Sherlock Holmes (and cissexism)
So I just came back from seeing the new Sherlock Holmes movie! I haven't seen something in theatres in ages, so it was fun. The movie itself was great, too, and I'll talk about it in a bit, but before the cut I'm going to rant a little about an ad they played before the movie.
It was an ad for tampons. Ok, that's cool. Except that the main premise was that you aren't a woman if you don't menstruate, or that transgendered women aren't girls because they don't have a vagina/ovaries. I'm not reading too much into it or exaggerating; that was essentially the entire point of the ad. There is no other interpretation.
Basically, a girl is in a public bathroom, doing her makeup in front of a mirror. Next to her is a man playing someone who seems to be a Drag Queen (though for various reasons, in real life that kind of character would be more likely a trans* woman; but I'll give Libra the benefit of the doubt and refer to her/him as a Drag Queen). The Drag Queen is wearing gaudy makeup, a sparkly gold dress and an over-the-top wig; the "real girl" next to them is much more subdued, with casual clothing, straight honest hair, and natural makeup. The "real girl" starts putting on mascara; the Drag Queen notices and puts on (more) mascara as well. The "real girl" puts on some lipgloss; the Drag Queen notices again, and slathers their lips with gloss too. The "real girl" adjusts her shirt; the Drag Queen adjusts their dress and their "breasts" (the dress comes above any cleavage so it's unclear whether the Drag Queen has actual breasts, or a padded bra). Then the "real girl" takes out her box of Libra tampons and holds one, looking at the Drag Queen with an expression that says, "Can you do this?". The Drag Queen then looks annoyed/offended and walks off, the "real girl" smiles, and we cut to a closeup of Libra's tampons with the slogan "Libra gets girls".
Now, Libra probably intended for the Drag Queen character to be seen as, well, a Drag Queen; a cisgendered man who was dressing up as a girl without identifying as one. However, the only thing actually supporting this idea (other than optimism) is the fact that her/his outfit was extremely over-the-top - even then, compared with what an actual, professional Drag Queen wears, and compared with what is socially acceptable for cisgendered girls to wear to clubs/parties in real life, they seemed much more like a trans* woman. Their behaviour reflected this much, much more, too; for starters, most cisgendered men wouldn't go into a woman's bathroom and use it seriously, even if they were crossdressing (unless they were at a place for cross-dressers). The fact that they were in there, on their own, treating being in the women's bathroom like it was natural to them implied that they were trans*. The other thing is that they look hurt when they're confronted with the idea that they've "lost" because they can't use a tampon.
So in reality, the ad is about a trans* woman who is eager to prove to herself that she can do anything a "real girl" can (not to mention that the reaction from the "real girl" implies that she's amused/offended/annoyed that *gasp* a "man" is putting on mascara and lipgloss) and then has it shoved in her face that she can't, because she doesn't menstruate/have the "right parts".
Seriously. That's it.
It's just a "real girl" who lets that big, ugly tranny know who's boss by holding out a tampon and saying, "You're not a real girl, because I can use this and you can't".
Even if their intentions were just to portray the Drag Queen as a cis male, the message is still the same; "You can fake it on the surface, but you can't be a real girl unless you have a vagina [and menstruate]". The most mind-boggling part is that there was no reason to even have this kind of character in this kind of ad. There is no reason why you should have to bring a man into an ad about tampons. There's no reason why you should have to bring sexuality or gender into it. Tampons aren't about "being a girl", they're about having a vagina that bleeds. You can be a girl without that - and you can have it without being a girl.
Reading up on it, it seems like the ad has been yanked off TV (but not from theatres, it seems - they said that the ad has "not aired in Australia", which is just sloppy). The Drag Queen from the ad, "Sandee Crack", made a blog post addressing the controversy... and, of course, defended the ad; because being gay means that you are universally understanding of other LGBT+ issues, and that there is never any cissexism or transphobia in the LGBT+ community, so clearly a cisgendered gay man who sometimes puts on a dress understands exactly what it's like to be a trans* woman. From the post:
"When I was presented with the Libra commercial and saw it as a great opportunity to participate in a positive step towards acceptance for drag queens and gay men among the wider community. [What kind of Kool-Aid has this guy been drinking??]
"Libra were both sensitive, professional and accepting of my needs as a drag queen and as a gay man throughout the production process. [... "Needs as a drag queen"?] I never felt for one moment that I would be depicted as a trans woman, nor do I believe that I have been.
"We consciously kept my arm hair, chose strapless dresses to accentuate my broad shoulders and if you look carefully you will notice my stubble is slightly visible. They also ensured I looked much taller than the girl next to me. [Because if you have any of those things, you're not a real girl, and/or you're a failure as a trans* woman.]
"... I believe strongly that by putting a drag queen into the mainstream media, we are one step closer to acceptance and this is something I am very proud to be part of. [Poor, misguided person. How does an ad that encourages people to make fun of cross dressers - because that's what the ad does, the woman is literally laughing at him - encourage acceptance, in any way? It does the exact opposite. By having a Drag Queen shown in mainstream media and then having them be the point of ridicule, you are only encouraging the public to continue to ridicule them, because you are showing that it's OK and acceptable. There is no possible way to take 'acceptance' from this ad.]
"... However, I feel hurt that representing myself as a drag queen on television and playing out a common place scenario in my life has lead to a clear “Dragphobia” among some transgendered individuals who wish to pull the plug on something that reflects true honesty about the life of a drag queen. A drag queen is a man in women’s clothing and if that offends a trans woman I am afraid I cannot apologise, as by doing so I am apologising for being me. [... Yeah, I don't have any words for that. If I could start somewhere, I would start with the idea that 'men who sometimes dress up like girls because they think it's fun' are being oppressed by 'women who are trapped in the body of men and face daily discrimination and prejudice against them merely for daring to wear clothes that they feel align them more closely with their actual gender', but beyond that I just kind of blue-screen.]"
Basically the article can be summed up with "Drag Queens and trans* women are totally different. But I was a Drag Queen in this ad, not a trans* woman, so the fact that the issues I faced as a Drag Queen in this ad are the exact same as those that trans* women have to deal with every day is a total non-issue and this ad is totes not offensive. Because the name of my character was 'Drag Queen' and not 'Tranny'. So all those similarities never happened."
uggghhhhhhhh.
Here is the ad, if you haven't seen it. The top two rated comments are (at my time of watching the video) awesome, but... don't read the others. Just save yourself the headache and don't (It's basically just a lot of straight-out trolls, denial, and of course a lot of "some of my best friends are trannies and they thought it was hilarious! the only problem here is that people have no sense of humour!! POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!!!!").
Here is the article I'm quoting from. I have no idea why they keep referring to Sandee as "she", though, since he's made it incredibly clear that he is not a trans* woman and that he identifies as a man. Fake edit: Apparently they identify as male... but use female pronouns to write about themselves for what seems like no reason. ... Alright.
- - -
... Anyway. The movie itself was, I'm happy to say, brilliant. I will now ramble about that instead, since it's much more fun.
I adored it! It was a lot of fun. The fight scenes were, as always, magnificent (we were all on the edges of our seats) and RDJ + Jude Law both had the same heart-warming chemistry. I love how Watson is portrayed in these films; in so many incarnations (the newer series "Sherlock" is an example) he becomes the Butt Monkey, and Holmes always seems to be patronising him, when in the books he considers him to be a valuable peer and friend. So it was great to see that they didn't succumb to that idea in this sequel (of course, it helps that Jude Law with a handlebar mustache is basically impossible to make look like anything other than a snappy badass). For example, I just loved the throw-away moment that he noticed the sniper smoking the same kind of cigarettes as him. Of course, the scene where he blows up the bad guys with a tank is icing on the cake.
There is a... lot of shipping fuel in these movies, and I think it's all intentional. Interviews that Robert Downey Jr did around the time of the first movie showed that they were completely aware of the rabid Holmes/Watson fangirls, and watching the first movie I couldn't help but feel like certain scenes/elements had been changed or added very close to the release date to capitalise on this (there's a scene where Holmes has a hangover and Watson mercilessly opens the shutters and makes as much noise as possible, and Holmes says "Be gentle with me, Watson" in a way that sounds incredibly dubbed-over when you consider the seamlessness of the rest of the movie). I feel like they've have done a masterful job of pandering to the shippers while at the same time making it all possible for people who don't ship them to ignore and enjoy without feeling awkward. In the first movie, this was mainly achieved by having the scenes be very subtle. This time, they're so overtly homosexual that they come full circle (no pun intended) to just feel like two guys who are so comfortable and brother-ly around each other it doesn't even register as being gay. In one scene, Holmes stows away on the train disguised as a woman; by the end of it, his shirt has been ripped off and he and Watson are grappling with each other in a carriage (after he just threw Watson's new wife out of the moving train). It's so ridiculous that it's impossible to feel awkward looking at it, but you just know that the shippers are going to go NUTS with it. The scene, too, where Holmes gingerly leads a bruised and hung-over Watson into the church is adorable, especially since Holmes himself is in pretty awful condition.
(Personally, I'm not a Watson/Holmes shipper and I think their relationship is more interesting as friends, but it's fun to think about from the director + writer's points of view.)
Speaking of Sherlock's disguises, his urban camouflage costumes are the fucking funniest things ever. I loved the final scene so much, I was laughing so hard I wasn't even making a sound. "THE END ?" is one of the finest ways I've seen a movie close in a long time. I cannot WAIT until the next one.
Unfortunately, the depth of some characters was disappointing. (It wasn't bad, it was just kind of lacking.) For this reason, I think overall I prefer the first movie, where every main character introduced got enough time on-screen for the audience to feel a connection. In this movie, I felt like I never actually got to know Simza (the "gypsy"); she was just there. She definitely had a personality, and she kicked ass, and I did appreciate noticing some of the smaller things she did as part of her characterisation (for example, drinking from teacups by holding them like cups instead of by the handle) - she was just never on screen for long enough. It wasn't bad or anything, since you know when you go to see the movie that it's going to focus much of its effort on Sherlock, Watson and Professor Moriarty, but I felt like considering how much of an effect she had on the story, and that she essentially replaced the previous female lead, she could have been used a lot more. In some ways I'm glad that she didn't, though, since it seemed at times like she could have become a potential love interest, which would have been ragingly OOC for both of them and probably would have damaged the story. I hope romance never enters into it, except for perhaps the occasional pining for Irene.
... Speaking of which, she died. It was handled incredibly well and was fascinating to watch. She must have known that she was doomed basically from the moment everyone left the restaurant; so we can see that she clearly wants to live (self preservation is basically the entire drive for her character), but that she knows she is going to die, and knowing that she must have realised she was poisoned, but remains calm and dignified, is incredibly moving. The fact that her actual death (well, until flashbacks) is left off-screen - we just see her walk off, then stumble, and finally hear the sound of crashing plates and a thud - was masterful. It added a very sad, touching and above all gripping feeling to the scene. I can't explain how or why (despite the fact that I've used about a billion words so far in this post), but I felt like there could not have been a more perfect death scene for her. (Not that I wanted her to die, though.)
Of course, my friend pointed out that it's not impossible for her to come back to life. It was written in such a way that if she does stay dead, it won't feel unresolved, but that if she appears again later, it wouldn't seem like an Ass Pull. So, essentially, the perfect movie death in an ongoing franchise.
Speaking of near-deaths, I loved evreything about Sherlock's "last" scene, too. But in particular I loved the look on his face when he saw Watson come through the door, just as he was throwing himself off the edge. It was a simultaneous combination of "oh, for fuck's sake", and "c'est la vie"; he had already resigned himself to almost certain death, but when Watson came through the door he realised that it was in fact unnecessary and futile; but he also knew that he had made the right choice, based on his chances, so ultimately - though obviously disappointed - he was calm and accepting.
Of course, it's also possible that if he survived, Professor Moriarty did, too; and considering he's basically the Lex Luthor to Sherlock's Superman, I find it unlikely that he won't return at some point in the future, too.
In short, it was an awesome movie. If you haven't seen the first movie I would suggest that you do, and then go and see this one while it's in cinemas. I really, really think I want to get a movie poster for one (or both) of them - I wonder if I can buy this one somewhere?
The music was fantastic, too. There are two songs that I absolutely adored and know for certain I'm going to buy if the OST ever goes on iTunes. ... Aaaaand it already is! Hee! ... Thhhouuugh it seems the ones I wanted... aren't on it. Poo.
Anyway, that's it. I don't expect anyone to have read ALL of this, but you know... it's obligatory to gush after seeing a movie.
It was an ad for tampons. Ok, that's cool. Except that the main premise was that you aren't a woman if you don't menstruate, or that transgendered women aren't girls because they don't have a vagina/ovaries. I'm not reading too much into it or exaggerating; that was essentially the entire point of the ad. There is no other interpretation.
Basically, a girl is in a public bathroom, doing her makeup in front of a mirror. Next to her is a man playing someone who seems to be a Drag Queen (though for various reasons, in real life that kind of character would be more likely a trans* woman; but I'll give Libra the benefit of the doubt and refer to her/him as a Drag Queen). The Drag Queen is wearing gaudy makeup, a sparkly gold dress and an over-the-top wig; the "real girl" next to them is much more subdued, with casual clothing, straight honest hair, and natural makeup. The "real girl" starts putting on mascara; the Drag Queen notices and puts on (more) mascara as well. The "real girl" puts on some lipgloss; the Drag Queen notices again, and slathers their lips with gloss too. The "real girl" adjusts her shirt; the Drag Queen adjusts their dress and their "breasts" (the dress comes above any cleavage so it's unclear whether the Drag Queen has actual breasts, or a padded bra). Then the "real girl" takes out her box of Libra tampons and holds one, looking at the Drag Queen with an expression that says, "Can you do this?". The Drag Queen then looks annoyed/offended and walks off, the "real girl" smiles, and we cut to a closeup of Libra's tampons with the slogan "Libra gets girls".
Now, Libra probably intended for the Drag Queen character to be seen as, well, a Drag Queen; a cisgendered man who was dressing up as a girl without identifying as one. However, the only thing actually supporting this idea (other than optimism) is the fact that her/his outfit was extremely over-the-top - even then, compared with what an actual, professional Drag Queen wears, and compared with what is socially acceptable for cisgendered girls to wear to clubs/parties in real life, they seemed much more like a trans* woman. Their behaviour reflected this much, much more, too; for starters, most cisgendered men wouldn't go into a woman's bathroom and use it seriously, even if they were crossdressing (unless they were at a place for cross-dressers). The fact that they were in there, on their own, treating being in the women's bathroom like it was natural to them implied that they were trans*. The other thing is that they look hurt when they're confronted with the idea that they've "lost" because they can't use a tampon.
So in reality, the ad is about a trans* woman who is eager to prove to herself that she can do anything a "real girl" can (not to mention that the reaction from the "real girl" implies that she's amused/offended/annoyed that *gasp* a "man" is putting on mascara and lipgloss) and then has it shoved in her face that she can't, because she doesn't menstruate/have the "right parts".
Seriously. That's it.
It's just a "real girl" who lets that big, ugly tranny know who's boss by holding out a tampon and saying, "You're not a real girl, because I can use this and you can't".
Even if their intentions were just to portray the Drag Queen as a cis male, the message is still the same; "You can fake it on the surface, but you can't be a real girl unless you have a vagina [and menstruate]". The most mind-boggling part is that there was no reason to even have this kind of character in this kind of ad. There is no reason why you should have to bring a man into an ad about tampons. There's no reason why you should have to bring sexuality or gender into it. Tampons aren't about "being a girl", they're about having a vagina that bleeds. You can be a girl without that - and you can have it without being a girl.
Reading up on it, it seems like the ad has been yanked off TV (but not from theatres, it seems - they said that the ad has "not aired in Australia", which is just sloppy). The Drag Queen from the ad, "Sandee Crack", made a blog post addressing the controversy... and, of course, defended the ad; because being gay means that you are universally understanding of other LGBT+ issues, and that there is never any cissexism or transphobia in the LGBT+ community, so clearly a cisgendered gay man who sometimes puts on a dress understands exactly what it's like to be a trans* woman. From the post:
"When I was presented with the Libra commercial and saw it as a great opportunity to participate in a positive step towards acceptance for drag queens and gay men among the wider community. [What kind of Kool-Aid has this guy been drinking??]
"Libra were both sensitive, professional and accepting of my needs as a drag queen and as a gay man throughout the production process. [... "Needs as a drag queen"?] I never felt for one moment that I would be depicted as a trans woman, nor do I believe that I have been.
"We consciously kept my arm hair, chose strapless dresses to accentuate my broad shoulders and if you look carefully you will notice my stubble is slightly visible. They also ensured I looked much taller than the girl next to me. [Because if you have any of those things, you're not a real girl, and/or you're a failure as a trans* woman.]
"... I believe strongly that by putting a drag queen into the mainstream media, we are one step closer to acceptance and this is something I am very proud to be part of. [Poor, misguided person. How does an ad that encourages people to make fun of cross dressers - because that's what the ad does, the woman is literally laughing at him - encourage acceptance, in any way? It does the exact opposite. By having a Drag Queen shown in mainstream media and then having them be the point of ridicule, you are only encouraging the public to continue to ridicule them, because you are showing that it's OK and acceptable. There is no possible way to take 'acceptance' from this ad.]
"... However, I feel hurt that representing myself as a drag queen on television and playing out a common place scenario in my life has lead to a clear “Dragphobia” among some transgendered individuals who wish to pull the plug on something that reflects true honesty about the life of a drag queen. A drag queen is a man in women’s clothing and if that offends a trans woman I am afraid I cannot apologise, as by doing so I am apologising for being me. [... Yeah, I don't have any words for that. If I could start somewhere, I would start with the idea that 'men who sometimes dress up like girls because they think it's fun' are being oppressed by 'women who are trapped in the body of men and face daily discrimination and prejudice against them merely for daring to wear clothes that they feel align them more closely with their actual gender', but beyond that I just kind of blue-screen.]"
Basically the article can be summed up with "Drag Queens and trans* women are totally different. But I was a Drag Queen in this ad, not a trans* woman, so the fact that the issues I faced as a Drag Queen in this ad are the exact same as those that trans* women have to deal with every day is a total non-issue and this ad is totes not offensive. Because the name of my character was 'Drag Queen' and not 'Tranny'. So all those similarities never happened."
uggghhhhhhhh.
Here is the ad, if you haven't seen it. The top two rated comments are (at my time of watching the video) awesome, but... don't read the others. Just save yourself the headache and don't (It's basically just a lot of straight-out trolls, denial, and of course a lot of "some of my best friends are trannies and they thought it was hilarious! the only problem here is that people have no sense of humour!! POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!!!!").
Here is the article I'm quoting from. I have no idea why they keep referring to Sandee as "she", though, since he's made it incredibly clear that he is not a trans* woman and that he identifies as a man. Fake edit: Apparently they identify as male... but use female pronouns to write about themselves for what seems like no reason. ... Alright.
- - -
... Anyway. The movie itself was, I'm happy to say, brilliant. I will now ramble about that instead, since it's much more fun.
I adored it! It was a lot of fun. The fight scenes were, as always, magnificent (we were all on the edges of our seats) and RDJ + Jude Law both had the same heart-warming chemistry. I love how Watson is portrayed in these films; in so many incarnations (the newer series "Sherlock" is an example) he becomes the Butt Monkey, and Holmes always seems to be patronising him, when in the books he considers him to be a valuable peer and friend. So it was great to see that they didn't succumb to that idea in this sequel (of course, it helps that Jude Law with a handlebar mustache is basically impossible to make look like anything other than a snappy badass). For example, I just loved the throw-away moment that he noticed the sniper smoking the same kind of cigarettes as him. Of course, the scene where he blows up the bad guys with a tank is icing on the cake.
There is a... lot of shipping fuel in these movies, and I think it's all intentional. Interviews that Robert Downey Jr did around the time of the first movie showed that they were completely aware of the rabid Holmes/Watson fangirls, and watching the first movie I couldn't help but feel like certain scenes/elements had been changed or added very close to the release date to capitalise on this (there's a scene where Holmes has a hangover and Watson mercilessly opens the shutters and makes as much noise as possible, and Holmes says "Be gentle with me, Watson" in a way that sounds incredibly dubbed-over when you consider the seamlessness of the rest of the movie). I feel like they've have done a masterful job of pandering to the shippers while at the same time making it all possible for people who don't ship them to ignore and enjoy without feeling awkward. In the first movie, this was mainly achieved by having the scenes be very subtle. This time, they're so overtly homosexual that they come full circle (no pun intended) to just feel like two guys who are so comfortable and brother-ly around each other it doesn't even register as being gay. In one scene, Holmes stows away on the train disguised as a woman; by the end of it, his shirt has been ripped off and he and Watson are grappling with each other in a carriage (after he just threw Watson's new wife out of the moving train). It's so ridiculous that it's impossible to feel awkward looking at it, but you just know that the shippers are going to go NUTS with it. The scene, too, where Holmes gingerly leads a bruised and hung-over Watson into the church is adorable, especially since Holmes himself is in pretty awful condition.
(Personally, I'm not a Watson/Holmes shipper and I think their relationship is more interesting as friends, but it's fun to think about from the director + writer's points of view.)
Speaking of Sherlock's disguises, his urban camouflage costumes are the fucking funniest things ever. I loved the final scene so much, I was laughing so hard I wasn't even making a sound. "THE END ?" is one of the finest ways I've seen a movie close in a long time. I cannot WAIT until the next one.
Unfortunately, the depth of some characters was disappointing. (It wasn't bad, it was just kind of lacking.) For this reason, I think overall I prefer the first movie, where every main character introduced got enough time on-screen for the audience to feel a connection. In this movie, I felt like I never actually got to know Simza (the "gypsy"); she was just there. She definitely had a personality, and she kicked ass, and I did appreciate noticing some of the smaller things she did as part of her characterisation (for example, drinking from teacups by holding them like cups instead of by the handle) - she was just never on screen for long enough. It wasn't bad or anything, since you know when you go to see the movie that it's going to focus much of its effort on Sherlock, Watson and Professor Moriarty, but I felt like considering how much of an effect she had on the story, and that she essentially replaced the previous female lead, she could have been used a lot more. In some ways I'm glad that she didn't, though, since it seemed at times like she could have become a potential love interest, which would have been ragingly OOC for both of them and probably would have damaged the story. I hope romance never enters into it, except for perhaps the occasional pining for Irene.
... Speaking of which, she died. It was handled incredibly well and was fascinating to watch. She must have known that she was doomed basically from the moment everyone left the restaurant; so we can see that she clearly wants to live (self preservation is basically the entire drive for her character), but that she knows she is going to die, and knowing that she must have realised she was poisoned, but remains calm and dignified, is incredibly moving. The fact that her actual death (well, until flashbacks) is left off-screen - we just see her walk off, then stumble, and finally hear the sound of crashing plates and a thud - was masterful. It added a very sad, touching and above all gripping feeling to the scene. I can't explain how or why (despite the fact that I've used about a billion words so far in this post), but I felt like there could not have been a more perfect death scene for her. (Not that I wanted her to die, though.)
Of course, my friend pointed out that it's not impossible for her to come back to life. It was written in such a way that if she does stay dead, it won't feel unresolved, but that if she appears again later, it wouldn't seem like an Ass Pull. So, essentially, the perfect movie death in an ongoing franchise.
Speaking of near-deaths, I loved evreything about Sherlock's "last" scene, too. But in particular I loved the look on his face when he saw Watson come through the door, just as he was throwing himself off the edge. It was a simultaneous combination of "oh, for fuck's sake", and "c'est la vie"; he had already resigned himself to almost certain death, but when Watson came through the door he realised that it was in fact unnecessary and futile; but he also knew that he had made the right choice, based on his chances, so ultimately - though obviously disappointed - he was calm and accepting.
Of course, it's also possible that if he survived, Professor Moriarty did, too; and considering he's basically the Lex Luthor to Sherlock's Superman, I find it unlikely that he won't return at some point in the future, too.
In short, it was an awesome movie. If you haven't seen the first movie I would suggest that you do, and then go and see this one while it's in cinemas. I really, really think I want to get a movie poster for one (or both) of them - I wonder if I can buy this one somewhere?
The music was fantastic, too. There are two songs that I absolutely adored and know for certain I'm going to buy if the OST ever goes on iTunes. ... Aaaaand it already is! Hee! ... Thhhouuugh it seems the ones I wanted... aren't on it. Poo.
Anyway, that's it. I don't expect anyone to have read ALL of this, but you know... it's obligatory to gush after seeing a movie.