#her decision to go back seems flippant and her story to the cops is not well thought out like in the book

[sochilll]

Gone Girl book better than movie send tweet

[twentiethcenturymoviesandtv]

Running Scared: The Characters

One of the interesting things about Running Scared is that, despite the number of cast members there actually are, there are only a handful of main characters.  Of the named cast members, only four of them have real personality, story relevance, and characterization: Danny, Ray, Anna, and Julio Gonzales.

Now, of course, this isn’t to say that the other characters don’t have character traits or defining characteristics, but I am saying that, for the most part, the characterization that takes place tends to be archetype based, and little else.  Snake is a double-crosser, the police chief is hard-nosed, etc.  But these four main characters have a little bit more to them, even if they aren’t all developed equally.  Let’s take a look, starting with our protagonist(s).

(Spoilers below!)

It’s kind of hard to nail down who exactly Running Scared is about.  Traditionally, most buddy-cop films are about both cops fairly equally.  The screentime is about equal, the development is roughly equivalent, and the focus is on the partnership and the relationship between the cops.  So, with that in mind, it would make sense to expect both Danny and Ray to be the protagonists of the film.  And, they are.  They are the main characters.  They share a lot of screentime, and their relationship is already developed to the point where the audience doesn’t need to see them learning to get along, they’re already there.  But just because they don’t develop as a team, doesn’t mean they don’t develop at all, and here’s where you can figure out that one is more the focus than the other.

While Ray is vital to the plot and chemistry, he is not who the story is about.  His sub-plots of picking up women are present, but they take a backseat to Danny’s sub-plots: his inheritance, and his relationship with his ex-wife.  It’s even his idea for the two to to retire from the force.  It is Danny who drives the character aspects of the story.  As a result, it is Danny who is our protagonist.

The question is, is he a good choice?

Like I’ve said before on these character pieces, every good protagonist needs a problem, preferably a problem pertaining to the plot, and while Danny has his fair share of problems (Gonzales being released, wanting to retire, wanting reconciliation with his ex-wife), it’s a little more unclear whether or not any of them drive him as a character.  And if they did, it seems like they’re contradictory.  If his only goal is to retire, why bother with one more case?  If he wants to get Gonzales, why keep entertaining the idea of retirement?  If he wants to fix his relationship with his ex, why doesn’t he talk about it or make that clearer (at least, until the last thirty minutes or so.)  

After some consideration, I came to a conclusion: it’s not one of them that drives him.  It’s a combination, and it’s that more than anything that makes Danny a realistic protagonist.

Danny clearly still has feelings for his ex-wife, but doesn’t address it, choosing to be flippant about her re-marriage instead of working on the problems Anna has told him he has: namely his immaturity and refusal to act responsible.  Rather than work on them in a way that makes narrative sense, he……doesn’t.  He deals with it in a rush towards the end, escalated when Anna is kidnapped.  As another person, Anna doesn’t really fill the category of ‘goal’ or ‘driving force’ exactly, but Danny’s relationship with her is one of the sources of his growth.

For the other two, on the other hand?

Danny has a decision to make.  He can retire, get his bar, relax and not get shot at anymore, but on the other hand, a dangerous man who he’s spent a lot of time putting away is on the loose again.  His sense of justice and anger is keeping him on the force just until they get Gonzales, he claims.  By the end of the story, he brings himself to admit that he enjoys being a cop.  He can’t have both at the same time, but like a real person, Danny is trying to decide what he wants and it affects his life accordingly.  He gets ‘careful’, up until the end, where he makes his choice for good.  Again, it’s a bit rushed, but it is there.  In this sense, he is the protagonist.  From start to finish of the film, he is the one who has driven the story and changed the most, even if it’s only a small bit.  He even gets his ‘hero’ moment, when he rescues Anna and charges back in to finish the fight, helping to get rid of Gonzales once and for all.

Is he a ‘hero’ in a traditional sense?  Not really.  His moment of ‘change’ can be boiled down to the plot escalation of Anna’s kidnapping, but again, it’s not overt.  There’s no debate about the ‘right thing to do’, morality doesn’t come up at all.  In that, Running Scared is a relatively small-scale story, which works well with the protagonist we’re given.

But there’s more to this cast than Danny.

Let’s talk about Ray.

The chief difference between Danny and Ray as far as the story is concerned is their plot relevance.  

As characters, the two are actually rather similar, especially as far as ‘buddy cops’ go.  They’re both witty, funny, and snarky, with similar outlooks on their jobs and life.  Both are Cowboy Cops, they enjoy the same vacation, heck, they don’t even argue over who drives the car (much).  But while we get a little bit of a look at Danny’s life outside of the job, we don’t get too much of the same for Ray.  

He gets a few scenes focused on him, sure, but they’re rather brief and less in-depth than scenes focusing on his partner.  We get an idea of what he’s like, and he’s likeable enough as a person, but we don’t really get an idea of what’s driving him.  His goals and motivations aren’t really expressed, as he ends up agreeing to quit the force with Danny, but not really giving his own thought processes about it.

He drives the car, he takes down the criminals just as well as Danny does, but he never develops as a character, ending the film as he started it.  In short, Ray is a deuteragonist, sharing the spotlight of the protagonist without as much growth.  

Which is more than we can say for Anna.

Unfortunately, Anna as a character has even less development than Ray does.  So much so that we don’t even get a real feel for her as a person.  She’s nice enough, and clearly still has feelings for Danny, but left him due to his immaturity and lack of responsibility.  At the beginning of the film, she is getting remarried to a dentist, and at the end, she is not, having decided to get back together with Danny after he saves her life, demonstrating a fair bit of maturity and responsibility in the process.  The most we really see of her development and character are in the conversations she has with Danny, notably the one in the police department towards the beginning of the film, and the one in his apartment towards the end.  She’s not really given much of a personality, and doesn’t have a whole lot of screentime.  On the bright side, with what personality and screentime she is given, much like Ray, she makes the best of it, managing to be a memorable and important part of the film.

But hey, there’s nothing more important in a film than its villain, right?

Yeah, about that.

Boy howdy, talk about little character.

Julio Gonzales, as a person, is a Criminal.

That’s it.

In all seriousness, while the other characters have distinctive traits (Danny’s humor, Ray’s impulsiveness and Anna’s common-sense), Julio Gonzales seems to have, chiefly, one: being the Bad Guy.

Like the other characters, he’s played well enough (the performances for all of the characters are legitimately great), but he’s not given a whole lot of personality.  Or arc.  Or connection to the main characters.

Unlike villains like Darth Vader, The Wicked Witch of the West, or even Norman Bates, Gonzales doesn’t have a whole lot of presence, specific relevance to the plot, or ties with the protagonists.  The only reason he is the Bad Guy is because he happens to be a criminal who happened to get busted by our heroes, and then happened to make bail.  He’s not given a whole lot else to work with.  He’s smart enough to disguise his cocaine as containers, but he’s not defined by intelligence.  Or brute force.  Or even force of will.  He claims to be the next Godfather of Chicago, but he doesn’t really have a whole lot of personality for the audience to feel the threat of that claim.  We register him as the villain of the piece, interchangeable with basically any crook with any kind of pull.

The chief failing of this film’s characters lies in the villain.  By being generic, he has no personal effect on the story.  If he were removed and replaced with another criminal, the movie would not change in the slightest.  He comes and goes accompanied by mild fanfare and reputation that we aren’t really allowed to see demonstrated by his character.

Once again, very real world.  Very few criminals have gimmicks or interact personally with the cops after them.  In that, Gonzales is fairly realistic.  He is simply a criminal trying not to be caught by the cops.  Makes sense.  But as a narrative villain, he does leave a viewer wanting.

These characters aren’t really all that complex.  There’s no Rick Blaine here, no Rocky Balboa (Must be those R.B. initials), no characters who go through immense growth and really draw an audience in with their interesting, multi-faceted personalities.  But then again, they don’t have to be.

Yes, the characters aren’t really that developed, but the same argument could be made for other classics like The Wizard of Oz.  The characters that exist within the film Running Scared aren’t that complex, and they don’t need to be.  They aren’t trying to tell a grand story, or even a character piece.  They’re telling a funny buddy-cop movie.

Could it use a little more work in the character department?

Absolutely.

Does that necessarily make it a bad film?

Not really.

Running Scared is perfectly serviceable for what it is.  It’s not great storytelling, or character development, but the characters do manage to do what they’re supposed to: make you care about them.

Do they grow?  Not a whole lot.  But the protagonists are likeable enough for the audience to enjoy, care about, and relate to them as people, making us want to stay and find out what happens to them.  We care about their decision in the end not because they’re complex, but because they’re human, and funny, and fun to watch, and in the end, making you care about the fate of a character is what they’re supposed to do.  In that, Running Scared succeeds.

Thank you guys so much for reading!  If you enjoyed it, stick around for more, since we’re not done talking about the elements that make up Running Scared. If you have something you’d like to add or say, don’t forget that the ask box is always open!  I hope to see you all in the next article.

[southsidewrites]

Thoughts on Riverdale and Marginalized Groups

So, after a lot of thought, I’ve realized what one of my biggest issues with Riverdale is, and that’s their flippant treatment of marginalized and disenfranchised groups.  I’ll preface this by saying I am a straight white woman, meaning that I will undoubtably have gaps in my understanding and experience.  I do always welcome additions/corrections from people who have lived these experiences, though, so don’t feel bad for calling me out (politely please).  I just need to put this in words though because my discomfort with this show is so much deeper than “ew, cringey plotlines”

Warning: This is going to be long (and it’ll probably still not cover even half of the issues).  Topics covered will be people of color, Native Americans, the LGBTQ community, people with mental illness, and people suffering from poverty/homelessness.  Read on for more.

People of Color

Riverdale has a lot of people of color for a network show.  No doubt about it.  However, these people of color have literally some of the least development.  It’s like they were cast to shoot a few promo pics and then forgotten as soon as they were introduced,  Most prominent examples:

Josie and the Pussycats: When I saw they were an all-black group, I was thrilled.  Then, they promptly disappeared.  This feels like such a half-hearted attempt to be diverse without any care for making them actual people.  A huge dissapointment.

The Serpents: Aside from Jughead, our main Serpents are all people of color.  And what do we get for them? No backstories, no real names in some cases, no representations of healthy families, and definitely no solid character development.  Again, a huge disappointment.

Reggie: One of the most under-developed characters on the show.  Not much to say other than he’s a stock douschey bad boy.  Again, no family and no development to speak of.

Special shout-out to the Lodges who are canonically Latino but show almost no sign of it other than an occasional “mi’ja”.

Extra special shout-outs to Chuck and Dilton who basically serve no purpose on this show other than a half second of storyline.

Basically, this show loves hiring actors of color, but when it comes to actually giving them screentime and worthwhile development, no such luck.

The Uktena

This I wanted to touch on in addition to people of color because it was extra disappointing.  The whole episode that introduced the Uktena and their history with the Serpents and the Blossoms was downright fascinating.  It was interesting, complex, and a sort of thoughtful exploration of colonialism.  Then, once they could promo it and get the box checked, it was gone, leaving us wondering if the Serpents are/aren’t the Uktena and why the heck is it being run by a white man?  Cool idea, pitiful execution.

LGBTQ

Ugh.  This one is hard to even start because I am PISSED. Riverdale has given us a few non-straight ships (Joavin, Kevin/Moose, and Choni), and they’ve all been messy af.  Let’s break it down.

Joaquin/Kevin: Initially built on a lie, but immediately a fan favorite.  Some interesting potential.  Ripped away as soon as it got good. 

Kevin/Moose: A rebound couple with a history of cheating.  Possibly the realest thing on this show, but kind of a disappointment.  Why can’t Riverdale just give Kevin a love interest that isn’t built on a foundation of lies/cheating/death?  Also, why can’t they develop Kevin as more than a stock gay best friends?  Literally, he just seems to be there for other people to vent to.

Chery/Toni: I’ve said a lot of this before, but this ship pisses me off the most because it could have been so good. Instead, we get a rushed romance that goes from literal enemies to literal girlfriends in the span of like three two-minute interactions.  Then, they get no  individual or relationship development, no valid screen time, and no anything really.  They’re just there to be there, and it seems to clear to me that they only exists to appease us.  It’s such a shallow cop-out relationship, and it makes me mad.  I would have been happy to wait for season three to get Choni if it meant I got well-developed, natural Choni instead of forced down my throat Choni.  Do better, Riverdale.

I don’t know what else to say other than I’m mad, and I want some valid LGBTQ relationships.  Give me some depth on these characters--tell me their struggles, their joys, their messy teenage emotions as they wrestle with who they are.

ALSO LET’S NOT FORGET THAT THEY MADE A WHOLE EPISODE ABOUT CONVERSATION THERAPY AND THEN DROPPED IT LIKE IT WAS NOTHING. Conversion Therapy is downright traumatizing.  Even a few days can literally destroy teens.  I am not okay with how passively they “rescued” Cheryl, and literally all she needed to do to feel better was kiss Toni.  That’s just wrong, and it downplays such a huge, traumatic problem that is still a problem today.  Basically, they just wanted Toni to play hero, and they thought that could be an “edgy” way to do it.  Not okay with it being taken so lightly.

Mental Illness/(and kind of abuse)

So, a while back, Lili made some remark in an interview about how Riverdale tackles mental illness in a complex and real way.  Lies.  Sorry if this one gets heated, but I am someone with a diagnosed mental illness, and I get heated about poor representation.

Betty has some sort of mental illness.  Not sure if it’s depression, PTSD, something else, or some combination, but it’s there.  Calling it “darkness” and having it presented as her becoming some sort of dominatrix in a wig is creepy, romanticizing, and not to mention offensive. Her darkness isn’t profound or dramatic, it’s an illness, and she needs help and support.  Taking down bad guys is not the solution--real treatment is.  

Archie was sexually groomed and abused and watched his father get shot.  No way the boy doesn’t have PTSD.  Maybe instead of making him make all these dumb, thoughtless decisions, develop that a little more so we can see him as a struggling, hurt kid and not an idiot that’s easier to manipulate than a jar of play-doh.  

Cheryl attempted suicide and then literally burned down a house after her murderous father killed himself.  And how was that handled?  Not at all.  Literally, she should be hospitalized and given real, meaningful treatment, not sent back to her crazy abusive mother, sent to conversion therapy, and then initiated into a gang.  Honestly, it’s so ridiculous that I don’t even have words.

In general, all these kids are going through some heavy stuff, and there is not a doubt in my mind that they are suffering some clinical trauma and abuse issues.  I’m not sure how/if the show should tackle this, but what they’re doing now just isn’t working.

Poverty/Homelessness/Economic Disparity

Let’s talk about the Southside for a minute.  Jughead has been bounced around in foster after being semi-homeless.  Toni is admittedly couch-surfing while semi-living with her uncle.  Fangs and Sweet Pea have zero backstory.  All of them are lower-class, go to a poor school, live in trailers or other lower-class housing options, and all of them joined a gang (which typically don’t attract people with means and money).  And how does the show introduce them? Villains.  How shallow is it that the rich side of town was initially presented as good guys and the poor side as bad guys.  Sure, that dynamic was mostly demolished in Season 2, but it definitely started that way.  Not to mention, the three main Serpents are POC while the core four are all white or white-passing.  While some of these dynamics were disrupted, the foundational assumptions are still there, and they’re a bit too heavy-handed for my taste.  

Basically, the Serpents were introduced as the “edgy” foils to the main characters, but none of them have any of the development to go with it.  The ONLY reason I care about the Serpents is the fanon development because canonically, they’re beyond shallow.  They’re barely even characters--really, they’re just kind of plot pawns that keep the action moving.  Overall, they should have been more developed.  At least give the kids some parents, some background, some internality, because I cannot get behind them as heroes or villains when all we know it that they come from the “rough” side of town.

IN CONCLUSION/ TL;DR

Riverdale needs to stop worrying about checking inclusivity boxes and develop their damn characters.  Instead of trying to cram in a little bit of everything, slow down and do a couple things well because right now, it feels phony.  Like, “yeah, he include all sorts of real-world issues and problems, and our character are totally #diverse.”  When in fact, the show is about four kids, three of which are white, all of which are straight, three of which are upper middle class/wealthy, and all of which have been through severe trauma/abuse.  Don’t tell me this show is inclusive if your definition of inclusivity is two second storylines that have no development and serve only to forward the stories of four main characters.

As I said before, I welcome feedback/additions/corrections.  I just had to get this off my chest before I punched a literal wall.