'm always very tactless when arguing. I think it encourages effort!

---

@Fabricant451
I certainly wouldn't consider Tarantino to be a producer of feminist film. Though maybe I'm confusing how people are using the terminology. I can agree that his films are certainly in line with feminist thinking, even from a political standpoint, but only in regards to equality. The issue I see is that these so-called feminist themes are not given any measure of focus. They're an afterthought and play second fiddle to the core themes of his movies.

It's like I'd mentioned. If we're associating ideals that have become common sense in the past two decades with every film that treats women like people, the label loses significance, and becomes completely inane. I believe that in order to label any media as 'feminist', it should actively play upon feminist themes as the focal point of its story. But at that point I guess it really is-

like fighting over calling it a shovel or a spade.

-which I think is an important distinction to make! Otherwise, we're just being reductive, and there's nothing to be gained from that.

and I certainly don't think that any competent feminists would like to identify their movement with a movie about a woman brutally murdering people for her independence.

EDIT:

I'm not going to keep quote cutting you, mainly because you keep repeating the same 3 things with different caps/emojis/images for emphasis.

Your main point of contention seems to be that you don't think Kill Bill is a feminist movie. Me and @Fabricant451 have both laid out why it is one. So why don't you give me your definition of feminism in film and let's work from there.

I believe that in order to label any media as 'feminist', it should actively play upon feminist themes, using them as focal points of their story.

That's exactly why I think it's inane to label movies like Kill Bill as feminist, when the core themes are so far south of feminism that it's laughable.

The most I'd concede to is that some of Kill Bill's themes can be correlated with vague feminist ideologies. But I still believe that an argument should be made to defend this, in this case.

Movies that put feminist themes front and center, and use them in conjunction with the narrative, tone, etc. to construct a dialogue on feminism, or society's reaction to feminism. From there, it's an argument of how one defines 'feminist themes'.