The Bold Type

One of my favorite shows that premiered this summer is The Bold Type. I hadn’t really heard too much about the show prior to its premiere, but a friend suggested I watch it because it seemed right up my alley and she was absolutely right. On the night of the 2-hour premiere, my sister and I put on our pajamas and settled in for a girl’s night and The Bold Type did not disappoint! I’m excited about this show and think it contains a lot of important messages.  

So, what exactly is The Bold Type about? According to IMDb:

The Bold Type is inspired by the life of "Cosmopolitan" editor in chief, Joanna Coles. The show is a glimpse into the outrageous lives and loves of those responsible for a global women's magazine. Their struggles are about finding your identity, managing friendships and getting your heart broken, all while wearing the perfect jeans to flatter any body type.

The show centers on three main women: Kat, Jane, and Sutton, who work for a popular women’s magazine called Scarlet. Each girl faces their own set of problems. Kat, the social media director, is discovering that she may be bisexual when she finds herself attracted to the Muslim model she works with in the pilot episode. Jane has just been promoted as a writer for the magazine and has to search for inspiration and fight to be heard. Sutton, who remains an assistant at Scarlet, wants to branch out and experiment with new departments, specifically fashion, at the magazine. The three girls are extraordinarily close and serve as one another’s support system. Each girl is headstrong, intelligent and driven.

As Karey Burke, the executive vice president of programming and development at Freeform, said in an interview to Variety: “The Bold Type is our love letter to modern feminism and aims to be a destination for authentic female friendship and empowerment.” 

After watching the episodes that have aired thus far, I can say that the message has been delivered effectively. When I watch the show, it feels very authentic and definitely empowering for females. It is very feminist without coming across as “preachy” or over-the-top. I love it!  

One of the reasons I find The Bold Type to be an important television show is because it deals with a lot of significant issues going on in society in a tasteful way. The show writers do an amazing job of addressing tough topics.The show touches on matters of race, sexuality, feminism, and identity.

Obviously, no show is perfect and there have been some critiques that The Bold Type could be more inclusive in terms of diversity with the main and supporting cast. It could also be more realistic in its representation of junior-level staff. For example, an article on Bustle mentions that “there's the mystically large salary of the early-career media professional. The Bold Type characters haven’t mentioned where in New York they're living or how far it is from the office, but Jane and Sutton do live together in an apartment that doesn't scream downtown Manhattan.”

Another great aspect of The Bold Type is that it pushes back against stereotypes of women in the workforce. The three main girls wear fashion-forward pieces that could be deemed “inappropriate” for an office environment. Kat wears a crop top in one episode, Jane sports an all leather look, and Sutton struts around in a semi-transparent top. These are not looks typically seen for the business casual category but I think they work really well and I would categorize them as appropriate for their specific work environment. 

Additionally, the show fights back against the cunning and manipulative female boss often seen in television shows. In an article written by TVGuide,

The erasure of any kind of nurturing or compassionate femininity is a very real thing in the business world for women who want to climb the ladder, and it's something that's seeped its way onto TV. The purpose of female characters like this is two-fold: one, a harpy woman creates a funny and yet challenging obstacle for our compassionate and girlish main character to overcome; two, it reinforces the idea that for a woman to succeed in a man's world, she must become cold, calculating and heartless. 

Watson says that this mentality is something that older generations of working women recognize as normal behavior, which is exactly the kind of mold she wanted to break with The Bold Type.

The article goes on to state that:

This depiction of a powerful, beautiful and well-balanced woman is where The Bold Type really thrives. By creating these supportive female dynamics in the workplace that feel instantly intimate, we get to see women who have personal lives in the office, and outside of it, too.

As Matt Seitz said for Vulture:

It’s part journalism drama, part Sex and the City–style female-bonding comedy with sex and romance; it’s equally interested in being both things at once, to the best of its ability, and damned if it doesn’t pull it off more often than you’d think.

Right now, on RottenTomatoes, The Bold Type has a 100% rating. This is mostly due to the fact that it does not have a lot of critical response because it’s still fairly new, but I’m certain it will continue to maintain a high rating. The Bold Type is on Freeform (previously known as ABC Family) every Tuesday night at 9pm (Eastern time).

I highly recommend giving this show a chance. As both a feminist and entertainment enthusiast, I find the show to be extremely well done and entertaining. I’m excited to see where the show goes and will continue to read critical response to it. I think it’s an important show because of the topics it deals with and the way it handles matters of representation.

Check-up on My Wikipedia Post

A couple weeks back I wrote about a Dutch film I saw (A Question of Silence) and mentioned that I updated the Wikipedia page to include a better summary of the film. My original post can be found here.

I decided to check in with the Wikipedia page to see if my changes were still intact and they were! I'm proud I was able to contribute to this page and that my additions to the summary are still there. If you're interested in film, I recommended heading over to the Wikipedia page to see what it's about.

The Bechdel Test

At my last internship for an independent film production company, I was given a lot of research assignments. During one particular assignment, I stumbled upon The Bechdel Test. The video I included in this post lays out the basic background, rules, and explanation of the test. 

So, as the video discussed, it's a pretty basic test. There are only 3 things a film must include in order to pass.

1. Are there 2 or more women?
2. Do they talk to each other?
3. Do they talk about something other than a man? 

One point I found to be very important from the video was the statement that this test is not meant to serve as a way for testing if a film is feminist or not. It is about measuring the presence of women in films. I thought she made a strong argument when she referred to it as a "systemic test." The phrase is used to show that films are typically made about men rather than women. (I think it is worth stating here that a film can still be great and fail the test). Her examples of films that do not pass the test were really strong in my opinion because it displayed a mix of recent and older films. This conversation has been going on for years and it's surprising how many films made today still do not pass the test.

However, women are not the only group being left out of films; there are minority groups that get even less screen time. It's always shocking to me that in 2017 we are still having so many discussions about diversity in films.

Something I have thought about since learning about The Bechdel Test is if there are similar tests for the other, more underrepresented groups in Hollywood films. Also, should we be testing television and streaming services? Does one platform produce more diverse content than the others? These are just some of the questions I have wondered and wanted to share.  I do not think too much trust should be put into the test because the issues of representation are deeper than who appears on screen. It's a good place to start but equality, in my opinion, needs to start behind the scenes.

5 Reasons to See Wonder Woman

Superhero stories are a major trend in Hollywood right now. On television, superheroes dominate The CW with The Arrow, The Flash, Supergirl, and Legends of Tomorrow. Netflix released a few originals with superhero protagonists such as Luke Cage and Jessica Jones. In the film industry, everywhere you look a new superhero movie is ready to be the next big blockbuster. Whether it’s from the Marvel or the DC universe, superheroes are the hot new trend.

At the start of the summer, a new superhero was introduced to the big screen: Wonder Woman. Though Wonder Woman has been around for about 75 years, she is new to Hollywood. The Wonder Woman film has been considered a huge success and it’s all for a good reason. I’ve listed below the top 5 reasons why everyone should go see Wonder Woman.

1. It has a female protagonist, who is a superhero! This is such a rare occurrence in Hollywood that I had to include it on my list.
2. Patty Jenkins, the director, just became the most successful female to direct a live-action film in Hollywood. This is huge for the industry and goes to show that women can make successful films when given the chance.
3. Gal Gadot (Wonder Woman), gives a stellar performance. Her character, Diana is well developed, strong, and relatable to anyone, not just women.
4. It has a 92% rating on RottenTomatoes.
5. Lastly, the film talks about important, larger issues in the world without sounding preachy.

Wonder Woman is a movie that will, hopefully, serve as the start to the inclusion of more diversity and representation in Hollywood. I know it’s an ambitious thought, but I have hope. If you haven’t seen the movie yet, you should! Even if you simply go to watch the stunning cinematography, it is worth it. 

Wikipedia of A Question of Silence

Recently, I watched a really interesting Dutch feminist film called A Question of Silence. I thought the film was so fascinating and wanted to read more on it so I began where most people start their searches: Wikipedia. When I got on the website, I noticed the plot summary of the film was very short and did not include a lot of information. It looked like this:

Housewife Christine M. tries to shoplift some merchandise from a boutique in a shopping mall but is caught by the male shopkeeper. Christine and two other customers, waitress Annie and secretary Anna, beat the man to death, witnessed by a large group of other female shoppers. They are tried with murder and deny the plea of insanity that the male prosecutor and judges assume they should plead. The female criminal psychiatrist assigned to ascertain their level of sanity comes to identify with the women's situations and concludes that they are not insane but have been driven to murder by the strain of living in a patriarchy.

This plot contained wrong information about the secretary's name and did not include the psychiatrist's name despite her large role in the film. I decided to expand the plot summary and fix the characters' names. With my changes the plot summary now looks like this:

Christine is a housewife, who does not speak. Her husband works while she stays home with their three children. Andrea is an executive secretary in an office predominantly run by men. Annie is a jolly waitress at a local café. These three women have never met before until one day in a dress boutique. Christine attempts to shoplift a dress by slipping it into her bag. She is approached by the male owner of the store. After refusing to return the garment, Andrea and Annie join Christine in a circle around the man. Together, the three women brutally murder him as a group of women stand and silently but attentively watch. 

Female criminal psychiatrist, Janine, is appointed to the case of these three women by the court to determine if they are sane or crazy. Janine takes the time to get to know each woman and their story. None of the three will say why they committed the crime, Janine comes to realize they were fed up with the strain of living in a patriarchy. After much deliberation, she concludes that they are all sane and finds herself identifying with them. Eventually tensions rise between Janine and her husband because he worries her statement in court will ruin his reputation. 

The court date arrives and Janine gives her professional opinion that the three women are in fact sane and that the court should take into consideration that the owner of the boutique was a male. Despite the prosecutors attempts to get her to change her opinion, she stands her ground. When the prosecutor suggests that the crime would have still happened if the owner were a woman, Christine, Andrea, Annie, Janine and the other women who witnessed the crime all laugh and exit the courtroom.

When writing my summary, I wanted to stay away from a lot of major spoilers and deep analysis of the film. Though it is a rich film that provides for an interesting analysis, I thought a simple, but extended, plot summary was the best way to go. I also didn't want my edit to be too lengthy because then it's more a full synopsis. The page now features a more detailed plot summary so visitors can either jog their memory of key plot points from the film or determine if they even want to watch it.