Clueless: Representation Test

The 1995 film Clueless, gives Jane Austen’s novel a satirical look on teenagers in a Beverly Hills high school. Cher and her best friend Dionne are both upper-class girls and are at the highest on the popularity scale at their school. Cher decides to use her popularity for good throughout the film. She brings together her two introverted teachers and helps the geeky new student Tai get as popular as herself. After comparing this film against the representation test, Clueless earned eight points, which put the film at the “B” range.

The representation test is separated into six different categories. The first category pertains to women. Clueless scored four points in this category. The protagonist of this film is Cher as it centers around her life and every scene involves her. The film also earned a point for including a woman of color in speaking who was not reduced to racial stereotypes. The character Dionne, Cher’s best friend, is African American and was not presented in stereotyped manner in the film. The final point this film earned in the women section was that it passed the Bechdel Test. There are numerous scenes where Cher and Dionne and talk about school work and shopping. Although there is a lot of talk about men, the few scenes that don’t help this film pass the test.

There are several criteria in the women section Clueless fell short on. The protagonist, Cher, is not a woman of color nor over the age of 45. Also, the film does not include women in speaking roles with diverse body types. All the women in the movie are slim and fit teenagers. Although Cher is strong female character, the film did not earn a point for the criteria, “Does the film represent women as more than “objects for the male gaze”?”.  The whole film Cher is altering others looks to get the attention of men. Also, there is a scene where Cher herself is trying to get the attention of the new guy in school. She shares her secrets such as drawing attention to her mouth and showing skin. Cher says that by showing skin it, “reminds them [men] of being naked and then they think of sex.”

In the men section, Clueless was one criterion short of earning all four points possible. The film avoided glorifying violent men as none were seen. Cher stands her ground against the men that come on to her. For example, Elton tries to kiss her multiple times while in the car and never once did she let him get his way. The film also earned a point for avoiding perpetuating an extreme and unhealthy body ideal for men. All men in the film had an average body size for males. The third point in this category was rewarded because the film included a man in a non-stereotypical role. Cher’s father is her only parent figure in the film. He is the one that interacts with her about grades, driving, boys and such. Since many times women are seen as the main caregiver, the films offers a different view on the gender roles related to parents.

The film also did not earn any points for the LGBT people and people with disabilities categories. However, the film was written and directed by a woman so it earned two bonus points for aspect.

The only criteria that the film did not meet in the men section was regarding the question “Does the film include one or more men of color, in speaking roles, who are NOT reduced to racial stereotypes?” The film did not earn this point because of the presence of the character Murray, an African American man. Murray is introduced in the film with his loose pants hanging down to his feet and talking in a vernacular or slang that is stereotypical of African Americans. Because of this, the film did not earn the point in the race, ethnicity and culture category which asked, “Does the film avoid celebrating offensive racial, ethnic, and cultural stereotypes?”.

In my opinion, the Representation Test is a fair scoring system and should continue to be used along with the Bechdel Test. The Representation Test is should be used along with the Bechdel test because the issues in films are not only the lack of representation and stereotyping of women. Films also tend to trivialize certain groups such as people of color and with disabilities along with the LGBT community. This test elicits a spark in conversation about representation both on and behind-the-scenes is the next step towards in getting a wider range of representation of all groups of people. According to Joy Schaefer from the International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, women only accounted for 15% of protagonist, 29% major characters and 30% of speaker characters in 2013’s top 100 grossing films. What’s even more surprising is that these numbers have barely changed since 1940s. Because of the underrepresentation of women and other groups in films in this day of age, us as viewers should continue to advocate for change. For this reason, the Representation Test is relevant.

I am giving Clueless three out of five pickles. Although the film has a good representation of women and men, the film fell short in incorporating other group of races, LGBT community and people with disabilities. 

Evil Dead: Representing Humanity (And Inhumanity)

Evil Dead:Representing Humanity (And Inhumanity)  

Curiosity can kill you; literally. In Fede Alvarez's 2013 adaptation of Evil Dead, a group of teen friends stumble into a death trap, with seemingly no way out. The clique decides to spend the weekend together in an old, run-down cabin in the woods. What better place to have a reunion? One of the young women, named Mia, is a drug-user, and with the support of her friends she vows to quit. But after a very weird series of events, a hidden basement is discovered, filled with voodoo, witchcraft, and a tattered book. They all disregard its significance, and unknowingly summon an evil force... straight from hell. 

Stereotypes are everywhere. We as a society need them to survive, but have we gone too far? Is the media failing to address all different types of people? The Representation Test was created to challenge films, and the types of people that are chosen to represent those films. The project itself states the reasoning for the test stems from an "effort to change the limiting culture of Hollywood, which continues to fail to represent the full spectrum of humanity, we’re proud to introduce The Representation Test – a media literacy tool that grades films on how well they challenge the status quo." (therepresentationproject.org) The test awards points to films that avoid damaging stereotypes, and think beyond the scope of cultural limitation. I will be analyzing Evil Dead in light of this vision.

First off, I'd like to point out the fact that the 5 friends in Evil Dead are literally the only human beings present throughout the entire film. So although there is a limited number of people to represent in the first place, I'd say that the group is somewhat diverse. Now, let's look at the specifics. Will it pass the Representation Test?

According to the results, Evil Dead earns a total of 7 points, narrowly receiving a B grade on the test. Three out of five characters in the film are women, representing a majority. (To be honest, the 'demon' in the film also seems to be a woman, but I won't consider this because I'm not 100% positive on that...) So, I don't see any problem here. In fact, I think that the film did a really swell job of balancing genders in the movie. In addition, I really think that the movie uses ethos in a powerful way of representing the characters. The whole film runs on adrenaline, scare factors, and the like. In this way, it avoids stereotyping its characters. As Lunsford agrees in Everything's An Argument, "sometimes emotions can support the legitimate claims you hope to advance." (Lunsford, 452)

There is one woman, out of the five total characters, who is African-American. Again, considering the movie only has five characters to work with, this isn't a bad representation at all! There is no reference to her race, there is no stereotype associated with it. She is not reduced, she is just there, as a character, trying to fight an evil demon, no big deal. This is what I love about horror movies; there's no focus on trying to be funny, and there's not much romance. Not that I don't enjoy those things, but it's just refreshing to see them absent. The plot of Evil Dead is so imaginative, that it stays away from stereotypes in general. Yes, the characters all make unbelievably stupid decisions, and get themselves into a boatload of trouble with the 'demon of the dead,' but I feel like there is no pressure to judge people.

In Evil Dead, there are no people who identify themselves as being LGBT. This is one instance where the film is lacking. Thus, it does not get any points in this category of the Representation Test. There are also no people with a handicap, or any sort of physical disability. (unless you consider Mia ripping her own arm off a disability) Although, I would like to comment on the fact that Mia is a drug addict. Is this stereotypical? I think not. The film portrays Mia is being a cute, happy girl who happens to have a really unfortunate problem. The friends try and help her out, to overcome the addiction in an attempt to be positive. So I like what the film decided to do there.

One other point of insufficiency has to do with the body types of the characters. Every single character (out of the five) is a pretty attractive person. The women are thin, and very good-looking. The men are decently athletic, as well. So for the most part, the film does a bad job, because it is unrealistic in portraying all of the friends as being super appealing to the eye. I will say, though, that the characters are diverse in how they appear. Mia has dark brown hair, her brother David has light brown hair, his girlfriend Natalie has blonde hair, Olivia is African-American and has dark brown hair, and Eric has long, wavy, muddy blonde hair and glasses. In my perspective, this cast does vary in a sense.

While I personally have an 'everybody should love everybody' type of outlook on life, I think that the Representation Test's aims are unrealistic, and over-the-top. It just seems like it's trying too hard. I love the message, and I agree that all types of people should be positively represented in motion pictures: no matter what gender, race, class, age, sexual orientation, or disability the person may have. But life isn't equal. It never is; not in school, not in the workplace, nor in communities. There will always be a college, or a company, or a town, that has more Caucasian people than African-Americans, or vice versa. This is true most of the time, so I think it's just a little silly to think that we have to always make sure everyone in a film is different and displayed as so. On the other hand, I do believe that directors should aim, if they feel it's necessary, to provide a diverse cast, obviously if each person is the best for their perspective role. I only say this because I notice that if people are more represented, then we will recognize their 'differentness' and be more educated and in-tune to eliminate stereotypes and make healthy judgments on other people. Evil Dead doesn't really do anything to eliminate stereotypes, or enhance diversity, but it doesn't do anything negative, per say. 

Unfortunately, Evil Dead is a difficult film to analyze in light of the Representation Test! However, there were a few notable things to comment, on and so I award the movie 3 pickles. Evil Dead earned a solid B grade on the Representation Test, and embodies the appeals with a fair, unprejudiced standpoint on its characters.

Bull's D

           Bull's D

           Bull Durham is a classic baseball film directed by Rom Shelton in 1988.  In this movie, “Crash” Davis is the protagonist, and is sent down to advanced A-ball to help mentor a new young prospect with a lot of potential.  This prospect’s name is Ebby LaLoosh, and is as stubborn as the worst of us.  The entire movie take place in one summer, which highlights the relationship between Crash and Ebby and the progress he makes as a ball player, but also the progress they both make off the field with the prospective “cleat chasers”. 

            The Representation Test is designed to test a movies ability to touch a broad spectrum of cultures and races.  When I put Bull Durham up against this test, it does not fair well with a solid score of a D.  The test is broken up into six different categories; Women, Men, Race, Ethnicity, and Culture, LGBT People, People with Disabilities, and Bonus Points. 

            In the Women portion of this test, Bull Durham scored zero points.  This is not honestly a surprise considering that this was filmed back in 1988, and takes place in about that point in time.  Women did not star in that many movies back then, and even more so, there was not a woman to date that had starred in a sports related movie.  And if there had not been a white woman who had starred up to that point, the idea of a woman of color starring is ludicrous.  In fact, the only roles that black woman played in this film are purely as background characters, there was not one meaningful line said by a woman of color.  In one of the opening scenes of the movie, Ebby is having sex with Millie, the manager’s daughter.  The film is also quick to point out that Annie picks a different ball player every summer to sleep with.  Within the first 5 minutes of the film, women are already objectified as “objects for the male gaze”.  For the entire duration of the film, the lives of the women completely revolve around the men’s agenda.  The protagonist in the film is a male, but there is a strong female role played by Susan Sarandon.  Even though the film did not receive a point for this, she is around the age of 45 and many may consider this one a judgment call on whether or not it deserves a point.  The last question in this section includes, “does it pass the Bechdel Test?”  This test features two or more women, who must talk about something other than a male character.  And once again, this movie fails the test.  Because the women’s lives are centered on the male characters in the film, all they talk about with each other is other males.  Although this one may be a judgment call as well, seeing as they do talk a lot about baseball.  Some would argue that baseball is played by a group of men, so they are still talking about the male gender, but some would say that baseball is a game, and it doesn’t matter who is playing it. 

            Next up on the test is the Male section.  Bull Durham did manage to scrape up one point from this category.  This point was from “Does the film avoid perpetuating and extreme and unhealthy body ideal for men?”  Because the main characters in the movie are all professional baseball players, they make a living on how well in shape they are.  It is no surprise that all of the males in the film are in great shape.  There are only a few scenes in this film in which they show angry baseball players throwing equipment and cursing through the air. These few scenes, though they may seem minor, give off the perception that is this okay to do.  Another judgment call on this one, but in my opinion I think that the little kids who see this violence occur will feel inclined to imitate them.  And because this movie has done so well in the box office, the citizens who have seen it obviously have no issue with it.

            The film does avoid celebrating “offensive racial, ethnic, and cultural stereotypes.”  There are small amounts of praying and references to the Christianity religion, but no stereotypes occur in which are offensive to any culture.  And because of this, Bull Durham gains another point from this section of the test. 

            The next section focuses on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender roles within a movie.  There are no characters in the film that fit this description and the movie does not gain a point from this section.

            There are also no characters in this film with any sort of disability.  Once again the protagonist is a professional baseball players and heavily relies on his body to make a living.  No points are received from this section as well. 

            As for the last section, a white male directs the movie, whom is straight, and does not have any sort of disabilities.  Because this does not fit any of the bonus questions, no points are received. 

            I believe that this film does not get a fair rating from The Representation Test.  A D seems a little low for such a classic of a movie.  A lot of these questions came down to personal opinion, such as “does the film avoid glorifying violent men.”  If the text could manage to be more specific, then I believe that this scoring system would be more effective. 

            Bull Durham is going to receive two pickles for failing the Representation Test.  The only reason that this film did not receive one pickle is because I think the test is open for interpretation, and needs some improvements.    

Shooter should shoot a little higher towards Representation

It was no surprise that the movie I chose, Shooter did not pass the Representation Test. The plot line of the movie consists of a man who was in the military and his skill was to be the best at shooting at extremely long distances. He was the best too, but he fell into solitude in the mountains when his country turned on him and left him whilst under fire with his best friend dead next to him. Some men come showing up to his house to asking him to plan an assassination on the president so that they could prevent him, but once again his country had turned on him and ended up setting him up for an assassination attempt on the president and for murdering the Arch Bishop of a country they were striving towards peace with. The rest of the movie he spends trying to prove his innocence, and trying to get revenge on the men who set him up.

Before he could do that, however, he needed to get treated for gun shot wounds. Remembering that his best friend’s wife was in nursing school at the time that he died, Bob Lee Swagger showed up at her house to get treated. Turns out she had stopped nursing school when her husband died and she was now a third grade teacher, but even so she treated Swagger in her house with common house hold items bought at the grocery store. She was there to help, not just there for “objects for the male gaze.” She does happen to get kidnapped in only a bra and pants and there are a couple scenes with her wearing that, but for the most part of the movie she is dressed in conservative clothing and she is more portrayed as the innocent type since she is a third grade teacher.

There is one woman that is African American and although she did not appear often, she had some speaking roles and she worked for the FBI giving off the impression that she is a woman of power.

This movie is a difficult one to get some diversity of men’s body types in it because the protagonist was in the military so he is obviously going to be extremely fit. He was in great shape, being able to take down men while harshly injured. Also, because he had been framed for an attempted assassination on the president, the rest of the men in the movie were all agents of some sort and in good shape. If they were not in good shape, then they were old men who were either extremely skinny, or very fat (AKA the senator).

This movie was very big on glorifying violent men. The senator was very violent because he killed off an entire village just to put a pipeline through it. The Colonel (the only man of color in the film) had helped to kill them off, had men working for him that were very violent, had framed Swagger, got Swagger’s girl kidnapped, and used one of his men as bait knowing very well he would die. And of course swagger was a violent man because he had to kill to prove his innocence and get revenge, and his profession was shooting people at distances.

The movie did not have any LGBT People in it, and the only person with a disability was the man used as bait. He had a very important role in the movie because he was a key part of proving Swagger’s innocence, but more importantly his disability was a key part of his role in the movie, making it to where a point could not be added to The Representation Test.

Lastly, the man who directed it was a person of color, and what is interesting is that the man who had a disability in the movie was a co-writer. But, due to me being at an airport right now with extremely restricted Wi-Fi that blocks any website with a picture on it, I have no ability to find out if he is truly disabled or not. Shooter, as a movie, I would give 5 pickles because it is my favorite movie, but based off of The Representation Test, this movie would get about 1 ½ pickles, especially since it only made a C on The Representation Test.

I personally do not believe in The Representation Test or the Bechtel Test. I get that they are trying to help to achieve women’s rights, or equality for all, but that isn’t going to sell. People want to see attractive actors falling in love. Men want to see girls with great bodies, and women want to see men with even better bodies. It’s how movies sell and that wont change. What can change is making them both successful, and that is happening in movies. Having good looks will not make women less equal then men, but having these girls with good looks play dumb will. Its not the actual actresses that are setting men and women apart, it is the role that they play that does this. And that is why I like this movie and the main actress in it. She is smart, beautiful, and healthy looking. Swagger goes to her for help, and she saves his life. The other main woman is a high authority figure in the FBI. She is also very fit, and beautiful, and I don’t see how this could be a problem for society.