Most aromantic movie?

[Holmbo]

I keep wanting to bring in more pop-culture discussion in this forum. Maybe because most other forums I enjoy are about this, so I want to merge them

I read this topic Romanticizing aromanticism which made me think about all the ways one could romanticize different aspects of being aro. For example there is much pop-culture where being single is shown to be free, fun and exciting or being married is like imprisonment and a chore.

What do you feel is the most ideal aromantic movie? I feel like, for guys at least, it's I love you man. The main character has a fiance  but that just makes it better because it shows that mere romantic love is not enough and that everyone needs close friends in their lives.

[Lex Barringer]

Perhaps we shouldn't be romanticizing aromanticism because that would further blur the lines and understanding of what it really is. The idea is to explain what aromanticism is to non-aro people but dramatizing it isn't the correct way, besides, I don't want be marginalized in this manner, as I assume other aros don't either. 

 

Looking at movies looking for things that you believe they are but aren't reality or at least not in the eyes of the writers and producers is a wrong-headed approach. The equivalent thought process in a different area is as follows;  applying the Betchdel test to movies that were created way before it was invented. Of course, the movies won't pass the Betchdel test that came before it, it wasn't even thought of and wasn't the vision of the writers, executive producer(s) and director.

 

Instead of trying to figure out what's more aromantic in terms of movies, perhaps we should start doing screenwriting and writing stageplays that show our own unique pespective. By doing this, we don't marginalize ourselves or other people and the truth by acting it out from our hearts gives a better understanding of how life, events and activities are for all of us that identify as aro.

[Apathetic Echidna]

yes, but pop culture is fun! 

I like pop culture in the forums too @Holmbo perhaps you have seen my topic that has basically tuned into a 'show me some interesting songs' topic 

As for aromantic movies......well certainly not 'The Lobster' or 'The 5th Wave' those movies were terrible horrible painful movies to watch - maybe a film student could read into it more and find something good but as a casual watch, no. 

I sort of think the movie '40 Days and 40 Nights' is sort of an ace movie, a horrible commentary on normalised sex obsession and how not pursuing sex is seen almost as a threat to society....basically this movie is messed up too. 

 

I'm not very good at this. I am meant to be posting good aromantic-type movies to fill the gap until actual aromantic movies are being made. 

Maybe 'Perks of Being a Wallflower', friendship is important in that movie and none of the romances seem to work out, the friendships are much more supportive than the romantic partners, and the main character being trapped in a relationship seems very close to an aro experience. (though everyone seems to be seeking a romantic relationship throughout the whole thing). 

How about all the recent Star Trek movies! Kirk is single and free, while enjoying his time with work and friends and adventure. 

'Legally Blonde' needs a mention too even if she does end up with someone at the end of the movie. 

 

[Holmbo]

On 2017-10-05 at 7:07 PM, Lex Barringer said:

Perhaps we shouldn't be romanticizing aromanticism because that would further blur the lines and understanding of what it really is. The idea is to explain what aromanticism is to non-aro people but dramatizing it isn't the correct way, besides, I don't want be marginalized in this manner, as I assume other aros don't either. 

 

Looking at movies looking for things that you believe they are but aren't reality or at least not in the eyes of the writers and producers is a wrong-headed approach. The equivalent thought process in a different area is as follows;  applying the Betchdel test to movies that were created way before it was invented. Of course, the movies won't pass the Betchdel test that came before it, it wasn't even thought of and wasn't the vision of the writers, executive producer(s) and director.

 

Instead of trying to figure out what's more aromantic in terms of movies, perhaps we should start doing screenwriting and writing stageplays that show our own unique pespective. By doing this, we don't marginalize ourselves or other people and the truth by acting it out from our hearts gives a better understanding of how life, events and activities are for all of us that identify as aro.

That's quite a serious take on it. I didn't think anything beyond a fun post were we list movies. But we could branch out the topic, let me think a bit about a reply.
 

On 2017-10-06 at 3:12 PM, Apathetic Echidna said:

I sort of think the movie '40 Days and 40 Nights' is sort of an ace movie, a horrible commentary on normalised sex obsession and how not pursuing sex is seen almost as a threat to society....basically this movie is messed up too.

Hmm like a satire? I like it. Though, that movie is weird on many levels.

 

Unfortunately I don't have any aro songs to add to the song discussion. For some reason I don't really have that much interest in music.
 

[Apathetic Echidna]

So I thought of one movie that doesn't have any romantic love and it is about a group of people coming together, as friends or just to help out a neighbour. Some of them start caring for each other and the main relationship dynamic is almost like a father/daughter thing..

The movie is The Lady In The Water! 

[Skittles87]

I would recommend Frances Ha to any aro woman who has fallen deeply, platonically in love with another woman then had everything go to hell when said woman gets into a serious romantic relationship. The film is a bit hipsterish, but the friendship it focuses on is complex and very moving.

 

 

[Holmbo]

Now I have thought about your points @Lex Barringer and I want to make some clarifications to my post.

 

When I talk about aro-culture I don't equal that with aro-representation. The way I see it, a movie can have a theme that resonates with people who are aromantic, no matter if there are any aro-people in it. It's not that I want to read in to a movie that it is somehow "secretly" a message about being aromantic. It's just that some movies will have messages that people who are aro tend to enjoy.

 

[Lex Barringer]

21 hours ago, Holmbo said:

Now I have thought about your points @Lex Barringer and I want to make some clarifications to my post.

 

When I talk about aro-culture I don't equal that with aro-representation. The way I see it, a movie can have a theme that resonates with people who are aromantic, no matter if there are any aro-people in it. It's not that I want to read in to a movie that it is somehow "secretly" a message about being aromantic. It's just that some movies will have messages that people who are aro tend to enjoy.

 

Oh, okay, I'm in agreement with that idea.

[DeltaAro]

On 10/15/2017 at 1:00 PM, Skittles87 said:

The film is a bit hipsterish

Well, shot in black and white goes beyond a “a bit hipsterish”.

[Star Girl]

On 10/5/2017 at 1:07 PM, Lex Barringer said:

Of course, the movies won't pass the Betchdel test that came before it, it wasn't even thought of and wasn't the vision of the writers, executive producer(s) and director.

(With the risk of sending this thread into a completely different topic,) I am going to disagree with you here.  The Bechdel test is a way of assessing whether movies actually treat women as independent people whose lives do not revolve solely around men.  Whether or not a movie existed before this specific way of quantifying how it portrays women is independent from its actual portrayal of women.  The point of the test is not that the writers and producers should be thinking about this when they create a movie, it is that they should be portraying women in a way that meets these criteria anyway because women should be portrayed fairly in films.

 

On 10/5/2017 at 1:07 PM, Lex Barringer said:

Looking at movies looking for things that you believe they are but aren't reality or at least not in the eyes of the writers and producers is a wrong-headed approach.

Usually, I get annoyed at people doing this when I feel they are reading romance into a character relationship that I don't think is there.  

 

The only movie that I can think of at the moment is The Color of Magic (yes, from the Terry Pratchett book... )  I'm pretty sure you could make an argument for it... the two central characters have a relationship that is not romantic and the only romantic relationship in the movie is meant to be totally ridiculous.  (Since I was talking about it earlier, I don't think it passes the Bechdel test... I'm having difficulties coming up with a second female character... )

[Apathetic Echidna]

2 minutes ago, Star Girl said:

Usually, I get annoyed at people doing this when I feel they are reading romance into a character relationship that I don't think is there. 

I tend to read the romance out of a lot of movies  but yeah, adding in romance really annoys me. I mentioned it in the fanfic topic before but yes, interpreting romance into understanding relationships in movies/tv series or just romanticising the whole thing in a fanfic turns me off the whole topic and I will judge the person doing it. 

 

as for another movie, I don't know how many people will agree with me, Tamara Drewe. The movie is based around couple relationships but they are manipulative, rebounds or seem to have ulterior motives or lies conflicting with the emotional aspects. It would have had a stronger ending if there was some revelation about needing to stand as an individual (like the awesome scene in the last episode of From Dusk Till Dawn season 2) but overall the movie shows how people hide behind façades of false romantic gestures used to placate their partners. Plus there is a side story of obsessive love which highlights pretty much all the negative aspects of romantic love. 

[DeltaAro]

On 11/15/2017 at 12:16 AM, Star Girl said:

(With the risk of sending this thread into a completely different topic,) I am going to disagree with you here.  The Bechdel test is a way of assessing whether movies actually treat women as independent people whose lives do not revolve solely around men.  Whether or not a movie existed before this specific way of quantifying how it portrays women is independent from its actual portrayal of women.  The point of the test is not that the writers and producers should be thinking about this when they create a movie, it is that they should be portraying women in a way that meets these criteria anyway because women should be portrayed fairly in films.

If the cast is small, it might fail the Bechdel test, though there's nothing wrong with the movie in the sense “doesn't treat women as independent people …” (e.g. Gravity). OTOH there are movies like “Gone Girl” which pass the test.

[Apathetic Echidna]

So as the Bechdel test comments are still cropping up I thought I should add a comment 

 

So in a weird journey down the rabbit hole I found a good rant about the Bechdel test (which is technically misnamed as Alison Bechdel admits to stealing the idea from Liz Wallace)

Quote

 JUNE 15, 2017 revolutionarygays:

i’m sure this has all been said before but it’s so fucking tiring to read article after article and post after post by straight (or even just non-lesbian) feminists waxing poetic about the bechdel test. like yeah, obviously it’s indicative of a massive issue w the representation of women in media and a useful tool to gauge the failings of hollywood and big time show writers or whatever

 

but that wasn’t what it was fucking intended for. it was never about all women, it was about the lesbian experience. it was about the overwhelming loneliness of the lesbian identity and how far removed you feel from media. i feel this every day, and i have for the last decade that i’ve been out

 

it’s infuriating to watch straight women talk about the bechdel test at all (“my show is different – even though they’re talking about men, the story is about their friendship. it’s like turning the bechdel test on its head”) and even MORESO when they’re fucking criticizing it (“the bechdel test isn’t the end all be all… films can still be feminist and not pass it. films that don’t pass can be even more feminist than films that do!”)

 

it’s like…. the name of the fucking strip has the word “dyke” in it. have you all ever considered once that the original comic wasn’t ever meant for your consumption at all? have you ever thought about the fact that alison bechdel was writing as a lesbian about her lesbian experiences and that maybe, just maybe, this isn’t some generic feminist concept but instead a description of a lesbian-specific experience?

 

and the thing is that the liberal feminist application of the bechdel test has been criticized for not being intersectional – which it isn’t! movies about gay men and men of color are still incredibly groundbreaking and significant to our culture even though they “fail” the bechdel test

 

and that is LITERALLY BECAUSE the bechdel test wasn’t ever fucking MEANT to be the Generic Feminism Test Of Diversity And Equality – it was commentary specific to the lesbian experience when engaging with media

 

straight feminists historically hated and excluded lesbian feminists (and many do to this day lmao) but still, as always, want to co-opt and misappropriate our writing, concepts, and experiences to suit their needs

Personally I like this rant because it does highlight the point that many people make about movies being 'less' if they don't pass the test. Equal representation is good and all but only when it suits the movie but the rules of the test don't determine the overall theme of the movie. Technically there are Carry On movies that pass the test, yet no one would really think of them as equal or even a good representation as they are still mostly objectifying women for comedy. And the (very good) feminist short film Oppressed Majority (Majorité Opprimée) by Eleonore Pourriat doesn't pass the test. 

Just for info I'll post the original cartoon strip 'The Rule' from Dykes To Watch Out For that launched the test into the popular consciousness. (it was done in 1985)


 

 

aaaand back on topic: Practical Magic, relationships can be good or bad but family (and friends) are really there for you when you need them. One woman has a relationship that ends and her sister comes back to help, then later the sister's relationship goes nuclear and they support each other. They are looking out for their family even when they aren't physically present. Though the romance from about the middle of the movie is a tad bit icky with the whole 'you are my perfect person' thing. 

 

aaaand back on topic: Practical Magic, relationships can be good or bad but family (and friends) are really there for you when you need them. One woman has a relationship that ends and her sister comes back to help, then later the sister's relationship goes nuclear and they support each other. They are looking out for their family even when they aren't physically present. Though the romance from about the middle of the movie is a tad bit icky with the whole 'you are my perfect person' thing. (I don't know why this thing sucked this comment into the spoiler and now won't let me edit it, this is the second time this has happened)

[DeltaAro]

On 11/17/2017 at 2:06 PM, Apathetic Echidna said:

So as the Bechdel test comments are still cropping up I thought I should add a comment 

Yeah, we are sorry.

On 11/17/2017 at 2:06 PM, Apathetic Echidna said:

On 6/15/2015 at 2:00 AM, revolutionarygays said:

it’s infuriating to watch straight women talk about the bechdel test at all (“my show is different – even though they’re talking about men, the story is about their friendship. it’s like turning the bechdel test on its head”) and even MORESO when they’re fucking criticizing it (“the bechdel test isn’t the end all be all… films can still be feminist and not pass it. films that don’t pass can be even more feminist than films that do!”)

The criticism may be naive, but come on, there's quite some “terrorism of obscurantism” involved here. Is the criticism directed at the historically informed interpretation (an insider joke for lesbians – which, believe me or not, I knew about already) or not rather at the widely popularized understanding of the Bechdel test? Rhetorical question, of course. I deliberately chose to repeat this naive criticism, because @Star Girl did understand the Bechdel test as “a way of assessing whether movies actually treat women as independent people whose lives do not revolve solely around men”.

 

Ideas can't be owned, and if the use the Bechdel test outside of the original context would make sense, there would be nothing wrong with it (of course, give credit where credit is due). The problem is that people who propagate it as the test about female representation are sadly quite hush about how to really understand it. On the level of the individual movie it clearly fails and for any statistical analysis the whole issue is too muddled (and also a serious statistical analysis has never been attempted). So… what happened to “be clear, crisp and concise”?

[Apathetic Echidna]

I wasn't particularly replying to anyone with the comments I put in the spoiler, which is why I didn't tag mention anyone. (and really there should be a double quote or something on your second quote from me because that was a quote I was already quoting. < so much 'quote' that that sentence almost doesn't make sense). 

11 hours ago, DeltaV said:

if the use the Bechdel test outside of the original context would make sense, there would be nothing wrong with it

I have no issues with the test itself just how some people give it importance beyond what it capable of in it's design. Simply 'as a way' it is fine, but it is certainly not 'the way' of determining independent representation of women. .....mainly I like the rant (though it is not really clear, crisp and concise) because someone is passionate about something other people seem to care about but I personally don't really care at all. I am more concerned with the overall attitude towards women in a movie rather than some lesbian perspective media joke that has become a pop culture test. 

But then I have always focused on equal pay being more of an issue than equal representation, and those things being two separate issues. The test is good if it is making people improve the representation of women, but it would still be much more interesting if media creators had feminists consulting during production ~ and then hopefully the women working in the process aren't being paid 10+% less. Yeah, sorry for continuing to drag this topic off, and I can't even think of a movie to add to the list to at least partially excuse this post. 

[Holmbo]

On 2017-11-15 at 12:16 AM, Star Girl said:

Usually, I get annoyed at people doing this when I feel they are reading romance into a character relationship that I don't think is there. 

 

I think people are so used to seeing the "relationship ladder" play out in narratives that they just expect it.

I was watching this movie Queen of Katwe the other day, about a girl in Uganda who becomes a chess champion, and it struck me that if it was not based on a true story they would totally have written it so that her coach and her mother ended up together.

[DeltaAro]

On 11/18/2017 at 3:42 AM, Apathetic Echidna said:

I wasn't particularly replying to anyone with the comments I put in the spoiler, which is why I didn't tag mention anyone. (and really there should be a double quote or something on your second quote from me because that was a quote I was already quoting. < so much 'quote' that that sentence almost doesn't make sense). 

Sorry! Please excuse my laziness. The board does make that quite cumbersome, you have to hack the html code to quote a non-user.

On 11/18/2017 at 3:42 AM, Apathetic Echidna said:

But then I have always focused on equal pay being more of an issue than equal representation, and those things being two separate issues.

IMHO those two issues (if we understand “equal representation” broadly) are still tightly connected, or at least they must be if you get at all serious about it. Otherwise somebody just comes along saying “I refute you thus” where ‘thus’ is a link to a Forbes article. There is the very important question if and how to define the unexplained portion of the gap; if you define it à la Forbes (where they cite the most skeptical studies), that is, for example, also including career position as an explanation, the unexplained gap is practically non-existent. If you only take type of occupation, type of industry, work hours, educational level as explanations, you get to over 10% (yet still with no unexplained wage gap at lower paid jobs and the highest unexplained gap at the highest pay levels – this fact is usually completely overlooked in the discussion).

[Apathetic Echidna]

On 20/11/2017 at 4:25 AM, DeltaV said:

quite cumbersome

yeah, there are a few issues with the system, but it mostly works well and the issues seem possibly impossible to fix. 

 

On 20/11/2017 at 4:25 AM, DeltaV said:

career position

is this like seniority in position? or is it a sketchy sort of 'there are no women CEOs so there is no wage gap'?

I just threw the 10% in as a general number as there is a range. I like looking at the issue on the smaller scale rather than an overall outlook because that is where the discrepancies shine, not only between genders but also between job types in the same companies. There are plenty of jobs where there is no unexplained gap, but there are others where it seems very bad. Not even mentioning the bonuses system which I have many thoughts about and the work claims some people get away with ~I think I just know the dodgy dealings of a bad company. Anyway we should take this to another topic or something as it certainly is not related to movies anymore. 

[DeltaAro]

On 11/21/2017 at 12:07 AM, Apathetic Echidna said:

is this like seniority in position? or is it a sketchy sort of 'there are no women CEOs so there is no wage gap'?

A Forbes-style statistical analysis (by which the gender wage gap is practically zero) rests on the assumption that, basically, if it's not approaching a situation where a legal case because of employment discrimination could be mounted against the company, it's definitely caused by women's free choices or inherent qualities. If women don't get promoted it must be because they don't want to, preferring the less stressful job or they just aren't that good. It is obviously very questionable to place the burden of proof that high.

 

But on the other hand… If we don't define “(un)explained gap” sanely and robustly, we get reports like from World Economic Forum¹ which force us to conclude that employers in Qatar² and the United Arab Emirates³ are at the forefront of female empowerment on this issue. Yeah, nothing against Qataris or UAE citizens, but that's simply not very plausible, too.

 

Ok, let's leave it at that, I'm not going to open a thread about this. It wouldn't end well.

 

¹ see here, pages 68, 278, 330. Point “Wage equality for similar work”

² here women get jailed for giving birth to an illegitimate child
³ and here rape victims are routinely jailed for extramarital sex – but the UAE have the second best score worldwide for gender wage equality