Tammy Totally Reps

               Tammy tells the hilarious story of a woman who has hit rock bottom is trying to find her out. Uncommonly, the solution to Tammy’s problems is not a man, but finding herself and saving her grandmother from herself. This idea seems almost radical considering its lack of feature on the big screen.  A mix of this idea and untraditional and non-stereotypical characters, Tammy passes the Representation Test with flying colors scoring a high A (13 points), which measures a film’s societal impact or commitment to change.

               Tammy checks off most of the boxes on the Representation Test, but gains most of its points from the Woman section. In reality, the film is very woman oriented with all main characters being female. Tammy, the protagonist of Tammy, is a female protagonist. She is not a woman of extreme beauty, fitness, or shape; in all honesty, not only is Tammy a non-stereotypical lead but she is also a very unfamiliar body type for the big screen especially for a woman.  Gaetti, from Understanding Movies agrees with the typical mold asserting, “good looks and sex appeal have always been the conspicuous traits of most film stars”. The idea of Tammy breaking all the common molds for women in film goes along with what the theme the storyline portrays: Tammy teaches that a women’s way out should not be a man and that in order to make something of yourself or to make your way up in life, your only option is solely to work hard. The film’s emphasis on this idea also helps Tammy check off the rep-test that a woman is not presented as solely an “object for male gazers.” Tammy is not bursting with sex appeal, but she is also funny and strong. The film also checks off “passing the Bechtel test” which mostly comes from the conversations of Tammy and her grandmother as they are learning about each other and helping each other to grow.

               In terms of men, Tammy does not check off as many. Tammy does avoid “glorifying violent men” and “perpetuating an extreme and unhealthy body ideal for mean”. However there is a general lack of men having conversation without a woman. Tammy has mostly main characters being female with the male holding supporting smaller roles. These supporting roles are rather untraditional making it able to mark off another rep-test. The man Tammy ends up with, Billy is an example of this. Billy takes after his parents including his father, who drinks too much, and his mother, who is very sick, even though they are both separated. He is an uncommon nice guy who is not extremely attractive or even remotely smooth. When trying to compliment her says “It’s not that you’re a catch, not that your not a catch, but my life is boring, and you’re not boring.” This exemplifies how Billy very much breaks the mold of what most men in film want from woman. Billy wants her for her personality not her looks. Tammy is also very representative for the LGBT People as the film features many lesbians, whom are very diverse, and whom are not reduced to stereotypes. An example of this is Lenore, the cousin of Tammy’s grandmother, whom the film gets to know very well. She not only is a main character but she also is a strong woman, who has made a life for herself, and teaches Tammy that ‘life isn’t fair” and that the only way to make it is to work hard. This promotes a very positive message for the lesbian community, as a lesbian is made to be hard working, intelligent, and in touch with the world which is not a typical role for lesbians in film. Tammy also checks off in Race, Ethnicity, and Culture as there are no celebrated offensive racial, ethnic, or cultural stereotypes but there are also not too many races featured in the movie. Lastly, the film does feature a person with diabetes whose “storyline [is] not limited to [her] disability.

          The Representation Test is supposed to measure a film’s contribution to change or cultural impact. In terms of Tammy the representation test is accurate in that it is very successful in representing most groups and presenting a positive image of those groups. This shows how in order to pass the test with a high score; a film must be very successful in representing many groups and elements very well. The more groups presented to a certain level, the higher the score. Essentially, the rep test asserts that if all films could include all the test’s diverse elements then a change in society would result. However, it is also possible that a film could be very successful in representing one group or category, and could change for that group.If each group were represented solely by a film, then all together they would also have cultural impact. This goes with the idea of “separate we fall, united we stand.” With many films specialized for change in different areas, all together they would successfully represent. But with the reptest if a film is very strong in presenting woman as equal to a man but lacks in many races, alternate sexuality, and disabilities, it will not score well. How can the test not grade a film that’s emphasis is on a commitment to change for woman in society well in cultural impact because it lacks in showing other groups? How could a film that represents gay men as being athletic not be graded high for its contribution to change because it does not feature females? Though the rep test grades well for movie with overall different groups, it disincentives producing a film that’s focus for change is society is centered only on one group. In evaluating films, it must be noted that society views many a year: not all films must contribute to change for all films, but all the films together must cause change for all groups.

               In closing, Tammy rocks because it shows a strong woman, teaches that a man is not the end goal, that you shouldn’t rob a fast food joint, no matter how desperate you are, and keeps you laughing the whole way through. And on top of all that, it asks for gender equality and acceptance of all people while passing the impossible rep test. Therefor I am giving Tammy 5 pickles.

 

Ashley Smith

Failing to Be a Test

Failing to Be a Test

            A movie that not only brings up racial issues, but also focuses on them the entire movie seems like it would easily pass the Representation Test, but putting the film through the test is no easy task. The test starts out with straightforward questions like “Is the protagonist a woman? 2 points” and “Is the protagonist a woman of color.” All simple questions that are black and white, but then the questions start to get a little tougher to answer. “Does the film avoid celebrating offensive racial, ethnic, and cultural  stereotypes?” Now how in the world do you answer that? But the hardest question to answer has to be “Does the film include men in non-stereotypical roles? (i.e. caregiver, competent involved parent, etc.)” This question is extremely hard to answer for 12 Years a Slave because the protagonist has many different roles. At first, he is an average businessman, living in the north where he is a free man. He takes care of his children and I would go as far as to call him a “competent involved parent.” He later then becomes enslaved when he is kidnapped and sold off to a plantation. Here, he falls into a stereotypical slave surrounded by many stereotypical white men who abuse him and the other slaves. But the question makes it hard to answer because it is not specific enough. At the beginning of the film, it seemed as if he did not fit the stereotypical black man of the time period. So because of this, does it get the checkmark for this question? I said no because of the vagueness. There were no characters that really broke the stereotypes of the time period. The next question up is “Does the film avoid celebrating offensive racial, ethnic, and cultural stereotypes?” Another tough question to answer for such a movie. The film seems to show how bad these racial, ethnic, and cultural stereotypes were in the time period. It doesn’t celebrate it, but rather embraces it and does a fantastic job of showing just how bad society was at one point. Through incredible amounts of ethos, pathos and logos, 12 Years a Slave breaks boundaries that bring up tough subjects like racism. The movie looked so real and the audience felt the frustration and pain Solomon Northup, the protagonist, went through. In Reading Arguments, it states people “create ethos in at least two ways- through the reputation they bring to the table and through the language, evidence, and images the use (Reading Arguments, p.52).” 12 Years a Slave uses the fact that it is a true story to build a ton of credibility and the audience judges the film knowing that these are real events that happened. All of this makes the film hit home and show how bad slavery really was. Because of all of this, there is no way to say the film celebrates “offensive racial, ethnic, and cultural stereotypes,” but it is also hard to say it avoids it either. Again,  I could not check the box next to this question because of how vaguely written it is.

            After some serious debate over some controversial  questions, scoring the film was complete. The grading chart goes as follows: F = zero points, D = one to three, C = four to six, B = seven to ten, A = anything above ten. A film that shows how awful racism and slavery is scored a seven. That’s a very weak B. Before actually going through the grading process, I expected 12 Years a Slave to easily score a high A, but did not see it going this low. On the test’s website, the Representation Project, they state the goal of the test to show how well a film “challenges the status quo.” They admit that it is not a perfect method, but a good guideline for people to use when deciding which Hollywood movies to support (The Representation Project). From that description, 12 Years a Slave seems like it did a fantastic job of challenging the status quo of today’s movie culture. Instead of selling sex and action, it presents a darker and harsher picture of humanity that was once a huge part of America. Not too many movies are pushing these boundaries at all. The website claims graded 12 Years a Slave and gave it a “high B” while stating that no Oscar nominee last year would have scored an A. I do recognize there is a lack of diversity when it comes to Hollywood, but this test is not the best way to show it. There are large flaws in the test, mainly the vagueness of the questions that make it hard to use, and it seems too small of a test. It’s hard to rate a movie’s diversity based off of sixteen short questions and four “bonus points” given based off of the diversity behind the camera. A large part of the making of the test was to show the lack of diversity that also occurs off screen with the directors and writers. If it is trying to show that, don’t make it four questions at the end and call it bonus. That right there takes away a lot of their argument. All in all, the test is a poor judgment for diversity in the film industry. I give it two pickles because it does get its point across of the misrepresentation of the real world.

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.