“Mulan” is a 1998 American animated musical adventure film produced by Walt Disney Pictures. The plot takes place in China during the Han dynasty where Mulan, the daughter of a very old aged warrior impersonates a man to take her father’s place when there is an invasion. Mulan knows that her father’s health and age will interfere with his time in combat, so she protects him and fights not only for her father, but for herself, proving that she was more than just a housewife. Women are taught growing up to fulfill their gender roles as a woman, like cooking, cleaning and being a good housewife. We are taught at a very young age that there is a difference between masculinity and femininity, and since this movie is often shown to children, it starts them thinking about the differences in gender at a young age. Over time though, we have seen that women can do things that men do and succeed beyond their gender roles. We see in the movie Mulan how she breaks gender roles when she proves that women can be tough and endure the pain and sacrifice men did when going to war. 

As the movie plays out, we can see ideas that are parallel with what we have learned in class. For instance, de Beauvoir’s theory of Other is present in this plot. Mulan is oppressed as a woman and she has to hide her true gender because she is underrepresented in the warfare, so this could be considered Otherness as women are looked down upon and treated differently. The men in this movie are considered the One as they have power over the woman in this movie, being stereotypically the more powerful ones in the war. In addition to Otherness, we can also refer to Spivak’s Subaltern, “Can the Subaltern Speak.” Spivak says “identity is its difference.” In this movie, Mulan, as the non-represented subject (women) hides her true identity to make it evident that her gender does compare and even succeed beyond the comparison to the more powerful/dominant one (men). The producers of this movie therefore, inspires conversations about gender roles, power and injustice and we can see how Mulan’s Otherness appeals to the viewers of this movie as she shocks the world with her ability to overcome gender stereotypes in war and even sparks conversations of stereotypes of everyday life.  

At face value, 28 Days Later is another zombie flick: a film about a group of people who struggle for survival in a twisted version of our own world in which some event has resulted in the transformation of most of the human population into mindless, angry cannibals. While the premise of many of these films is the same, one must not forget to look for ways in which this genre may critique our world through its own. Fiction offers a way for us to view the flaws in which we act as people because it presents a world, often one that is not spectacularly different from our own, through which we can view the absurdities and contradictions of our way of life from an outside perspective. In the context of the disaster genre, we are shown the degree to which we take our comfortable and convenient lives for granted. Disaster films, especially ones in which the main characters are isolated or pressed for survival, can and do offer valuable critiques on our fallacious social constructs.

Many would be surprised to find that 28 Days Later, a film which presents to its audience an experience that pretends to be nothing more than a horror film featuring armies of flesh-eating enemies, takes advantage of its setting and circumstances to make valuable points about gender equality.

A common trope in zombie films remains the idea that humans can be enemies to the same degree as zombies, with the main separation between human enemies and the undead being the nature of their malice. In 28 Days Later, the protagonists Jim and Selena arrive at a military compound which presents itself as a refuge from the hordes of people infected with the Rage virus. It is later at this compound that they learn that the refuge is a trap in order to capture female survivors, who are then supposed to be inducted as slaves in an attempt to repopulate the United Kingdom.

28 Days Later is unique among films of its type in that it critiques the common damsel-in-distress archetype by featuring the female protagonist as strong and competent. Selena is often responsible for protecting or saving other characters, and in this sense, she rejects the classification outlined by Simone de Beauvoir in her introduction to The Second Sex, in which women are viewed as being different from the default, or as a simple derivative of man.

With the world in ruins, 28 Days Later is able to pick apart assumptions we have about gender. With the collapse of the world’s traditional systems of social control, the various stereotypes and negative dualities of gender fall with it. Selena’s rejection of these categorizations represents a return to normal. Upon my first viewing of the film, one quote stood out to me as proof of the film’s deeper meaning:

“If you look at the whole life of the planet, we, you know, man has only been around for a few blinks of an eye. So, if the infection wipes us all out… that is a return to normality.”

To say that the disaster genre is capable of showing a world without social constructs is an understatement. In fact, as illustrated by the quote above, the film is aware of it.

Parasite is a must see film this year. It was writtened and directed by Bong Joon-ho. Among its many awards this season, Parasite won four Oscars including Best Picture, Best Director, International Feature Film, and Best Orgininal Screenplay. Parasite was more than deserving of every accolade it received, and is my number one recommendation for an insightful film to watch. Bong Joon-ho explores wealth disparity in South Korea through a social satire. The plot begins as the Kim family infiltrates the home of the Park family as employees. As the film progresses, the plot line only gets more complex as the cast plays out an upstairs-downstairs family dynamic.  

The movie is set in South Korea in two separate locations. The juxtaposition between the urban basement apartment of the Kim family and the suburban mansion of the Park family parallels the relationship between the two families in the movie. In one particular scene, the Kim family comes home exhausted to find their half-basement apartment flooded with sewage water. In direct opposition, the Park family is inconvenienced by the rain ruining his camping trip. This moment marks a pivotal recognition of social divide for the Kim family. As the viewer, we are left to decide who is the real “parasite” in the struggle of class aspirationalism.  In a larger sense, their families represent a dangerous gap in classes. This injustice is often overlooked by those who ignore the realities of poverty.

Although it is completely in Korean, it has widley circulated Western audiences. In the context of this class, I think it is important to mention that most Americans, myself included, do not watch films in other languages often. We are missing out on so much cultural awareness and insight by only limiting ourselves to movies that fit our Western agenda. This is why I wanted to highlight Parasite as a film that really opened my eyes to a gap in my education as well as excellent commentary on wealth disparity, and recommend this film as material for this course in the future. 

In the television show, Grand Army, various issues are addressed that create a realistic appeal to audiences. The plot of the show revolves around high school students that encounter identity crises’ which play a role in their social development as they transition into adulthood. It realistically depicts the lives of teenagers without romanticization of the plot or the happy, unrealistic endings. These characters are forced to deal with adult issues at an age that is meant to be enjoyable. By watching the characters in Grand Army who experience such issues firsthand, the audience is able to understand and empathize with such characters they feel they may know personally. One character in particular, Joey, is someone who voices her opinions, fights against the objectification of women, and explores sexuality without caring how it’s perceived. Through her, we witness realistic conversations that arise during adolescence which aren’t commonly portrayed in television. Overall, it shows the value in bringing awareness to such topics which are commonly dismissed because of their heaviness. 

In the show, we follow Joey, a high school student advocating for feminist beliefs that heavily focus on the objectification of women. She is a character who unapologetically remains confident in her femininity, and is heavily supported by her three male best friends, George, Luke, and Tim, who are all considered the most popular students of their class. Most of her class supports her in these empowering endeavors, but in the third episode, we see an unforgivable betrayal when Joey and her friends get drunk. On that night, George and Luke rape her while Tim silently watches. When she finally speaks out concerning her rape, many of the same classmates who formerly supported her refused to believe that her own best friends could do such a thing. She is then accused of being perceived as a “slut” and a liar for being open about her sexuality and assumed to be the one who initiated the events that had led to the “alleged” rape. Throughout the rest of the season, Joey rapidly falls into a state of depression and uncertainty, showcasing the effects of sexual assault/rape as a high school student. In conversations with her therapist and lawyer, she came to the conclusion that her words didn’t hold as much value over the boys who were simply trying to protect themselves while she was looking for justice. In a session with her therapist Joey explains that, “They were acting like nothing happened. Or no, like it was just some f*cked up orgy. And the whole week I was questioning what I was remembering, which is.. Which I couldn’t. And I’m just so f*cking angry. They don’t get to do that to me. But now I’m the bad guy.” … “I’m already getting texts. I’m ‘f*cking them over.’ And even though they did what they did, and they did, I’m still f*cking them.” … “And it’s probably obvious, but you know what sucks more than anything?” … “They’re my friends. And I love them. Or I loved them. And part of me feels like I’m betraying them. And then I also don’t regret what I’m doing, so I’m just-” (Episode 5, 22:52).

In connection to Gayatri Spivak’s theoretical work, “Can the Subaltern Speak?”, the audience witnesses Joey and her experience ignored by many she once believed supported her. Regardless of the truth, others quickly assumed that it was Joey’s fault and that the boys had played along in a game that she started. While the boys are given the benefit of the doubt despite their being guilty, Joey is shamed for being the victim and for being honest about her rape. Throughout Grand Army, it is evident in the way that people easily assumed the events without truly listening to the victim. The show addresses the fact that these events do not affect survivors only once, but rather long term through their lack of trust, uneasiness around men, and the inability to fully process their traumatic experiences. For Joey, it does not end in high school, but will remain with her for the rest of her life.

George: You were all up on Tim’s d*ck, then five minutes later, you’re up on the both of us. I mean, that’s on you. Luke: Did you ever say no? (Episode 9, 17:32)

Joey: I was hysterically crying. I tried to push you guys off of me. I f*cking bled. (Episode 9, 17:32)

     In the 2019 film, What Men Want is about a sports agent named Ali Davis who faces obstacles at work with her male colleagues. For example, she was passed up for a well-deserved promotion and was told by her boss “just stay in your lane” instead of listening to her and giving her a chance. In the film, she visits a psychic who ends up giving her the ability to read men’s thoughts. Throughout the movie, she uses this new ability to her advantage at work as she tries to climb up the latter. The audience gains a good understanding on what it’s like for a woman to work in a male-dominated career field. She is excluded from certain social gatherings at work because of her gender, is often overlooked to handle big responsibilities, and overall isn’t taken as seriously as her male counterparts. For example, there is a regular scheduled poker game with the employees at the agency and have never once invited Ali to attend. She found out about the secret poker game with her new ability and surprised everyone at the gathering. At the table, one of the men asks Ali, “Little lady, what are you doing at the big boys table huh?” This film tests gender stereotypes and showcases how an ambitious woman may be treated in a male dominated industry. 

     Ali is treated as the “Other” whereas all her other male counterparts are seen as the “One.” She is considered unfavorable in the workplace by both her colleagues and clients. These obstacles push her to fight the gender stereotypes in the workplace specifically. The Othering concept is prevalent throughout the film. In the end, she succeeds and can be considered the “One.” However, it took a lot of perseverance and determination to get to that point. The movie also touches on the idea of the subaltern which is someone who is not heard from while experiencing oppression or discrimination. Generally speaking, some women in careers may be seen as subalterns as they face inequality in the workforce.

     It was interesting to note that the film is categorized as a comedy, so serious topics such as gender inequality in the workplace were demonstrated in a lighthearted way. The main character is a smart, independent, ambitious career driven woman. This isn’t seen as common in the media and the creator highlights these characterizations for women. It’s empowering to see this as there have been many instances of injustices with gender. The creator wants to break the stereotypes towards women in media, and in the workplace so they can be seen as equals with their male colleagues which the film does a good job in emphasizing.

In the movie, Princess and the Frog, it is set in New Orleans and we see a young black woman named Tiana. Tiana lived her whole life working hard to make enough money to open up her own restaurant. One day everything hit a bump in the road when Prince Naveen shows up in her life. The only problem is that Prince Naveen has been turned into a frog by the evil Dr. Facilier. Naveen mistakes Tiana for a princess and kisses her, thinking he might defeat the curse put upon him. Only to find out he turns Tiana into a frog as well. The two of them thus go on an adventure through the bayou in search of finding a way to reverse the spell put on them. Throughout this movie we see a lot of problems with race and gender. if we look outside the story line and focus on the movie itself, we can see that Princess Tiana is one of the first main character in a Disney movie to be Black. This movie depicts the black community in New Orleans and how they live their day to day lives. The problem with this movie is that we see Tiana, a black woman working a minimum wage job as a waitress, and this girl named Charlotte. Charlotte is a white woman who comes from a very wealthy family. In this movie we see people of wealth being white and we see the poorer community as black. Tiana works insanely hard to get what she wants out of society while charlotte, who is friends with Tiana, does not have to work at all. This can be seen as a problem with power and injustice because the black community is depicted as less than the white community. I think that this movie expects us to take away that no matter where you come from or what you’re going through, you can achieve amazing things. Tiana started out barely making and ends the movie rich and achieving her dreams. We can reflect this back to some other works we have read in class, like “Can the Subaltern Speak?”. We see the author talk about women of color who ultimately are not the same level as men, meaning they are of lower rank in society. We see this in the Princess and the Frog because Tiana starts off the movie making ends meet, while Prince Naveen and even Charlotte’s dad, have lots of money and are of higher social class.

The Bechdel Cast Podcast is a podcast hosted by Caitlin Durante and Jamie Loftus that focuses on the representation of women in film, but over the years has also come to focus on representation of minority groups/people of color, social issues in film and more. The name of the podcast comes from the hosts utilizing the Bechdel Test as a baseline to measure a film’s representation of women. Each episode starts with a summary of the film, followed by in-depth discussion and analysis of representation, how issues and ideas are presented as well as a final wrap up. Oftentimes guest speakers of a range of occupations, gender identities, racial backgrounds, etc. are invited to provide deeper insight into the film and discussion of the episode.

Being able to explore different topics and representations through the examination of a variety of films allows a flexible approach towards different ideas. Ideas such as Simone de Beauvoir’s concept of the Other are explored when Durante and Loftus frequently identify how many films place white, heteronormative men as the default and centerpiece while placing women (and the LGBTQ+ community) in the role of the Other. Topics such as systemic injustice are also discussed in several films such as Den of Thieves where guest speaker Cerise Castle talked about how communities of color are less likely to have crime and their stories reported compared to more affluent and white communities, as well as the deeply rooted copaganda of America.

Although the podcast addresses serious topics, the tone remains conversational, and humor often appears to lighten the mood. Ultimately, each episode leaves the audience thinking about how the media and society has shaped our views. The movie The Dark Knight is often hailed as one of the greatest superhero movies, however, when analyzed it didn’t even manage to pass the Bechdel Test of two named women characters exchanging two lines of dialogue about a topic not about a man. The intersectional lens the Bechdel Cast Podcast uses to examine a work forces both the hosts and listeners to notice problematic issues they might not have noticed in a beloved film before, as well as the ripple effects these issues have on what we expect in the visual medium and in real life.

When Judy Heumann, camp creator, joined alongside other students, their first question was not “what is your name?,” but rather a statement labeling her as “sick.” Before Judy even got the chance to identify herself, able-bodied children had identified her as someone with sickness—someone with a disability. Even the principle at Judy’s school engaged in these microaggressions by offering concerns that Judy was a “fire hazard.” As Judy recalled her own experience being a disabled student watching other “more” disabled students being sent into the basement for separated classroom sessions, she recalled knowing that she and her disabled classmates were being “sidelined.”  When Judy found her way to becoming a counselor of a camp, it was her utmost priority to ensure that everyone had a chance to talk. In the documentary, we see individuals utilizing one another to better understand themselves and each other. The film highlighted the difference between how disabled people are treated in the depths of an ableist society versus how they are treated when disabled people can create a society that fits their needs. While ableism runs rampant as we see in texts such as the subaltern character of Maggie in Toni Morrison’s Recitatif, it does not have to. Ableism dictates that disabled people are only capable of certain things and the concept of a disabled person achieving something beyond those limitations seems unfathomable. However, this documentary proved all those limitations to be faulty; it displayed disabled people running their own camp entirely on their own. If this sound’s surprising, it should not. Disabled people live in a world that is designed against them and forces them to consistently be faced with the burdens of systemic ableism. Disabled people often cannot make it through one day without experiencing a systemic barrier and injustice. To assume the same people that are being treated as ‘others’ simultaneously cannot endure and achieve insurmountable things is only further degrading the incredible strength and power that disabled people withhold. The next time you enter a building, consider how accessible the door to enter is. The next time you walk through a grocery store, consider the accessibility barriers: narrow aisles, tall shelves, wheelchair-inaccessible checkout counters. The next time you post on social media, consider the language you use such as crazy, deaf, blind, dumb, etc. As was quoted in the Crip Camp documentary, “move the architectural barriers—we can work.” 

Additional website with a longer video and some more information about the documentary:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/26/health/crip-camp-americans-with-disabilities-act-wellness/index.html