![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
You might remember Charmed back in the 90's with three witch sisters, it aired at the same time as Buffy and was very popular. I see bits of Charmed because it airs right before re-runs of Supernatural.
Now, why this show does not work for me. First off, the idea of three sisters who are witches who are stronger together than apart and live in a cool Victorian house is not a bad concept. However, by having them be biological sisters, you get three WASPY chicks, (size 2) no idea of 'sisterhood' and you can't have someone of a different ethnic type or even body shape or age as a sister.
The women have no visible signs of income, they don't seem to have jobs, they prance about in designer clothes and perfect makeup. (this includes scenes where they get zapped off to different times, the past in particular where togas are accented by stilleto heels) Now if you were going with a campy Charlies Angels vibe, it might be fun, but the sisters are deadly ernest, even when riding naked ala Lady Godiva to protest the fact that the local coffeeshop won't allow them to breastfeed in public.
Hunting down and defeating evil seems to take second place to arguing with your magic/demon boyfriend about being stuck raising your two spawn on your own. Let's not mention that we are wealthy, live in a house with our sisters to babysit and hello, magic powers? It's not exactly the same as working 9-5 in a low wage job without child support.
Esthetically, the show could have used more location shooting, everything, including the fab house is an obvious set, and as for direction, when the gals use their magical powers, they simply stand together in a group, one or more raise their hands and 'zap' fairly small fireballs and that's the extent of 'fighting'
Just to compare with Supernatural, the boys get sweaty and dirty when they fight, they bleed when they are cut, the production spends time and effort on locations, even time on the god-awful-motel rooms the boys bunk in every show. Sam and Dean live in a very realized, detailed world, they hustle pool and steal credit cards to make their way as hunters, they have enough issues to fill the trunk of their impala. And I'll give a nod to Jared and Jensen for having a great chemistry as siblings. While Supernatural at times does not live up to the promise of its core concepts, it's got a great sense of humor, which leavens the incredible angst. (right now I am watching Sam deal with a Groundhog Day situation where he sees his brother Dean being killed over and over again in absurd ways, an episode written by Sera Gamble)
I identify personally more with the brothers of Supernatural, than the sisters of Charmed. Not that I don't find the boys attractive, but I'd rather BE THEM, despite the lousy bar food, the lousy motel rooms, the lousy life of pretty much death and despair. I don't doubt that they are heroes. So,we need these shows with female characters.
Aside: the actors of Supernatural are predominately male, and I find SPN has a predominately female fanbase, which surprised me a bit, I thought it's main appeal was to boys and young men. There have been a few good female characters on the show (Jo, Ellen, Jodi, Pamela) regrettably, all but one have died, but then, everyone dies on this show. And there have been awful female characters (Ruby no 1, Bela) but they haven't been forgettable either.
Are there a Buffy and a Xena around for young girls these days? (and I haven't seen Hunger Games to gauge it's female lead, we watch Battle Royale in our house)
Now, why this show does not work for me. First off, the idea of three sisters who are witches who are stronger together than apart and live in a cool Victorian house is not a bad concept. However, by having them be biological sisters, you get three WASPY chicks, (size 2) no idea of 'sisterhood' and you can't have someone of a different ethnic type or even body shape or age as a sister.
The women have no visible signs of income, they don't seem to have jobs, they prance about in designer clothes and perfect makeup. (this includes scenes where they get zapped off to different times, the past in particular where togas are accented by stilleto heels) Now if you were going with a campy Charlies Angels vibe, it might be fun, but the sisters are deadly ernest, even when riding naked ala Lady Godiva to protest the fact that the local coffeeshop won't allow them to breastfeed in public.
Hunting down and defeating evil seems to take second place to arguing with your magic/demon boyfriend about being stuck raising your two spawn on your own. Let's not mention that we are wealthy, live in a house with our sisters to babysit and hello, magic powers? It's not exactly the same as working 9-5 in a low wage job without child support.
Esthetically, the show could have used more location shooting, everything, including the fab house is an obvious set, and as for direction, when the gals use their magical powers, they simply stand together in a group, one or more raise their hands and 'zap' fairly small fireballs and that's the extent of 'fighting'
Just to compare with Supernatural, the boys get sweaty and dirty when they fight, they bleed when they are cut, the production spends time and effort on locations, even time on the god-awful-motel rooms the boys bunk in every show. Sam and Dean live in a very realized, detailed world, they hustle pool and steal credit cards to make their way as hunters, they have enough issues to fill the trunk of their impala. And I'll give a nod to Jared and Jensen for having a great chemistry as siblings. While Supernatural at times does not live up to the promise of its core concepts, it's got a great sense of humor, which leavens the incredible angst. (right now I am watching Sam deal with a Groundhog Day situation where he sees his brother Dean being killed over and over again in absurd ways, an episode written by Sera Gamble)
I identify personally more with the brothers of Supernatural, than the sisters of Charmed. Not that I don't find the boys attractive, but I'd rather BE THEM, despite the lousy bar food, the lousy motel rooms, the lousy life of pretty much death and despair. I don't doubt that they are heroes. So,we need these shows with female characters.
Aside: the actors of Supernatural are predominately male, and I find SPN has a predominately female fanbase, which surprised me a bit, I thought it's main appeal was to boys and young men. There have been a few good female characters on the show (Jo, Ellen, Jodi, Pamela) regrettably, all but one have died, but then, everyone dies on this show. And there have been awful female characters (Ruby no 1, Bela) but they haven't been forgettable either.
Are there a Buffy and a Xena around for young girls these days? (and I haven't seen Hunger Games to gauge it's female lead, we watch Battle Royale in our house)
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-30 03:15 pm (UTC)I've always identified with male characters (and character archetypes -- I've always been a huge action and western movie fan) more than with female ones, and yeah, it really doesn't help that TV women are often completely unrelatable because they're viewed less as individual people and more as feminine stereotypes (shoes! babies! dieting!) written from a male perspective.
Take a show like Game of Thrones, as contrast, which has completely relatable female characters, even though their circumstances are complete unlike one's own and the set-up of their world is extremely anti-feminist. They are just... people. With very individual goals and issues that are often influenced by their female roles, but just as often are not. That's how TV needs to be to make me care about and identify with women!
I haven't read The Hunger Games yet, but I did like the movie! The main character is awesome and would make a great role model for young girls!
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-30 04:17 pm (UTC)Have not seen season two yet, waiting for it to come out on DVD.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-30 05:30 pm (UTC)I don't know about TV shows with strong female role models but there are some good positive non-sexualised female video games role models that I have introduced some teen girls to recently.....and it's done WONDERS for their self-esteem because watching TV made them feel like ugly and fat, even though they are both svelte gymnasts and have boyfriends who adore them.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-30 08:29 pm (UTC)(and the person in my family who likes Charmed is my nephew, but he grew up watching Charmed with his mum)
T
Date: 2012-05-30 08:46 pm (UTC)Increasingly so characters are seen as more defined by their actions, personalities and their story rather than acting or looking a certain way just to remind the gamer every 10 seconds of the characters gender. This approach simply allows them to be more par with male or even genderless characters which appeals to both male AND female gamers.
The problem with the media is that they make money from shaping women (and men, but to a lesser extent) towards a certain consumer ideal. Ensuring women are reminded non-stop that they are women by adding in storylines about shoes/vanity/importance of being seen as sexy by men etc is good brainwashing material and ensures they keep on consuming. TV is tied to advertising, in video games the product to be consumed is the game itself....so its the story/experience that sells.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-30 06:17 pm (UTC)That said, I think what you describe is a Doylistic problem, not a Watsonian one -- female charactwers don't intrinsically lack the ability to be interesting, they're often just badly served by writers, etc.
I think The Hunger Games does this well, actually. (It's in the same genre as Battle Royale, but not at all the same thing.) And The Legend of Korra does it excellently.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-30 08:27 pm (UTC)Oh, yeah, I get that Hunger Games is not Battle Royale, the later film is much more in your face with kids killing other kids.
The daughter is really liking Korra, and I think the Airbender series did well with it's female characters, come to think of it, might be the only show where about 2/3 of all characters in it were female.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-31 12:44 am (UTC)