I think it’s important to be able to empathize with characters, particularly “the other” and those who it is easy to dehumanize.
I can’t think of a circumstance where it’s useful to diminish or excuse any abuse or where empathy with a person requires doing so.
I wholeheartedly agree.
I’m just cautious about dictating or censoring what stories others should tell or how they should tell them.
That’s why I brought up Dead Man Walking, as an example of a film that humanized a character who committed monstrous crimes while still recognizing that his crimes were monstrous and inexcusable. Nobody was supposed to hope the guy on death row would eventually win over the girl he raped at gunpoint.
The films and stories we are discussing here are not that.
God forbid anyone take Hollywood to task for continuing to use a lame plot device about how romantic abduction can be.
The book is better than the movie. I haven’t seen the series, and probably won’t, as for me what was cool about the original was the novel kind of analysis the protagonist did(*); by all accounts in the series he is just the same kind of tech whiz that we’ve seen in 1000 other movies and shows. Boring.
As for the relationship, I don’t even remember it being in the book, and in the movie it seemed to me even at the time to be an intrusive way to introduce some unnecessary extra tension.
(*) A couple of years later I very nearly went to work for the NSA, and part of the attraction was my impression of the agency based in part on the book. My first interview for the job was in a small hot room in a fading city hotel; the interviewer looked just like Redford.
For me, the whole point of the movie was that Redford’s character learned his techniques from reading novels.
People’s fantasies, awakenings and explorations occur through the lens of the stories that are available to them. Stories inform our thoughts, feelings and personal narratives.
Have you ever noticed that there are no stories of men falling in love with ugly and monstrous or abusive women? So few stories of men falling for a persistent yet emotionally unstable girl who doesn’t respect his boundaries?
Why do you suppose we aren’t giving boys the same “opportunties”?
Ironically I think that is because those stores are written for women. Romance for men isn’t really a genre.
It isn’t about “romance”. Stories with male protagonists almost always include a love interest, but because male characters are written as independent heroes in their own stories, we don’t label it as “romance”.
Let me introduce you to the…
Manic Pixie Dream Girls aren’t a love interest though, at least not by the end. They are there so the guy can get his life back on track and “win” the girl. It’s still all about him convincing a reluctant love interest that he is worthy. If the love interest were obsessive and personal space invading he wouldn’t need the MPDG, it would be a very different story.
Interestingly enough, there are plenty of movies/books where a woman is obsessive over a man, but it almost invariably ends in murder attempts instead of storybook romance/Stockholm syndrome.
It’s still a romance for men genre, whether he ends up with the MPDG herself or the love interest who was right in front of his eyes the whole time. Those romance movies aren’t intended to appeal mainly to women, that’s for sure.
Of course Scott going for Ramona in the end was the most egregious fuckup of the movie…
Irrelevant; Ramona is still undeniably the love interest, upon which Scott’s fixation is the entire point of the whole movie.
Exhibit B: Zoey Deschanel in 500 Days of Summer.
In Scott Pilgrim (in the comics) he’s a much more problematic character. He’s more of a douche, and while they kind of touch on it in the movie he was actively trying to pursue an underage girl. I love the movie and like the comic but i have no illusion that Scott is someone to live vicariously through.
Oh, I can imagine.
Though I thoroughly enjoyed the movie as a stylistic comedy, pretty much all the main characters are problematic; shallow, immature, and utterly lacking in basic consideration and respect. IRL no one who’s not a masochist would want to date either Scott or Ramona.
They do kind of deserve each other 
In my younger years i’d definitely relate to Scott, which is why i find the relationship and characters problematic. It romanticizes behaviors that are not ok. I still get that its a comedy and love the movie, and i’m nitpicking. But its important to recognize bad behavior, especially when it comes to guys taking on certain obsessions toward women,
He was supposed to end up with Knives. But since everybody in that movie is an asshole I guess I didn’t feel too bad that they made the wrong choice.
Well that and she was 17
Yep.
Knives who was too young for Scott, both chronologically (statutory rape, anyone?) and emotionally.
Jinx!
Granted Scott is suppsoed to be 23 in the comics so the age gap isn’t huge or out of the ordinary. But there’s something to be said for that dynamic and pursuing a high schooler.
