Bechdel Test vs Mako Mori Test
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- SUBSCRIBE for more videos
Find me here:
/ www
/ aithinne
/ rowans_room
In that case, come join us over at Ellipsis Book Group on Goodreads, where this month we’ll be reading The Miseducation of Cameron Post, and then discussing it on Sunday 22nd February at 6pm GMT at our monthly livestream on this channel.
/ ellipsis-book-group
Bechdel Test vs Mako Mori Test
Pros and Cons of the Bechdel Test and the Mako Mori Test. What are the tests for? Are they a good measure for how feminist a film is? What do they measure? How should be use them?
The Bechdel Test was an idea popularised by Alison Bechdel in her comic Strip "Dykes To Watch Out For" 30 years ago.
The Mako Mori Test was created on tumblr by chaila in 2013 in response to criticism of the film de Toro's Pacific Rim and of the lead Mako Mori (Rinko Kikuchi)
Both can be used to examine trends in female relationships on screen, and the prevalence of female storylines, but they are not without their critics.
Help us caption & translate this video!
amara.org/v/GXYS/
Stripping the Bechdel test of its origins also strips it of its intent. which was to portray lesbian erasure in media. Its is hard for a lesbian to watch a movie when the only conversations women have are about men. The test needs to still have the intersectionality it was made with.
Angela Is here : ¿so the criticism about "lesbian porn movies passing the test a bunch" would actually be the intent (but the implicit wish would be for non-pornographic representation)? Also omg I was wondering how the test would work in like all female films like whether it'd just be female tokens of patriarchal gender roles (like essentially having a sexist script but just casting all the male roles with women.)
It is quite weird how you can have a movie where several men talk to eachother or to women, about a bunch of things, yet no woman talking to another woman even if the setting would allow it. Everyone is used to it I guess, so it's not really something we think about. But once you start paying attention to it, it feels weird!
I agree. I like the Bechdel test as a guideline rather than hardfast rule though. I'm an author myself (not much of one but I'm trying), and in my experience it can depend on the story. For longer fic with a world of characters interacting it's a little silly not to have two women chat about something other than men. But in short fiction it gets a bit tougher, especially the more condensed a story gets. Short fiction might only have one or two characters after all and imply a lot more than show. Same with a movie that limits its perspective to one character's experience, and even more if it limits that further to only one or two days that character experienced. If it services the story, yeah add in some scenes that pass the BT, but if not and you add them you can kinda risk engaging in tokenism which is also problematic.
On a final note, the Bechdel Test is very limited in scope. It focuses on women, but there are other maginalized groups who receive similar treatment in stories (POC, LGBT+, etc). You can try to "Bechdel" every possible group into a story, but like I said, depending on the size and scope that might not be possible without sacrificing narrative integrity.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think your best bet is to write people honestly and consciously fight against bias. Use your own writing to try to understand people better who are outside your own group, what makes them human, what gets them off, less if what they do and think is right so much as why they do or think it, and so on. If you do that, you're going to explore the lives and interactions of diverse people by default and the result will be much more meaningful.
Lol sorry if that was an essay. I get a little carried away.
All stories, especially condensed ones, focus heavily on the main character. Most dialogue will be between protagonist A and side characters B, C, D, E, ... and if not, C and D for example tend to talk ABOUT protagonist A, because the story is, at its core about A. If A is male, it becomes obviously significantly more difficult to include meaningful, organic dialogue beween two female side characters about something unrelated. If A is female it's a cake walk. So if anything the Bechdel test indicates a lack of female leads, not a lack of good female characters in general.
It ruins a movie having women yap away. I like women as much as the next straight guy, I can have interesting conversations with them but have 2 of them start talking to each other the conversation becomes uninteresting. Perhaps it interests them, but not a wide audience. Even women don't like listening to other women talk in movies.
Its not really about setting but more about ratio of male to female cast and the nature of conversation that are predicated on character to push the plot forward.
@@jacob_ian_decoursey_the_author but what conversation that a man and woman talk and the conversations are about another woman or a woman in a conversation
I have a suggestion for an opposing test. The Buttercup test. If the female character(s) can be replaced with a potted plant without causing a total rewrite, it passes, and that's not good.
It's already there, it's called Kelly Sue Donnick's Sexy lamp test. Meaning can you literally replace a female character with a sexy lamp and can the plot still function? If the answer is yes then there's something wrong.
I have heard a similar test, called the Lamp Test, which essentially just uses a lamp instead of a potted plant. BUT--I then come across people who use this as a way of dismissing female characters as "Lamps" even if (to use one obvious example--Rey in the new STAR WARS films) they are clearly doing things in the plot no Lamp possibly could (like rescue a robot, fix and pilot a space craft, inspire some one to risk their life, etc.).
Does the Buttercup Test take its name from The Princess Bride?
@@DavidMacDowellBlue, we're obviously buying our lamps from the wrong store. :-P
In all seriousness, tying back in with the video, these "tests" are all very useful tools that, alone, can each tell us a little something about a story. But we should never take the result of a single quiz, of 1 to 3 questions, as a rigorous diagnosis. However, taken together as an ensemble, we might start to make a deeper, more meaningful conclusion in an attempt to answer, "Is this a GOOD story?" And it's great that a semi-serious reflection on a 30-year-old comic has helped to give us writers and consumers of media the awareness to really challenge the characters and plots of our stories.
Hawley Olsen of course not! shes great!
I’m still pretty attached to the bechdel test because why tf is it so hard to have two women talk about something other than a man? I feel like when films don’t pass it just shows how over centric the man was to the plot and the women no matter how feminist and kickass are still secondary players in the plot
Yes exactly, the bar is literally on the floor and still most movies don't pass
All stories, especially condensed ones, focus heavily on the main character. Most dialogue will be between protagonist A and side characters B, C, D, E, ... and if not, C and D for example tend to talk ABOUT protagonist A, because the story is, at its core about A. If A is male, it becomes obviously significantly more difficult to include meaningful, organic dialogue beween two female side characters about something unrelated. If A is female it's a cake walk. So if anything the Bechdel test indicates a lack of female leads, not a lack of good female characters in general.
@@Alias_Anybody That's a good observation.
I think it's a very important question to ask, but make sure you treat it as a question. “Why is it so difficult??” is a great question because it asks why movies fail so often, but it's also important not to assume that there's never a good answer.
Occasionally a movie comes that has a good answer. It may have been possible to change the movie to pass the Bechdel Test, but perhaps not without seriously altering parts of the story that have value.
The foremost example in recent memory always seems to be Gravity, since most of the movie is one woman and one supporting male character. Of course, for the purposes of queer theory, it's perfectly fair to point out that there's some attraction between the two, however mild.
Well every character that isnt the main character would be secondary to the plot that's how stories work.
I mean the Bechdel test was never meant to be some end-all-be-all rating of how feminist a movie was. Originally, it was meant to point out how hard it was for queer women to relate to movies--if women can't even speak to each other about stuff other than a man, how are wlw supposed to see themselves in these stories? It was also written kind of tongue-in-cheek, more jokey than serious. And I think even with the newer, more serious interpretations of it, it isn't a baseline on the feminist quality of individual movies. It works better as an indicator of how many movies lack this--quantity, not quality.
The problem is not that movies don't always pass it, the problem is that a vast majority of movies fail it. If most movies passed, it wouldn't be an issue at all, but the ratio of pass to fail is absurd.
Callie S of course, you could just watch nothing but Lesbian Porn and never have to worry about this again.
Thank you for pointing out that these tests aren't there to measure quality! Every time I see a conversation about the Bechdel test, I see people going 'I know it failed, but it's still a good film'. And it annoys me, because that's not the point! The point of the test is to point out how little women are represented in media.
Great video! I'd never heard of the Mako Mori Test, but I agree that it's a great idea, especially when used along side the Bechdel Test. I find that in my real life (and sometimes online) conversations it takes more than the Bechdel test, or at least a lot of explaining around the Bechdel test, to convince people that there's a problem with representation in media.
Library at the Edge of the World I find conversion conversations so draining... like trying to get people to the stage where they can see the problem is so hard. I think it's a defensive thing... like some people feel like it's a judgement on them as a man, or a white person, or a straight person etc that people are complaining that they are the majority of characters...rather than just acknowledging that they are and that there's space for everyone.
Absolutely! And with this attitude it's no wonder that authors and creators keep defaulting to main characters who are male, straight, cis and white (as a general rule).
What really annoys me lately is how much women's pain and torture are considered entertaining. Just look at crime series and horror and thriller movies. Most of them have really drawn out torture or chasing scenes where women are screaming and fearing for their lives (some even get set in all female environments, like Split) , but when was the last time you saw a man go through such drawn out scenes while crying and screaming and being hurt, without him being the hero who saves everyone. And of course with women it always gets turned sexual in some way. No one should want to watch rape scenes, but somehow they always manage to put a drawn out throwback scene in there somewhere.
Damn this comment was 2 years ago but it is relevant to me to this day. I've seen family members watch a lot of old action Filipino films. What honestly appalled me was the amount of r-pe scenes, I would be lucky to find one where a woman doesn't get r-ped. It's usually never quick and short as well, you are able to see them really struggle and weep. I wondered why so much movies needed to have that, was it that entertaining that a lot of movies needed to constantly depict it?
I know that one test for any minority to see if their character(s) is/are actual representation and not just the token minority character is to see if they were taken out completely, would the whole plot change, or just one tiny storyline within many others?
I think the Bechdel test is best used to evaluate culture (in film at least) as a whole than used for specific ones. If most films pass the reverse Bechdel test but not the Bechdel test, then we have a problem. But if one specific film does or does not, there could be many valid non-sexist reasons behind it.
Pizza Addict Precisely
not a mark of quality, a mark of Equality
One LGBT test me and my friends have used (that has probably been lifted from tumblr or somewhere but I can't remember) has been 1. There must be a named lgbt character who 2. Isn't in an abusive relationship (for example huge age gap, cheating) and 3. Doesn't die
I would argue that huge age gap isn't necesserly abusive, but it raises red flag so it really depends on a story and charcters.
Great video! I had never heard of the Mako Mori test before. Thanks for teaching me something new!
Yes! The key is working TOGETHER! I started watching this video sort of angry, because the title of the video says "vs", but you concluded the video by summing up my whole feminist agenda (in a nutshell): As we approach a feminist issue, we should work together, and not serve the people that want us women to fight each other. Only together, instead of crushing into the glass ceiling, while stepping on other women on our way up, we can LIFT the glass ceiling. Thank you for that.
I even made my own test I call it the Marlin and Dory test. Here's how it goes, The main lead characters are a male and female character who are not related. They stay together throughout the entire film. And by the end, they don't fall in love but still remain friends. This is mainly to send a message that men and women can be just friends and they don't have to fall in love.
Great video. Mind if I redirect all those that don't get the meaning of the Tests here?
I've seen a lot of misunderstandings on both of them online.
+Malcom Chase Go for it :)
Aw, this was wonderful. Awesome ^^
I do love that you made the point about the Bechdel Test being used as a measurement of any given movies feminism credentials when it shouldn't.
I will say, personally, I have a preference towards the Mako Mori test as I've always felt that the requirements to pass the test also happen to be the requirements of writing good characters (I remember the rule being 'character arc' rather than 'storyline' though). That being said, I've never felt that the Bechdel Test was inherently useless, but instead what its been used for has always bothered me.
Great video, I love your channel. ^-^
Personally, I can't see myself applying the Mako Mori test because of the very quickly mentioned Smurfette Principle. I'm over media, especially children's media, where there is one female character for girls to learn and attach to. As a kid, I was obsessed with the Power Rangers, not because I had seen the show beforehand and loved it. But because i found out that there were two girl rangers, pink AND yellow. AN OPTION, I LOST MY DAMN MIND.
Nicole Rusche Exactly, I think the difference in the number of male to female characters in shows or movies is worth the discussion, one of the reasons I really like She-ra lol, how refreshing to have it the other way around for once, I think there should always be a balance if possible tho
This comment sums up my thoughts perfectly! Power Rangers was the first time I didnt see a woman charactwr as just a token or a love interest. Why? Simply because there was more than one one woman! That almost guaranteed that at least one of them wasnt there in relation to men and she would be her own stand alone character, giving the womwn depth. It is also more realistic because in real life that is literally half the population is women.
For example, the Return of the King would pass the MM Test (if we think Eyown’s role for fighting for those she loves counts & has enough importance-it is only a small part of the film but it is there & she the the independent driving force to it who proves herself & chooses to bring Merry with her) & RotK does still fail the B Test
but all the other LoTR films & Hobbit films fail both tests.
It hurts me that none of my favourite movies come even close to passing the Bechdel test (LoTR, Shawshank Redemption) :(
I got really dissapointed by LotR, I mean it was such a big film, right?
ololo518 I know!! Such great movies with tons of characters and different species, kinda sad there wasn’t any space in there for two women just saying hi to each other
It shouldn't. Things are good as they are. Movies that pass it are rarely good. Usually forced.
Why does it make you sad? They are good movies regardless.
I usually think of the Bechdel test not as a test of feminism, but as a part of the historical context. It was originally about how alienating it is to be a lesbian (or a bi woman!!) in Hollywood. There aren't even two women to ship in most movies. It's all about men, even with major girls in the film. It wasn't necessarily created to be a test of feminism, although it's definitely become one.
To be honest, I think there isn't a perfect explicit test for all media being feminist and maybe there shouldn't be. It's probably good if you pass them all, and it's probably a failure if you pass none. Beyond that, I guess I'm a bit "whatever the audience of women thinks while watching"
Oh my gosh I hadn't even ever heard of the Mako Mori test! Your videos are so brilliant Rowan! I love watching your videos and growing as an intersectional feminist! PS come visit Canada!
omg I wish, I need some poutine! Hopefully I get invited to speak at an event there soon :)
Omg thanks for the reply Rowan! I just found your youtube page and its awesome! I feel like we're friends- many of my in person friends are getting really tired of me debating feminist theory with...basically myself lol
As someone who didn't really understand either test it was great to have it clearly and succinctly explained.
The potential for a false negative in the Bechdel test does mean I would have thought it would be more than a simple yes/no scenario. As an example if two female journalists were discussing a male who was the subject of a story they were involved in does that pass or fail? It could easily be a significant conversation and the male characters gender may not even be relevant to that conversation but with the over simplified yes/no answer you would have to answer no and could possibly cause a false negative.
Ultimately I would probably ignore either test as I would be interested in seeing a "good" movie, an what constitutes good may even change from day to day as my mood changes
I'm baffled about your concern over "false positives". The Bechdel Litmus is about industry-wide trends, the scarcity of female presence in films as a media, outside of being accessories or satellites to male characters. Whether a specific work "fails" or "passes" is hardly a useful thing to know unless you also know the rates of most/all other films of that time or genre. For assessing single films, it's basically worthless. The commonly asserted requirement of the female characters being *named* is not in the original strip and actually makes the test worse in my experience. Its very purpose is to be super low threshold to highlight how badly a majority of films fail at having female characters with a bare minimum inner life and any existence at all unrelated to males. In the strip, character Mo introduced it as a personal standard: if a film didn't pass her criteria she wouldn't watch it. The (bitter) joke was that she wasn't seeing any films at all.
The journalists talking about a male subject of a story they're involved with should indeed count as talking about men--since the subject just so "happens" to be a man, and not a woman, or non-binary, or ungendered, or an event, or an object, or a place... The purpose or motivation of the discussion shouldn't matter, or there's an endless swamp of "what ifs" that totally encumber the intended use of the measure.
My problem with the Mako Mori test is that it doesn’t really work for the purposes of a test, ie; to show a broad pattern. If you’re analyzing a specific character, just do that, it doesn’t, and shouldn’t, be framed as a “test”, as it becomes reductive.
I don't understand what you're saying. How is it not a test?
In the beginning you mentioned that Wall-E failed the Bechdel Test and it just made me think "oh come on". I mean, I get how this test applies to a lot of films and other media, but this is an example of one that simply doesn't work. Wall-E was about two ROBOTS, neither of whom had ((confirmed)) genders, and both of whom were incapable of speech. Humans were barely featured at all, and when they were they were mostly portrayed as literal blobs floating around in space. In this case, I fail to see where the test was even applicable, much less necessary
I mean, that's kind of the point of this video- that both tests are flawed and sometimes difficult to implement, and on their own don't necessarily say anything meaningful about "how good" or "how feminist" a film is?
Rowan Ellis Yeah, I understand that. I guess I just have a natural bias against the test, because I'll be honest, it kinda scares me. I'm a writer with a male protagonist, and though I have tons of strong girls in my story, I fear that I'm going to get called out on it simply because it was from a guy's POV
It may be a futuristic robot story, but some male characters talk to each other in it. No females. So it still doesn't pass. It's kind of amazing how even in these odd cases men still find a reason to talk but not women.
With regards to male POV, the point of the Bechdel test is whether those strong girls have a life (within the narrative) independent of the men in their lives.
nothing wrong with writing what you know. if youre a man, youre gonna do good writing men. of course, being able to write people unlike yourself is a great thing, but you cant do it if youre simply inexperienced or havent been exposed to the things you may be attempting to write. (i saw a great tip that simply says ''write female *characters*, not *female* characters'' if what will help you in any way). But even when writing what you know, that includes women and queer people depending on your friends. so dont sweat it too much, take inspiration from your friends and family, and simply try not to make every character similar to *you* only (which i have a feeling youre already doing :))
Purple Burples With all due respect I think it's rather impolite of you to assume things like that. If you noticed, my name is "Brianna" (clearly not a man's name). I have a male protagonist simply because I want to, not because I'm trying to prove anything and not because I'm male either. I'm sure if you got to know me better you'd see that I do in fact know what I'm doing, and my characters come in all shades of the rainbow. My protagonist is like me in many ways, but he differs from me in some crucial areas as well. On the other hand, I have characters who are the complete opposite of me. My concern doesn't arise from lack of experience, but rather from fear that if my audiences don't enjoy my works I may not have a job anymore.
I remember talking to my boss after I saw both the Tony Awards where the musical Fun Home based on Alison Bechdel's graphic novel-style memoir was nominated AND the film Mad Max: Fury Road in the same weekend, and somehow the conversation went from Fun Home to the Bechdel Test to Fury Road logically, as I pointed out to her that Mad Max: Fury Road passed the Bechdel Test with flying colors. Having now heard about the Mako Mori test, I'd say it passes that test, too, because while Mad Max is technically a character in the film, he's supporting Furiosa's storyline rather than the other way around.
personally i like to check both the bechdel test and the reverse bechdel test, it really helps to make it clear how much more men talking there is than women talking
Men have interesting things to say.
combine them: the mako-bechdel test.
I noticed your tiny picture with a really thick frame about a bit over a minute in and now I can't pay attention to anything else hcjshfjsh
This is super interesting! And I agree with you that they work best together. I am also sick of the idea of the worthwhile women are soley ones which kick ass, like they are a fighter or a spy. This is why I love Felicity Smoak as a Character, she is awesome without going "Hey, look at me doing these fancy kicks!". It's starting me make me feel that unless I have a sharp tongue and the skills of a spy, I am not an appealing female. So, I think the Smurfette principle has created a new stereotype.
Firefly does an amazing job at passing both of these tests, I believe. So does Buffy, actually. I am starting to believe that Joss Whedon is one of the fairest directors and writers....
But all storylines should support each other.
Ayatron34 not storylines. Character arcs. Two different things. Andnit says directly support or rely on. No character should entirely rely on a another.
I like the idea of combing the methods/tests.
I think that it's important to have more worthwhile female characters but I also think not having a ton of female characters doesn't mean the writer is biased it depends on the story, and not in a why are we interested in stories that focus on men way in a writers get ideas and sometimes those ideas require an entirely or mostly male cast where if there are female characters there supporting. And as a writer, I always try to pass the Bechdel test or the mako mori test but sometimes based on my idea that's not possible and I've written short stories and short films that don't have any female characters but I've also written ones with only female characters. Again the point I'm making is that we need more female characters but also we shouldn't force them in because that will also end up being harmful in the long run.
Isn't the bechdel test kind of null in void if the movie is about one character or just doesn't have 2 women in it
Surprised there was no mention of the russo test.
tell more
It's a variation of the Bechdel test concerning LGBT characters but somewhat better thought-through, the Bechdel test was a joke in a cartoon strip and was never actually meant to be a real test.
The film contains a character that is identifiably lesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or transgender.
That character must not be solely or predominantly defined by their sexual orientation or gender identity. I.E. they are made up of the same sort of unique character traits commonly used to differentiate straight characters from one another.
The LGBT character must be tied into the plot in such a way that their removal would have a significant effect. Meaning they are not there to simply provide colorful commentary, paint urban authenticity, or (perhaps most commonly) set up a punchline. The character should “matter.”
I'd never heard about that test, but it looks a *lot* more effective than either of the "feminism" tests, which seem to be more about *amount* of representation than *quality* representation. (Interesting Side Note: I've never seen a rom-com where the female lead was actually a feminist. If feminists were represented, it was as the Feminazi Friend.) As you said, this is definitely better thought through.
@@mayawallace7735 there can't be a chance of good quality characterisation is we aren't there in the first place
Like you, I don't see the Bechdel Test, or any other test, the final determiner of quality film. I do think the implications and applications of it for the film industry are worth talking about though. On a surface level it measures how well women are represented, how many leading female roles are out there, and if Hollywood recognizes that female relationships center around something other than men. However, it can also be used to critique a long legacy of sexism and traditional gender roles in American culture where women are the supporters, the prizes, the things to be rescued, and the people who have no goals or dreams of their own outside of marriage and child-rearing. Women were expected to be submissive to men and comply to standards of ultra-femininity. Her happiness and needs always came second to her husband/father/brother and childrens'. I'm not saying a traditionally feminine woman who wants to be a wife and mother is a bad example or anti-feminist, but I strongly believe that is not the only example of womanhood girls should be exposed to. This holds especially true for a society that encourages people of all genders, ethnicities, orientations, religions, etc. to be anything they want to be. One point I find a little problematic with this test is the second point. Real women's lives, and strong female friendships, involve a lot more than talking about men, and I think media should show that. However, real women do go to each other for intimate conversations and advice about their male relationship. This is probably because it is easier for a female to relate to another female going through a similar situation and/or women tend to be more nurturing listeners. Women are trained from a young age to be that, while traditional masculinity labels that trait as unmanly and undesirable. I think there is a balance of the different aspects of female friendship Hollywood can't seem to find.
I haven't heard of the Mako Mori test before, so thank you for the wonderful explanation.The Bechdal test implies that women should have more opportunities to take on roles and character complexity non-dependent on men, especially love interests. It is so good to see that there is a test to pinpoint that. I agree that American film has historically struggled to create leading female roles filled with complex characters non-dependent on male support or intervention to successfully complete their plot-driven mission and individual character arc. A lot of the time there is no character arc, even if the other elements are present. But there are plenty of male lead roles that do most of these things, with or without female supporting characters. I like how the Mako test forces people think about women as complex people who are capable of personal growth and becoming successful through their own merits. However, I think a potential flaw of this model is that it implies feministic women achieve success all on their own. And that is simply not true in most cases for real people, regardless of gender. For example, a woman may be the best employee at a company, but she cannot simply will herself a promotion. She has to get recognized by a superior, male or female, and get their sponsorship/approval to be promoted. She can ask for the promotion and argue why she deserves it, but she still has to involve another person to be successful. Does this diminish her merit or value as a person? Does this make her any less of a role model or feminist? I say no to both. A strong, independent woman recognizes her weaknesses and limitations, not just her strengths. She earns her success through her hard work and merit, but is not too prideful to seek assistance where needed and lift others up with her. I would apply this premise to character arcs as well. People are inspired by those around them. The gender(s) of the person(s) being inspired and inspiring are decided by chance. If a man is inspired by a woman, great. If a woman is inspired by a man, also great. It would be nice for movies to have character arcs inspired both genders if they want to be representative, but I'm not going to fault them if a male character is the main inspiration for their female character.
The last test I've seen around the internet is the sexy lamp or potted plant test. That one is bit tricky to me because a character can have an ideological/thematic purpose without greatly impacting the plot or character arcs within the work. Or maybe the entire point of the character is to be a potted plant as part of a social commentary on the depiction of women in popular film and media. That has value to me.
One of my favorite female characters is Eowyn from Lord of the Rings. Tolkien's works are male-centric. It would be difficult to argue otherwise. However, the book versions of his female characters are (generally) outstanding and the movies bring out the best parts of them. Am I going to remember all of the dwarves from the hobbit or a fraction of the non-fellowship/plot prominent male characters? No. Am I going to remember the women who accomplished far more in fewer pages than anyone else? Oh yes. Tolkien's father died when he was little and his mother was estranged from both sides of the family for converting to Catholicism. She raised two boys, with the assistance of their local parish, at a time when women were given very little opportunity for self-sufficiency. His stories draw heavily on classical British literature (he was an English professor at Oxford), all full of righteous, heroic men and non-existent, classically "perfect," or evil women. However, he never forgot the importance of strong women. Eowyn's character arc, in both versions, is about self-discovery, fighting for what one wants and believes is right, and learning to lead. I love how most of the men discourage her because they love her and don't want to loose her, she is the sole successor to her uncle's throne, or they simply want her to start over and be happy somewhere else. It's not because the men are sexist brutes. They care about her and have good reasons to discourage her. However, it is not the path that will make her happy. She has to go outside the gilded cage, where she realizes her full potential. I also love how she encourages Pippin to fight when everyone else says a hobbit has no place on a battlefield and how she was critical to winning the war. And when she does fall in love and marry, it is to someone who respects her and went through a similar journey of discovering his own self-worth. I was so happy for them both. Tolkein does representation right. He broke traditional gender depictions and roles with purpose, created a complex female character who shows growth, and made her a key part of the plot. It is not about how many women an author can show into a work, or even how many pages are devoted to each of them. It is how much the reader can learn from them and how well they be remembered long after the final page is turned. I don't want more tokens to fill quotas. I want more Eowyns.
I don't use these tests to judge movies. Many of my favorites would fail at least one, if not more, of them. But that's okay. I know this was a short essay, so thanks for sticking around. I would love to hear about a movie/character you love that fails at least one of these tests.
Two works of Japanese animation that have a reasonably strong following and that I regard very highly I have just worked out do not pass the Reverse Bechdel Test - these are Puella Magi Madoka Magica and Studio Ghibli's adaptation of When Marnie Was There. The closest the former gets is a one-word each exchange between two named male characters, one of whom is a toddler. Clearly a character's gender or sex does not determinate quality, but producers are less eager to producer a 'girl's' show/film...
Another thing noticeable about both examples though is that the reason for it failing is that the male characters don't talk to each other, not that they just talk about women...interesting, I'm not sure what it means though.
Haven understood what the Bechdel test is as far as representation of gender in film is concerned, I think that the question is who is behind the story been told? are we dealing with a female or male scriptwriter and what is he or she's intending and moral story?
Your video is A.M.A.Z.I.N.G.
A good one which fails the reverse Bechdel test is the action/horror film 'The Descent'.
Very good information in a nutshell.
Good video. One thing I don't quite get, though. The topic of conversation should not be about men. This is both too broad and too narrow the way I see it. For example, a conversation about whether the women feel beautiful, what their auntie did last Saturday or how drunk they were at a party will pass, but as almost all conversation in "Pride and Prejudice" is about men directly or indirectly, it will not.
Pride and Prejudice fails. That's fine. It's a contemporary novel about society in 1813.
Mako was the most interesting character in Pacific Rim
Except for Ron Perlman of cause, he's always the best XD
really helpful thank you
OH SHIT, WONDER WOMAN FAILED BOTH THE TESTS, because Dianna is a fake leading role to Steve Trevor.
Annihilation is a film that doesn't pass the anti bechtel test, I think. #funfact
Ah okay in anime terms the legends of the galactic heoros would fail the Bechtel test but would pass the mako more test since yang wendi's sister protested a dictatorship and got killed in the protest as she was a problem democracy leader Haha
The Bechtel test I don't really agree with it dosnt pit in consideration the environment of that media
Those conversations only go one way. Lets use the example YOU gave; movies about war before the 1980s. They do well because war is interesting. Kinda simple.
Well, Apocalypse Now did really well because of the great writing/ directing and how much money they dumped into it. It might actually have been better if they swapped out Marlon Brandos character with a skinnier female. The point of his character was to be this enlightened, emaciated, war-torn guru. A female character MAY have done better
Huh, I don't think Wall-e passes the reverse bechdel test..?
jauxro I know I’m a year late lol but anyways, I’m pretty sure it does (haven’t watched it in a while tho) but I remember the captain arguing with the (assumed male) wheel robot managing the ship, also I think there’s a small short scene in which a guy was having a casual conversation with another dude through their screens
It's like rotten tomato's mixed with metacritic. Also omg I didn't realize I already watch you a bunch because you didn't have your blue hair yet
Thanks for the vid! I'm a male writing a fantasy novel and I'm looking for guidance on how to write nuanced female characters. Any research suggestions anyone has would be greatly appreciated!
The bechdel test doesn't matter too much. Some of the best movies ever made don't pass it. Like Toy Story for example.
Your arguement types are very cornering and manipulating. But the subject is A1
The main reason this test is useless is because of WHY so many movies with a female lead have them mentioning men. Most people have significant others, so most movies, whether the protagonist is male/female, will probably mention the other sex at some point. Pretty much every critically good movie out there does this. People write based off of real life, and most people are in romantic relationships, or thinking about them.
Mentioning the other sex at some point is fine. A movie can do that and still pass.
To pass, there needs to be just one conversation about a thing that's not men. Just one. Any length, any time, any situation.
two females gossiping in a super cruel way about another female passes the Bechel test
Also
If the subject happens to be male but that is a secondary quality of the subject of the conversation. I mean if it's talking about a male.
I’m a big fan of the Furiosa test:
The film passes if it pisses off sexist assholes in the internet.
Well. I'm a huge sexist and objectifier of women, as an anime youtuber, but I really like your videos. Keep up the good work
Both tests are bullshit because they are so specific. Deadpool fails the Bechdel Test and the Mako Mori Test, but it is profeminist.
Did you watch the video?...
And how is dead pool pro feminist? I'm really not sure
Zu8 ikr?
I hate the Bechdel test.
Ah the Bechdel Test, the test that doesn't prove anything about the quality of your movie yet people think is important.
the more it failed the tests, the better it gets
if anthropology studies had been able to pass the Bechdel test to begin with
this book would have never been needed to clear up decades of false data.
Blood Magic - The Anthropology of Menstruation - Thomas Buckley (Editor), Alma Gottlieb (Editor)
I have never thought the bechdel test was meant to show what film are feminist or even have good female representation it’s never been about quality it’s not even a big honour it’s more so to say here is something so basic the bare minimum of what a film should have it’s an incredibly easy thing to do but it points out how few there are despite this it’s more so a measure of bad than good it’s should not be the bar in any way
The Bechdel test wasn't to test how "feminist" the movie was- it was to determine if the movie wasn't heteronormative. A lot of people misinterpret its intent.
But... heteronormative means falsely representing heterosexuality as the only true “normal.” A movie can fail the test without portraying or even implying heterosexual attraction (though it's rare).
As for the test's intent, Alison Bechdel describes it as “lesbian-feminism,” which makes it sound to me like its joint purposes of lesbian representation and feminism are closely tied to one another.
I do still think there is feminist subtext to derive from it but yeah that is true.
This is so interesting, I never heard about the Mako Mori test before. But I agree, both tests together work as a great analysis-tools!
Riotschminke Glad I could tell you about it :)
Not really cause the bechdel test doesn't account for depth agency and character work.
best part of Pacific Rim is that they dont Kiss in the end, they hug, in a non romantic way.
How to make a successful action film:
There's a main charcter with their goal
They meet a love interest they get in the end
They live happily ever after
And then there's Pacific rim, where we finally don't need a fucking romance scene.
I just realized that this may be one reason why Pacific Rim is among one of my favorite movies. And of course, the giant robots and monsters.
not only that but the male POV (arguably) character goes to bat for her, vouches for her ability and her potential, not because they are related or in love.
Inversely, she's held back by her father figure because he feels she isn't ready, not because he "has to protect his little girl".
Agreed. I hate unnecessary, tacked-on romantic plotlines in action movies. Not only they distract from the main story, but also the female love interest (assuming a male lead) usually doesn't have any volition or personality of their own, they just exist to be the Hero's girlfriend.
The two leads in Pacific Rim were like mannequins. So wooden, generic, lifeless. If women are using this as a source of excellent portrayal of women and the issues that affect them, then I find that curious and sad. Certainly there was far better than this that came out that year.
I would love a test for "did this female character have to be naked" or "would you film a male character in the same perspective", thinking of gravity and many other films
Thank you for telling me about the Mako Mori Test! I think it's an essential counterpoint to the Bechdel Test, *especially* with regards to films like Gravity with small casts.
Discussions? At best I've had men scoff at the very concept of these tests and call them "pointless". It's the, "Who cares. Movies are fine as they are." defense. I guess some people just don't want to have the discussion of good female characters. I think it's an incredibly important discussion to have.
The Bechdel test has been framed as a feminist test but it more of a LGBT test. And it ignores intersectionality. The fact two women talk to each other about something other than a man doesn't give you any indication about how complex their relationship is.
Ok Write The fact that you think that the only way women can NOT talk about men is to be lgbt is the problem in the first place.
The idea is that you mostly have men in the center of movies and if there isn't even more than one woman caring about anything besides men, you can be sure lgbtq is completely absent, unless it's a movie about exlusively gay men. But in that case the bechdel test wouldn't be needed anyway bc the movie is set in an exclusively male environment anyway. The bechdel test is meant to show up movies in which female characters' only reason for existing is to frame a male protagonist,
@@nareushardin8990 Alison Bechdel is a lesbian and the whole point of the comic strip/the Bechdel test was that most movies are not relatable or alienating to lesbians because either the movie lacks named female characters and if they do have female characters they only talk about men. That's why Ok Write said it's more of an LGBT test.
@@shutupdani why would a movie be alienating to LGBT audience if it doesn't have women talking to other women, case in point the wire , Gregg's especially in the first season primarily interacts with other male characters sure she interacts with a woman as well but would say that her interactions with men are less engaging to male audience than her interactions with women.
@@lampad4549 I've never seen that show so I can't comment on it. The point isn't that one piece of media is alienating because it lacks a conversation between women, it's that there is barely any media with lesbians as main characters so if there could be at least a conversation between two women that's not about men, it would be more relatable to a lesbian.
I can easily watch media without women or a Black person or an LGBT person in it but if that's the only thing available and I see no one like me then it becomes very tiring and not relatable to me. Sometimes we do need to see ourselves in the media we consume to enjoy it. It's not even gender or race related either. Sometimes it can be a job or a personality trait.
I would love to see a test about the validity of queer characters and characters of color.
They totally have these! :D I talked about it a bit while filming, but had to cut due to length of the video... they are the Deggans Rule and Russo Test, haven't analysed them and their applications too rigorously yet, probably because there's so few show/films that would pass to be able to collect data. Although I'm currently editing a "Best LGBT Characters on TV" video, so that might give some sample ideas.
+Rowan Ellis I know this comment was from a year ago but I just wanted to let you know that I'd be perfectly happy with watching your videos at any length, as I'm sure lots of others also would! I personally really enjoy these types of videos when they're long and in depth. Anyway, keep doing what you're doing, it's great!
I'd never head about the Mako Mori Test and I'm glad that I have now. I'd always seen some flaws in the Bechdel test and I totally agree that using it with the Mako Mori Test is the strongest way to go.
Sidenote: I always loved River Song as a character in Doctor Who, but her writing bugged me because her whole story arc was focused on the Doctor. I guess now I have a word for it, it fails the third part of the Mako Mori Test. Thanks for this great video!
Akshata P I agree so hard! River had so much potential, but her dependance on the Doctor was a big turn off for me... it was intruiging in the RTD era, because as a character in a 2 parter, you needed her to have some connection to him to be significantly relevant, but after that not so much. That's why I liked this season's Clara above her character previously, because she was given more relationships other than just with the Doctor.
Yeah about Clara, I was a bit disappointed with the whole "Her whole timeline is based around saving the Doctor" shenanigans from previously but I'm glad we got Danny in there so she wasn't all about the Doctor. Same reason I started liking Matt-Smith-Era Who more when Amy and Rory were more of a thing instead of Amy-Doctor so she could actually have her own development instead of being all over the Doctor.
Plus Rory is just great.
Issues I could identify:
* Two female characters having a quick trivial exchange (i.e. yes/no answers) would pass the Bechdel test.
* Two mothers talking about their sons wouldn't pass the Bechdel test, as if maternity wasn't an important part of many women's life.
* This could be polemical (feel free to disagree) but I think most women are not very interested talking about objects (a good thing because they don't objectify people as much). If that's the case, they will be most probably talking about situations related to people, and usually half of the people are male. The third Bechdel criterion narrows the acceptable conversations too much, imo.
The vid was great, by the way.
Umm, Sweden introduced what? I'm Swedish, I live in Sweden and I've never heard of there being a "Bechdel test rating" of films here. Did someone *in* Sweden *suggest* a rating system to that effect, and this was misunderstood as *the country of Sweden* introducing this thing on a general level?
Would love to point out how most if not all Ghibli movies pass both
Something I see a lot in Fantasy (books as well as movies and TV) is that concept of having a female protagonist but pretty much every other character is male. In-universe, this is often justified with sexism in the Fantasy society which more often than not doesn't even have a serious impact on the story. It's just there because that's what authors think is realistic for a fantasy setting inspired by medieval Europe or whatever. This means that the story pretty much automatically passes the Mako Mori test since the main character is female and is likely to have a story arc of her own not involving the other men. Then, by simply adding one minor female character and having her have a short conversation with the MC, the story would also pass the Bechdel test.
The book I'm currently reading has - so far - about 25 or so named characters that had dialogue (I'm only about one quarter in though). One of these 25 characters is the female protagonist. Then there are about 10 or so men who are very important to the story, some of which even get their own PoV. There is also one woman who got a name but no character description who got to say two sentences in the prologue. And the most recent addition is a servant woman who talked to the protagonist briefly about something inconsequential, but it wasn't a man. So all tests passed. Great story. Much feminism. Such wow.
I'm not saying that a story is automatically bad for doing this, but I still wonder: Why? Why not simply have some of the more important characters be female? You literally don't need to change anything about their personality. And having sexism in your fantasy story is not a requirement and therefore not an excuse for lack of compelling female characters. Especially if you don't even make the story about the sexism or address it in any meaningful way.
So yes I completely agree that while tests like this are useful to make a point, it's important to realise that passing the test doesn't necessarily mean that much.
I write heroic fantasy / sword and sorcery stories that pass both tests. My two main female characters are also lesbians.
Deep diving on your videos and man
I don't miss the era where people treated the Bechdel test with any legitimacy.
I didn't know about the Mako Mori test! great vid
There's a bechdel test app on the play store now
I love the emphasis on what is this tool used for and meant to bring up, and also the emphasis on how the really important juicy stuff is the conversations these markers can bring up. Also the repeated attention to the idea that maybe there are reasons to do smth that sidelines women in a specific piece of media, but that we also have to look at the industry as a whole and spend time with how that's not a one-off thing, it's a trend, and it being such a pervasive trend really means something that individual creators have to reflect on. Thanks for your perspectives here!
Whereas it can be obviously annoying for lesbians to watch a movie not passing the Bechdel test (and most movies don't), where women only talk about men, the same can be said about gay men watching movies (where guys discuss women, cars and money). What about American Asians, who seem to be invisible? I think the problem is the industry/media in general, which is made by and for white heterosexual men. So if you're a lesbian Ethiopian Jew, chances are you'll have trouble in seeing yourself represented. Interestingly, when that happens - think of "Brokeback Mountain" (gay cowboys in Wyoming, not exactly a widely represented group) - audiences seem to be fascinated.
I think the Bechdel test is just very culturally important, regardless of how many great movies do or do not pass it. I’m, of course, quite partial to Bechdel as I enjoy her work (read Fun Home if you haven’t, it’s amazing) but it holds a mirror up to the film industry and acts as kind of barometer of how well Hollywood can be at depicting women in movies and television. Bechdel herself has said her favorite movie doesn’t pass the test, so it’s not as if we should expect ever thing to meet the extremely low bar it takes to pass her test, but if we’re seeing that over time more movies are passing the test then I think we’re showing that the industry can get better. If 75% of major motion pictures pass, that’s a win. We don’t have to cast out anything that fails for being anti-women or anything, but just to have the awareness of this extremely low bar and use it to measure the industry as a whole.
As for mako mori, well, I can see the merit in it, but giving my opinion as a male, I feel like that’s to easy a test to pass. It’s easy for a male writer to just say “I’m going to make this movie about a badass hero, I’ll just make them female and write them the way I’d write my male characters.” To the point where a male writer could just basically have the character be his female stand in and be queer and for that to be lauded as a win when it doesn’t really portray anything about what it means to be female in society other than the gender of the character. For a male writer to actually have to sit and think of dialogue between two women that isn’t romantic ends up being somehow tougher, which just calls for a need for more female writers. So I feel that for better representation as a whole, the Bechdel test proves just slightly more useful as a barometer. It creates a situation that calls for more female voices. But that’s just my opinion on the matter. Enjoy the stuff you like regardless and yes, the blending of the two leads to more robust characters, but I think the touchstone of the Bechdel test has proven to be one of the most powerful shifts in the way we discuss the portrayal of women in cinema.
One test that could be considered is the DuckTales Test: Could you replace the people who write the female characters with writers from a different show and get the same result? If you can do this, then the media is following templates so the media fails the test. I call it the Duck Tales Test, because the original incarnation of DuckTales fails it, but the reboot passes it.
Obviously it's something that is more calibrated towards mainstream media, and wouldn't work on say, John Waters movies.
This has to be the absolute, most stupid, set of tests on the planet. If you don't like a movie just don't watch it. It's that simple. Or write your own movie. One that only gay, female, blind, left handed, and whatever other crying thing I can put in there, write, star in, and work on. No men allowed. Get it out there.
The thing about the Bechdel test is that it's so simple to pass. I mean, for heaven's sake, how many movies don't have at least two men who have a conversation about something other than a woman? Just have two women talking about the weather, or food, or the popular book everyone is reading. The test doesn't just apply to Lesbians. Women do have friends and relatives to whom they speak. Movies show guys talking to friends and coworkers, why not women?
First world problems. I wish feminist reviewers would make top ten best female and top ten worst female movies of the year. Or just be a guiding voice which movies to go to or guide away from. But most are detached to the point of abstraction- Bechdel, mako mori, etc.
A great example of why these tests doesn't say much about the feminist or progressive level of the film is "Persona". It is one of the few movies that passes the reverse bechdel test and it does so in the most extreme form since it only has one male character and he is on screen for a few minutes. But despite this the movie can still be perceived as mysogynistic in it's portrayal of the lead women. It's still a great movie and I highly recommend it.
If the historical movies are accurate and condemm the sexism, they get a pass.
the 3rd bit should be edited as not be not be simply designed to enforce a mans story.
i think the problem is that the test is miss used and not the test itself
the bechdel test is about lesbians
The purpose of the test should be to make women more relatable.
wait a minute. you said that the Mako Mori test requires:
1: have at least on female character.
2: have said female character have her own story arc.
3: have the story arc not be supporting a man story arc.
then by these three rules, Pacific Rim also fails the Mako Mori test, because her character arc directly supports Idris Elba's character(who's name i currently do not remember)story arc.
+dopboy35 Mako Mori's story arc doesn't support Pentacost, she is mearly his student, someone she admires, her story is her own arc, where Pentacost could be a mentor figure. if anything, Pentacost is her support character.
that is false, because directly after Raleigh learns that Mako and Stacker have history, it becomes clear why all of Stacker's decisions in regards to Mako have been what he thought was best for her. Mako's character arc directly supports Stacker's character arc ergo Mako Mori fails her own test.
+dopboy35 I have only recently watched that movie and I would agree with you to a large degree. I think Mako's character is supporting Pentacost's character. But at the same time, she definitely has her own story that works without Pentacost. So, I would feel uneasy to call that a fail - or a pass. *scratches head*
@@YensR That is what Rowan says in video - it's not so clear test as the other one. Whether arc is significant and not support a man story can be a very subjective.
The Bechdel test just seems to me like a joke that was taken too far. Sure, having less than 2 named female characters, have 2 but not have them have a conversation or have 2 that have a conversation but it's only some vapid fawning over a man (probably the male Protagonist) is not really a staple for a good film from a Feminist standpoint, but the criteria just feels a bit arbitrairy. That's the first time i hear about the Mako Mori test and it feels a lot more usefull to critizise a film by this test. it feels more genuine.
That said, i'm not sure that having some sort of test for determening if a film upholds Feminist values is a really deep way of looking at movies. Sure for a quick laugh you can say "movie x has no female character with a character therefore = bad" might be good. but in the end you should look at a film individually and judge it on its own level.
The Bechdel Litmus isn't really supposed to measure any sort of feminism. The characters don't even need to be named. That's a random later add-on. It's also not intended to assess single, specific works, but masses of works. The strip's point was, the character who wanted to only see films that fulfilled these very low standards, was not seeing any films lately. No implication of worth or quality. Just a personal interest to see films with films with two or more female characters, who get to interact with other female characters, and to talk about anything besides men. And an industry that doesn't seem to offer that even accidentally, years on end. (At the time.)
I loved your video, and i really agree with your opinion about combining both tests. I never heard of Mako Mori test before and I enjoyed the way you explained it :) Keep it up, great work!
Thank you!
Wall-E is a good example of how the Bechdel test can be misleading. Of course it doesn't pass, there are like three speaking characters in the whole movie. Granted, it's a very abnormal case.
Alessio Aletta Wall-E is not a good example tho, because it does pass the reverse Bechdel test, the captain (male) argues with the (assumed male) wheel robot managing the ship, and if I remember correctly, I’m pretty sure there’s a very short scene about a guy having a casual conversation with another dude through their screens while Wall-E is passing behind or something. A good example on how the Bechdel test wouldn’t apply would be Gravity, cause it’s mostly only Sandra Bullock (one character) the whole movie
Does Mulan even pass the bechdel test?
I think technically it does because of the scene where her mom and grandmother prepare her for the matchmaker (who is a female) even though they're preparing her to be married off.
Mako Mori test is clearly better for one simple reason: It's credentials are the same as writing good characters. The move must contain one female character with a story arc that isn't about supporting a mans story arc. Remove the female part of the sentence and replace man with another characters and it is the same thing.
Does the Bechdel test HAVE to have named female characters? That feels a bit restrictive. Of course, having prominent female characters is important, but it does limit a film which, say, doesn't give a name to any of their characters.
What films don't name any of their characters?
@@salemkitty99 Very artsy ones.
But to better demonstrate my point, there's this one episode of Doctor Who where he's trapped on a shuttle for nearly the entire episode. He proceeds to have discussions with all the other passengers, but only at the end of the episode does he realize no one learned the hostess's name, who is present for the whole episode and plays a very prominent role, but is never given a proper name. Now, I don't remember if she actually had a discussion with any of the other female passengers, but if she had, is it right to disqualify her just because she never got a proper name?
I don't know if it's a test exactly but a comic book author Gail Simone once mentioned something about a female character needing to both have flaws AND solve her own problems e.g. the perfect princess who gets saved: Fail, female who needs saving from her own flaws: Fail, The perfect bad ass character who saves herself and others: Fail, The perfect bad ass who saves herself and others until she messes up and becomes imperfect and then gets saved from her screw up: MAJOR FAIL. I think it's something about when a female character is perfect she is boring, idealised and unrelatable i.e. one dimensional and when she can't solve her own problems she had no agency and/or expectation of adult responsibility... If that's not a test then I would suggest it be called the Red Sonya (my favourite Gail Simone written comic book character) test but then again I'm paraphrasing Gail Simone and I don't know how she'd feel about he words being turned into a test....especially if she got them from somewhere else...