<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Continuing in the series of reviewing stuff that&#8217;s been out awhile, zombie edition</title>
	<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:37:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: 79soul &raquo; Blog Archive &raquo; Ripley Versus the Space Monsters&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-407261</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2007 20:13:01 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-407261</guid>
					<description>[...] Anyway, as I said, this was prompted by a series of comments in the thread at Pandagon where Amanda reviewed 28 Days Later. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>[&#8230;] Anyway, as I said, this was prompted by a series of comments in the thread at Pandagon where Amanda reviewed 28 Days Later. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: 79soul &raquo; Blog Archive &raquo; Progressive Action/Horror Movies?</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-406884</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2007 18:25:36 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-406884</guid>
					<description>[...] So, Amanda reviewed 28 Days Later (including a lovely spoiler warning, that really shouldn&amp;#8217;t be necessary), and there was an interesting discussion about movies in general that followed. It got me thinking. I&amp;#8217;m going to be doing a series of reviews, I think, about action movies that I think have some interesting progressive statements in them. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>[&#8230;] So, Amanda reviewed 28 Days Later (including a lovely spoiler warning, that really shouldn&#8217;t be necessary), and there was an interesting discussion about movies in general that followed. It got me thinking. I&#8217;m going to be doing a series of reviews, I think, about action movies that I think have some interesting progressive statements in them. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: mightydoll</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-405663</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 09:06:39 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-405663</guid>
					<description>Deanna -  I'm not sure Selena does get set up as a victim at the end of 28 days later.  She is calm and collected in the face of her torment and there is very clear indication that most of the torment she undergoes at the hands of the military men is something which she could deal with if it were just her own well-being she was thinking about, but she opts to stay with Hannah and protect her, help her through it. 

That, I think, makes her a hero, albeit one of a more matronly sort than her pre-established shoot-first ask questions later sort.

We could argue that Selena's passage from taking care of number one to actually caring about what becomes of the man and child in her presence being portrayed as a good thing reinforces the expectation that women are caregivers and men are action people, but that's a completely different argument.  And one that I'd poke holes in, too, I think.

In terms of the initial rage/zombie metaphore, we see Selena move further away from zombification in choosing to form attatchments to those around her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Deanna -  I&#8217;m not sure Selena does get set up as a victim at the end of 28 days later.  She is calm and collected in the face of her torment and there is very clear indication that most of the torment she undergoes at the hands of the military men is something which she could deal with if it were just her own well-being she was thinking about, but she opts to stay with Hannah and protect her, help her through it. </p>
	<p>That, I think, makes her a hero, albeit one of a more matronly sort than her pre-established shoot-first ask questions later sort.</p>
	<p>We could argue that Selena&#8217;s passage from taking care of number one to actually caring about what becomes of the man and child in her presence being portrayed as a good thing reinforces the expectation that women are caregivers and men are action people, but that&#8217;s a completely different argument.  And one that I&#8217;d poke holes in, too, I think.</p>
	<p>In terms of the initial rage/zombie metaphore, we see Selena move further away from zombification in choosing to form attatchments to those around her.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mhorag</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-404059</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 14:41:44 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-404059</guid>
					<description>BizarroSuperman:  I, too, am an Aliens fan.  I prefer the Director's cut as well, as it provides some much-needed background as to certain decisions.  And I personally feel this is a *VERY* feminist movie.  Even Hollywood must have seen something in it, since Weaver was actually nominated for Best Actress for her role as Ripley in a SEQUEL.  A SCI-FI sequel, no less.

I'm sure I'm getting some of &quot;who said what&quot; mixed up in here, so please accept my apologies for responding to whatever you did not say. :)

Vasquez is not a &quot;dude with a vagina.&quot;  Based on her behavior, I'd be willing to bet she's a &quot;barrio girl&quot; who joined the military as a way out that did not involve prison.  Having watched this movie about 100 times, pay attention to the background action where the Marines are suiting up onboard the Sulacco.  It's obvious that Drake and Vasquez are in a sexual relationship of some sort.  She's saying something to him which I believe is &quot;watch yourself&quot; (very hard to hear) and his response is &quot;Okay, babe.&quot;  Or when Drake gets Hudson back for insulting Vasquez ('Have you ever been mistaken for a man?'  Vasquez's response:  &quot;No.  Have you?&quot;  Luv it!) by having Bishop do his knife trick.  This is a wonderful subtext going on, because it's obvious Drake respects her strength and ability to take care of herself.  

And does anybody have anything to say about the green officer they send to lead this mission?  That right there states that it's not being taken as a serious threat - just enough to get the boy some command experience.  How would it have turned out if an experienced officer had led the mission?

Okay, now on to Ripley.  I was so impressed by Weaver in this role, because she played Ripley *perfectly*.  Here's a woman who survived a situation which killed the rest of the crew (the original cut of Alien shows her killing Dallas to spare him the chestburster), spends the next 57 years in hypersleep so EVERYTHING she's familiar with is gone, and finally gets dicked by the company (surprise, surprise.  Bet they're Republicans.).  She is scared clean to the bone, but she goes back when she finds out that the coloney (with *families*) may be infested.  She is obviously scared spitless practically the whole movie, but she does not let her fear stop her from doing whatever has to be done.  If the character of Ripley was male, would we even be commenting on it?  Of course not!  And the battle between the two mothers for the survival of their children ... Magnificent!  Ripley going after Newt is the descent into the underworld to retrieve the lost child (Mabinogion, anyone?)

Erg.  Sorry, I'll shut up now.  I haven't actually seen 28 Days Later, but the posts here are making me seriously reconsider (zombie movies usually aren't my thing).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>BizarroSuperman:  I, too, am an Aliens fan.  I prefer the Director&#8217;s cut as well, as it provides some much-needed background as to certain decisions.  And I personally feel this is a *VERY* feminist movie.  Even Hollywood must have seen something in it, since Weaver was actually nominated for Best Actress for her role as Ripley in a SEQUEL.  A SCI-FI sequel, no less.</p>
	<p>I&#8217;m sure I&#8217;m getting some of &#8220;who said what&#8221; mixed up in here, so please accept my apologies for responding to whatever you did not say. <img src='http://pandagon.blogsome.com/wp-images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
	<p>Vasquez is not a &#8220;dude with a vagina.&#8221;  Based on her behavior, I&#8217;d be willing to bet she&#8217;s a &#8220;barrio girl&#8221; who joined the military as a way out that did not involve prison.  Having watched this movie about 100 times, pay attention to the background action where the Marines are suiting up onboard the Sulacco.  It&#8217;s obvious that Drake and Vasquez are in a sexual relationship of some sort.  She&#8217;s saying something to him which I believe is &#8220;watch yourself&#8221; (very hard to hear) and his response is &#8220;Okay, babe.&#8221;  Or when Drake gets Hudson back for insulting Vasquez (&#8217;Have you ever been mistaken for a man?&#8217;  Vasquez&#8217;s response:  &#8220;No.  Have you?&#8221;  Luv it!) by having Bishop do his knife trick.  This is a wonderful subtext going on, because it&#8217;s obvious Drake respects her strength and ability to take care of herself.  </p>
	<p>And does anybody have anything to say about the green officer they send to lead this mission?  That right there states that it&#8217;s not being taken as a serious threat - just enough to get the boy some command experience.  How would it have turned out if an experienced officer had led the mission?</p>
	<p>Okay, now on to Ripley.  I was so impressed by Weaver in this role, because she played Ripley *perfectly*.  Here&#8217;s a woman who survived a situation which killed the rest of the crew (the original cut of Alien shows her killing Dallas to spare him the chestburster), spends the next 57 years in hypersleep so EVERYTHING she&#8217;s familiar with is gone, and finally gets dicked by the company (surprise, surprise.  Bet they&#8217;re Republicans.).  She is scared clean to the bone, but she goes back when she finds out that the coloney (with *families*) may be infested.  She is obviously scared spitless practically the whole movie, but she does not let her fear stop her from doing whatever has to be done.  If the character of Ripley was male, would we even be commenting on it?  Of course not!  And the battle between the two mothers for the survival of their children &#8230; Magnificent!  Ripley going after Newt is the descent into the underworld to retrieve the lost child (Mabinogion, anyone?)</p>
	<p>Erg.  Sorry, I&#8217;ll shut up now.  I haven&#8217;t actually seen 28 Days Later, but the posts here are making me seriously reconsider (zombie movies usually aren&#8217;t my thing).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: wedeman</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-404015</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 12:58:36 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-404015</guid>
					<description>Off topic, but I'd be very interested to get people's opinions on the more recent horror flick, &quot;The Descent,&quot; if anyone has seen it.  Not a male in sight - does it matter?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Off topic, but I&#8217;d be very interested to get people&#8217;s opinions on the more recent horror flick, &#8220;The Descent,&#8221; if anyone has seen it.  Not a male in sight - does it matter?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Trevelynne</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403933</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 07:53:59 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403933</guid>
					<description>I never thought of Selena as having been saved by Jim.  I saw it more as a partnership between two equals.  Jim begins the process by unchaining infected Private Mailer, knowing that Mailer was going to go into the house and kill/infect some/all of the armed guards.  

Jim knows that Selena and Hannah are no longer armed and may be restrained.  Jim respects Selena and her strength and her intelligence so much that his entire plan hinges on her being able to keep herself and Hannah alive while he is essentially jumping from rooftop to rooftop trying to keep himself alive until he can reunite with them (and I would argue, he uses this time to formulate his revenge against the two soldiers who were going to execute him).

I saw the two soldiers that he personally killed in this sequence as being part of Jim's revenge on those two specific soldiers - not as a means to save the women or even keep them alive.  Those soldiers were the same exact soldiers that were supposed to be his executioners in the wood.  He didn't need to kill either of them to keep the women alive; the last solider states that he is going to get Selena out of there so that they can set up house and he can rape her.  

It was shown over and over again in the film that Selena can kick butt in one-to-one combat (a skill that Jim can only claim as being somewhat proficient in because he seems to need the element of surprise on his side in order to win just about any fight), so I have no doubt that she could have eventually taken the soldier out even if Jim had never shown up.  But that wouldn't have allowed for Jim's revenge/rage sequence, which I also think was very important to the overall theme(s) of the movie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I never thought of Selena as having been saved by Jim.  I saw it more as a partnership between two equals.  Jim begins the process by unchaining infected Private Mailer, knowing that Mailer was going to go into the house and kill/infect some/all of the armed guards.  </p>
	<p>Jim knows that Selena and Hannah are no longer armed and may be restrained.  Jim respects Selena and her strength and her intelligence so much that his entire plan hinges on her being able to keep herself and Hannah alive while he is essentially jumping from rooftop to rooftop trying to keep himself alive until he can reunite with them (and I would argue, he uses this time to formulate his revenge against the two soldiers who were going to execute him).</p>
	<p>I saw the two soldiers that he personally killed in this sequence as being part of Jim&#8217;s revenge on those two specific soldiers - not as a means to save the women or even keep them alive.  Those soldiers were the same exact soldiers that were supposed to be his executioners in the wood.  He didn&#8217;t need to kill either of them to keep the women alive; the last solider states that he is going to get Selena out of there so that they can set up house and he can rape her.  </p>
	<p>It was shown over and over again in the film that Selena can kick butt in one-to-one combat (a skill that Jim can only claim as being somewhat proficient in because he seems to need the element of surprise on his side in order to win just about any fight), so I have no doubt that she could have eventually taken the soldier out even if Jim had never shown up.  But that wouldn&#8217;t have allowed for Jim&#8217;s revenge/rage sequence, which I also think was very important to the overall theme(s) of the movie.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jeric</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403922</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 03:42:00 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403922</guid>
					<description>I concur w/all the snarking against Deanna's views-- trying to make an action movie under all her apparent constraints would pretty much be impossible.

If I'm wrong, well shit, then get to work.  Your arms busted or something?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I concur w/all the snarking against Deanna&#8217;s views&#8211; trying to make an action movie under all her apparent constraints would pretty much be impossible.</p>
	<p>If I&#8217;m wrong, well shit, then get to work.  Your arms busted or something?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: the amazing kim</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403918</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 01:38:35 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403918</guid>
					<description>Now I think about it, the scariest thing about 28DL was that you couldn't really tell the difference between the zombies and everyone else. 

For example, when Frank gets infected, it's quite unclear when he is a zombie and when he's just panicking; and when Jim goes nuts and kills the soldiers even Hannah thinks he's infected. In the anecdote by what's-his-name who Serina kills, he tells Jim how his father and sisters were killed in a mob, and emphasises the confusion over who was infected. He says you couldn't tell in the madness who was really mad. 
Like the soldiers say in the beginning, uncontrolled rage existed before the virus, and I think that was the really scary part.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Now I think about it, the scariest thing about 28DL was that you couldn&#8217;t really tell the difference between the zombies and everyone else. </p>
	<p>For example, when Frank gets infected, it&#8217;s quite unclear when he is a zombie and when he&#8217;s just panicking; and when Jim goes nuts and kills the soldiers even Hannah thinks he&#8217;s infected. In the anecdote by what&#8217;s-his-name who Serina kills, he tells Jim how his father and sisters were killed in a mob, and emphasises the confusion over who was infected. He says you couldn&#8217;t tell in the madness who was really mad.<br />
Like the soldiers say in the beginning, uncontrolled rage existed before the virus, and I think that was the really scary part.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mike</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403842</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2007 18:51:16 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403842</guid>
					<description>Amanda, I'd love to hear your opinion of Romero's Day of the Dead. It's by far the most pro-feminist horror movie I've ever seen, and serves as a good apology for NOTLD's many stereotypes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Amanda, I&#8217;d love to hear your opinion of Romero&#8217;s Day of the Dead. It&#8217;s by far the most pro-feminist horror movie I&#8217;ve ever seen, and serves as a good apology for NOTLD&#8217;s many stereotypes.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Phoenician in a time of Romans</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403838</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2007 18:30:29 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/05/12/continuing-in-the-series-of-reviewing-stuff-thats-been-out-awhile-zombie-edition/#comment-403838</guid>
					<description>&lt;i&gt;They are fighting fucking Aliens, what do you want, Ripley to start some sort of sing-along and entrance them with a My Little Pony puppet show?&lt;/i&gt;

It's also worth noting that:

(i) There's another strong female character who is anything OTHER than masculine - the Alien Queen.

(ii) Ripley takes on the Queen directly not by using a nice phallic gun, but by strapping technology to herself and using it to take the creature down face to face.  Actually, come to think of it, when she *does* use guns, she modifies them herself, possibly to deemphasize their phallic nature.  

She's a technologist - women *are* physically inferior to men, but technology more than compensates.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><i>They are fighting fucking Aliens, what do you want, Ripley to start some sort of sing-along and entrance them with a My Little Pony puppet show?</i></p>
	<p>It&#8217;s also worth noting that:</p>
	<p>(i) There&#8217;s another strong female character who is anything OTHER than masculine - the Alien Queen.</p>
	<p>(ii) Ripley takes on the Queen directly not by using a nice phallic gun, but by strapping technology to herself and using it to take the creature down face to face.  Actually, come to think of it, when she *does* use guns, she modifies them herself, possibly to deemphasize their phallic nature.  </p>
	<p>She&#8217;s a technologist - women *are* physically inferior to men, but technology more than compensates.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
