G.I. Jane and the Navy SEALs

It is surprisingly difficult to find media dealing with modern warfare that actually shows female soldiers, even in an era where that is perfectly normal. One notable exception to the rule is Ridley Scott's 1997 action film G.I. Jane. However, on some level this particular film, while an excellent thrill-ride with a strong female lead, is a curious film to see in light of its subject matter. The story focuses on Jordan O'Neal, an athlete and military analyst who finds herself becoming the first female Navy SEAL. Much of the film naturally deals with sexism in the military (she is being deliberately put with the SEALs on the assumption that she will easily fail), but it is also curious to watch in light of how society has developed since G.I. Jane's release.

It is fitting to discuss this film right now, since is just happens that this year the real-life Navy SEALs are hoping to begin opening their doors towards women, almost twenty years later. Of course, the reality is not as dramatic as Scott's vision. Quite a few of the top SEAL commanders are on board with the idea (if still getting accustomed to it), far from the vision Scott had of a sexist military pulling every trick it could to prevent integration. Unlike the film, in which the SEALs are depicted responding to political pressure, they seem to be doing this willingly, and the only reason the change has not already been implemented is government bureaucracy. Some of the officers have even gone on the record to state that women will be held to the same standards as men (a right O'Neal had to fight for). The movie was also made while Don't Ask, Don't Tell was still in effect; the trick of forging evidence that O'Neal was homosexual would not cause anywhere near as much of a scandal today.

Also ironically, the film is about the SEALs being used as a test case to see if gender integration is possible in the military as a whole, when in fact they have proven to be one of the last branches to begin accepting women. In Canada, women can serve in any position, including submarines. In America, women are now being accepted as marines and rangers. If anything, much of what really happened has been the exact opposite of what is shown in G.I. Jane.  This is not, however, to say that the film is irrelevant to today's world. In fact, very much the opposite.

G.I. Jane is not just a story about a female SEAL, but one about intolerance as a whole. Throughout the movie, attention is drawn to the ignorance and prejudices in the military. Homosexuality is also brought up (though not given much focus), including a subplot where O'Neal is almost reduced to a desk job because someone took a picture of her sitting on a beach with a female officer.  There are a variety of claims brought up early on about how women are weaker than men and therefore not fit to serve. Sadly, these same arguments still persist today. The subject of whether women should meet the same standards

At one point, she also speaks to an African-American recruit, Lt. McCool (Morris Chestnut), who draws a parallel between O'Neal's situation and his grandfather. In his anecdote, McCool explains that his grandfather enlisted in World War II as a gunner in the Navy, only to be told that the only position he could take was the cook. According to McCool, the rationale for not letting a man fight for his country was that blacks supposedly cannot see at night. This is an absurd and blatantly racist claim today, perhaps just as absurd as saying women cannot meet the same physical standards as men, or discharging people for the sole reason that their commanding officer thinks they might be gay, even if that has no impact on their performance.

G.I. Jane is very much about deconstructing these absurd prejudices. From the moment Jordan first appears, she is obviously a good choice. She already works in intelligence, and despite having years of experience got rejected from one post in the Gulf War simply because the submarine lacked women's wash rooms (this itself an absurd claim, given the restroom was probably a single toilet that could easily have been shared). She is smart and quick-thinking, as well as being extremely fit.

Still, everyone maintains that she should not be present, yet the film constantly presents evidence to the contrary. During a training exercise, O'Neal deliberately knocks over the steps used to get over a wall and instead crouches down herself. Several men climb onto her back and she is still able to keep moving afterwards, yet even after she has helped the last man over the wall, he still refuses to help her get over in return. Even the senator responsible for all this happening in the first place (Anne Bancroft) admits she expected O'Neal to fail and only did it for publicity. Early on, she is given special treatment. She has her own room, an officer she can personally consult about any issues, and is required to go through dumbed down versions of the physical exercises. She also proves on multiple occasions to be good at handling stress, including several situations where the recruits are deprived of sleep.

It is only when O'Neal manages to get herself on the same ground as the other recruits, to the point of even sharing her sleeping quarters with them, that any progress is made. This is reflected in her appearance. O'Neal begins as an attractive young woman, with long dark hair tied back into a ponytail and a formal suit. In her early days of training, she sheds the suit in favour of combat fatigues, but her long hair remains as a visual symbol of the inequality that still exists. Once she is facing the same standards, O'Neal visits a barbershop and proceeds to shave her own head; now looking like one of the guys. After this change, O'Neal begins to show more of her body, particularly her muscles, a visual indicator of her full potential.

These skills also prove useful once field training begins. O'Neal eventually becomes a team leader, though not entirely by choice (the original guy kept trying to sabotage her efforts, proving that he was unqualified seeing as teamwork is an essential part of SEAL operations). This includes and exercise where the SEALs are faced with a simulation of a combat situation. They are brought to an island and given a practice mission. O'Neal is put in charge of her team and quickly proves she knows what she is doing. Her experience as an analyst allows her to easily locate their target. The mission likely would have proven a success had it not been for the former team leader, who outright ignores her orders and gets everyone "captured."

Of course, even after being caught, and finding herself in a simulation of such an experience, O'Neil still remains strong. Her instructor beats her repeatedly and yells sexist remarks in an attempt at discouragement. He even goes as far as to attempt to rape her, which ends with O'Neal defending herself appropriately. Despite the constant pressure, she never gives in to the simulated interrogation, and proves, just as was indicated in training, that she is good at taking pressure, a crucial component to SEAL training. By this point, O'Neal is finally accepted as an equal, even being cheered on by her male comrades as she fights back against the instructor. 

This in turn leads to the climax of the film, where the recruits are unexpectedly faced with an actual mission to recover a fallen satellite. The task is a dangerous one, as it involves entering territory owned by Muammar Gaddafi. By this point, the SEALs are coordinating together. O'Neal herself is even given the task of acting as a spotter for her instructor. He ends up being separated and it is once again O'Neal who has to take charge. She is the one who plans their strategy both for recovering the satellite and rescuing the instructor, and it is because of her the mission is a success. She is obviously deserving of the badge she receives at the end that indicates her acceptance as a SEAL.

The whole point has essentially been that women can in fact meet the same standards as men. They are not physically weaker, as some would like to claim. Any such claim is nothing more than futile attempt to justify prejudice and bigotry, no different from McCool's anecdote about his grandfather not being allowed to serve because people claimed blacks had bad eyesight. Just as that absurd World War II-era theory was eventually disproven, so is the claim that women are unfit for military service. The same could be said of any group that has been barred from active duty, be it race, gender, or sexual orientation. 

Good Things About Prometheus

I remember there as a great deal of excitement when it was announced Ridley Scott was working on some sort of prequel to the Alien franchise, having directed the original film. That was followed by confusion when it was announced that the film would be in the same continuity but at the same time it would be something separate. Hype only increased with all the secrecy surrounding the film and vague hints. 

When the movie finally came out, reactions were mixed, but it received a lot of criticism. I don't know if I'd go as far as to say it was like The Phantom Menace all over again but there was a lot of disappointment. I myself have shifted my opinions quite a bit since its release, going from being unsure what to think to calling it brilliant to finding myself on the fence.

The reason I eventually ended up on the fence was the result of me finally having to confront the problems with the movie (and they are numerous) instead of just trying to rationalize everything. It is hard to overlook the problems. There are issues with the story (just before the initial entry to the cave, Shaw talks to a "security" crew member named Jackson who never appears at any other point in the film), but the big thing seems to be the bad science.

The part about Fifield getting lost after panicking despite having brought the mapping equipment was a bit of an odd choice on the part of the screenwriter. Sure, he didn't have much to contribute to the "gigantic dead body department" but perhaps it would have worked better if instead he had just said "I don't think there's much I can do here, I'm going to go check out the rocks" and then got separated after being distracted by some peculiar formations. While he had brought the mapping equipment, it was never explicitly shown that he could access that map while in the cave, but even then there was a map on the ship and one of the guys there could have used it to direct them to the exit.

An alternative scenario that might have worked better: perhaps Fifield is a bit anxious about the dead body and keeping his distance when he suddenly notices a peculiar rock formation. He turns toward the rest of the team and says "hey guys, that looks weird. I'm going to go check it out." Just as he briefly sees something move and reports it, which inspires Millburn to follow him in the hopes of seeing a live specimen.

Unknown to them, something about the room is causing interference with the radios so they don't hear the report of the storm (and can't access the map). They spend some time there but eventually they leave and re-establish contact at which point they find out they've been left behind and the crew can't get to them. That might have worked a bit better, but the version in the film seems a bit odd.

Then there was the part where they decided to go right into the cave immediately after landing without any knowledge of what was inside and only a few hours of daylight. Even with Holloway's justification ("It's Christmas, and I want to open my presents") the Captain could have just said "Alright, we'll do a preliminary survey and maybe send in the mapping equipment but we won't go in until tomorrow."

That said, there are some good things in Prometheus and it can be enjoyed if you're willing to overlook the problems. Since it is common to hate on the film I think is fair to highlight some of its better qualities. For one thing even with all the problems it does still have some very good ideas. After all we've already had four films centered around the premise of "Xenomorphs are loose and killing everybody one by one" (and that's not even getting into the various video games or the Alien vs. Predator series).

As iconic as the xenomorph aliens are they've been used way too much. They're not completely absent in Prometheus but I do think it was a smart move to downplay their role and find some other aspect of the universe to explore in the hopes of bringing out something new. Even if that idea didn't quite work the way Ridley Scott intended, it was refreshing to see something different instead of just a rehash of same plot as the other four films.

In fact, while the plot isn't directly connected to any of the other alien films, the attention to detail in Prometheus is really good. When looking at the design of some of the sets you can tell Scott had drawn from the original film. Yes, there are some logistical problems with the design of Prometheus but you can see it drew from the designs used for the Nostromo.

Similarly, we have the the scenes on the alien spaceship. The control room seen in Prometheus is instantly recognizable due to its resemblance to the room seen in the first act of Alien. In Prometheus it is a bit cleaner, in contrast to the dark and decomposing style of the original. In the original film it was hard to tell if we were seeing the alien fused to a chair or a suit, and Prometheus offered a partial explanation. 

However, to be fair the promotional material was somewhat misleading as it didn't actually explore the back story of that particular engineer (that would be the famous "space jockey seen in Alien) so much as it provided clues towards the nature of its species as a whole. In fact, I've even heard one potentially crazy fan theory exploiting the reveal that the "Space Jockey" was wearing a suit and claiming that underneath that was actually Elizabeth Shaw.

This film does also address a few aspects of Alien, including a minor plot hole in that film: in Alien, Ripley is able to decode part of the distress call even though there is no reason for her or anyone present to know the language. Taking into account the events of Prometheus and assuming that some of their information got back to Earth, it is a bit more plausible that the computer could have had partial data on the language of the Engineers. Some of that data might have even been programmed into the Nostromo's computers given the reveal that they were intended to collect an alien and bring it back to Earth.

The acting was also quite good in this film. Everybody seemed to give the film everything they had. Even the two guys that were obviously set up to die seemed to be trying to give a good performance even if their characters were not particularly well written. That said, there are some pretty good characters and some interesting ideas.

Elizabeth Shaw earned a place in my Women In Film Blogathon and she is an interesting character. The whole idea of her being constantly torn between science and religion, and trying to reconcile both extremes is a fascinating one. In addition, it is also nice that they tried to do something different with her personality. The Alien franchise is already full of tough girls: Ripley, Vasquez, and Call being good examples. All of these women turned out to be super-tough, sometimes better than the men.

As awesome as Ripley's assault on the queen was in Aliens it is nice to see them trying to go in a different direction. Rather than just making another Ellen Ripley they tried to write a new character with a distinct personality of her own. Shaw is a bit more vulnerable, with a few issues of her own. She never gets to hurl a hostile alien into space (which Ripley got to do twice), but she does still try to do the right thing and remains determined to keep pursuing the truth even when it seems hopeless.

She does have her character flaws but those make her more human (Ripley may have been tough enough but in the climax of Alien you can tell she's scared out of her mind, singing a lullaby in a desperate attempt to calm herself). Also, on the bright side, Shaw didn't have some director come along and make a sequel that opens by undoing every one of the few things she did accomplish in her film.

Of course, the real star of the film was David, the android. Even if you didn't like the film as a whole you have to admit that Michael Fassbender was exceptional with this one role. We know right from the start that he's an android programmed to assist the crew but he isn't just another Bishop. This character has some peculiar qualities, and you can never be sure whether to admire him or be afraid of him. He seems to care for the crew but he also tries to follow his programming. When all is said and done, David is basically free once his master is dead and seems to show concern for Shaw's safety (despite being literally reduced to a head) to the point where he agrees to help her in her pursuit of the truth behind the "engineers".

So in the long run, is Prometheus a terrible movie? I wouldn't go that far. It has its flaws, yes, some of them interfere with the main plot and can be a bit irritating. The bad science is a bit troublesome (though granted, the Alien franchise was never exactly hard sci-fi to begin with). However, the film does have its merits.

Maybe it's not as good as the original Alien, but I wouldn't say it is as bad a film as some people make it out to be. Flawed? Yes, but awful? Not really. This is where I'm left on the fence. One side, the problems with the film are hard to overcome, particularly the bad science, but the stuff that is good is really good.

The Three Science Fiction Classics of 1982

In 1982 Steven Spielberg won over thousands of viewers with the release of his iconic science fiction movie E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial. This family film about the friendship between a young boy and an alien accidentally stranded on Earth made a huge impact on the science fiction genre, with a balance of comedy and drama, solid relationships, and some impressive special effects. At the time, Spielberg was at the top of his game, but his success was not without a price.

What many people forget is that Spielberg wasn't the only one making a science fiction film at the time. Two other newly-established directors were also creating their own. One was Ridley Scott, who had established himself with 1979's Alien and was now working on an adaptation of the Philip K. Dick novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep which would be released under the title of Blade Runner. At the same time, John Carpenter, riding the success of Halloween was working on his latest project, an adaptation of John W. Campbell's novella Who Goes There? which would become arguably one of his best horror films: The Thing.

Both these films were huge flops at the box office. They were critically panned and it was not until years later that they finally started to get the recognition they deserve. Why? There's plenty of reasons but one that frequently comes up is the success of E.T.: The Extraterrestrial. Audiences were so in awe of the family fun of E.T. that they didn't seem to care much for the much bleaker atmosphere of the other two movies.

I do find this interesting because having finally watched E.T. for the first time in years, I would say that Blade Runner and The Thing may have actually been better films. E.T. is an enjoyable movie but when you get down to it there are a lot of story problems and plot holes. For one thing, as solid as the relationship between the kids and E.T. was, I personally felt a lot of the cast was underdeveloped. There were those three characters who liked to bully Elliot and then suddenly they decide to help him during the climax with no clear motivation. They also don't really do a whole lot to help outside of following Elliot on bicycles.

There was also that strange man with the keys. Throughout the first three quarters of the film we never see his face. He is kept mysterious and the only indication of his identity is a distinct set of keys on his belt that tend to make a jingly noise whenever he walks. There is this certain intimidating vibe to the character, but we have no idea who he is, almost as if they're building up to a twist. So then we come to the big reveal and the man with the keys turns out to be... some guy who wears keys on his belt. Seriously, he doesn't even get a name, and suddenly he's treated as being somewhat sympathetic despite being played as frightening for most of the film.

The mother could also have been a more interesting character if she had found out about the alien sooner. Elliot had no problem introducing E.T. to his siblings, why not also his mother? Sure, it would have been a shock but her gradual warming up to his presence could have been an emotional touch instead of getting cheap laughs out of her failing to notice when they're both in the same room.

The stories of the other two movies are far more complex and I'd say far more interesting. The alien is hostile in The Thing, but what makes that film so interesting is how it affects the characters themselves. They have to deal with the paranoia that comes from relying entirely on themselves since the alien could be anyone. With E.T. you have a relationship forming between the kid and the alien, but with The Thing you have the alien tearing apart the already strenuous relationships between the protagonists.

Meanwhile, Blade Runner has a bit more depth and an intriguing atmosphere. With E.T. you don't get a whole lot of depth to the characters outside of a basic dynamic between each. Blade Runner lets you dive into the minds of Rick, Rachel, and the other characters. It raises philosophical questions about the nature of humanity, none of which have a solid answer. The character of Roy Batty himself is a very psychologically-driven villain, and we get to see into his mind as to why he acts the way he does, certainly a more complex character than the guy with the keys.

The relationship between Rick and Rachel may well be stronger than the bond between Elliot and E.T. ever will be. With Elliot and E.T. you just have two friends from unlikely sources, whereas Blade Runner deals more with the social and ethical consequences of the relationship. Rick is a man trained to kill replicants, and yet he falls in love with one who doesn't even know her true identity.

So why did E.T.: The Extraterrestrial become such a hit while two better films were left in its wake and only gained their deserved recognition later on? Well, at the time the concept was revolutionary. Spielberg had previously explore the themes of benevolent alien visitors in Close Encounters of the Third Kind (parallels to which are pretty clear in E.T.), but the idea of a children's movie, and in particular a child's friendship with an alien was pretty unusual. We do see that sort of dynamic in The Day the Earth Stood Still but there the alien had a goal. It was treated as a superior being intentionally visiting Earth with a plan, as opposed to an innocent alien who gets left behind by accident.

It is interesting to compare these three movies. All three of them came out in the same year of 1982, and yet they are all so different. E.T. became a huge box office success and won four Oscars, while leaving The Thing and Blade Runner, both far superior films in terms of atmosphere and story, to fail horrendously.

Parrallells Between Prometheus and Blade Runner

There was a lot of hype when it was announced that Ridley Scott would be returning to the world of Alien with a prequel film. Many of us were also surprised when it was announced that his movie wouldn't be a straight-up prequel to Alien, but instead would open up something new. The word was that it would have something to do with the "Space Jockey" seen briefly in the original Alien, but anything else about the plot was kept secret. The cast was required to sign confidentiality forms before seeing the script (though they all expressed great confidence in their project). Finally, the movie came out, and reactions were mixed. A lot of people despised it, while others were more optimistic.

Personally, the first time I saw it, I was unsure what to make of the film. Not long after I went to the theater to see it again and thought it was brilliant, and then after the third and fourth times I wasn't quite so sure. I've never gone as far as to say I hate it, but I can't necessarily hail it as the masterpiece I once did. It's a weird case, since usually when it comes to movies I either love them or I hate them, but once in a while I end up in a situation like this where the stuff that's good is really good, but I still have to acknowledge there are serious problems that are hard to overlook.

In the past I have attempted to rationalize many of the problems, some more successfully than others (there were a few edit wars in the IMDB FAQ page when some guy kept replacing my explanations with hateful comments about the movie). It is hard to refute the bad science once you understand where the problems are. On the other hand many people complain that the movie raises questions it never answers, but so do a lot of the best science fiction movies including but not limited to 2001: A Space Odyssey, Alien, The Thing, Contact, Solaris, and Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

Of course, most of you have probably heard all this before. We've all heard the arguments in defense of and in opposition to Prometheus. I could go on examining the areas where the movie fails, particularly the bad science (arguably the biggest issue with the film) and bring up the better parts (largely from a technical standpoint, such as the incredible visuals and reasonably solid acting). However, instead, I'm going to focus on something a bit more interesting. Among the many rumors that emerged when Prometheus was in development and during its production was that in addition to Alien, there was going to be some connection to Ridley Scott's other major science fiction movie Blade Runner. Story-wise, there is no direct connection (at least not that I'm aware of), but there is one particular aspect that does draw a striking parallel.

Many were disappointed by the old man makeup of Guy Pearce in Prometheus. A few were also confused as to why such a young actor was chosen despite the fact that we never see his character of Peter Weyland as a young man (although a young Weyland, also played by Guy Pearce, does appear in one of the viral videos used to promote the film). Still, what I am more interested in looking at is how Weyland's story plays out.

In Prometheus, we find out late in the film that Weyland was aboard the ship the whole time. Some may have seen this twist coming, but it is revealed the scientific aspects of the mission were just an excuse for Peter Weyland to seize a potential (if extremely unlikely) opportunity to extend his life. He is an old man and he doesn't have long to live, so his hope is to literally meet his maker, who might just be able to do something to help him. Sound familiar?

That's because it's not a whole lot different from Roy Batty in Blade Runner. Now, unlike Weyland, Roy is an artificially created being with an even shorter lifespan (they use the term "replicant"; they never actually say how they are made but I've often heard them described as androids). However, like Weyland, he is nearing the end of his four-year life, and wants to live longer. His method is also to literally meet his maker in the hopes of getting an extended life.

Now in each case, said person attempts to take advantage of another individual to help get them to that creator. Weyland, as we eventually find out, took advantage of a young scientist's theories that humanity was created by a superior alien race and her desire to find them, while Roy and his friend Pris took advantage of a lonely fellow by the name of J.F. Sebastian who has ties to his own creator Tyrell.

Once the confrontation starts, let's just say that things don't get pleasant. In either case, the film culminates with a literal meeting between creator and creation. In Blade Runner we have Roy meeting Tyrell, and in Prometheus Weyland meets the last known "Engineer" (the name given to the aliens in reference to the fact that they "engineered" us). In either case, the creator is unable to help. As Tyrell puts it "The light that shines twice as bright burns half as long, and you've burned very bright."

What happens next varies slightly between both films. In Blade Runner, Tyrell is killed by his own creation, who also turns on J.F. Sebastian soon after. Meanwhile in Prometheus, Weyland is subsequently killed, along with most of the others present (outside of Shaw and the android David), by his creator, who also plans to destroy his other creations, namely the entire human race.

After this confrontation, both Roy and Weyland are forced to confront the fact that death is inevitable. Roy is able to show some humanity in his final moments by saving Rick's life. Finally, both are alone with only one other person to share their final words with before they die. In Weyland's case it is David, and in Roy's case, it is Rick.