web
counter

serial podcast / the walking dead / snl / mindhole blowers / netflix / celebrity facts / marvel


Alison Brie As Captain America? That's Actually Hilarious.

By Joanna Robinson | Pajiba Love | December 28, 2012 | Comments ()


Brie.jpg

Quentin Tarantino discusses his newest idea for a third in his "Revenge Movie" trilogy. You folks may be dubious, but I wants it, precious. (CB)

Yeah, sure, go ahead and explain to me how this lawn ornament of Obama eating a watermelon isn't racist. (ABL)

Why did someone photoshop Alison Brie into a clingy Captain America costume? The question isn't "why?" The question is "why not sooner?" (Reddit)
BHxhN-650x974.jpg

I'm not sure at all if this message for help from a Chinese worker is real, but I think it's definitely worth a look. (22 Words)

I just watched "Lazy Sunday 2" on this year's "5 Most Popular SNL Clips on Hulu" list and now I'm craving mimosas. (WG)

Not in the mood for "SNL"? Maybe the first four minutes of Warm Bodies is more your cup of tea today. (FD)

These Batman shelves look awesome and rather tricksy to make. No wonder they cost a small Wayne fortune. (Etsy)
il_570xN.399016853_cynl.jpg

Dean Norris (aka Hank Schrader) tweets the first image from the set of the next season of "Breaking Bad." Spoiler alert: it picks up right where it left off. (WG)

The best mugshots of 2012 are here to make you feel a little bit better about your hair today. (The Smoking Gun)

Finally, these Christmas-themed hot dogs sound delightful, but all the close up sausage shots are making me feel a bit flustered. (Serious Eats)

Speaking of flustered sausages, please do enjoy these bloopers from the year in local news. Absolutely unsafe for work.




Promised Land Review: Big Fracking Deal | Egosurfing: Don't Try to Act All Innocent






Are you following Pajiba on Facebook or Twitter? Every time you do, Bill Murray crashes a wedding.


Comments Are Welcome, Bigots and Trolls Are Not


  • psykins

    I said it on reddit and got downvoted, but I'll say it again: She looks like a fucking lotr elf. WHY?

  • Quartermain

    That y'all are having this long, rambling argument about whether a photoshopped picture of a mid-level celebrity dressed as a comic book hero is sexist is both retarded and the Internet in a nutshell.

    Also, how is that y'all waste time on that but nobody mentions (or thanks Joanna for) the video of Kate Upton dancing in a bikini? Y'all's priorities are out of whack.

  • Buck Forty

    This isn't photoshop, it's an outtake from a pitch reel Brett Ratner made when trying to secure the franchise.

    And I don't understand why everyone is so confused about the crop top. Isn't that similar to what many high performance athletes wear? It's not like she's dressed for beach volleyball.

  • DeistBrawler

    In that Best News Bloopers 2012 video I'm trying to figure out what the lady has under her skirt at 6:28. What is that?

    Someone tell me what I'm looking at!

  • The only way that picture could be more sexist and misogynistic would be if there was a treasure trail.

    So can one of you photoshop geniuses get on that? Like right now? Please?

  • theotherone

    Oddly only Brie's head was photoshopped, the chest, tummy and tights are all Chris Evans...

  • As for the Tarantino thing, Spike Lee is gonna be PISSED.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    Apparently Spike Lee is already pissed. Or so my 71 year old mom says. And she's not remotely cool, so not sure how she heard...

  • googergieger

    "Quentin Tarantino discusses his newest idea for a third in his “Revenge
    Movie” trilogy. You folks may be dubious, but I wants it, precious."

    Park Chan Wook, rolling over in his grave.

  • Blake

    Chan-wook Park is dead? The grave rolling might be a bit premature.

  • googergieger

    Charles Barkley reference.

  • JC

    Have you been hacked again? Ugh.

  • Mitchell Hundred

    I love how that guy says "It's freedom of speech" and "It's a joke" as if those things and racism are mutually exclusive. It's not that they're not allowed to do these things, it's just that doing them makes you an asshole. That's why everyone gets pissed off at such people.

  • I love it when you link me. It gives me downlow tingles.

  • Mitchell Hundred

    :-o

    I'll just leave you two alone.

  • Maguita NYC

    Not that there is anything wrong with it.

  • Blake

    I'd actually watch Captain America if Brie was the lead.

    But with that hair (which doesn't look helmet friendly at all) she looks like she should be either an Elf or Lara Croft...

  • FrayedMachine

    I actually for a split second thought it was Lara Croft which I guess means she'd be a pretty good casting role if they ever did a reboot based on the new game? Maybe? Can she fight? I don't know.

  • Blake

    She did look awfully good with a gun in "A Fistful of Paintballs / For a Few Paintballs More". Can she fight? Who cares. I think the accent would be the bigger issue.

  • FrayedMachine

    Oh right yes, I completely forgot Lara Croft was British.

  • Blake

    Alison did have one in The Five Year Engagment...

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.c...

  • Milly

    Not a British accent, but an English one (the use of british as a catch all is a bit maddening), one that was quite estuary/south of the watford gap in tone as Emily Blunt's natural accent is that.

    It was good, but still forced to English ears. In the same way that English actors putting on American accents (ones alligned to different areas) may sound plausible to us, it will sound off to people from those regions.

    I've yet to hear any big name non-UK actor try anything north of Milton Keynes in their accents.

  • FrayedMachine

    Okay, you'll have to probably school me on this because I don't know anything about where the different regions that specific kinds of English accents come from come from but James Marsters accent on Buffy seemed quite believable, same with David Anders' accent in Alias. Though I'm not English/British so I can't really say if those were actually legitimately good or not. They just seemed way less forced.

  • Milly

    Marsters is better than most, particularly as he didn't have the luxury of that faux upper class/received pronunciation accent that is the default of most non-English speakers, but still there are notable slips that jar.

    It's just a gripe of mine, and one that doesn't matter in any context, so apologies for the slight derailment.

  • FrayedMachine

    Huh, her accent actually isn't terrible! I'd be totally fine with her being casted for this.

  • Robert

    The Batman shelves are not hard to make if you have the means to bend wood. They cost that much because it's Etsy, where everyone can have an inflated sense of self-worth for sloppily throwing paint on un-sanded scrap wood and ask for hundreds.

  • John G.

    put a bird on it.

  • Salieri2

    And a mason jar.

  • L.O.V.E.

    I was going to wait until January 1, to unveil my 2013 avatar/muse. However, this post seems like the right time to name ALISON BRIE the 2013 L.O.V.E. Avatar!

    Kristen, you had a wonderful year, and you will be greatly missed. Everyone, please give a warm round of applause to Ms. Bell.

  • FrayedMachine

    Man, that photo is everything that's wrong with the perception of female super heroes, le sigh. It looks rather cool, though, if you disregard the part of it that makes no sense.

  • Dragonchild

    I don't remember anyone complaining when Frank Miller portrayed the Spartans wearing only loincloths in "300". Except not only was that a comic book, it was based on history where the Spartans' heavy bronze armor was a DECISIVE TACTICAL ADVANTAGE AT THE VERY BATTLE THE COMIC/MOVIE WAS ABOUT.

    The role reversal was kinda weird, my female friends all ogling an action flick that showed waaay more male flesh than I ever care to see for the rest of my life, but I enjoyed it regardless and don't fault them for enjoying the eye candy. I figured I would get sick of it after a while, but then "Twilight" came out and the only thing that pissed me off about that trash was the pathetic emptiness of the characters, not how they LOOKED. I was more than OK with the revelation that straight women also have libido.

    The world could use more genuine heroines, which is a void I'm personally working to fill. But "300" goes to show that feminism is a double standard whenever the hell women want it to be.

  • FrayedMachine

    Want to know why no one complained (well that's a lie, there were probably people who complained but not nearly enough to cause a ruffled feather)?

    Because 1.) Men, no matter little clothing they're shown in, are still being shown in a position of power. Their lack of clothing does not effect the kind of control and/or strength we perceive them to have. The lack of clothing that the Spartans wore was a reflection of -just how bad ass they were-. They were so fierce, so filled with strength and filled with so little fucks to give about what kind of damage they'd receive that they took no issue with going into battle with very little clothes. This is something that's equated to -Manliness-, not sexy behaviour.

    2.) On top of that, but even if you did want to complain, you still have a million other examples of male characters out there who are not going into battle shirtless wearing next to nothing. Surprise! Welcome to being in the role of privilege where it doesn't matter how many poorly displayed examples you have going around because for every one shitty role you have 50 others that compensate for it.

    Women who oogled it (including myself) oogled it -because- it was showing men who were doing "manly" things, because it was a movie filled with men who were outright strong and powerful and that, in and of itself, is sexy.

    However, take a gander at female power roles. Wait, no. Those are virtually non-exstent. The media conveys female power in one of two ways.

    1.) In order to be a strong and powerful woman, you need to be almost manly to do so

    or

    2.) In order to be a strong and powerful woman, you need to, by default, be sexy and sacrifice all sense of real power for the satisfaction of being visually appealing.

    -This- is a problem.

    300 is not an issue because it satisfies the fantasy of both sexes by appealing to POWER.

    Female representation often forgoes this by disregarding the female audience by simply appealing to SEXUAL fantasies of the male audience.

    Like I've stated already, it's very easy for a man to walk around shirtless, be burly and bad ass and still be something that would appeal to men (because going into battle guns blazing and kicking ass is -manly-). However, there's very little appealing to see a female character being rendered into nothing but a sexual fantasy.

    How does it make sense that the male representation of Captain America actively goes through the effort to protect himself and ensure that he can make it through combat but the female version has an exposed midriff for what reason, I don't even know.

    People are simply sick and tired of the idea of power being connected to sexuality for women. How is it fair that men get a full spectrum but women can only have one small field of option to land in?

  • AxlProse

    You seem fun.

  • FrayedMachine

    Fuck yeah I am. Just wait until I have a drink in my hand.

  • Dragonchild

    "Like I've stated already, it's very easy for a man to walk around
    shirtless, be burly and bad ass and still be something that would appeal to men. However, there's very little appealing to see a female character being rendered into nothing but a sexual fantasy."

    In other words, the amount of skin isn't the problem. Your problem is that fanservice sells. You're going to be angry for a long, long time.

    And for what it's worth, when I see sexism IRL, I don't put up with it once just because there are "have 50 others that compensate for it". If it's a numbers game to you, then you're very clearly on the wrong side of this battle.

  • FrayedMachine

    Was that not clear? As I've already stated that time and time again that the issue is the objectification and the sexist treatment that female super heroes receive.

    My problem isn't just that "fanservice sells". My problem is that this is an inherently ingrained aspect of society. This is how we expect our women to be represented and portrayed and very rarely do people actually acknowledge that it's unjust without someone bringing up that "oh hey, what the fuck guys, girls get the sex treatment? AGAIN?"

    I don't care if I'll be angry for a long time. As a woman, it's part of my duty to make sure that I help build a better world for women who will come after me. I plan on raising my daughters to be strong willed and strong minded because there's no reason for us to put up with this bullshit. We've come a long way but there's still much to be paved and I don't see why anyone should be expected to stop because it's going to be a long and grinding journey.

    And before anyone says "oh, you're just bitching about it", just be aware that I do plan on making my difference by hopefully, one day, having a strong influence within the gaming industry - another place where female representation is lacking.

    It's not just a numbers game, but that is part of it. People who are often in a place of privilege do not realize the kind of liberty they have to disregard these things because they have so many places to pull for influence. So yes, numbers are important. It's important that young women have a number of places to look to. That they have a number of resources to turn to. That they are not growing up in a world that forces them to think that in order for them to be acceptable, they must be a part of a very specific mold.

    Diversity, at the end of the day, comes down to numbers. It's not a diverse world if we see One of so many and 1,000,000,000 of a few. The end goal is to try and even out the resources and the representation, and people who feel threatened by that should re-evaluate where they're coming from. Why is it a bad thing to provide a large source of positive strong female imagery? And why is it something that bothers you?

    I'm not saying that you're sexist. Nor am I saying that you're a supporter. What I am doing is making it very clear what the issue is. What you do offline is your prerogative but the internet is still a place where minds of many backgrounds come together and any action or semblance of re-inforcing said sexism is going to be perceived as such since I do not know you outside of any other form or context than this.

  • Milly

    Well, disregarding the exposed abdomen - which could be construed as being similar to the exposed biceps/accentuated six packs in most male super hero costumes as it alludes to the physical strength of the character - the depiction of Ms Brie may be quite realistic as she is, to put it bluntly, quite chesty.

    Tight fitting clothing appears to be de regueur of the superhero class and as such nothing appears to be untoward.

    In addition, she is wearing a greater amount of fabric than most female superheros; which is an indictment of them rather than this image.

  • FrayedMachine

    The vast majority of Iconic Male Superheroes do not have exposed body parts.

    Super Man
    Batman
    IronMan
    Spider Man

    Exposed skin only occurs with super heroes that tend to have Regenerative powers (i.e. Wolverine) or are almost entirely immune to any physical damage (Colossus, The Thing).

    The thing with any kind of muscle definition with male super heroes is that it's a fantasy in connection to -power-. With women, they do not have that same position. Even muscled super heroines (like She-Hulk) are inherently sexualized, substituting more fragile, feminine looking physiques for actually truly muscled and burly body types.

    Examples:

    Super Man
    http://img.gawkerassets.com/im...

    vs. Super Girl

    http://image.naldzgraphics.net...

    The Hulk

    http://images3.wikia.nocookie....

    Vs. She-Hulk

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...

    You're going to try and say that female super heroes get the same treatment? Do not make me laugh.

    She-Hulk and Super Girl are both female characters who are, by definition, physically strong, and yet nothing about their design indicates that, and rather than providing them with such, they're given rather sexualized ensembles.

    Enter Ms. Captain America.

    Nothing about her shows any kind of strength. You see she has abs for whatever reason that's apparently necessary and that's about it. It also doesn't make sense since those are vulnerable, vital organs that are being revealed which, as we've seen from the Male Captain America depiction, SHOULD be covered as it is completely and totally cannon given the abilities that are provided for the super hero.

    With Ms. Super Brie's situation, this is not a matter of coming off as being strong, it's a matter of being hot. Providing her with a low cut top would not, in this situation, be completely believable as it would prevent a realistic positioning for the star that's so iconic for Captain's costume. Instead we're given a shot of her stomach, why? What does this provide for an interesting character and concept design?

    No one's saying that tight fitted clothing is not typical in super heroes. What IS being stated is that said tight fitted clothing on women are by default sexualized.

    Catwoman

    http://images.wikia.com/marvel...

    Black Widow

    http://media.comicvine.com/upl...

    Starfire

    http://images2.wikia.nocookie....

    The list can go on.

    Men get the power fantasy. Women get the sexual fantasy that, not only is offensive, but makes. No. sense.

    But just because she's wearing more clothing, this makes it acceptable? This makes it kosher? No, it doesn't work like that. Any play into the fantasy that women need to be sexualized in order to be powerful is inherently and by default bullshit. Yes, women are sexual creatures, but when you manipulate and use that as the sole source of their interest and abilities then why should they be taken seriously?

  • Milly

    Firstly, I applaud the zeal (for there is no other word that would not be seen as being antagonistic) of your posting to support your viewpoint.

    Secondly, I do have an issue with the latter part of this particular comment:

    "Men get the power fantasy. Women get the sexual fantasy that, not only is offensive, but makes. No. sense."

    Skin tight, body defining suits aren't a sexual fantasy to some people? The suits that cling to the chest and shoulders, that hug the thighs and reveal every indentation of their washboard stomachs are not desirable or sploosh inducing?

    Zealots can be blind to anything but their own true path, while those are are not similar in mind can see many avenues. You may need to step back, have a few breaths and perhaps look upon this particular image and the discussion that you began afresh.

  • FrayedMachine

    What differentiates the two is that skin tight clothing on men does one thing - shows off muscle. Something that is universally attributed to strength and power. There's a difference between being able to find something attractive and something inherently being done TO be attractive. People who design male super heroes who's central focus in their abilities is strength are going for one thing and one thing alone - making sure that people -know- very well and without any question that these super heroes ARE strong. Easiest way to communicate this? Providing them with clothing that accentuates their physical strength.

    Women, on the other hand, well... like I've already stated. Female super heroes, even female super heroes who's central powers have to do with their strength, do NOT get that treatment. They get skin tight clothing to accentuate their sexuality and their physical attractiveness. The treatment between characters like She-Hulk and The Hulk says it all.

    What separates them is that with Male Super Heroes, male fans look to these as goals to actually achieve as reflective of success, power and achievement. Female fans who lust after them are merely a coincidence (mind you - the root in the attraction to these male super heroes is, again, that they symbolize success, strength, power and achievement).

    The same, however, cannot be said for female super heroes. The appeal in their design is that they are -attractive-. Their attractiveness is rooted in nothing more than the kind of sexual appeal they provide to their fans. Although it's fine and dandy to go around wanting to be sexy, it also sets a really shitty example for little girls if they're raised to think that in order for them to be respected, they must first become sexual objects.

    We raise our boys to want to be strong, we raise our girls to want to be fucked. That. Is. fucked. up.

    But no, I don't really need to take a step back. You can call me a zealot because I'm not shying away from being blunt and up front, that's perfectly fine, but that's your opinion and your perspective. Anyone who really wants to say that women don't get a very different and stark treatment from men probably need to take a step -closer-, especially when their arguments do nothing to contradict and disprove what's being presented before them.

  • Aaron Schulz

    Its almost like 85% of comics are read and written by males. In like 30 years it might change but until then deal with it.

  • FrayedMachine

    Right, because change happens by saying and doing nothing hahahahahahaha silly me

    Also, I question your statistics that 85% of comic readers are male. It's 2012, not 1942.

  • L.O.V.E.

    No sense? As in the part where she would have a super-human body after she had a special serum injected into her?

    And this looks nothing like you see in actual comic books.

    Its a woman with a strong physique! And long hair! That's not feminine. Run for your lives.

    Um, the answer you GUYS are looking for, is that these movies can show more male skin. The answer is NOT LESS FEMALE SKIN.

  • mswas

    No, the answer is to not to show more male skin, the answer is to NOT MAKE THE WOMAN LOOK LIKE A STUPID IDIOT. You cannot convince me that a super-smart, talented, strong woman would go into battle like that. No way. And that's where they lose me. Another example, the actual Captain America movie, where Peggy Carter goes running into battle with tons of soldiers - she is the only one without a helmet*.
    http://demonsresume.files.word...

    Oh wait, her beautiful glossy hair will protect her, she just needs to swing her head and giggle nicely and all will be well! I'm sorry, I could not suspend my disbelief that much. She was a great character who walked intellectual circles around the men on her team, and it really pissed me off that they chose to show her that way in battle.

    *yes, I know that ultimately the helmet didn't defend against the Tesseract at all, but neither did the soldiers.

  • One of my all-time favorite jokes is in Spaceballs, when Daphne Zuniga's perfectly coiffed hair withstands a laser blast that normally kills on a single shot, and she yells, "My hair!" But, of course, Mel Brooks is genius.

  • FrayedMachine

    Hahahaha you're totally right. It's completely and totally acceptable to allow female super heroes to be belittled into nothing but sex objects. It makes so much sense to make such a huge difference between how we design our male and female super heroes, where Male heroes are expected to come with protective gear and Female heroes are expected to put safety last in exchange of being visually enticing.

    Also who said anything about defining what is and isn't feminine? The complaint is that female characters are often times placed and labeled in a very small sphere - Sexy. That's it. If you come across a female character that puts sexy -second-, then the world's mind explodes.

    So yes, the answer actually is less female skin.

  • L.O.V.E.

    You do know that this is a fictional mock-up of a fictional character, and not an actual representation of an actual character in an actual movie, right?

    It is an obvious photoshop meant for amusement. It doesn't require a 300 word thesis on the plight of heroines in cinema.

    As in, lighten up, Frances. And no, you still have the wrong answer.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

  • FrayedMachine

    Whoops, not retyping this C+P'ed

    You're so right. No one should ever be allowed to provide criticism on a problem that is actually present throughout all forms of Media and the inherent by default appeal to the sexist imagery that women experience day to day.

    PPFFTTTT SILLY ME

  • John G.

    they even made it realistic by showing a wound on that exposed stomach. Although, I'm not sure how much protection spandex provides in any case.

  • FrayedMachine

    I actually like Captain America's armor because it doesn't come off immediately as Spanex. It just registers as some other kind of synthetic tough material that provides just as much flexibility and movement as you'd expect him to need/have. A lot of that just comes from the details of weaving in his uniform.

    Woops, sorry, there goes my inner concept art and design nerd.

    ETA because this actually got me more curious to look into his designs but looking at a High-Res image of his outfit actually shows the hints of slightly harder, more bulletproof like material around his stomach which makes me so many kinds of happy.

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-72sD...

    They actually did a pretty damn good job with this one. Wasn't all too crazy about his initial design in the Captain America movie. Looked a little too bulky.

  • Enrique del Castillo

    I agree; at first I thought it looked cool, but on a closer look, the open belly,and the long hair ruin it. It could work as well with a full suit and short hairstyle

  • FrayedMachine

    Remember, female super heroes are only viable if they come with sex appeal.

  • Exactly. Chris Evans has abs to kill for but apparently you only have to show your stomach if you have a vagina.

  • L.O.V.E.

    Yes, Chris Evans was never shirtless in Captain America. Oh wait...

  • Dude, he PUTS ON A SHIRT before going outside to fight the bad dudes. They make him cover up for THAT. But no, let's battle the aliens with our boobs hanging out and our stomachs showing.

  • Jezzer

    Can I just point out that we have now gone on for volumes about a fake picture of a mediocre comedic actress whose major contribution to the pop culture zeitgeist can be summed up as "boobs"?

  • L.O.V.E.

    Touche, to the first part concerning the "volumes" about the fake picture. Agreed.

    But calling Ms. Brie's talents "mediocre" was uncalled for, good sir.

    (Not my downvote by the way)

  • FrayedMachine

    Wait, I'm sorry. Is that how he went into battle? Because last I checked, they never sent him into any fight with guns blazing sans any kind of uniform.

    Just sayin'.

    Just gonna leave that right there.

  • L.O.V.E.

    You do know that this is a fictional mock-up of a fictional character, and not an actual representation of an actual character in an actual movie, right?

  • FrayedMachine

    You're so right. No one should ever be allowed to provide criticism on a problem that is actually present throughout all forms of Media and the inherent by default appeal to the sexist imagery that women experience day to day.

    PPFFTTTT SILLY ME

  • L.O.V.E.

    One, the dude is wearing pants but no shirt while undergoing a science experiment. The only reason this makes "sense" is as an excuse to show his abs.

    Two, your critique is completely misplaced and invalidated in this instance, because it is not real. You might as well criticize Alison Brie for wearing the non-existent G-damned outfit.

    The same Alison Brie who has no qualms about showing cleavage in real life --whose breasts are a national treasure and the name of a monkey --but this sight of fake abs is an injustice, evidently.

    For the love of God, they are abs. Not boobs. Not rear ends. Its a stomach. With muscles.
    Anyway, enough of this inanity. Brie, walk me out.

  • John G.

    Hey buddy, let me talk you off that ledge. NO ONE is gonna take your Allison Brie fantasies away from you, ok? We just want to mock something that anyone who's honest understands about the double standard that exists in Hollywood when it comes to women and men.

  • L.O.V.E.

    Ok, Ok, Ok. But I'm also keeping my Kristen Bell fantasies. So, there. Pfft!

    ---------------------
    Anyway, my essential argument still stands re: the double standard. My plan to fix it calls for more male skin, not less female skin.

    In the actual Avengers Captain America and Black Widow were both covered in tight spandex. I think Mark Ruffalo was the only one to get naked.

    The ladies can have their Magic Mike's, or Ryan Reynolds' abs, or what-have-you. And I can have my Salma Hayek in From Dusk to Dawn. No one has to lose.

    The ladies can have Jeff Winger in his undies, just don't take away my Brie goodness, dammit.

  • The answer isn't "more male skin," though you allude to the right one in the above comment. It's about sexiness equity, or sexquity. "Community" is a pretty good example of a piece of media that goes out of its way to get everyone off, but it does so in the context of characters and storytelling. Yeah, Joel McHale is in his underwear a lot, but it's immediately after sex, a strip search, or the culmination of the most hilarious pool match in history. When he's playing paintball, he's geared up and ready to go unless the writers are calling attention to the Kirk/Mclane trope, and when he's lawyering he's in a suit and tie. When Chris Evans' Captain America goes into battle he's not shirtless because that would be downright stupid for a guy who isn't invulnerable -- unless he's attacked in the middle of a scene where he's already doffed his top, which is what happens in the movie. Why would Alison Brie's Captain America do anything different?

  • L.O.V.E.

    Valid point, Rob. Call me a hypocrite, because I am about to go on a 3000 word diatribe.

    The thing is that the picture of Brie is quite restrained and not all that different than the characters in the actual Avengers. Its splitting hairs. Did any of them NEED skin tight clothes? Its all gratuitous, really. Actual Navy Seals aren't fighting in spandex.

    Look at Thor. In some scenes his arms are covered, but in others he gives us the 21 gun salute. He flies into the cold of space and bis biggest weapon is a hammer, but the arm wielding that armor isn't protected.

    The Picture of Brie does not reveal the cleavage of a 34DD heroine, a Barbie waist or a skirt short enough to show her panties. The only skin is her muscular abs; not skinny, emaciated abs. This is not skinny Salene or skinny Salt. This is what Gina Carano would be wearing if she were a super hero. You see those abs and you know you aint fighting a delicate flower. The idea that showing that abs reduces her to a singular, sexual object, is false. She can be sexy AND ...

    To me, frankly, its those people (not you, but a particular commenter on this post) who are so stringently opposed to the sexy heroine like above who come across as more judgmental towards woman. As if her beauty or her desire to show her beauty negates or invalidates any other quality. And it is those type of people who seem unwilling or incapable of considering such women more than just sex objects.

    And the reality is that the movies are now ripe with male action heroes showing gratuitous skin. I saw John Carter last night (free on cable mind you), and this big Hollywood production features a society with technology of flight and mechanized weaponry. Yet the male soldiers were practically shirtless. A quick google search revealed numerous male action figures without their shirt. Its fantasy. Jake Gyllenhal is the shirtless Prince of Persia, for christ's sake. Why can't the Man with the Iron Fist put on a shirt?

  • ,

    "free on cable"?

    You must have shinnied up the pole again. I'm turning you in, and hoping there's a reward for cable theft.

  • I get what you're saying and appreciate the response, but I still think you're off point, L.O.V.E. We're talking, here, specifically about a reinterpretation of the typically male/powerful Captain America into a female/sexy Captain America. It isn't about female superheroes not being allowed to be "sexy" but that it should be appropriately used -- wherein "appropriate" means within the correct context of character and story. A female Cap ought to be Cap first and female second, just like her male counterpart is considered. So, sexifying her outfit, only considered reasonable because she's a woman and that's the default, is wrong. Whether it's sexist or misogynistic or not, it isn't appropriate for that character.

    On the other hand, a Lady Iron Fist, because of the *original* costume design, would be inherently sexy -- if one finds the female form aesthetically pleasing, anyway. I'd still argue that she'd (and he'd) be better off with some Kevlar, but that's Iron Fist's prerogative, regardless of gender. As well, neither Iron Fist nor Captain America, nor Thor or probably any other male example that could be brought up, were designed to be obviously sexy like, say, probably every example of a female superhero that could be mentioned. (Let's go with Wonder Woman, Zatanna, and Psylocke just for the sake of balance.) Copping to the skintight costumes doesn't even really count, because that's simply a trope of the genre now and wasn't part of the first pulp heroes like Dick Tracy, Green Hornet, or the Shadow, but was always present for Miss Masque, Domino Lady, or any of the Cave/Jungle-themed heroines. (H/T to Google for those names.) The fact that Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth are comfortable without their shirts on doesn't take away from the fact that their characters' uniforms aren't designed to reveal skin, but character. Damned if Black Widow's zipper never goes above her cleavage, though.

    Superheroes can be attractive because, well, physically fit men and women in skintight costumes are generally attractive, and that look is obviously what people want in their funny books. The point is considering everything pertinent, and that includes how your audience will receive the image, when designing a character. For Captain America, it's supposed to be about being a hero, right, not a trip to the beach? What could have been an empowering image, and still is in many respects, on top of being expertly done Photoshop is marred by an easily avoidable cliche. The fact that the art is so technically brilliant probably makes the failure to live down expectations even more dispiriting for those bothered by it than if it were a simple sketch or drawing. All that time spent and the point of the entire exercise was totally missed. (Much like this conversation? Touche.)

    And I've seen Haywire. That movie didn't shy away from Carano's sex appeal at all, but I don't remember her wearing a belly shirt when she geared up for her final mission, either. Just sayin'.

  • Oh, and curse you for making me write that much on this topic. I'm done now. Harrumph.

  • FrayedMachine

    Uhm actually no? If anything it doesn't make sense that they still have his pants on since I believe the needles were injected throughout his entire body. They likely kept his pants on for fear that a lot of the male audience would turn away over the view of another dudes junk (eeeewwwwww)

    Also no, my critique isn't misplaced. It doesn't -have- to be real. Someone created it, it's out on the internet, it's open for critique. Nothing that anyone ever puts out there, especially if it's Art or Design related is immune to critique. This is how people grow, and this is also how people learn to not make the same god damn stupid cliched mistake.

    Who cares if Alison Brie has no issue with showing cleavage? That's her choice, that's her perogative. I'm totally fine with showing of my twins a little bit every now and then, too. No one's complaining about when a women CHOOSES to show off her body. People are complaining when people assume that this is, by default, how a woman, especially a woman who's supposed to be exemplifying strength and power, is depicted. It's cliche. It's dumb. People are sick of it. Boohoo. Sorry that hurt your feelings.

    And no, it's not just that they're abs. It's that they make no sense. Like I've stated in another reply, they actually went out of their way in the new Captain America design to show that his abdomen of godly glory is protected.

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-72sD...

    Look at the bullet proof like material provided in his design. It shows that even with these added bonuses to his strength, he is still capable of being horribly wounded, therefor his outfit is designed TO MAKE SENSE. Not just to appeal to all the swooning fan girls who are attracted to him regardless because he doesn't have to depend on constantly showing off skin or wearing something inherently sexy to be an appealing character.

    So baw. Baw boohoohoo. You don't like someone calling out the sexist cliche bullshit. Wait for me to cry for you.

  • Zen

    Thoughts exactly. Brie would have looked great in the same costume that was represented in the movie. It didn't need to be overtly sexualised - surely a figure-hugging suit would do enough to titillate. She's supposed to be in uniform. It's another case of function over form that tends to befall the female supes rather than the males.

  • Lord Otter-Blotter

    [there's an edit button :p]

  • Zen

    By which I mean form over function. Ugh.

  • FrayedMachine

    Which baffles me more because uh. revealing vulnerable organs what? Talk about shittiest super hero move ever.

blog comments powered by Disqus