This Film Was So Bad It Turned Me Feminist

[00:03] feminist and I normally give a high-minded answer about caring about the best life of everyone and that sexism is an impediment to that compassionate utilitarian view of the world. However, that's not

[00:17] the real reason. The real reason is because I had a movie inflicted upon me because I had a movie inflicted upon me that was so bad that I became a feminist that was so bad that I became a feminist out of pure anger and spite about it.

[00:31] broadly based on my memory of the movie and I'm sure I'm going to get details wrong here and there, but I have so little respect for this movie. I don't want to watch it again

[00:47] for this video. To be honest, I did not watch this movie in the best of circumstances and it is well within the range of possibilities that I've missed range of possibilities that I've missed a few key points or I've even totally

[01:01] misinterpreted it. However, this is not a film review. This is a review of my experiences. At the time I watched this movie, I was a university student with

[01:13] movie, I was a university student with limited income and during the break between semesters, I would often travel between the Australian states of New between the Australian states of New South Wales and Queensland. Now, between

[01:27] Brisbane and Sydney, there are two train routes. There is the direct route where routes. There is the direct route where you get onto the XPT at Sydney and you get onto the XPT at Sydney and arrive in Brisbane 14 hours later. Then

[01:40] there is the indirect route where you catch an interstate coach from Brisbane catch an interstate coach from Brisbane to a town called Casino from which the XPT continues the rest of the way to Sydney. There are three significant

[01:57] things about the northern New South Wales town of Casino. It is where the XPT stops. It is the beef capital of New South Wales. And despite being called South Wales. And despite being called Casino, it does not have a casino. Like

[02:12] Casino, it does not have a casino. Like many people of my ilk, I love train. Not just for their efficiency as public transport infrastructure, but also for autistic reasons. So, a 14-hour train journey isn't a bad thing, but it would

[02:27] take a person with a very peculiar masochism to enjoy long-distance bus masochism to enjoy long-distance bus travel. And on this bus trip, perhaps just to amplify the distress the passengers were in, we had the in-bus

[02:42] passengers were in, we had the in-bus entertainment of watching a movie. Now, this movie featured a work-hard, play-hard professional woman who was employed doing some sort of desk job in

[02:56] the city. Marketing, design, something like that. You know the kind of jobs that movies have people doing where it isn't clear that the writers did any research about that occupation, but they knew that most of the viewers would not

[03:12] know the minutiae of that occupation as well. But, it appears that she enjoys well. But, it appears that she enjoys her work and her life. Then, her sister and brother-in-law are killed in a car crash. And our protagonist, along with

[03:29] her living brother and sister-in-law, go to the lawyer's office to have the go to the lawyer's office to have the reading of this dead woman's will. This is done as a video will, which I expect only really exists in movies because

[03:46] movies are a visual medium. And you know, that's a convention I am totally in favor of. If you have to surrender some realism to tell the story better,

[03:59] some realism to tell the story better, I'm all for it. Our protagonist inherits the dead sister's three kids. The single woman who lives in apartment works a high-demand job and dedicates

[04:13] the rest of her free time to partying is the one who inherits the three kids. Not the other sibling who's in a stable marriage and lives in detached housing

[04:25] in the suburbs. Okay, perhaps dead sis has a good reason for entrusting the protag with the kids. Is the other family in a financial state where the responsibility of three kids would be imposing an extra burden? Or is there

[04:39] some other myriad of other reasons? Is that the protagonist has never experienced the joys of motherhood? And nobody in the film seems to treat this line as completely and utterly batshit.

[04:55] Like, you do not simply Like, you simply do not force people into situations without their consent because you think that they would enjoy them. Did nobody in the production of this film realize how creepy that sounded? There is

[05:10] another problem with this. When I was much younger, I had developed a special interest in children's rights, mostly because I was a child at that time. There is a fundamental principle of child welfare

[05:26] that decisions should be made in the best interest of the child. But the best interest of the child. But the framing of this makes it sound like the decision was made in what the dead sister thinks is the protagonist's

[05:41] interest. And I'm not an American family lawyer. I don't think you can bequeath your children like they are a heirloom set of plates. I think you can advise people of your wishes and the law will

[05:55] take that into account when it makes the decision on who gets custody of the children. Due to her commitments to the children, she ends up failing to meet the obligation of her work and she gets fired. By the

[06:11] way, in New York, where this movie was set, one of the best interest of the child considerations a court will make is your work duties and if they are is your work duties and if they are compatible with child raising. Now, I'm

[06:26] not the type of person who expects science fiction to slavishly obey the science fiction to slavishly obey the laws of fiction and while a legal drama that is all about legal minutiae would be fun to a certain type of person,

[06:40] I'm that person. By treating kids as tools rather than potential people. Sorry, I got riled up. Anyway, our protagonist gets saddled

[06:52] with these kids. Now, to my memory of this film, she had to take a leave of absence from her work in order to look after these kids. But the plot summary says she gets fired and has to work part-time to at a servo. Sorry, gas

[07:09] station. After some events, she meets the principal of the school where the kids attend. Oh. Did you know that prince and principal come from the same linguistic root, originally meaning a person of utmost

[07:25] authority or or importance? Honestly, discovering that simple fact brought me discovering that simple fact brought me more joy than this entire movie. This prince, this principal is also the priest of some generic

[07:40] Protestant Christian denomination. However, I don't think the movie really did anything with him being a priest. I don't remember him doing anything priestly. There are no scenes of him giving a sermon,

[07:54] conducting mass, or turning the lesser undead. He is supposed to be the love interest of this film. But, honestly, I didn't get any romantic chemistry between the two leads. The guy was bland and empty. What

[08:10] I like in my romances is when the characters empower and fulfill the other, allowing each to grow and flourish. Like, Yukino and Fechiro in

[08:24] flourish. Like, Yukino and Fechiro in Harikano, or Fate and Nanoha Harikano, or Fate and Nanoha in Magical Lyrical Girl Nanoha, or in Magical Lyrical Girl Nanoha, or Hajime and Yue in Arifureta. And yes,

[08:37] all of those examples are from anime. A bee true but like anime. Fork is found in the kitchen. An irrational number is found in the reals. Then, there is some found in the reals. Then, there is some sort of crisis with the kids, and they

[08:52] go missing. Protagonist comes to realization that she really loves the kids, marries the priest, gets the kids back, and this is the happy ending. The back, and this is the happy ending. The bus trip ended just as the movie ended.

[09:06] bus trip ended just as the movie ended. So, I had the entire 14-hour train ride back to think about this movie. It was something that just kept going It was something that just kept going over and over, churning in my mind. The

[09:19] fact that in the first act, the protagonist needs is told she needs to learn the joy of motherhood. In the last act, she has learned that lesson. The message of the movie seemed to be, "Women, even if you are happy and you

[09:33] are employed, true happiness will only come if you're a mother." That's the kind of thing that you would read in the worst kind of forums. You know, the ones that are populated by men who call all women females and discuss how females

[09:48] women females and discuss how females should be valued on their body count. I don't mind the plot of due to circumstances, a character ends up as a parent of a child, discovers that they find child-rearing fulfilling. Spy Cross

[10:04] Multiply Family or Magical Lyrical Nana Ha Strikes are both examples of that kind of plot to me. And I love both of those, but these stories frame parenthood as something that could be fulfilling regardless of

[10:21] that could be fulfilling regardless of gender or sexual orientation. However, gender or sexual orientation. However, this movie framed its narrative a way to make it feel like it was just about women. And yes, I know it's a movie. You

[10:34] this character and her her circumstances, not all women." To say that in a cinematic way takes time, but what you cinematic way takes time, but what you choose to include or exclude in a

[10:49] narrative reflects what you feel is important to that narrative. I know some people find parenthood fulfilling. I had the wonderful privilege to have a mother

[11:01] and a father who were keenly invested in my upbringing, who found joy in my and supported me in the case of setbacks. But I know people who are wholly and utterly unsuitable for parenthood as well. This was why the

[11:18] movie stayed with me on the train ride home and in the months and the years afterwards, making me reflect on the pressures, subtle and

[11:30] overt, that want to women from people who engage in society according to the vocation that calls them to be vocation that calls them to be restricted to only the reproductive

[11:43] role. And as always, thank you very much for watching. The next video will be about a topic completely unrelated to this as all my videos are. So, if you want to see something new, subscribe, and I hope

[11:58] see something new, subscribe, and I hope to see you all later. Bye-bye.