(500) Days of Summer: The Anti-Romantic Comedy (Part Three)

In my last semester of college, I completed a writing portfolio entitled "Exploring Modern American Culture through Contemporary Cinema." It contained four essays dissecting four recent films. The second of those essays discussed Marc Webb's 2009 romantic comedy (500) Days of Summer. The third part of that essay is below. I will post a new portfolio excerpt every day.  Previous posts: The Dark Knight - Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four; (500) Days of Summer - Part One, Part Two. 

(500) Days of Summer: The Anti-Romantic Comedy

Reversing Gender Roles

As previously discussed, (500) Days of Summer’s message about extreme attitudes toward love is underscored by its reversal of conventional gender roles. This reversal is noteworthy because it is an anomaly in the movie business. Though they may be growing more varied in their representations of the sexes, Hollywood films still tend to employ traditional ideas about gender. Female characters are often characterized as passive, dependent, and domestic, among other things. Such cinematic women do not take charge of the situations they are in. In contrast, males are usually active, adventurous, and independent. It should be noted, though, that when it comes to male characters there seems to be more diversity of personality. This may simply be because there are more male-led films being produced by major American studios (Smith and Cook 13). With more roles to write, there comes a greater assortment of types. Even so, stereotypical gender roles for both females and males prevail in U.S. filmmaking and marketing. The romantic comedy genre is no exception. Films with plots as different as Runaway Bride (1999), My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002), and He’s Just Not That Into You (2009) all feature a number of men and women that have at least some – if not all – of the traits outlined above. (500) Days of Summer does not rely on such categorization. Presenting many characters – male and female – with differing interests, views, and backgrounds, the movie avoids depending on narrow ideas about gender.

It has actually been suggested that (500) Days of Summer is a feminist work because the interactions between Tom and Summer defy gender norms, as well as expectations about male-female relationships. The pair displays a refreshing romantic dynamic where “the female love interest… can not only be equal, but can also hold more power than her male counterpart” (Williams 43). From start to finish, Summer is the dominant one in the relationship. As such, she takes on a more traditionally masculine role than Tom, who is passive, insecure, and commitment-focused. Conversely, Summer is forward, assertive, and independent. Though Tom’s attraction to her is revealed to viewers before she ever shows interest in him, it is Summer who makes the first move. She asks Tom directly if he likes her, a question he is hesitant to answer, presumably due to bashfulness. Later, Summer initiates their romantic relationship by kissing him in the copy room at their workplace. She also chooses whether the relationship will have a label (i.e. dating), and she is the one who ends it. Through these acts, Summer establishes herself as a driving, deciding, autonomous force; she remains this way for the entirety of the film.

Tom is in many ways Summer’s opposite; as already noted, he comes across as more conventionally feminine. Where Summer is decisive and bold, Tom is submissive and reactive. The film openly acknowledges this. Take the breakup scene, for instance. The couple meets at a diner where Summer expresses frustration with their relationship, complaining “We’ve been like Sid and Nancy for months now” (Webb). The reference is to ‘70s punk rocker Sid Vicious and his girlfriend, Nancy Spungen; their volatile relationship ended when Vicious stabbed Spungen to death in a hotel room. Tom finds the comparison harsh, responding “we have some disagreements, but I hardly think I’m Sid Vicious” (Webb). Much to his surprise, Summer informs him that she is Sid, making him Nancy. Here, Tom is clearly portrayed as a passive presence, a softer counterpart to Summer’s sometimes aggressive personality. This idea is reinforced throughout the movie. Tom is a reserved and romantic person who waits for things to happen to him rather than makes them happen himself. Overall, he fits stereotypical ideas about feminine behavior, making him an atypical leading man.

Sources

Smith, Dr. Stacy L., and Crystal Allene Cook. "Gender Stereotypes: An Analysis of Popular Films and TV."Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, 2008. 12-23. Print. .

Webb, Marc, dir. (500) Days of Summer. Perf. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Dir. Zooey Deschanel, Scott Neustadter, and Michael H. Weber. Fox Searchlight Pictures, 2009. Film. 20 Oct 2013.

Williams, Brenna Claire. "Mainstream Mulvey: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and (500) Days of Summer as Alternatives to the Feminist Avant-Garde." Film Matters. (2013): 43-49. Print.

(500) Days of Summer: The Anti-Romantic Comedy (Part Two)

In my last semester of college, I completed a writing portfolio entitled "Exploring Modern American Culture through Contemporary Cinema." It contained four essays dissecting four recent films. The second of those essays discussed Marc Webb's 2009 romantic comedy (500) Days of Summer. The second part of that essay is below. I will post a new portfolio excerpt every day.  Previous posts: The Dark Knight - Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four; (500) Days of Summer - Part One. 

(500) Days of Summer: The Anti-Romantic Comedy

Going Against the Cinematic Grain

The film’s very premise is subversive because it is told from a male’s perspective. This is part of a modern trend in Hollywood of making male-led rom-coms. It joins a moderately-sized group of films that includes such hits as Knocked Up (2007), The 40-Year-Old Virgin (2005), and Hitch (2005). But even within this group, (500) Days of Summer stands out due to its treatment of its protagonist and his views. Tom Hansen is undeniably the film’s chief romantic idealist. He believes in falling in love fast and hard. In many films, this view is championed, but here Tom is not rewarded for his beliefs. On the contrary, Tom comes across as likeable but foolish. This can be seen in an early scene where he and Summer stand next to each other in an elevator at work. Tom is wearing headphones, listening to the ‘80s song “There Is a Light That Never Goes Out” by The Smiths. His music is faintly audible; Summer hears it and leans over to say “I love The Smiths.” And just like that, Tom is smitten. He loves how much he and Summer have in common, but it is like his younger sister tells him: “Just because some cute girl likes the same bizarro crap you do, doesn't make her your soul mate” (Webb). Despite the many superficial similarities Tom and Summer share, they have significant differences, particularly when it comes to their views of love.

The elevator scene is one of many that demonstrates Tom’s shallow and romanticized outlook on love. He is optimistic to a fault, which the film credits to a misinterpretation of The Graduate at a young age. He interprets the melancholic ending of that movie as a happy one promoting true love. Consequently, he believes his life will not be complete until he meets “the one” (Webb). When he meets Summer, he thinks he has found that one. Summer, on the other hand, tries to be realistic, though her views often seem extreme. She does not believe love exists, thinking it as imaginary as Santa Claus. This is attributed to her parents getting divorced during her adolescence. In real life, it would be expected that such a couple would be destined for difficult times, and perhaps even an unhappy ending. In the movies, that resolution would never be anticipated. Romantic comedy couples end up together. Period. That is what audiences expect and want, apparently: on the list of the highest-grossing romantic comedies in the U.S., only two of the top twenty-five – 2006’s The Breakup and 1997’s My Best Friend’s Wedding – end with the core couple’s separation (Romantic Comedy Movies at the Box Office). Following these film’s examples, (500) Days of Summer’s Tom and Summer never reconcile. The fact that their differing ideas about love kept them from having a successful relationship indicates not only a lack of compatibility, but also the significance of these ideals. The filmmakers seem to be saying overt idealism and cynicism can interfere with one’s happiness. In this way, (500) Days of Summer is less about being an escapist piece of entertainment focused on the fictional attainment of true love and more about critiquing certain detrimental viewpoints in the context of a romantic relationship.

Sources 

"Romantic Comedy Movies at the Box Office." Box Office Mojo. IMDb, n.d. Web. 17 Oct 2013. .

Webb, Marc, dir. (500) Days of Summer. Perf. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Zooey Deschanel. Wir. Scott Neustadter, and Michael H. Weber. Fox Searchlight Pictures, 2009. Film. 20 Oct 2013.

(500) Days of Summer: The Anti-Romantic Comedy (Part One)

In my last semester of college, I completed a writing portfolio entitled "Exploring Modern American Culture through Contemporary Cinema." It contained four essays dissecting four recent films. The second of those essays discussed Marc Webb's 2009 romantic comedy (500) Days of Summer. The first part of that essay is below. I will post a new portfolio excerpt every day.  Previous posts: The Dark Knight - Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four.
 

(500) Days of Summer: The Anti-Romantic Comedy

Introduction

Love – a short, simple word. Its meaning? That is a mystery infinitely more complicated, one that has confounded humanity for eons. Definitions of love vary, numbering as many people as there are on earth. The perceived importance of love also varies, from era to era and culture to culture. In the Western world, there is a reverence for love that “has not been shared by all cultures in all times” (Owens 266). In the West, romantic love is seen as the ideal basis for courtship and marriage. One country with a particularly strong love culture is the United States, where the attainment of romantic love is treated as a necessity for living a happy life (Wherry 1).

This kind of love culture is often exemplified by Hollywood films, especially romantic comedies. The meet-cute, love at first sight, the breakup, the happily-ever-after reunion – these are all familiar elements of one of film’s favorite genres (Gleiberman). Most rom-coms stick to these conventions, and the public seems drawn to this type of film. According to one box office analysis, romantic comedies grossed more than $10 billion between 1995 and 2010, making the genre the sixth-highest grossing in that time span (Nash). Some argue people seek romantic comedies – and other similar media – “to see relationships that appear to work despite all obstacles” (Hefner and Wilson 151). Unfortunately, many scholars also argue that romantic comedies – or any type of Hollywood romance, for that matter – present unrealistic views of love, filled with whirlwind romances and happy endings that seem almost fantastical. There are concerns about what effects these fanciful stories have on audience members.

Marc Webb’s 2009 film, (500) Days of Summer, is the rare romantic comedy that departs from the typical Hollywood scheme. The film follows greeting card writer Tom Hansen (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) through his head-over-heels infatuation and doomed relationship with his co-worker Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel). As a deep-voiced narrator says just moments into the film, “This is a story of boy meets girl, but you should know up front, this is not a love story” (Webb). Instead, it is a coming-of-age story about the different views people have on dating, relationships, and love. Tom, an unabashed romantic, and Summer, an independent skeptic, could not be more dissimilar in their perceptions of these matters. This causes tension between the two and ultimately hurts their relationship, making (500) Days of Summer an important contribution to the romantic comedy genre. Unlike so many of its contemporaries, it is somewhat realistic. Rather than inventing ridiculous, cartoonish scenarios in which the characters fall in love and live happily ever after, (500) Days of Summer focuses on relatable issues like the simple ups and downs of relationships and how it feels to have your heart broken. Furthermore, it does not rely on stereotypical characters to get its point across; indeed, the film defies rom-com character conventions, particularly when it comes to gender. (500) Days of Summer plays with and inverts genre expectations through gender role reversals. In doing so, it highlights two common, contradictory attitudes toward love that permeate contemporary American culture: idealism and cynicism.

Sources

Gleiberman, Owen. "(500) Days of Summer." Entertainment Weekly. 24 Jul 2009. Print.

Hefner, Veronica, and Barbara J. Wilson. "From Love at First Sight to Soul Mate: The Influence of Romantic Ideals in Popular Films on Young People's Beliefs about Relationships." Communication Monographs. 80.2 (2013): 150-75. Print.

Owens, Erica. "The Sociology of Love, Courtship, and Dating." 21^st Century Sociology. Ed. Clifton D. Bryant and Dennis L. Peck. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2007. 266-71. Print.

Nash, B. "Top-grossing genres 1995 to 2010." The Numbers: Box office data, movie stars, idle speculation. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct 2013. .

Webb, Marc, dir. (500) Days of Summer. Perf. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Dir. Zooey Deschanel, Scott Neustadter, and Michael H. Weber. Fox Searchlight Pictures, 2009. Film. 20 Oct 2013.

Wherry, Maryan. "Introduction: Love and Romance in American Culture." Journal of American Culture. 36. 1 (2013): 1-5. Print.

The Dark Knight: A Post-9/11 Tale (Part Four)

In my last semester of college, I completed a writing portfolio entitled "Exploring Modern American Culture through Contemporary Cinema." It contained four essays dissecting four recent films. I started with Christopher Nolan's dark epic The Dark Knight (2008). The fourth and final part of that essay is below. I will post a new portfolio excerpt every day. What's up next? A look at Marc Webb's (500) Days of Summer (2009). Previous posts: Part One, Part Two, Part Three.

The Dark Knight: A Post-9/11 Tale

White Knights and Dark Knights: Leadership Dilemmas

In “the battle for Gotham’s soul,” three main players try to keep the city from succumbing to chaos: Batman, Gordon, and Dent (Nolan). While they have the common interest of defeating the Joker, their varying backgrounds and positions produce three distinct views of how to deal with the rapidly escalating situation. Batman, the vigilante, has one rule he strictly adheres to: no killing. That principle aside, he believes in protecting the city at all costs, making him only one step away from being as lawless as the Joker. He will break rules – and mobsters’ legs – if it means keeping Gotham safe and sound. Gordon and Dent, on the other hand, are bound to legality by their jobs. They admire Batman and allow him to disregard the law, but they can never do so themselves. Though they both follow a creed of lawfulness, discrepancies exist between the two men. Gordon wants to rely on his police force; Dent does not trust the lieutenant’s men and women due to their history of corruption, often a source of tension between the lawmen. Even though all three – Batman, Gordon, and Dent – have their differences, they manage to compromise and cooperate with each other for a higher purpose.

While the trio is able to find common ground, the disputes the men have raise a few questions. Which route – vigilantism or lawfulness – is better for combating the Joker’s malice? Is one better than the other? What about the morality and ethics of one versus the other? What measures are appropriate when dealing with imminent security threats? The list goes on. The film does not give easy answers to any of these questions. The citizens seem to favor Dent’s approach. To the public, he is Gotham’s white knight, a bright symbol of hope for a better future. By the end of the film, Batman becomes the dark knight of the title, vilified by the very people he strove to defend. In many ways, though, he is more heroic. It is Batman who defeats the Joker in the end, while Dent, suffering from great personal tragedy, loses faith in their cause. He concludes in the third act that he failed, alongside Batman and Gordon, because they could not be “decent men in an indecent time” (Nolan). The corruption that allowed the Joker to thrive in the first place made it impossible for the trio to keep their hands clean as they tried to reestablish order in the city.

Even in a generally upstanding community, acts of terrorism are difficult to cope with. There are many reasons for this, one being the arduous task of responding to them in a timely manner that is both effective and just. Gotham’s leaders and heroes face this dilemma when the Joker begins his reign of terror, just as the Bush Administration did after the foreign strike on the U.S. in 2001. Several tactics from that presidency were widely questioned or condemned, such as entering into foreign wars, using enhanced interrogation techniques, and implementing invasive surveillance programs. Some critics of The Dark Knight have claimed it has a neoconservative slant that supports the aforementioned strategies. Others have disagreed, saying the movie is about “the need for public resoluteness in the face of terrorism… the inherent limitations of relying on vigilantism,” and “reaffirming law, legal institutions, and popular courage” (Ip 211). Commenting on The Dark Knight’s politics, Nolan denied the presence of an intentional bias saying “We just write from the perspective of the world we live in, what interests us and frightens us” (Svetkey).

Regardless of the filmmakers’ aim or angle, the world created in The Dark Knight is clearly analogous to the present-day United States in terms of its struggles with morally ambiguous leadership. Like the Bush Administration, Batman uses invasive, secretive security measures to fight terrorism. In the film’s third act, he uses an advanced high frequency generator that accesses every cellphone in Gotham. This device helps him defeat the Joker, but does the end justify the intrusive means? As his friend and colleague Lucius Fox says, the tool is “beautiful, unethical, dangerous” (Nolan). Fox believes it is wrong for Batman to use such a powerful invention to essentially spy on millions of people, even if his intentions are good. This is not the only time Batman’s techniques are questionable. There are multiple instances earlier in the film in which he uses violent interrogation tactics. For example, he deliberately injures a mob boss to get information from him, and he brutally beats up the Joker after Dent and his girlfriend, Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal), are kidnapped. In these scenes, viewers may be reminded of alleged torture committed by U.S. agents, one of the extreme methods used for gathering intelligence in the War on Terror. While the specific tactics are different, the general idea is not: use violence to get important details needed to protect citizens. And just as many Americans denounced the government’s stance on torture, audience members may recoil at the sight of Batman using inhumane force for interrogative purposes.

Conclusion

The ethical problems of surveillance and torture are just two elements of the film that may feel familiar to a post-9/11 audience. There are distinct parallels between Gotham and the U.S. found throughout The Dark Knight’s superhero storytelling. The Joker’s actions characterize him as a terrorist, while in the narrative of early 21st-century America, terrorists – both domestic and foreign – are the main villains. Acts of extravagant violence cause anxiety and tension to rule Gotham. Millions are left on edge, wondering when and what the Joker’s next move will be. In the days, months, and years after 9/11, U.S. citizens have dealt with similar worries. The last decade saw a country suffering from national post-traumatic stress disorder, filled with “psycho-political fears” and concerns about the potential for future attacks (Kolenic 1023). To quell the nation’s dread, government heads, like the protectors of Gotham, employed plans of questionable moral quality. Whether they were noble dark knights, like Nolan’s hero, or simply crooked politicians is up for debate. What is not is The Dark Knight’s connection to post-9/11 culture. It is a reflection of a wounded nation’s problematic road to recovery.

Sources

Ip, John. "The Dark Knight's War on Terrorism." Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law. (2011): 209-29. Print.

Kolenic, Anthony J. "Madness in the Making: Creating and Denying Narratives from Virginia Tech to Gotham City." Journal of Popular Culture. 42.6 (2009): 1023-39. Print.

Nolan, Christopher, dir. The Dark Knight. Writ. Jonathan Nolan, Perf. Christian Bale, and Heath Ledger. Warner Bros., 2008. Film. 31 Oct 2013.

Svetkey, Benjamin. "Q A Director's Chair." Entertainment Weekly. 01 Aug 2008: n. page.