The Modern-Day Fairy Tale Dilemma

Matt here! As a writer and someone who is greatly moved and influenced by the written word -- both in print and spoken word -- I recognize the extreme importance of Einstein's quote above. Like a majority of kids in my generation and those that have followed, the fairy tales I was raised on were transformed into Disney's classic cartoon films: Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, The Little Mermaid, etc. Lately, there has been a lot of ruckus about how these classic films are portraying women and thus teaching young girls how to think about and perceive their purpose in life and male-female relationships. I'm not quite sure little girls ages two through nine can actually perceive the complexities of The Little Mermaid's Ariel being willing to sell a part of herself in order to marry a man, or the idea that a woman must be quiet in order to obtain a man's love. These concerns over how women are treated or portrayed in these films was not always there. Back in 1937, 1950, 1959, and even 1989, no one made a fuss over any of these storylines. I was raised on these same films and never thought a woman was more attractive if she was submissive. 

However, in the 2006 New York Times Magazine article, “What’s Wrong with Cinderella?” feminist writer Peggy Orenstein mentions her disagreement with the entire "Princess culture." When her three-year-old daughter was often called a princess, Orenstein set out in her article to explore the development and ongoing popularity of the Disney Princess merchandise line. As a result, Orenstein found the reason for the creation of the line, but she only briefly touched upon the effect that admiring Disney princesses had on a young generation of girls. She stated:

“There is evidence that young women who hold the most conventionally feminine beliefs – who avoid conflict and think they should be perpetually nice and pretty – are more likely to be depressed than others and less likely to use contraception. What’s more, the 23 percent decline in girls’ participation in sports and other vigorous activity between middle and high school has been linked to their sense that athletics is unfeminine” (Orenstein, 2006).

But, again, do little girls recognize these same issues (although, their parents sure will!)? In an American Psychologist article entitled “The development of children's knowledge about the appearance–reality distinction,” writer John H. Flavell concluded that “findings suggest that many 3-year-olds seem to possess little or no understanding of the distinction and are unresponsive to training. At this age level, skill in solving simple appearance–reality tasks is highly correlated with skill in solving simple visual perspective-taking tasks” (Flavell, 1986). Furthermore, “[i]t is noted that, while children of 6-7 years manage simple appearance-reality tasks with ease, they have great difficulty reflecting on and talking about such appearance-reality notions as ‘looks like,’ ‘really and truly,’ and especially, ‘looks different from the way it really and truly is’” (Flavell, 1986). These age ranges (three to seven) are a prime target for the Disney princess movies and merchandise, and are the ages that find most children repeatedly watching the films. With violence, bad language and sex in the media being extremely influential toward impressionable youths, it is easy to see that particular values strewn throughout the Disney princess films are equally influential in how children perceive materialism as well as the ideas of love, marriage, gender roles in society.

Mr. Flavell's findings are just the slightest cause for concern with most parents who believe the concept that these early Disney princess fairy tale movies teach -- that being it's the man often has to rescue the woman and she should be grateful for it. There's plenty more research available out there to make their concerns grow. Don't believe me? Think I'm making this up? When searching the internet, entering "problem with Disney princesses," this is what pops up:

As a father of two daughters this distresses me, to say the least. I've known about these issues long before this picture graced my computer screen. I've even closely examined other Disney movies and how certain aspects of them can be perceived in a negative light. But I also don't want to rob my girls of the same fairy tales I had when I was growing up; after all, it didn't damage me or my perception of girls/women. My youngest daughter loves the princess movies and loves the dresses ... which is fine. But I don't want her to ever think that a man needs to swoop in and solve her problems for her. Or that just because a man buys her things or treats her with the dignity and respect she regularly deserves all the time means she has to start a relationship with him. Now, granted, the man she falls in love with should definitely treat her with respect, but her thought process shouldn't include falling in love for every guy that treats her -- or appears to treat her -- nice. Princesses like Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Jasmine (Aladdin), and Belle (Beauty and the Beast) all have messages of the princess needing to be saved by the gratuitous handsome prince. And these are the most popular Disney princess films! However, notice the princess movies in which the princess either did not need saving by a prince, decided to not ride off into the sunset with a man, or insists on being treated equally to a man, are the movies that are the least popular (i.e., not as well marketed, received poor reviews, low DVD sales, etc.). Such princesses are Mulan, Pocahontas, Tiana (The Princess and the Frog), Rapunzel (Tangled), and, more recently, Merida (Brave), as well as sisters Anna and Elsa (Frozen). Oftentimes, people like a good "damsel-in-distress" film (this is the formula for a majority of live-action romantic comedies and action films today). At least Disney does offer an equal counterpoint in Mulan, Pocahontas, Tiana, Rapunzel, Merida, Elsa and Anna. However, what is troubling is when Disney tries to do this:

Disney recently gave a makeover to Merida, the protagonist of the 2013 Academy Award-winning film Brave. The Merida on the left is the one seen in the film. The Merida on the right is what Disney was trying to have show on their princess website and on their retail (clothes, toys) items. Parents-in-arms voiced their strong opposition over this new Merida and her plunging neckline and more "physically attractive features." Soon after, the traditional Merida is who is featured on Disney's princess web site; however, some images of the Merida on the right still appear in other places (i.e., banners, toys, etc.).

Merida is perhaps the best princess for a new generation of girls/young women in that her film is not about a man saving her from some evil villain. In fact, it does not have a main villain at all and thus does not require her being saved (most critics panned the film because of that very theme). The film is a bonding film between mother and daughter, in which a daughter has to rescue her mother from a curse the daughter herself naively caused. In other words, Brave is about something bigger than good vs. evil. It's about personal responsibility, being yourself, independence, true beauty, loving and honoring your family, and a bit of rebellion. In other words, it's about growing up.

 As the video above proves, Merida does not believe in traditional conventions or needing to be married to make a difference. As she rips off her constraining ceremonial dress (a metaphor for shaking off the traditions of an old-fashioned society), she competes for her own hand in marriage and outperforms the "men" who are considered her potential husbands. But it's not merely this clip that makes Brave so great. What makes the film and her so great is the same thing that makes all strong female characters -- whether it be Merida, Buffy, Starbuck, Supergirl, Ripley, Sydney Bristow, Eowyn, Jane Eyre, Lois Lane (especially the Smallville version), Veronica Mars, or Hermione. She is strong-willed and has interests in which she has the need to excel, is independent and smart, feminine and tough-as-nails, loves her family, has her own sense of style as well as many hopes and dreams, but she is also at times vulnerable, humble and scared, which makes her endearing and relatable. Merida's long red locks are somewhat uncontrollable -- just like her fiery personality -- and she knows her life is meant for more than merely being someone's wife. All of these traits are what make her beautiful. It's what makes her real.  

I recently interviewed fellow writer Kelly Meding about the roles of females in books and film. Meding is an urban fantasy (UF) writer and the author of the Dreg City Series (Three Days to Dead, As Lie the Dead, Another Kind of Dead, and Wrong Side of Dead), as well as the Metawar Series (Trance, Changeling, and Tempest). Meding lists some of her early memories of film and fiction as Return of the Jedi, The Neverending Story, Legend, Superman 1-4, Star Wars; "I watched Tales from the Crypt and other horror movies with my dad. I saw Slaughter High (alone) when I was nine. I think it's the 'otherness' that attracted me to them. Reality was so … boring, but how cool was it to read a book that magically sucked you into the main character's adventures? I believed a man could fly." 

Regarding Disney princesses, Meding said, "I grew up watching the Disney classics. As a young girl, it's easy to fall into the dream of being swept away by your prince charming and living happily ever after. I think it's part of the beauty of being a child -- that age of innocence when you can believe in simple things. There are almost three categories of princesses in the names you listed. You have 'Helpless Princess' (Snow White, Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty) who didn't do much besides sing and look pretty for their future prince. Then you have 'Sassy Princess' (Ariel, Belle, Jasmine), who dream bigger than their current situation and actually take steps toward new things. Finally you have 'Millenial Princesses,' who are Disney's attempt to make the heroine more adventurous, braver, and more active in the story. Pocahontas stops a war. Mulan goes to war and saves China. Rapunzel decides to see the lights and she goes to see the lights. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, as long as you're also teaching your child (boy or girl) that you don't have to wait for someone to save you. You can be your own hero. But that's the same thing with any movie or TV show you let your child watch -- know what they're watching and be prepared to answer questions."

Never be afraid to let your silliness and uniqueness come out!

When asked about the female characters who inspired her both as a writer and as a woman, Meding said, "Is it a cliché if I say Buffy Summers? With that character, Joss Whedon took a trope and not only turned it on its head, he kicked the crap out of it and sent it away crying. So many of his female characters are strong, but they are strong in different ways. Willow didn't go out and physically kick ass, but she stood by her friends, she investigated, and she never backed down from an apocalypse.

"As a kid, Lois Lane (as portrayed by Margot Kidder) inspired me. Sure, Superman needed to save her from a falling helicopter, or a falling elevator once in a while. But Lois was headstrong. She knew she was good at her job, she didn't let anyone keep her from doing her job, and she didn't back down from her male boss. I think Aaron Sorkin also does female characters well. I'm a huge fan of The West Wing, and all of those female characters can go head to head with their male counterparts. They're never portrayed as 'less than' anyone else."

Keep your pop divas & reality star role models; we have our own.

Those previously-mentioned fictional females are just a few obvious strong women. However, sometimes there are strong women characters that have been hiding right under our noses. One such female character has been lying anonymously dormant for many years -- 74 years, to be exact. The Wizard of Oz's Dorothy Gale (Judy Garland) may have first graced printed pages in 1900, but it is the 1939 cinematic classic which made her a household name! Now, I know what most may say. "Are you kidding me!? Dorothy is surrounded by three men throughout the entire film! They have to sneak into the Witch's castle to save her!" To this, I say that, yes, the three male friends (Scarecrow, Tin Man, and Cowardly Lion) come to rescue her. However, she does not ride off into the sunset to marry them. She does not betroth herself to either one of them. They save her out of friendship alone. And why? Because it is merely a reflection of the friendship she has shown them throughout the film. Let's not forget that it is Dorothy who ultimately invites each one of them to join her on her voyage to Emerald City. Her kindliness and friendship are what ultimately save her life. When any of her three friends put themselves down or are unsure of themselves, Dorothy is the one who encourages them. Dorothy stands up to the seemingly scary (at first) Cowardly Lion, bopping him on the nose for trying to attack her dog, Toto. Dorothy is the one who inadvertently destroys the Wicked Witch of the West because she is trying to save Scarecrow's life. Dorothy -- it is revealed at the end -- is the one who ultimately had the power to go home all along. In fact, when you truly think about it, it is the women -- Dorothy, Aunt Em (who's bossing everyone around and the real boss of the farm?), Miss Gulch, Glinda the Good Witch, the Wicked Witch of the West -- who mostly have the power in The Wizard of Oz. If you need more proof, what does the "all-powerful wizard" turn out to be? A crusty, old charlatan who uses special effects, hiding behind a curtain. And, if you really wanted to delve deeper into analyzing Dorothy's male friends, it is first shown that one is brainless, one is heartless, and one is a coward. So, yes, while Dorothy is not as bad-ass tough as most of the aforementioned female characters; nevertheless, she belongs in the category for merely being a good female role model.

Imagine if The Wizard of Oz was advertised this way! Then Dorothy would be one big bad-ass!

It is not necessary for a good story and/or fairy tale to make the males of the piece cowards, macho, idiots, and/or selfish. A great story can treat both sexes with equal respect. One of the best examples of this is Disney's Tangled, which features the princess Rapunzel. For those who haven't seen this movie and want to, please skip down to the next paragraph as there will be spoilers. Even though the movie starts out with all of the trappings of a typical hero-rescues-a-damsel-in-distress, the story takes a different route. At the end of Tangled, the big reveal is that Rapunzel has been imprisoned all of her young life by an enchantress (Mother Gothel) who stole Rapunzel from her royal cradle when she was a baby. Rapunzel's magic hair keeps Mother Gothel young and although Rapunzel bravely refuses to do Gothel's bidding, when Rapunzel's love interest Flynn comes to rescue her, Gothel stabs Flynn. Rapunzel makes a deal with Gothel, telling her that if Gothel lets Rapunzel heal Flynn, Rapunzel will willingly go with Gothel and continue to make her young. However, knowing Rapunzel would lose the freedom she had spent the entire movie fighting for and all of her life yearning for, Flynn -- after professing his love for her -- selflessly sacrifices his life by cutting Rapunzel's hair so she cannot perform the healing spell on him. Flynn's single act of sacrifice  gives Rapunzel not just her true family back but also her freedom from a life of servitude to Gothel, whose age quickly catches up with her and destroys her.

In Disney's latest, Frozen, when Elsa inadvertantly freezes her kingdom, it is up to her little sister, Anna, to find Elsa and try to get her to lift the frozen curse. In her anger, Elsa accidentally strikes Anna in the heart, freezing it and placing a curse on Anna. Anna and her friends are told the only way to stop the effects on Anna's heart is "an act of true love." What Anna's friends -- and the audience -- think of as "an act of true love" turns out to not be valid. It is not until near the end -- when the sisters sacrifice -- that the "true love act" is revealed. Frozen addresses topics such as what it means -- and feels -- to be different (as evidenced in Elsa's "special talent"), and the love in the film is a love that is more important than any romantic love -- it's unconditional love. The film also touches on important aspects such as humility, selflessness and what it means to truly forgive and love.

Disney's new generation of princesses (l. to r.): Mulan, Pocahontas, Tiana, Rapunzel, Merida, Anna, Elsa: Ever notice the princesses (except Rapunzel, Anna, & Elsa) that are ethnic are the ones whose movies have the lowest ticket sales and the lowest popularity? However, it's not their ethnicity which makes them positive role models -- it's their story and personality!

Other Disney princesses with admirable stories include Pocahontas, who teaches Englishman John Smith the value of the land and the true meaning of home and respecting human life, as well as choosing to remain with her family at the end of the movie rather than return to England with Smith; Mulan, who disguises as a man to join her country's army and fight the savage killers who are pillaging her land; and Tiana, who works hard day and night to save money to open her own restaurant and refuses the help of two men (one a voodoo witch doctor, the other a prince!) to achieve her goal.  When asked about the importance of strong female characters in mass media (TV, books, film), Meding said, "Strong female characters in media are important to me, because one day I want us to be able to stop using that phrase. I want them to just be female characters. The simple fact that there are female characters versus strong female characters is irritating. It's as though the assumption is unless we specify the woman is strong, we must automatically assume she's weak. And I hate that. I also think it's important, because it gives girls and adult women heroes to look up to who aren't men. Heroes who stand up for themselves, who kick a little ass, and who don't sit around waiting to be saved. Women aren't helpless. Sometimes we need that reinforced in our media, instead of constantly being told we aren't thin enough, pretty enough, perfect enough." But let's not be so hard on just Disney's princesses. Many romantic comedies today as well as sitcoms on TV sadly revolve around plots in which the female is portrayed as either wanting to fall in love and live happily-ever-after, or surprisingly falling in love in relation to the "Taming of the Shrew syndrome." Being a parent of two daughters, I can dismiss any negative connotations that Snow White or Belle may give my young daughters as I'm sure they do not read as deeply into the psychological or philosophical meaning of the stories as much as us adults do. However, I can't help but make sure they know that waiting for someone to do something for them is not OK, and that if a boy hits them or shoves them or constantly insults them, it is not because he likes them. As I said in a previous post, to me, that is breeding ground for them growing up, thinking a boy/man who treats them like shit secretly likes/loves them. True or not, I don't want a boy showing his affections to either of my daughters in such a way. This opening scene from the romantic comedy film He's Just Not That Into You perfectly conveys the problem I'm discussing:

However, the biases of a woman's "place" in society and relationships does not just start with fairy tales and/or adult movies/books. It starts with earlier literature too! Beware the lessons learned from some pre-teen/tween/young adult novels. I call it: The "Bella Conundrum."

This about sums it up.

Unfortunately, there are popular female characters aimed toward pre-teen, teen and young adult girls -- when they are in their "formidable years" -- that subliminally teach a bad lesson to them. A majority of young women today seem to gravitate toward Bella Swan from the Twilight young adult novel series. Bella is constantly suffering over her "love" for her vampire boyfriend Edward, and goes into a deep depression when he leaves her halfway through the series -- during which time she gets close to another boyfriend, Jacob. In the end (spoiler alert), Bella decides to become a vampire so that she can live happily ever after with Edward, and when they have a child together, the little baby girl's soul "imprints" with Bella's other love interest Jacob (the werewolf), meaning Jacob and the baby are soul mates. I don't even want to know where it goes from there. Uggghhhh (shutter). While Bella may be a bad influence, strong female characters don't have to be perfect. In fact, it is their flaws which make them relatable to others. But they do have to learn from their mistakes and take that knowledge with them; Carrie Bradshaw is best when it comes to this. Hell, even Starbuck does crazy stuff! Sadly, though, learning from mistakes and being selfless is something that is sorely missing from Bella Swan and many other characters found in a majority of today's pop culture media and mainstream stories -- something I call the "Bella Conundrum."

Josh Radnor (of How I Met Your Mother) gets the dreadfulness of Twilight's writing in his film Liberal Arts. Why doesn't everyone else?

Meding hopes her female characters will help fill the role of being strong, making mistakes and being selfless. "I hope they [her characters Evy Stone, Dahlia Perkins, Trance West] show readers that you can be strong and active in your own fate, while still wanting to share your life with someone," Meding said. "Evy is a very damaged character. She's a fighter who is afraid to let anyone close, but she also has an emotional side that wants a connection to another human being. A character can be both strong and feminine, and I think that's a careful balance many UF writers I know grapple with. [If a female character is] Too strong, she's a bitch; [if a female character is] too girly, she's a wimp." When it comes to my "Bella Conundrum," Meding agrees: "I hate the message that Bella sends to girls. That it's okay for a guy to get possessive, stalk you, and take over your life, because he says he loves you. That any guy is worth killing yourself over. That's okay to be passive and let your man do all your fighting. That you should change a big part of yourself (lose your humanity, in Bella's case) for a guy. It's infuriating, and I'm very glad to see Bella passing us by, and to see active heroines like Katniss Everdeen taking her place." Personally, give me a Buffy Summers, a Zoe Washburne, a Fat Amy (Rebel Wilson's character from Pitch Perfect), an Emma Swan, a Jo March, or a Megan (Melissa McCarthy's character from Bridesmaids)!

Just a few of the fictional female characters that are portrayed in a strong, positive light in today's media. (top, l. to r.) Buffy Summers, Kara "Starbuck" Thrace, Kara "Supergirl" Zor-El, Ellen Ripley, Fat Amy, (bottom, l. to r.) Sydney Bristow, Eowyn, Jane Eyre, Lois Lane, Hermione Granger, and Megan.

Take a lesson from Megan about life ...

Today, there are plenty of fairy tales and fiction with good, strong female characters. Our job as parents is to weed through all of the other trite, stereotypical entertainment and make sure our children know right from wrong -- the same as if they were watching violence or sex. 

Fortunately, with characters like the ones pictured above, I've got plenty of positive female characters to point my daughters toward when they're old enough and interested enough. Hermione has already been introduced to them both and I'm looking forward to all of the other characters to follow! Yes, we still watch Snow White and Cinderella. But we also watch Wizard of Oz, Star Wars, Jem (remember her?), Tinker Bell, Curious George and regular cartoons to keep satisfied.

"Broad acceptance will come when society really begins to change. When we can move past the antiquated notion that a woman's place is in the kitchen, rather than in the workplace," Meding said. "When we can accept that women are equal to men, and that we actually outnumber them. When female Senators can stand up and not be told (in so many words) to sit down and shut up by their male colleagues. Take a risk on an action flick starring a superheroine instead of another male hero reboot. The Hunger Games proves that a woman can carry an action blockbuster and that people want to see it. "But as readers and movie-goers, we vote with our dollars. If Superman keeps making eight-digit opening numbers, Hollywood will keep making those kinds of movies. If Twilight-esque books starring Bella clones are making publishers billions of dollars, they'll keep publishing them. Media provides what they think we want to see, so we need to do a better job of showing them what we want. Change often happens slowly, over time. Like I said above, maybe one day we'll only have to say 'female character' and it'll always mean strong." 

As for now, it's good to see that Disney is headed down the right track. After all, any company that could produce Once Upon a Time (one of the best shows about fairy tales and gender roles) and begin to promote more female empowerment in its latest films, proves that the company is headed in the right direction and that they can't be doing all that bad.

Here is Joss Whedon's acceptance speech at an Equality Now conference in 2006. (Start watching at the 2:53 time mark!)

SPECIAL THANKS TO AN AWESOME LADY & WONDERFUL WRITER:

Kelly Meding, whose books can be purchased on Amazon.com and in most bookstores. Where you can check her out on the Web: Kellymeding.com, her blog Organized Chaos, on Twitter and Pinterest. 

Works Cited

Flavell, John H. (1986). The development of children's knowledge about the appearance–reality distinction. American Psychologist, 41(4), 418-425.

Orenstein, Peggy. (2006, December). What’s Wrong with Cinderella? One Mother’s Struggle with Her 3-Year-Old Daughter’s Love Affair with Princess Culture. New York Times Magazine.

Jay & Matt discuss their Best Movies of 2013

JAY: OK. So, last week we posted our picks for best films of 2013. What was your first impressions from my list?

MATT:  I liked some of your picks but I have to admit that I hadn't seen a few just because they're not my "cup of tea." The only one things I didn't agree with was your introduction where you said this year was a good year for movies; and the other was your pick of The World's End. I'm also beginning to question Scorcese.

JAY: You didn't think this year was great? I saw so many good movies that I didn't even put on my list, because I didn't want it to be too long. It was a fantastic year. It wasn't a great year for blockbusters, I do agree.

MATT: I just feel like I don't get a "wow" out of as many movies as I used to. Yes, the blockbusters were big let-downs but I just feel like there is material out there -- as well as writers -- that can bring some great work out. Like Wolf of Wall Street. Not a bad picture at all. But was the story really all that great!? I didn't think so.

JAY: Well, the story was pretty faithful to Jordan Belfort's memoir. So not much they can change there. I thought it was exceptional. His best movie since The Departed. Do you like Goodfellas and Casino?

MATT: Of course I like those films. Although, I have to admit that I'm not as big of an admirer of Goodfellas as everyone else seems to be. To me, I liked Casino far better.

JAY: OK. Well, I thought Wolf was akin to those two films in style and theme. DiCaprio was so good too.It really had me entertained all the way through. I loved it.

MATT: DiCaprio is always good! I really enjoyed The Great Gatsby (which deserves an honorable mention for my Best of 2013 list). But the plot of Wolf, to me, is akin to a glitzier version of Wall Street.

JAY: I think Wall Street was way more naïve then Wolf, which pulled no punches. In the real world, men like Gordon Gecko don't lose. Belfort didn't lose much of anything. That's how things are.

MATT: Maybe it's also just a testament to the sign of the times. Corruption goes more unpunished nowadays than it did back then ... at least, in the movies, anyways.

JAY: I agree.

MATT: I think Springsteen's "Wrecking Ball" album is a testament to that!

JAY: So why the hate for The World's End?

MATT: Well, there were two apocalypse-type movies out this year: World's End and This is the End -- and both had the same theme of growing up and moving on from friends and an old life(style). I wasn't crazy about This is the End either but just thought World's End was so .... corny. And not in a good way. It simply was ... not good. There were moments when the dialogue and story were making me roll my eyes. Sorry to say, but, although I like Pegg and Frost and I love Wright's Scott Pilgrim, I'm just not a fan of their films together. Although, I will say Shaun of the Dead wasn't that bad. But with World's End it's as if they wanted to make a serious film, but then decided at last minute, "Ah, fuck it. Let's just throw in some aliens.”

JAY: OK. I saw both movies as well and The World's End was my favorite of the two. It fit in perfectly with his trilogy, including Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. And that's what makes them great. There's always a subtext or meaning. And then you get zombies, or aliens or armed villagers. They aren't just some blow-em-up, kick-ass action movie. They have heart and something to say.

MATT: I don't think the film’s message said it that well.

JAY: All of the other blockbusters that came out this year have no heart. As I get older, it’s starting to wear thin. I just want something different. That makes me think, I didn't see that coming.

MATT: Nah. I'm over that movie.

JAY: Fair enough. We agree to disagree.

MATT: I think anyone else who watches should be the judge but when I watched it, I couldn't get over how sort of lame it was. I guess I just expected more.

JAY: Yes, everyone else can watch it and see how it’s a sweet look at adulthood and the nostalgic yearning for our younger years . . . . with aliens.

MATT: What's the deal with Gravity? Is it really that good!?

JAY: Yes. I loved it. I know people don't get it. It was so beautiful.

MATT: It seems like it's a bit overrated.

JAY: And you know I can't stand Sandra Bullock.

MATT: Me too!

JAY: What makes it "overrated"? Did you see it?

MATT: Well, a lot of people are raving about it but I don't see the draw. Then again, I have to admit that I haven't seen it. Guess I'll just have to wait and see.

JAY: Well it depends on what "draws" you. For me, I really enjoy to learn about what goes into shooting a film. Cuaron is a director who I love. What he did in this movie is amazing. It’s a technical achievement. It’s a simple yet effective story. It moved me and dazzled me with how it looked on the big screen. Since you'll probably watch it on DVD, it may not have the same effect.

MATT: Well, I hope it will have the same effect or it's not a very effectual movie.

JAY: I don't agree that a movie is unsuccessful if it doesn't have the same impact on a TV screen.

MATT: I do have to admit that Before Midnight was good. A lot of talking ... but good. I always thought Linklater's "Before" films would make great plays!

JAY: Probably. I remember watching Before Sunrise with you when it came out. You remember?

MATT: Yeah.

JAY: Your dad watched some of it with us. I believe he asked us, "What is this crap?!" Ha, ha!

MATT: Ha ha ha! I think his exact quote was: "You guys watch some weird crap." I do have to say. From your list, I'm interested in now seeing The Act of Killing and I've always wanted to see 12 Years a Slave.

JAY: Well, aren't relationships born out of a lot of talking? Both of those films are very good.

MATT: Yes (relationships are born out of talking). But, when you have two little kids, such talking is less and less of an event. Let’s be realistic. I remember having those conversations with my wife when we first met and before the kids were born. And any reiteration of such talks is sort of pointless. The one scene that I enjoyed in Before Midnight was the hotel scene when they talked about his and her roles in their home life.

JAY: Yeah, I can see your point. At that point of the movie the kids were removed from the scene, so in the hotel room they are able to explore the problems in their relationship that are causing them to grow apart.

MATT: I almost didn't like the ending, and how Hawke's character tried to play it cute with Delpy. I'm glad she called him out on his bullshit. The ending -- with the looks on their faces -- gave me a very The Graduate feel.

JAY: It's purposely ambiguous. I really thought Delpy was great. She should get an Oscar nod, but that won't happen.

MATT: Yeah. It was good! You’re right. I think she should at least get an Oscar nod; maybe not a win, though. I mean, c'mon, if Jennifer Lawrence can get a nod for Silver Lining Playbook, then Delpy should get one. No offense to Jennifer Lawrence (who I love) but I felt she should not have won the Oscar compared to Marion Cotillard's role in Rust and Bone.

JAY: Yeah. And she just won the Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actress for American Hustle which should have gone to Luptia Nyong'o for 12 Years a Slave. Can you say, "popular vote"?

MATT: THAT is why I don't watch those things!

JAY: So anything else about my list?

MATT: Obviously, we agreed on American Hustle, Blackfish, The Conjuring, and Short Term 12.

JAY: Yeah. Short Term 12 was one of my absolute favorites of the year. It was so good and hardly got any press.

MATT: That's why Award shows mean dick to me anymore 'cause they overlook the purely fantastic films. I would take one Short Term 12 over 10 Wolf of Wall Streets or American Hustles! Would you say Short Term was your favorite of all?

JAY: Hmmmmm. It's close between that one, Gravity and Her. Now Her did not make my list because I saw it after we posted our list but it would have been on it. I have a review coming shortly. What was your favorite from your list if you had to pick?

MATT: So difficult. It would be between Captain Phillips, Saving Mr. Banks, and The Way, Way Back.

JAY: The only one of those three I haven't seen yet is Saving Mr. Banks.

MATT: Oh! You gotta see it! So good! Even though the end is not historically accurate.

JAY: Both Captain Phillips and The Way, Way Back were good. I've heard about the accuracy. Some people are kind of upset about it.

MATT: Despite that, I think it was really well done and the idea of Travers' past issues resonates well with the story.

JAY: I'll see it soon and let you know what I think. Now comes the part of our discussion where we will devolve into an argument about Man of Steel. Let's try and keep it civil.

MATT: Here we go. What now?

JAY: Well, you wrote about it more than any other film on your list. It almost felt like you were defending it. It's a pretty polarizing movie.

MATT: Oh, no. I simply reposted my original review.

JAY: OK. So, I just to start by saying I do like many things about Man of Steel. I really like the way Snyder shot it. Especially the flashback scenes to his childhood in Smallville.

MATT: Alright, just get on with it and tell me what you didn't like about it.

JAY: Well, there's several things. First, there is absolutely no chemistry between Henry Cavill and Amy Adams. I did not buy them falling in love at all. All of the sudden they are kissing.

MATT: I said from the beginning that I wasn't crazy about Adams' casting.

JAY: Oh, it’s because she's Lois Lane and he's Superman. So they're supposed to fall in love. So let's insert kiss here.

MATT: But we can't really judge chemistry when they didn't have time to have romance. I felt like the kiss should have been pushed back to the sequel. Since this was the start. But that does not put the film's quality in any jeopardy.

JAY: OK, but they didn't do that. So it cheapened the establishment of their relationship. I take from you saying it doesn't do anything to worsen the movie, that the love story between Superman and Lois Lane is not important to the overall story of Superman? For me, it’s one of the most important elements of Superman. It’s arguably the most important comic book love story in the history of the medium.

MATT: And I'll say that even in the first original Superman movie, Superman and Lois Lane abruptly fall for each other also. So, it's nothing that hasn't been done before. All Superman does is save Lois' life and she's willing to drop her panties for him. In Donner's Superman, that is.

JAY: It’s different in the original movie, though, because you have Clark who first meets Lois, not Superman. The relationship's complexity builds from Clark's crush on Lois.

MATT: No. In that movie, to Lois, Clark and Superman are two different people! It's not Clark she falls for. It's Superman!

JAY: Exactly!

MATT: Yes, and she falls for him in Man of Steel just the same! Oh, but wait, just because she figures out he's also Clark, romance ruined!?

JAY: No, no. It's not the same as Man of Steel. The Donner Superman/Lois relationship grew out of a quasi-love triangle between Clark/Superman/Lois. Already, it’s got more levels than anything Snyder's love story had. And it was a main focus Lois and Superman in Man of Steel is an afterthought and comes off as forced.

MATT: But that's not how even Superman is written nowadays. That's the Superman of old when Lois couldn't figure out that a man looked the same with or without glasses, but yet, was also a star investigative reporter!

JAY: BTW, I rewatched Man of Steel the other day to make sure I wasn't crazy.

MATT: Again, you have to remember that the real person is Kal (his Superman persona), and Clark is a disguise. And Man of Steel shows Superman before he took on the Clark Kent persona.

JAY: Maybe, but that doesn't excuse the lack of chemistry and poorly written and developed love story.

MATT: I don't think the love story in the original Superman was as well written as you think it to be. In that movie, Clark starts working at the paper, falls in love with Lois (who treats him like shit), and that's it. Lois is saved by Superman and she instantly falls in love with him. It is only through their fly together that it cements both of their feelings. But she never acknowledges Clark.

JAY: Don't get me wrong, I don't put the Donner Superman on a pedestal. I don't like Margot Kidder as Lois.

MATT: Not many did.

JAY: But I'm trying not to compare Man of Steel to those movies. Just to what I know to be the main points that make the character of Superman.

MATT: The main point of Superman is what I said. He's Kal, not the disguise of Clark.

JAY: Lois is arguably one of the biggest things you have to get right. How can he be Kal when he doesn't even know who that is until he's older and the Kents tell him? He's Clark before he's Kal. Right? The Kents raised him as Clark.

MATT: No, Clark -- as Lois knows him in the earlier comics and in the original Donnor Superman movie -- is a bumbling coward, a disguise (and no, I don’t agree with Tarantino’s Bill monologue in Kill Bill 2 regarding Superman). In those instances, he doesn't act like himself -- how he truly is. The Clark the Kents raised is Kal, not the bumbling coward he pretends to be around Lois and everyone at the Planet.

JAY: I'm not even thinking about the bumbling Christopher Reeves Clark. I came away from this movie still thinking that the Clark the Kents raised is still Clark. A different Clark, but still Clark Kent. He is told about Kal from his father Jor-El when he is a man. He finds about Krypton from him. So much of Superman is about his numerous parental figures and how they raised him. I think the Kents were arguably more important in creating Superman than Jor-El. I didn't get the Kal thing at all. Diane Lane would disagree with you. She raised Clark not Kal.

MATT: What I'm saying is ... Clark is Kal. Their personalities are the same! But when he goes to work for the Planet, he puts on his bumbling personality. And that's the Clark that everyone -- including Lois in the original film -- knows.

JAY: OK, I get that. Hopefully, he doesn't create the bumbling alter-ego.

MATT: That is what we will have to wait and see on. But, unfortunately, he almost has to -- so others won't discover his secret.

JAY: Ok, so back to The Avengers, which by no means do I think is the king of comic book movies, but I do think is better than Man of Steel. Why the hate?

MATT: The Avengers is a popcorn flick -- pure and simple. And there's nothing wrong with that! But it doesn't have the emotional depth or meaning that Man of Steel has. But I can see why. The Avengers is an ensemble film whereas Man of Steel focuses on one. But, again, I enjoyed Man of Steel much more than any of the stand-alone Marvel movies. The only stand-alone Marvel movie that came slightly close was Captain America. But, still not as good.

JAY: OK. For me, The Avengers is served very well by the character development that takes place in the stand-alone movies.

MATT: It's two different animals 'cause the Marvel characters had their stand-alone movies, and Man of Steel is Superman’s stand-alone movie.

JAY: Man of Steel is better than Thor. I'll give you that. That's why I think you can't compare Avengers and Man of Steel, and it surprised me you did.

MATT: Sorry, but also better than Iron Man, The Wolverine, Captain America, Incredible Hulk. 

JAY: Ha, ha. Well we could argue that all night. But not better than the first Iron Man or Captain America. Better than those other two.

MATT: Agree to disagree. Maybe it's not the movie that's better. It's the hero.

JAY: Maybe you're right there and I think you're onto something. We project so much of our love of these characters onto our enjoyment of the movie that we tend to overlook the actual quality of the movie itself.

MATT: I'll just say that Man of Steel was a better film, had better cinematography, a better hero and had better writing than any of the Marvel stand-alone movies ... Iron Man and Captain America included, although those two films were really good.

JAY: Last but not least, I can't forgive Superman for killing thousands of Metropolis citizens. If I lived there, I'd want his ass off the planet pronto!

MATT: OK, Lex Luthor! I think this storyline aspect is going to be of major focus in the sequel. Watch it be a main reason Batman (Affleck) disagrees with Superman. Although, don't forget that Superman is still learning who he is and by the end of the film, his objection to killing is cemented.

JAY: For me, that was a departure on the same level as Joker killing Batman's parents (Tim Burton's Batman) and Norman Osbourne killing Spider-Man's parents (The Amazing Spider-Man). I hope the sequel does address it.

MATT: So when thousands died in The Avengers, you wouldn't want their asses "off the planet?" Or, because The Avengers are government-sanctioned, you'd be OK with it?

JAY: I think it's different. Hundreds of aliens attacked New York, not The Avengers.

MATT: Superman didn't attack Metropolis!

JAY: Zod was attacking Superman, not Metropolis.

MATT: Wrong! He was attacking Metropolis -- with the world-shaping machine. And the aliens in The Avengers were attacking the Avengers!

JAY: If the Avengers left, the aliens mostly wouldn't have followed them.

MATT: In both films, sadly, the people were merely in the way. 

JAY: If Superman left, Zod would follow.

MATT: You don't think the aliens in The Avengers wouldn't have killed people?

JAY: Yes, that's why they had to stay and fight. Also, there was a missile being fired at New York.

MATT: Superman was willing to leave with Zod ... for the people! Until Superman found out Zod was going to kill EVERYONE on earth! And that's why Superman had to stay and fight. The people would have died whether Superman stayed or not!

JAY: After Superman destroyed that world building machine, it was time to take the fight elsewhere. Let's be honest, Snyder wanted to blow shit up. And I'm fine with it, whatever. If that's the new Superman, OK. Oh, and Tom Hiddleston is a much better villain than Michael Shannon. He took a lame character and made him awesome.

MATT: You can't make Zod go away when he knows your weakness and wants to exploit it. Superman’s weakness are the people of Earth. I will, though, give you props for Hiddleston. But won't it be cool if they get Bryan Cranston to play Lex Luthor? That's what I'm hearing.

JAY: Oh yes! Please make that happen! I'll forgive everything!

MATT: "Just blow shit up!?" Oh, you're right. They didn’t do that at all in The Avengers! (*facepalm*) Any more comments about the "Best of" list?

JAY: Yes. Superman is different from the Avengers, though. He represents our highest ideals. Tony Stark does not.

MATT: That's for damn sure. Which is why Superman suffers when there are casualties -- especially thousands. But he has to move on.

JAY: I really want to see TWA Flight 800 after reading your blurb about it.

MATT: OH!!!! YES!!! You have to! It's on Netflix! WATCH IT TONIGHT! If you want to see proof of government fuck-ups and conspiracy (true conspiracy), then watch it.

JAY: I will. I did see Don Jon. I really liked it too. Johansson was hysterical.

MATT: I liked her Jersey accent.

JAY: It was very good, with a great message at its core.

MATT: Yeah. Gordon-Levitt is awesome.

JAY: Some of yours I haven't seen yet. Warm Bodies, Now You See Me, 42.

MATT: I'm surprised you haven't seen Warm Bodies ... you being a big zombie fan and all.

JAY: Yeah, I will soon. Don't know why.

MATT: Now You See Me was my fun pick.

JAY: I thought Star Trek: Into Darkness was OK, but I think I had some of the same problems you did.

MATT: Yeah. Like I said, almost didn't make the list. I couldn't agree more with Pacific Rim, although I knew it would suck, so it really didn't surprise me or disappoint me.

JAY: I had hopes, but they were dashed. I didn't see A Good Day to Die Hard. I avoided it, sorry to say.

MATT: If you love John McClane, and the original Die Hard, don't! You will be disgusted with what they did to the character. He's almost become a cartoon.

JAY: Then I will stay away. I love the first one too much.

MATT: Well, I guess that pretty much wraps it up for 2013!

JAY: I was pretty happy with my list and the films I saw this year. Looking forward to 2014. We should start our Most Anticipated List soon.

MATT: Yes! I liked my list too. I think 2014 will be a really damn good year for movies! And 2015 looks to be better!

JAY: Yes, it does!