The Identity Wars

For an entertainment company, catering to an audience is a useful thing. This is because an entertainment company is just that--a company, or business. So obviously, this means that they want to make money by giving the consumer what they want. As this is the way business works, this "give the customer what they want" thing is very much not an issue. The real issue comes when the company doesn't provide anything new and instead panders to their audience. This is a phenomenon known as "selling out."

Unfortunately, we see a lot of selling out today--perhaps because our modern media is overwhelmed with a kind of "progressive" mindset. For example, many big-time film characters are now becoming different races (such as Hermione's race transformation in a new rendition of Harry Potter), different sexes (such as Thor becoming a woman), homosexual (Sulu from Star Trek), or any other variety of "marginalized group." I am not against characters with these identities. However, what I am against are the reasons these characters are used and the way their characters are conducted throughout a more "progressive" film.

To further explain my distaste for established characters becoming part of a "marginalized identity," it's necessary to first understand what makes a good character. A good character is one we like and identify with, and not because of what he/she is, but rather who he/she is. This is an important distinction to make in an era of distinctly bad characters.

Leslie Jones's character in Ghostbusters is a good example of a character done wrong. Now, Leslie Jones has received large amounts of vitriolic hate (I believe it's undeserved because, if you look at some of her other work, she's actually quite funny and talented) for a character she played in the latest installment of the Ghostbusters franchise. This character, Patty Tolan, was very much the "token" black character and was not very funny. Instead, she was just really loud and somewhat crass. Although, I doubt this is the fault of Leslie Jones, as the movie was plagued with terrible writing. The fact that they gave her the personality type "black" is not only offensive, but also a mark of terrible, lazy writing and a clear example of pandering to a progressive agenda.

The idea that we can't identify with someone of another race, sexuality, or gender than ourselves is, quite frankly, ridiculous. The fact that we can identify with cartoon animals in a movie such as Zootopia is clear evidence that that notion is untrue. We identify with a character not by their skin color, gender, or sexuality, but by deeper things such as their hopes, dreams, goals, and struggles.

Many times, filmmakers are afraid to give these marginalized characters any weaknesses because directors and producers want these characters to be strong, independent people. And only that. However, filmmakers forget that a character is made strong by overcoming challenges and surmounting their personal difficulties. It takes a character being beaten down and pushed to the limit in order for them to grow to strength. Characters that are already perfectly strong, independent, and have practically no flaws are boring! Alice from the Resident Evil series is an example of a boring character because she is almost perfect in every way. She is a serious and overpowered robot. But she's a woman, which apparently makes her automatically awesome? At the same time though, she's a boring woman. Just as Patty Tolan is a boring African-American character.

All I'm saying is, let's remember what makes a real character and focus on that. There's nothing wrong with a diverse cast of characters, but they should have something else than diversity alone that makes them interesting. They just need something deeper. Filmmakers, give your characters a heart and soul.

Logan Christensen
(Pragmus Alpha)
CEO of Pragmus Media