Teddy Roosevelt was such a boss. He once took a bullet to the chest by a would be assassin. He then confronted the assassin, asked that the police take him away without doing violence to him. He proceeded to give a 84 minute speech, and only after that sought medical attention. That's as manly a story as youll ever hear.
This was great! I always thought Aragorn in PJ'S Trilogy exemplified masculinity well. Protector, hunter, gentleman, lover, and king. so, when he bowed to the Hobbits, it really MEANT something.
This is a great video! I'm a 35 year old man, and watching old western movies with Gary Cooper, John Wayne et al have been my father's non-negotiable Sunday morning ritual for as long as I can remember. But I myself never got into it till now, and I grew up with all the overly-violent, emotionally immature, unsatisfied, lonely and prone-to-depression characters, as you eloquently described. I will definitely start watching the oldies now, thanks a lot for the great content.
Maximus is my favorite manly character. He’s shown from an early point in the movie to not want to be stuck on a battlefield but be a farmer with his wife and son but when it’s go-time it is indeed go-time
Definitely! I thought it was a huge happy coincidence how a few days after I posted the video there came a character who checks off just about all the manly requirements.
@@Moviewise I would like to hear your analysis of Snatch; 99% per cent of the characters are men and has an interesting scene that seems to mean sthing about masculinity
Nancy Pearcey's new book "The Toxic War on Masculinity" covers much of this, too. Going through the past to discover just where the idea of masculinity turned toxic. That problem is not masculinity in itself, but a warped view on what masculinity is, that needs to be corrected. That Hollywood continues to perpetuate poor male role models sure isn't helping!
I think "Moviewise's" correlation between increasing action/violence in movies in the 80s leading directly to characters not having the time to inhabit the more positive side of masculinity is a really smart observation.
@@morgansowell3881yeah I hadn't noticed that. The older characters were more "father/king" archetype. The Eastwood films, as entertaining as they were, depicted this total loner type who kinda strolls into the story, in a world where authority and justice have lost meaning. One reason I don't like the James bond character is exactly this; the guy is a hedonist. A boy might like the thought of being like bond, but in reality it isn't virtuous and wouldn't work in the real world. Just dumb fun.
I ain’t hearing or reading anything about masculinity that comes from a woman’s mouth. Women don’t know anything about masculinity and the goal posts for them always change depending on what benefits them.
This is something I understood when I saw the evolution of the figure of the male protagonist in cinema. When a protagonist uses violence, and not force (arresting a criminal armed with his bare hand is force, beating a handcuffed suspect is violence), he loses his masculinity. Masculinity is facing danger BY CONTROLLING HIS EMOTIONS. In Bonnie And Clyde. Clyde is violent because he is impotant. It is because he has lost his masculinity that he uses violence. We see this difference very well in Gran Torino. Clint is never violent he uses force to defend those close to him. It is the gang that use violence.
Reading this made me realize the movie SE7EN also deals with this theme, maybe as a film commentary of sorts? Brad Pitt plays the prone-to-agressiveness bad cop while Morgan Freeman is the steady handed leader that is about to retire from the old school of cops and who coaches Pitt's character about doing what's effective rather than letting his own sin of wrath overtake him.
Good point on older movies being less violent but still masculine. But newer movies focusing exclusively on violence. Whenever people claim that action movies are toxically masculine, they lump in old westerns, but it’s not true at all.
could have made for an interesting video about hollywood's potential to embrace actors who embody a more positive model of masculinity. instead by romanticising these traditionally masculine caricatures, it only really perpetuates the harmful traits of toxic masculinity which (as many others have pointed out) ISN'T a term intended to criticise the wider concept of masculinity as a whole, only the specific aspects that are hugely damaging to both men and society. the traditionally-held societal ideal of a strong man repressing his emotions, asserting dominance over others (including women), enacting violence when necessary etc is detrimental to building healthy relationships, strong emotional well-being and empathy. the reason we don't really see these john wayne, clint eastwood-esque figures in the modern film landscape is because their on-screen personas reflect antiquated portrayals of what 'masculinity' really is. "real men" embrace their vulnerabilities, uplift others around them, build respectful relationships and don't hide themselves behind a façade of emotional suppression.
I have the theory that script writers and directors started to use their art for personal therapy. Imagine how - during the decades - parents' opinion changed on their kids starting a Hollywood career as a writer. I think after WW2 people just wanted to show and remind people about the good qualities of men. When the next generation came along it was all about rebellion. Some of the writers might have had traumatized veteran fathers and thus got a not so wholesome idea of masculinity. During the 90s and 2000s it was all about the parents not understanding their children. It really felt like the next generation of screenwriters used their scripts to cope with their personal stories. You bet every teen who wanted to go big in Hollywood had worried parents who told them to choose another career. And today ... the writers propagate their personal political ideas - without the need of a proper story. Sorry for being incoherent, I had a tough day. I hope my point is somewhat clear though.
My theory also explains the amount of on the nose identity politics. The new Generation of writers never Had to face any hardships - no wars, no poverty. Their parents supported them to live their dream in contrast to the Generation before. But when you never Made any meaningful experiences, never had to Work through difficult Times, you don't learn to Change and grow. And If you don't understand that concept for your own Life, how can you ever be able to write satisfying character transformations? I'm convinced that from this lack of experience and growth comes a huge inferiority complex, because These writers Feel that they have nothing meaningful to say. Thus, in Order to compensate for thus, these writers Take in some General "good causes", defending minorities they're mostly Not even a Part of, because they forcefully try to give meaning to their Stories. Or they make themselves Part of a alledgedly opressed minority and get into victim mode, trying to make / fake hardships and pretend to make meaningful experiences... yet, their is no growth in victimhood. They still don't understand the Base of character transformation. Summing it Up: current Hollywood writers had way too easy lives to write Something meaningful.
007, now that's a perfect example for a video like this. Started hyper-masculine (almost misogynistic), and became miserable, immature, reckless, and an easy target for manipulative women. R.I.P. James Bond (1962 - 2006)
Excellent, thoughtful analysis. I grew up in the 1960s and 70s, and I never thought about the Clint Eastwoods and Charles Bronsons as just being violent psychopathic loners…not real men.
Fantastic essay. To be honest my favourite male / masculine characters of all time were: James McKay (Gregory Peck in William Wyler's "The big country" and Marshal Will Kane (Gary Cooper in "High Noon"). Well and I have to admit: James T. Kirk (William Shatner in "Star Trek" - the original series). Iconic. Will we ever see characters, men and movie stars like these again?
I thought of Kirk too. The perfect representation of the "full" man as described in this essay. No wonder that Kirk and Spock homo fan theory had to be pushed and practicaly canonized at any cost. Goddamn hippies cannot allow a real man icon in pop culture.
Yeah, I probably would pick Jean Luke Picard. (sp?) Off the top of my head, anyway. Most male leads in the movies I like may be entertaining, but aren't necessarily who I'd want to be.
I feel like you completely missed the irony of Tony Soprano’s obsession with Gary Cooper, given that the machismo culture of the Italian Mafia is part of what prevents him being open about his feelings and damn well near kills him when the other mafiosos find out he’s seeing a therapist. Also, “no book or movie has ever shown a violent or misogynistic brute in a positive light.” I’m pretty sure James Bond has literally slapped women in several movies, and Sean Connery also thought it was completely fine to do so in real life as well. Even if the character is shown to regret doing something like that, it’s still usually framed as having been necessary in the moment or some shit. Anyway, I like your other videos, but this one just has some weird politics in it (which is reflected in a lot of the comments here)
One of my oddest experiences as a cinema viewer was when I was younger and I randomly clicked on a Sean Connery Bond film, and there's a scene where he forces himself on a woman (capital R); I was dumbfounded by what I saw cause i did not expect that (I didn't grow up on Bond films at all), but after I rewinded, it was exactly what I thought it was--it wasn't anything else. And yet, people look up to the character of yesteryear and call him the best Bond. I'm not here to question fandoms, but for people to praise him as a "real man" tells more about the people that idolize him than it does about Sean Connery himself.
The thing is - and this is a hot topic for sure - sometimes, people can enter emotional spirals. I guess it always happened to women only in the Bond movies, but I know it can happen to men too. Part of the trouble with an 'emotional spiral' is that it's hard for the person in it to pull out of it on their own; sometimes, what's needed to bring them back to their senses is outside influence. Whether this is a slap, a pitcher of water or even just somebody asking "do you need help?" is in my opinion mostly a difference of degree. Part of the Bond movies is that they aren't chronicles of a therapist and his patients, they are stories of life and death. If the Bond girl doesn't snap out of the emotional spiral right the heck now, they might get captured and killed. That, I think, is why Bond slapped women in distress, not because he enjoyed it or anything like that. I remember an interview between an ardent feminist and him, and she kept pressing and pressing this question of, essentially, "do you enjoy hitting women?" and he said, very strictly, "you should never hit a woman. My wife is very diminutive, and I wouldn't dream of hitting her." What I drew from this was, when he hit women in films, he was, for lack of a better word, acting.
@@jamjox9922 Here's what's really odd about that, no other Bond is like that whatsoever. Lazenby played Bond only two years after Connery did and Moore only four years after that, and they both portray Bond as a perfect gentleman, but everyone acts like misogynist Bond is some cultural thing from that era rather than something weird about Connery himself, which is how it seems to me. I think he's called the best Bond mostly because Bond's cultural relevance was much greater during that time, I'd pick Moore myself.
The screenwriter for High Noon (Carl Foreman) was a suspected Communist and was summoned to testify in front of Congress during the Red Scare, Wayne was head of the MPA and was one of the main contributors in having him selected for suspicion. Foreman then rewrote High Noon to be a metaphor for his experience in a "hostile society" (being a socialist in the American Red Scare). Wayne hated the movie because he saw the obvious parallels to a real life situation he was extremely involved in and considered it a subversive and unAmerican portrayal of the West (a film genre he was the face of). Note that he hated Clint Eastwood for similar reasons, he thought that Clint's darker themes were anti-American and morally decadent.
Wayne hated Spaghetti Westerns because it destroyed his career. Audiences wanted Spaghetti Westerns, which were grittier and more realistic than the rose-colored westerns of simple "good guys vs bad guys" scenarios John Wayne played in his films. Because even Wayne's characters were "bad" they were still "good." Spaghetti Westerns didn't mince their themes: In a lawless land, everyone is lawless.
Great video as always. My only objection is, associating integrity, courage, strength, maturity, gregariousness etc to masculinity can lead to associate their opposites to femininity. Needless to say, these characteristics are also found in women, some more often than in men, especially maturity. PS: I’m a man
I'm not sure why you're equating masculinity with maturity. Boys can be masculine, too. And toxic masculinity doesn't mean all masculinity is toxic. The term is meant to distinguish itself from healthy masculinity. I do agree with you that Teddy Roosevelt isn't toxic for the most part, though.
Because if it's masculinity then it's by definition not toxic. If it's toxic, it's now something else. And I think it's better to think in these terms, because you're NOT telling men who are good "but going a bit too far" to ease off the throttle; you're telling young boys that they are born into sinful, wicked male bodies.
man you have the best channel ever, you should make a second channel for literature, or random video essay stuff.. I could really listen to you for hours
Perhaps someone else has mentioned it, but the portrayal of Teddy Roosevelt in John Milius' 1975 "The Wind and the Lion" is a wonderfully masculine character (even sharing "secret" information with his daughter Alice at one point--BTW, if you're interested in the Roosevelt presidency, I recommend the book "The Imperial Cruise"). Brian Keith brings all the characteristic you mention into a complicated and fascinating performance. And great video: Thanks!
I think you skipped an important factor: The Spaghetti Western which was more focused on the brutality of actually living in deserts with actual vigilantes, criminals, and failing institutions of law enforcement. The realistic approach really buried the "fantasy" world of the old John Wayne where cowboys where just good guys, whether they were appreciated or not by their society. The "For a Few Dollars" trilogy really threw in the viewers face how harsh environments create hard men, and even "good" guys can do dirty things without actual remorse or want for change. The issue that comes with all the examples you used for proper masculinity is that they all inhabit a similar mold of masculinity; but not every man needs to be a sheriff with a gun, or a Warrior archetype--that's never how any society has ever worked. Even in the most developed societies, some men will be better wise men, teachers, business owners--some will only excel at being there for their famlies, and that is absolutey something to be admired--yet all those old school examples you used focus on a man having to be some grandiose protagonist of a story. Some men are actually better support roles, and that is also absolutely okay--it doesn't diminish their contributions; and while I have a lot of issues with the Marvel cinematic universe, it has clumsily pushed the idea that no man is an island, and that no one is actually a lone hero or even a leader, without the grand support of others. Tell me, did anyone idolize the support cast of the examples you used from old Hollywood? From what I remember about those films, everyone wanted to be John Wayne's character, or whoever played the protagonist. The trait of one single incredible individual was there from the start, and the action films you mention later, only amplified said iconic "Only He Can Solve This Problem" trope even further. That idea isn't terrible, it's very entertaining, but again, since you're using it as an example for masculinity--it falls short of actually being healthy examples or expectations for young boys and men. Going back to the MCU, much as I hate it for being overly goofy and having the issues you mention being absolutely true (I cannot stand how everything seems like a joke to all of the characters and how they reset their maturity levels at the beginning of every film)--the final film, Avengers: End Game really put forth the idea that all these guys were a team, different, and imperfect. There was some spot lights for sure, on Captain America and Iron Man, but the appearance of Black Panther (perhaps the gentlest of leaders), Hulk (someone with emotional problems), Rocket Racoon (Heavy Traumatized character), and Spider Man (Young and inexperienced), gives a wider perception of masculinity. While they are all heroes, they are all varied in what they can do, and not one of them can do it alone. You can be highly imperfect, and still be a part of something that changes things for the better. I never get that sense from those old Hollywood films, cause again, they are highly focused on the protagonist being more perfect than imperfect (despite your admission of them being fallible), and again, the Spaghetti Western destroyed that facade by having grittier and dirtier characters. It's not that masculinity doesn't exist in modern cinema, it will always be there, it's just that the particular brand YOU'RE looking for is frankly, outdated and unattainable. Many of the examples you cite isn't about guys dealing with their actual emotions, but about burying them. There's so much resources on how that affects real men in negative ways, I won't go into it here. In short, the only emotions men are expected and "allowed" to show is anger and happiness (but in a light note, not too emotional). And it has caused so much issues for men and for their relationships; it can lead to a lot of problems bonding in a healthy way. Also, consider a lot of the examples you used were made in a post WW2 era, marketing to Boomers and their parents before Counter-Culture of the 60s changed a lot of modern Western Culture--there was already a lot of issues in society with missing fathers (due to the war) or emotionally absent fathers; plenty of boomers have stories about how their fathers "men of action" enacted domestic abuse on their kids. And some of those undertones are easily traced to the films you mention as exemplary masculinity films, where a man could man-handle a woman by the shoulders and disrespect their personal bodily autonomy. In other words, they were gentleman, until they wanted sex or submission--in which case communication wasn't their strength, it was demanding, manipulation, or coercion. Leslie Nielsen does a great parody of that old Hollywood archetype with "The Naked Gun" series. A solo man that is actually bumbling his way through being the protagonist but exerting all those tropes you find as exemplary masculinity. Again, the MCU has a lot of issues, and it's also not what I consider good masculinity, but it's more diverse in representations of masculinity over the old Hollywood heroes you mention. But for better masculinity in modern cinema, I'd say: "Django Unchained" (both Django and The Dentist are different, and have their own versions of masculinity, with The Dentist being much more gentle and even a sweet person). Neither character is really a bold example of the Old Hollywood despite being inspired by some of those old western film traditions. "1917", for a film about war, it avoids the grittiness of the soul you mention; the main 2 characters are not brooding or moody, but relatively healthy people trying to sustain their mostly positive outlook even while being soldiers. Both are flawed, and far from the 'take action' archetypes you mention. I would say they're both real men, but by the old Hollywood definition, I think John Wayne would have an issue with their portrayal. "Get Out," the main protagonist acts more safe and cautious than actually being proactive about his situation, and that's pretty realistic to his circumstances--again, a real man, taking his safety, even while being provoked continuously. Even in his final scenes, it's not a solo venture that makes him "the hero" of the story, but rather a survivor. And it's become one of the most celebrated films in the last 10 years. "Mad Max: Fury Road" shows a helpless Max (a new brooding character that you mention) working alongside Furiosa (who inhabits more of the traditional Masculine John Wayne type role); it does a good job of humanizing them when tension and action is low, and their team up feels more organic than a lot of those old Hollywood ensembles where everyone seems to sign a paper and get a job. Max also doesn't try to be more than is necessary, some criticized the movie for being too "feminist" because Furiosa leads the film more than Max, but again, it expands the scope of Masculinity, sometimes being masculine is letting others take the lead, not always being tip of the spear yourself. All of the X-Men films, despite their flaws (some are better than others) have Charles Xavier, a man in a wheel chair, with a kind and empathetic soul leading many more dangerous mutants. I wouldn't call him a "man of action" or someone that "picks up their emotions" and says witty lines; but god damn, I think plenty of people reading this would wish their father was more like that fictional leader of mutants than what they got in real life. Would you say he's not masculine? He's damn healthy masculinity if I ever saw it. I think you should read more on the actual theory of what Toxic Masculinity is, and not what tumbler and social media turned it into. Masculinity has never been the issue, but they hyper application of such masculine roles is what made it toxic. The thing itself was never harmful, even if it was a stereotype of men or unattainable for all men, it was the fact that it was pushed as the ONLY way to be a man. And honestly, many of the heroes behind the camera I've seen you idolize: Roger Deakins, David Lynch, and many other cinema greats wouldn't fit the mold of that masculine archetype--and yet they're real men who have contributed immensely to their communities and the world. The old films would never consider such men masculine. That's where the toxicity comes into play; pushing all men to be this macho, bury your feelings, move on to the next woman, and be a savior to someone else's town bravado that creates issues. Yes, there's a lot of issues with young men and men not having ambition, being decisive and so on--but those issues aren't going to be fixed by cinema styles of the past (and certainly not the MCU either); these are complex issues that can't be fixed overnight. But as it is, all things considered, cinema goes in trends--and I always consider cinema more of a reflection of society, not a cause of society. So, the films of today are a better relfection of where men are: they are all over the place and they are diverse. Masculinity, is also very diverse. No two men are alike, but their masculinity shouldn't be danger just because one cries more than the other one. Human beings are so complex, we are not movie characters that walk into a town of desperados with guns blazing; even as a metaphor, handling your personal or interpersonal problems like that is a recipe for disaster. But thsoe old Hollywood John Wayne characters were representative of their time. That's why you don't see many of them today in cinema.
" many of the heroes behind the camera I've seen you idolize: Roger Deakins, David Lynch, and many other cinema greats wouldn't fit the mold of that masculine archetype--and yet they're real men who have contributed immensely to their communities and the world" BRAVO. I was trying to organize my thoughts on this video into a coherent post but had trouble with it, maybe because English is not my native language. But you have excellently analyzed the problem with the video and your points on the difference between masculinity and toxic masculinity are fantastic. Even though some of his points are valid (about immaturity, MCU, Teddy Roosevelt movie) this video comes across as very reactionary & that undercuts the whole thing.
Hollywood doesn't sell loner men anymore (only failed loner men), therefore people feel compelled to disregard or disrespect them. It isn't about being righteous and good to community when needed, it's about working 24/7 for the community hoping to be part of something. It's oppressive and tyranical. We're surrounded by screens and cameras everywhere, but what bothers me is that these communal people also act like cameras and screens. No individual there, only agendas to be decyphered.
You just perfectly explained my issue with the video and i sincerely thank you for that. We've come so far in our understanding of masculinity as a whole. It's a concept that changes with the passage of time, or perhaps, improves. So i fully agree with you about the old western heroes that the maker of the video idolizes as he mentions them for examples.
@@shokizm1perhaps it's too late for you, too far behind to see ahead. Not every modern thought and concept is invalid or false just as much as not every old/conventional "wisdom" is timeless.
your videos are every bit as good as the critical drinker’s when it comes to humor and personality. Your videos are perhaps quite a bit better than his, when it comes to content because you discuss more in-depth concepts and cover actually good films rather than just pop culture moments. The algorithm put you in my feed and I’m grateful for that, but your views don’t really seem to be where they ought to be so I wonder if you are getting screwed by the algorithm in some way. Anyway, thanks for the great videos.
For me its Bogie, Humphrey Bogart . He always got the Dame always beat the bad guy and always looked out for the little guy all while showing a touch of class. Bogie even showed his masculinity and class portraying an old drunkard in the African Queen when he literally chose to go down with the ship for the woman he loved who was portrayed by Katharine Hepburn. No one was cooler than Bogie when he played Sam Spade in The Maltese Falcon. Its what dreams are made of.
In the past, honor meant duels with swords and pistols. Now, it's men of certain religions killing their female relatives for divorcing, dating, wearing bikinis, etc. By "respect," do you mean "common courtesy" or a "tough reputation on the street"?
@@darlalathan6143 Honor has always been more than swords and pistols. Honor is not breaking your code, your ethics, your principles. When you tell the truth, even though it hurts you, that's honor. When you refuse to deny Christ even though you'll be seen as a religious nut, that's honor. Respect means showing someone due treatment, in word and action. We're talking principled men, unshakable men. These things mean something, and are important-as important today as they have ever been in history, and the average person's inability to see this makes it no less true.
Robin Williams has always been my role model, sure most of his movies aren't as masculine as you explained but there's a sense of empathetic wisdom he brings to his roles such as Good Will Hunting and Dead Poets Society.
I think this critique is good, but I have to disagree on your definition of masculinity and objection to the concept of toxic masculinity. To me "masculine" and "feminine" are themselves neutral descriptors that only denote whether something is associated with men or women; they then change in meaning across time and space depending on these associations and ideals. So, I don't think it's accurate to say that masculine traits only include virtuous and healthy ones. And connected to this, the "toxic" in "toxic masculinity" is just a qualifier-- it doesn't mean that all masculinity is toxic, but that there is both toxic and healthy masculinity. Obviously people on either side of the argument misunderstand this to mean that all masculinity is toxic, but that isn't what the term was created to mean, nor is it even implied grammatically.
Idiotic etymological argument, but sure. The way we use the word virtue differs from the way Romans used the word virtus, and likewise our ideas of what is and isn't masculine also differ.
People stopped using toxic masculinity in the way it's meant a long time ago. It's now applied to damn near everything that is traditionally masculine. But I don't ever hear those kinds of people addressing 'toxic femininity' in any way shape or form.
@@Caleb6000 personally, I rarely hear people actually using the phrase anymore. could just be my circles. I do remember what seemed to me the heyday of the word and I agree that a large portion of people took the phrase and ran with it in a way that obliterated any nuance it could and should have held. i understand the impulse to react to that with the similarly simple "actually, masculinity is good", but i think that this is unproductive and misses the point that initial critiques of aspects of masculinity were trying to get at. if more people could understand that the concept of "toxic ____" doesn't mean that the thing itself is intrinsically & wholly toxic, then we could actually form useful critiques and address these issues instead of people getting all defensive.
@@lizardguy5323 Well yeah, that would be reasonable - but in amongst the thoughtful people who were genuinely trying to give constructive criticism on masculinity with the aim of improving it, there was *also* a crowd of misandrists who were just waiting for the right bandwagon to leap onto. Unfortunately, that happened to be the "toxic masculinity" bandwagon.
What you said about toxic masculinity and oxygen morons is exactly how I feel about it. Masculinity can not by it's very nature be toxic, as toxicity is bred from immaturity, and is therefore not masculine.
So how about Waymond Wang in EEAAO (the happy, helpful one in the main universe)? I think he's the hero we need more of in our current times. And tbh I wonder if this video is more about heroism than masculinity?
some points- Hawks had a few movies in which women were assertive, I was a Male War Bride and Bringing up Baby, for example. -Most films made today by the mainstream American industry (''Hollywood'') are made for an adolescent audience. Up to the 1960s American film were made for adults. So you get films made for adolescent minds. American Graffitti may be a turning point for American films on this regard. -The transition from an industrial society to a post-industrial one: the idea of masculinity , what society expects of men, changed deeply within a few decades.The turnmoil we see in the post-industrial world today may have to do with with the inability of the culture to deal with this. The Ice Harvest is a film that deals with this. Heaven help us now as we move from the consumer society into the whatever is replacing it now. Rollerball may had something to say about that. PS- Bresson made A Man Esaped - '"A Man Escaped is blockbuster Bresson, a well-acted POW drama that builds with subtle, seat-gripping tension." So....
"It’s an interesting part of modern progressivism, that a huge amount of change is happening because corporations have identified where their bottom-line is best served,” - Tim Minchin
a wise man once said that films are logos. and we've allowed the left to completely take over the film industry, and today's society is the result. morals>profit
I'd like to point out one thing though- while I think there's nothing necessarily wrong with a man being romantically direct with a woman, being a gentleman means respecting her boundaries too. And I don't like the idea of a man just grabbing a woman he likes and kissing her like in the clip. I don't think it'd be ok if a woman did this to a man either. Being manly does not mean disrespecting a woman's boundaries or just taking what you want from her. That's a harmful idea with harmful implications. When it comes to romantic or sexual assertiveness, there's an appropriate limit. I like that you point out that true masculinity isn't toxic because "being a man" is based on integrity and being a good, mature, responsible person who cares for and protects others, and is about holding yourself accountable for your actions.
Masculinity is first and foremost not what whiny women want it to be. Every man with any experience knows that the nice guy thing doesn't work and that it's gaslighting by whamen who don't want men to be dominant. There are tons of females in modern movies and shows who don't respect any boundaries by men and who only exist to hummiliate men and push an agenda but that doesn't seem to bother you as much as men who are dominant or self-confident.
But she wanted him to kiss her. That's the point. The whiny kind of, "But it was mean!" is exactly the kind of men we have today. It's no good, trust me.
I agree that people should respect each other's boundaries. But there are also times when a woman wants a man to take the initiative and be the one to lean in for a kiss.
I think my favorite example of a good male role model, is Charles aka Pa from Little House on the Praire. Charles was hardworking, Godly, wise, compassionte, kind, didn't judge others He was such a good a father, that it left such imprint on me that that those are the qulites that I want in man. If there is anyone that a young man to look up to it's Charles.
there are two sports films in the mid 2000s that should be remembered, they got two great coaches portrayed by two outstanding actors (yes dwayne can be exceptional if given direction) that were the true alphas of their tribe,they molded the troubled kids playing for them,turned them into men i'm talking about coach carter and of course gridiron gang which were based on true stories never forget that scene when coach carter hugged that kid that ran with the gangs, he knocked on his door and broke down crying because his family member was shot,asked carter what he had to do and returned to the team or that scene when coach porter's team got thrashed in a football game,and porter said he wouldn't trade his team for the other guys that's what masculinity,direction along with a wealth of knowledge and experience can do to a troubled,angry teen give them an outlet and a purpose
This video seems to misunderstand that "toxic masculinity" means a kind of masculinity that is toxic, not that masculinity is toxic. It refers to toxic traits that are associated with expression of masculinity. Back in the day punching a woman if she mouthed off was seen as a masculine man keeping control. Today many men think acting tough and getting into fights is masculine. That's toxic masculinity and it's very much a real thing. The idea that masculinity by itself can't be toxic is cool in concept but not realistic at all since masculinity is something that changes throughout different times and different cultures. I like the channel but this was lackluster.
Which is sad, because this video is a WONDERFUL expression of positive masculine characters, contrasted against negative characters who embody toxic traits that are BAD for men. It's just the final part where he says "I showed all of this but I refuse to understand the terminology I'm mad about."
4 Annoying Main Male Stereotypical Characters That Entertainment Companies Should Seriously Stop Showing: 1. The Creepy Sexual Womanizer 2. The Hyperfeminine Flamboyant Whiner 3. The Lazy Drunkard 4. The Macho Gangster Thug 4 Amazing Male Characters That Entertainment Companies Should Definitely Show: 1. The Clever Scientist 2. The Heroic Warrior 3. The Protective Family Man 4. The Successful Entrepreneur
I liked Bruce Dern in SILENT RUNNING 1972. The man sacrifices everything for the greater good. Next Luthen Rael, ANDOR, "What have I sacrificed...Everything!"
The exemplary man died because culturally it was made uncool. In Indian Hindi Cinema there was the angry young man phase of cinema, representing the angst of that generation of men. Then came the romantic man in the 90s. Shifting political and cultural scenarios make the previous essential version of masculinity uncool. The "real man" as always remains a combination of desperation and ambition, trying to find a spot in society, with few happy moments with friends and family. Any movie about that I would like to see but it has to be done well.
Anyway - "toxic masculinity" isn't a term saying that all masculinity is bad. It's just a term for a specific type of behavior - when men do stupid, destructive things for the sake of being seen as manly. Like when Tony Stark takes stupid risks for the sake of impressing other guys - that's toxic masculinity. When Henry's Fonda's character in 12 Angry Men is strong and confident, that's not toxic masculinity - that's just plain old strength and confidence.
The problem is that you cannot so easily separate the obvious intent of the phrase from its more benign, retroactive apologetic definition. Toxic masculinity does not refer to a guy doing a stupid thing and hurting himself trying to be cool in front of his friends. The "toxicity" of even that action would be debatable. Toxic masculinity is saying that masculinity-forthrightness, aggression, emotional evenness, unabashed sexual interest in women-these are toxic. Of course, this is retarded.
His point is there is no such thing as toxic masculinity cause masculinity isn’t toxic. People are toxic. And if certain men happen to be toxic, then it means they weren’t masculine to begin with. Cause they act like children not men. Masculinity can’t be toxic, Imo.
Again, you miss the meaning of toxic masculinity. That phrase doesn't mean that masculinity is toxic. It's specifically referring to a type of behaviour in which people do destructive, stupid things in order to seem manly.
@@natesmart9959bro back in the 50s it was seen as masculine to punch a woman if she mouthed off. You can’t just pull this catch-22 of “Masculinity is good, and if something’s not good, it was never masculine.” It’s an evolving cultural concept like any other.
@@ferghalicious1480 Exactly this, this video is awesome and it truly defines the how the figure of masculinity in movies should be. But saying there is no such thing as toxic masculinity is being delusional.
0:15 Yes. Exactly. When boys become teenagers they will learn the hard way that it doesn't work that way. This video should be part of an elementary school curriculum.
You're brave to say that in the middle of all these modernity shit btw where are you from? I can feel a little accent in your language, and i think i'm from where you are from
Good take,that said there is surely a middle ground between the idealised masculine character who always says the right thing and acts the right way(don't forget the Hayes Code in all of this)and the brainless killing machine with no heart of the post 1980's action flicks,I feel that the 70's were a sweet spot,the Bronsons,EastWoods and McQueens,were flawed realistic characters,yet maintained a certain nobility,it wasn't Rio Bravo anymore but it also wasn't Commando...as for Roosevelt I think that people like him lead to the current status of modern manhood,he was what you would call today a white knight,for instance he believed that men who laid a hand on a woman,deserved judicial corporal punishment,don't believe me?check it.
Most adults DO NOT have emotional maturity lmao. While I can agree with some of your points, I think your insight into masculinity as a whole is very one-dimensional as well as delusional. Humans operate across a spectrum of principles and emotions and seldom remain fixed at one point. This video is also clearly biased and weirdly so. There's nothing emasculating about a suicidal or self-loathing man. That is a man in distress. And while I like a great many of John Wayne's films, I'd hardly call him an exemplary man of class. High Noon is a criticism of Hollywood and McCarthyism during that era of the Cold War. It's interesting you use both that movie as well as its counter-political argument, Rio Bravo, as an argument for "manliness" when you just previously referred to the act of "one-upmanship" as childlike and non-masculine as demonstrated by your choice of clips from Thor Ragnarok and Hobbs & Shaw.
I think his point is that the only time a man is portrayed as particularly masculine is when he's also suicidal, depressed and unsocial. I don't think it was the one-upsmanship that he was calling out, but the childish way in which it was done. The characters banter like teenagers who think they're clever. Your opening argument seems to boil down to, "But people are immature and dumb, so aspiring to an ideal is also immature and dumb," which I think is, with respect, immature and dumb.
I saw Some Western Classic movies, 80s movies and 300 Film plus John Wick 1-4 are masculinity Movies. Puss in Boots: Last Wish Jurassic World: Dominion Top Guns: Maverick
It’s because these movies you’re highlighting are not made for artistic purposes-for an exploration of the human condition-but as a socialisation agent in order to preserve the patriarchy: Man is strong, man saves woman, man is a protector of women; you women should be subservient to your man because, as you can see, he is far more practical and rational than you are. I’m not saying that’s an awful thing… but I find it rather depressing that people cling so arduously to their masculine values without even truly realising that it’s been drilled into them to oppress the one they’re meant to love most dearly. We shouldn’t go the complete opposite way and emasculate all males… but this is a part of the process: rationalism is met with romanticism; God is met with science, science is met in turn with God; values are preserved, torn and rebuilt with fervour; thesis, antithesis, synthesis.
Favourite manly characters: Atticus Finch (Gregory Peck) in 'To Kill A Mockingbird' (1962), Chen Zen (Bruce Lee) in 'Fist of Fury' (1972), Michael (Robert De Niro) in 'The Deer Hunter' (1978), Manny (Jon Voight) in 'Runaway Train' (1985), Ben Bugsy Siegel (Warren Beatty) in 'Bugsy' (1991), Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) in 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy (2001-2003), Alain van Versch (Matthias Schoenaerts) in 'Rust and Bone' 'De rouille et d'os' (2012) and Seán Cinnsealach (Andrew Bennett) in 'The Quiet Girl' 'An Cailín Ciúin' (2022).
Probably not my _favourite_ manly character but Clive Owen in Children of Men is basically just a normal guy who does his best to protect others and possibly saves mankind and in the end they kill him (spoilers) which is pretty damn masculine if you asked me. I really enjoyed this essay and I was also wondering what film is that clip with the woman clapping _"Violence! Woo!"_ from? 😅
Children of Men is terrific, but I still think Clive Owen's character is a bit too sad and unsociable... I'm glad you enjoyed the essay and the film you asked about is "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" I'll talk a bit about it in my next video next week.
@@Moviewise Cool thank you! I'll have to watch it now; the synopsis reminded me of my parents 😅 Yeah you're right he's definitely sad and unsociable, though the whole movie is kinda sad with the dystopian future, and he was cheerful enough with his ex and the ping pong ball 😆 but yes he fits into your thesis nicely 😬
I just released a video today about a kiss and a scandal. Naturally I stuck a bunch of clips in it: Hollywood kisses. I am not all that artistic as a film maker. A bit on the nose, I guess. But you do indeed have a point. Boys do kiss in Rom Coms and cartoons but girls initiate kisses way more now than they did when things were all black and white. Then again I put a bunch of clips in of women slapping men. Things may have changed for the better ... those clips were hard to find. But clips of men slapping women were very easy to come by. I suspect you would agree that clips of men forcing kisses on the ladies should be in black and white and not in colour. Greet video (again)!!
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Teddy Roosevelt was such a boss. He once took a bullet to the chest by a would be assassin. He then confronted the assassin, asked that the police take him away without doing violence to him. He proceeded to give a 84 minute speech, and only after that sought medical attention. That's as manly a story as youll ever hear.
You forgot his statement, “It takes more than that to kill a Bull-Moose.”
(The political party he ran for).
What a man.
That Grace Kelly reaction was a bullseye.
Man this channel is an absolute gem. So nice to find someone critiquing film who actually knows what they're talking about.
This was great! I always thought Aragorn in PJ'S Trilogy exemplified masculinity well. Protector, hunter, gentleman, lover, and king. so, when he bowed to the Hobbits, it really MEANT something.
They gave him self doubt which ran across all three movies and wasn't in the book though.
@@richardcahill1234 So?
Nail on the head
what about father,
This is a great video! I'm a 35 year old man, and watching old western movies with Gary Cooper, John Wayne et al have been my father's non-negotiable Sunday morning ritual for as long as I can remember. But I myself never got into it till now, and I grew up with all the overly-violent, emotionally immature, unsatisfied, lonely and prone-to-depression characters, as you eloquently described.
I will definitely start watching the oldies now, thanks a lot for the great content.
Maximus is my favorite manly character. He’s shown from an early point in the movie to not want to be stuck on a battlefield but be a farmer with his wife and son but when it’s go-time it is indeed go-time
"What we do in life echoes in eternity".
I think Tom Cruise in Top Gun:Maverick is a great example of the classic male charachter
Definitely! I thought it was a huge happy coincidence how a few days after I posted the video there came a character who checks off just about all the manly requirements.
In real life, he's a cut member and a horrible boss!
@@Moviewise I would like to hear your analysis of Snatch; 99% per cent of the characters are men and has an interesting scene that seems to mean sthing about masculinity
@@darlalathan6143i would happily join the cult if he asked me to.
@@darlalathan6143 Yeah wear that mask and limit the number of people who die in a plague :P
Nancy Pearcey's new book "The Toxic War on Masculinity" covers much of this, too. Going through the past to discover just where the idea of masculinity turned toxic. That problem is not masculinity in itself, but a warped view on what masculinity is, that needs to be corrected. That Hollywood continues to perpetuate poor male role models sure isn't helping!
Isnt it ironic that the newer breed of 70 to 80s movie perpetuate those ideas and not older ones.
I think "Moviewise's" correlation between increasing action/violence in movies in the 80s leading directly to characters not having the time to inhabit the more positive side of masculinity is a really smart observation.
@@morgansowell3881yeah I hadn't noticed that. The older characters were more "father/king" archetype. The Eastwood films, as entertaining as they were, depicted this total loner type who kinda strolls into the story, in a world where authority and justice have lost meaning.
One reason I don't like the James bond character is exactly this; the guy is a hedonist. A boy might like the thought of being like bond, but in reality it isn't virtuous and wouldn't work in the real world. Just dumb fun.
I ain’t hearing or reading anything about masculinity that comes from a woman’s mouth. Women don’t know anything about masculinity and the goal posts for them always change depending on what benefits them.
This is something I understood when I saw the evolution of the figure of the male protagonist in cinema.
When a protagonist uses violence, and not force (arresting a criminal armed with his bare hand is force, beating a handcuffed suspect is violence), he loses his masculinity. Masculinity is facing danger BY CONTROLLING HIS EMOTIONS.
In Bonnie And Clyde. Clyde is violent because he is impotant. It is because he has lost his masculinity that he uses violence.
We see this difference very well in Gran Torino. Clint is never violent he uses force to defend those close to him. It is the gang that use violence.
Reading this made me realize the movie SE7EN also deals with this theme, maybe as a film commentary of sorts? Brad Pitt plays the prone-to-agressiveness bad cop while Morgan Freeman is the steady handed leader that is about to retire from the old school of cops and who coaches Pitt's character about doing what's effective rather than letting his own sin of wrath overtake him.
Very good video! I'm a woman and I seriously miss movies with masculine characters. Please, bring them back!
If they would have made The Godfather today, Michael Corleone would have been an emotionless murderer who ruins his own life.
Wait...
Good point on older movies being less violent but still masculine. But newer movies focusing exclusively on violence. Whenever people claim that action movies are toxically masculine, they lump in old westerns, but it’s not true at all.
could have made for an interesting video about hollywood's potential to embrace actors who embody a more positive model of masculinity. instead by romanticising these traditionally masculine caricatures, it only really perpetuates the harmful traits of toxic masculinity which (as many others have pointed out) ISN'T a term intended to criticise the wider concept of masculinity as a whole, only the specific aspects that are hugely damaging to both men and society.
the traditionally-held societal ideal of a strong man repressing his emotions, asserting dominance over others (including women), enacting violence when necessary etc is detrimental to building healthy relationships, strong emotional well-being and empathy. the reason we don't really see these john wayne, clint eastwood-esque figures in the modern film landscape is because their on-screen personas reflect antiquated portrayals of what 'masculinity' really is.
"real men" embrace their vulnerabilities, uplift others around them, build respectful relationships and don't hide themselves behind a façade of emotional suppression.
I have the theory that script writers and directors started to use their art for personal therapy.
Imagine how - during the decades - parents' opinion changed on their kids starting a Hollywood career as a writer.
I think after WW2 people just wanted to show and remind people about the good qualities of men.
When the next generation came along it was all about rebellion. Some of the writers might have had traumatized veteran fathers and thus got a not so wholesome idea of masculinity.
During the 90s and 2000s it was all about the parents not understanding their children. It really felt like the next generation of screenwriters used their scripts to cope with their personal stories. You bet every teen who wanted to go big in Hollywood had worried parents who told them to choose another career.
And today ... the writers propagate their personal political ideas - without the need of a proper story.
Sorry for being incoherent, I had a tough day. I hope my point is somewhat clear though.
Don't apologize. You make great points.
Great points.
Makes sense. I'm a writer, know a lot of them, and this all makes a lot of sense.
Tbh you went straight on point with this, mary sue characters goes super well with the theory
My theory also explains the amount of on the nose identity politics.
The new Generation of writers never Had to face any hardships - no wars, no poverty. Their parents supported them to live their dream in contrast to the Generation before.
But when you never Made any meaningful experiences, never had to Work through difficult Times, you don't learn to Change and grow. And If you don't understand that concept for your own Life, how can you ever be able to write satisfying character transformations?
I'm convinced that from this lack of experience and growth comes a huge inferiority complex, because These writers Feel that they have nothing meaningful to say.
Thus, in Order to compensate for thus, these writers Take in some General "good causes", defending minorities they're mostly Not even a Part of, because they forcefully try to give meaning to their Stories. Or they make themselves Part of a alledgedly opressed minority and get into victim mode, trying to make / fake hardships and pretend to make meaningful experiences... yet, their is no growth in victimhood. They still don't understand the Base of character transformation.
Summing it Up: current Hollywood writers had way too easy lives to write Something meaningful.
This is quickly becoming my favourite RUclips channel. Keep it up mate.
Laughed my arse off when you cut to Grace Kelly - has there been a better looking woman? Loved the clip from 'The Edge' too, superb film. Great video!
My girlfriend. 😏
007, now that's a perfect example for a video like this. Started hyper-masculine (almost misogynistic), and became miserable, immature, reckless, and an easy target for manipulative women. R.I.P. James Bond (1962 - 2006)
Excellent, thoughtful analysis. I grew up in the 1960s and 70s, and I never thought about the Clint Eastwoods and Charles Bronsons as just being violent psychopathic loners…not real men.
Fantastic essay. To be honest my favourite male / masculine characters of all time were: James McKay (Gregory Peck in William Wyler's "The big country" and Marshal Will Kane (Gary Cooper in "High Noon"). Well and I have to admit: James T. Kirk (William Shatner in "Star Trek" - the original series). Iconic. Will we ever see characters, men and movie stars like these again?
I thought of Kirk too. The perfect representation of the "full" man as described in this essay. No wonder that Kirk and Spock homo fan theory had to be pushed and practicaly canonized at any cost. Goddamn hippies cannot allow a real man icon in pop culture.
Yeah, I probably would pick Jean Luke Picard. (sp?) Off the top of my head, anyway. Most male leads in the movies I like may be entertaining, but aren't necessarily who I'd want to be.
I feel like you completely missed the irony of Tony Soprano’s obsession with Gary Cooper, given that the machismo culture of the Italian Mafia is part of what prevents him being open about his feelings and damn well near kills him when the other mafiosos find out he’s seeing a therapist.
Also, “no book or movie has ever shown a violent or misogynistic brute in a positive light.” I’m pretty sure James Bond has literally slapped women in several movies, and Sean Connery also thought it was completely fine to do so in real life as well. Even if the character is shown to regret doing something like that, it’s still usually framed as having been necessary in the moment or some shit.
Anyway, I like your other videos, but this one just has some weird politics in it (which is reflected in a lot of the comments here)
One of my oddest experiences as a cinema viewer was when I was younger and I randomly clicked on a Sean Connery Bond film, and there's a scene where he forces himself on a woman (capital R); I was dumbfounded by what I saw cause i did not expect that (I didn't grow up on Bond films at all), but after I rewinded, it was exactly what I thought it was--it wasn't anything else.
And yet, people look up to the character of yesteryear and call him the best Bond. I'm not here to question fandoms, but for people to praise him as a "real man" tells more about the people that idolize him than it does about Sean Connery himself.
The thing is - and this is a hot topic for sure - sometimes, people can enter emotional spirals. I guess it always happened to women only in the Bond movies, but I know it can happen to men too.
Part of the trouble with an 'emotional spiral' is that it's hard for the person in it to pull out of it on their own; sometimes, what's needed to bring them back to their senses is outside influence. Whether this is a slap, a pitcher of water or even just somebody asking "do you need help?" is in my opinion mostly a difference of degree.
Part of the Bond movies is that they aren't chronicles of a therapist and his patients, they are stories of life and death. If the Bond girl doesn't snap out of the emotional spiral right the heck now, they might get captured and killed. That, I think, is why Bond slapped women in distress, not because he enjoyed it or anything like that.
I remember an interview between an ardent feminist and him, and she kept pressing and pressing this question of, essentially, "do you enjoy hitting women?" and he said, very strictly, "you should never hit a woman. My wife is very diminutive, and I wouldn't dream of hitting her."
What I drew from this was, when he hit women in films, he was, for lack of a better word, acting.
@@jamjox9922 Here's what's really odd about that, no other Bond is like that whatsoever. Lazenby played Bond only two years after Connery did and Moore only four years after that, and they both portray Bond as a perfect gentleman, but everyone acts like misogynist Bond is some cultural thing from that era rather than something weird about Connery himself, which is how it seems to me. I think he's called the best Bond mostly because Bond's cultural relevance was much greater during that time, I'd pick Moore myself.
Entertaining, thoughtful and revelatory. Thank you!!!!
The screenwriter for High Noon (Carl Foreman) was a suspected Communist and was summoned to testify in front of Congress during the Red Scare, Wayne was head of the MPA and was one of the main contributors in having him selected for suspicion. Foreman then rewrote High Noon to be a metaphor for his experience in a "hostile society" (being a socialist in the American Red Scare). Wayne hated the movie because he saw the obvious parallels to a real life situation he was extremely involved in and considered it a subversive and unAmerican portrayal of the West (a film genre he was the face of). Note that he hated Clint Eastwood for similar reasons, he thought that Clint's darker themes were anti-American and morally decadent.
Wayne hated Spaghetti Westerns because it destroyed his career. Audiences wanted Spaghetti Westerns, which were grittier and more realistic than the rose-colored westerns of simple "good guys vs bad guys" scenarios John Wayne played in his films.
Because even Wayne's characters were "bad" they were still "good."
Spaghetti Westerns didn't mince their themes: In a lawless land, everyone is lawless.
When High Noon was hailed as a freedom-oriented film, the screenwriter disowned it.
I stumbled onto your channel and have been loving your videos. Keep up the great work!
Great video as always. My only objection is, associating integrity, courage, strength, maturity, gregariousness etc to masculinity can lead to associate their opposites to femininity. Needless to say, these characteristics are also found in women, some more often than in men, especially maturity.
PS: I’m a man
3:10. I love that you placed Clark Gable on your top 3 men in movies.
If I could be anyone, I’d choose Clark Gable.
I just discovered your channel and I'm loving your videos. This is a great one. I'm gonna go rewatch High Noon.
I'm not sure why you're equating masculinity with maturity. Boys can be masculine, too. And toxic masculinity doesn't mean all masculinity is toxic. The term is meant to distinguish itself from healthy masculinity. I do agree with you that Teddy Roosevelt isn't toxic for the most part, though.
Because labelling immaturity as toxic masculinity is false. It is toxic immaturity not toxic masculinity.
Because if it's masculinity then it's by definition not toxic. If it's toxic, it's now something else. And I think it's better to think in these terms, because you're NOT telling men who are good "but going a bit too far" to ease off the throttle; you're telling young boys that they are born into sinful, wicked male bodies.
Thanks!
Thank you!
Uau! Sensacional esse vídeo! Fala sobre tudo o que eu estudo atualmente. Parabéns, qualidade incrivel. Vc é um gênio
man you have the best channel ever, you should make a second channel for literature, or random video essay stuff.. I could really listen to you for hours
Very good video. Thank You Sir.
Perhaps someone else has mentioned it, but the portrayal of Teddy Roosevelt in John Milius' 1975 "The Wind and the Lion" is a wonderfully masculine character (even sharing "secret" information with his daughter Alice at one point--BTW, if you're interested in the Roosevelt presidency, I recommend the book "The Imperial Cruise"). Brian Keith brings all the characteristic you mention into a complicated and fascinating performance.
And great video: Thanks!
I’ve been wanting to watch that one. Love Milius work.
I think you skipped an important factor: The Spaghetti Western which was more focused on the brutality of actually living in deserts with actual vigilantes, criminals, and failing institutions of law enforcement. The realistic approach really buried the "fantasy" world of the old John Wayne where cowboys where just good guys, whether they were appreciated or not by their society.
The "For a Few Dollars" trilogy really threw in the viewers face how harsh environments create hard men, and even "good" guys can do dirty things without actual remorse or want for change.
The issue that comes with all the examples you used for proper masculinity is that they all inhabit a similar mold of masculinity; but not every man needs to be a sheriff with a gun, or a Warrior archetype--that's never how any society has ever worked. Even in the most developed societies, some men will be better wise men, teachers, business owners--some will only excel at being there for their famlies, and that is absolutey something to be admired--yet all those old school examples you used focus on a man having to be some grandiose protagonist of a story.
Some men are actually better support roles, and that is also absolutely okay--it doesn't diminish their contributions; and while I have a lot of issues with the Marvel cinematic universe, it has clumsily pushed the idea that no man is an island, and that no one is actually a lone hero or even a leader, without the grand support of others. Tell me, did anyone idolize the support cast of the examples you used from old Hollywood? From what I remember about those films, everyone wanted to be John Wayne's character, or whoever played the protagonist.
The trait of one single incredible individual was there from the start, and the action films you mention later, only amplified said iconic "Only He Can Solve This Problem" trope even further. That idea isn't terrible, it's very entertaining, but again, since you're using it as an example for masculinity--it falls short of actually being healthy examples or expectations for young boys and men.
Going back to the MCU, much as I hate it for being overly goofy and having the issues you mention being absolutely true (I cannot stand how everything seems like a joke to all of the characters and how they reset their maturity levels at the beginning of every film)--the final film, Avengers: End Game really put forth the idea that all these guys were a team, different, and imperfect. There was some spot lights for sure, on Captain America and Iron Man, but the appearance of Black Panther (perhaps the gentlest of leaders), Hulk (someone with emotional problems), Rocket Racoon (Heavy Traumatized character), and Spider Man (Young and inexperienced), gives a wider perception of masculinity. While they are all heroes, they are all varied in what they can do, and not one of them can do it alone. You can be highly imperfect, and still be a part of something that changes things for the better.
I never get that sense from those old Hollywood films, cause again, they are highly focused on the protagonist being more perfect than imperfect (despite your admission of them being fallible), and again, the Spaghetti Western destroyed that facade by having grittier and dirtier characters.
It's not that masculinity doesn't exist in modern cinema, it will always be there, it's just that the particular brand YOU'RE looking for is frankly, outdated and unattainable. Many of the examples you cite isn't about guys dealing with their actual emotions, but about burying them. There's so much resources on how that affects real men in negative ways, I won't go into it here. In short, the only emotions men are expected and "allowed" to show is anger and happiness (but in a light note, not too emotional). And it has caused so much issues for men and for their relationships; it can lead to a lot of problems bonding in a healthy way.
Also, consider a lot of the examples you used were made in a post WW2 era, marketing to Boomers and their parents before Counter-Culture of the 60s changed a lot of modern Western Culture--there was already a lot of issues in society with missing fathers (due to the war) or emotionally absent fathers; plenty of boomers have stories about how their fathers "men of action" enacted domestic abuse on their kids. And some of those undertones are easily traced to the films you mention as exemplary masculinity films, where a man could man-handle a woman by the shoulders and disrespect their personal bodily autonomy. In other words, they were gentleman, until they wanted sex or submission--in which case communication wasn't their strength, it was demanding, manipulation, or coercion.
Leslie Nielsen does a great parody of that old Hollywood archetype with "The Naked Gun" series. A solo man that is actually bumbling his way through being the protagonist but exerting all those tropes you find as exemplary masculinity. Again, the MCU has a lot of issues, and it's also not what I consider good masculinity, but it's more diverse in representations of masculinity over the old Hollywood heroes you mention.
But for better masculinity in modern cinema, I'd say:
"Django Unchained" (both Django and The Dentist are different, and have their own versions of masculinity, with The Dentist being much more gentle and even a sweet person). Neither character is really a bold example of the Old Hollywood despite being inspired by some of those old western film traditions.
"1917", for a film about war, it avoids the grittiness of the soul you mention; the main 2 characters are not brooding or moody, but relatively healthy people trying to sustain their mostly positive outlook even while being soldiers. Both are flawed, and far from the 'take action' archetypes you mention. I would say they're both real men, but by the old Hollywood definition, I think John Wayne would have an issue with their portrayal.
"Get Out," the main protagonist acts more safe and cautious than actually being proactive about his situation, and that's pretty realistic to his circumstances--again, a real man, taking his safety, even while being provoked continuously. Even in his final scenes, it's not a solo venture that makes him "the hero" of the story, but rather a survivor. And it's become one of the most celebrated films in the last 10 years.
"Mad Max: Fury Road" shows a helpless Max (a new brooding character that you mention) working alongside Furiosa (who inhabits more of the traditional Masculine John Wayne type role); it does a good job of humanizing them when tension and action is low, and their team up feels more organic than a lot of those old Hollywood ensembles where everyone seems to sign a paper and get a job. Max also doesn't try to be more than is necessary, some criticized the movie for being too "feminist" because Furiosa leads the film more than Max, but again, it expands the scope of Masculinity, sometimes being masculine is letting others take the lead, not always being tip of the spear yourself.
All of the X-Men films, despite their flaws (some are better than others) have Charles Xavier, a man in a wheel chair, with a kind and empathetic soul leading many more dangerous mutants. I wouldn't call him a "man of action" or someone that "picks up their emotions" and says witty lines; but god damn, I think plenty of people reading this would wish their father was more like that fictional leader of mutants than what they got in real life. Would you say he's not masculine? He's damn healthy masculinity if I ever saw it.
I think you should read more on the actual theory of what Toxic Masculinity is, and not what tumbler and social media turned it into. Masculinity has never been the issue, but they hyper application of such masculine roles is what made it toxic. The thing itself was never harmful, even if it was a stereotype of men or unattainable for all men, it was the fact that it was pushed as the ONLY way to be a man.
And honestly, many of the heroes behind the camera I've seen you idolize: Roger Deakins, David Lynch, and many other cinema greats wouldn't fit the mold of that masculine archetype--and yet they're real men who have contributed immensely to their communities and the world. The old films would never consider such men masculine. That's where the toxicity comes into play; pushing all men to be this macho, bury your feelings, move on to the next woman, and be a savior to someone else's town bravado that creates issues.
Yes, there's a lot of issues with young men and men not having ambition, being decisive and so on--but those issues aren't going to be fixed by cinema styles of the past (and certainly not the MCU either); these are complex issues that can't be fixed overnight. But as it is, all things considered, cinema goes in trends--and I always consider cinema more of a reflection of society, not a cause of society.
So, the films of today are a better relfection of where men are: they are all over the place and they are diverse. Masculinity, is also very diverse. No two men are alike, but their masculinity shouldn't be danger just because one cries more than the other one.
Human beings are so complex, we are not movie characters that walk into a town of desperados with guns blazing; even as a metaphor, handling your personal or interpersonal problems like that is a recipe for disaster. But thsoe old Hollywood John Wayne characters were representative of their time. That's why you don't see many of them today in cinema.
" many of the heroes behind the camera I've seen you idolize: Roger Deakins, David Lynch, and many other cinema greats wouldn't fit the mold of that masculine archetype--and yet they're real men who have contributed immensely to their communities and the world"
BRAVO.
I was trying to organize my thoughts on this video into a coherent post but had trouble with it, maybe because English is not my native language. But you have excellently analyzed the problem with the video and your points on the difference between masculinity and toxic masculinity are fantastic.
Even though some of his points are valid (about immaturity, MCU, Teddy Roosevelt movie) this video comes across as very reactionary & that undercuts the whole thing.
ahh - i see its too late for you - too deep in the modern system to view outside of it!
Hollywood doesn't sell loner men anymore (only failed loner men), therefore people feel compelled to disregard or disrespect them. It isn't about being righteous and good to community when needed, it's about working 24/7 for the community hoping to be part of something. It's oppressive and tyranical. We're surrounded by screens and cameras everywhere, but what bothers me is that these communal people also act like cameras and screens. No individual there, only agendas to be decyphered.
You just perfectly explained my issue with the video and i sincerely thank you for that. We've come so far in our understanding of masculinity as a whole. It's a concept that changes with the passage of time, or perhaps, improves. So i fully agree with you about the old western heroes that the maker of the video idolizes as he mentions them for examples.
@@shokizm1perhaps it's too late for you, too far behind to see ahead. Not every modern thought and concept is invalid or false just as much as not every old/conventional "wisdom" is timeless.
your videos are every bit as good as the critical drinker’s when it comes to humor and personality. Your videos are perhaps quite a bit better than his, when it comes to content because you discuss more in-depth concepts and cover actually good films rather than just pop culture moments. The algorithm put you in my feed and I’m grateful for that, but your views don’t really seem to be where they ought to be so I wonder if you are getting screwed by the algorithm in some way. Anyway, thanks for the great videos.
Way better
love your videos man. You've earned another sub!
For me its Bogie, Humphrey Bogart . He always got the Dame always beat the bad guy and always looked out for the little guy all while showing a touch of class. Bogie even showed his masculinity and class portraying an old drunkard in the African Queen when he literally chose to go down with the ship for the woman he loved who was portrayed by Katharine Hepburn. No one was cooler than Bogie when he played Sam Spade in The Maltese Falcon. Its what dreams are made of.
Didn't get the dame in one famous movie! Otherwise spot on though
@@MichaelHayes_s6..... he came for the water
Epic, incredible, enterteining and fun video. Subscribed and good luck with the channel! 💪
Great video!!. Will download and repeatedly watch.
Much needed video in an age of moral and masculine degradation. Seems like honor and respect are supposed to be ideas of the past today.
In the past, honor meant duels with swords and pistols. Now, it's men of certain religions killing their female relatives for divorcing, dating, wearing bikinis, etc. By "respect," do you mean "common courtesy" or a "tough reputation on the street"?
@@darlalathan6143 You're not a female, dude.
@@darlalathan6143 Honor has always been more than swords and pistols. Honor is not breaking your code, your ethics, your principles. When you tell the truth, even though it hurts you, that's honor. When you refuse to deny Christ even though you'll be seen as a religious nut, that's honor.
Respect means showing someone due treatment, in word and action. We're talking principled men, unshakable men.
These things mean something, and are important-as important today as they have ever been in history, and the average person's inability to see this makes it no less true.
Robin Williams has always been my role model, sure most of his movies aren't as masculine as you explained but there's a sense of empathetic wisdom he brings to his roles such as Good Will Hunting and Dead Poets Society.
Robin Williams gives me the creeps. His only role I could see him is as the Antagonist in Insomnia.
very good and inspirational video! Agreed 100%
Your works is incredible, keep it up like this man !
I think this critique is good, but I have to disagree on your definition of masculinity and objection to the concept of toxic masculinity. To me "masculine" and "feminine" are themselves neutral descriptors that only denote whether something is associated with men or women; they then change in meaning across time and space depending on these associations and ideals. So, I don't think it's accurate to say that masculine traits only include virtuous and healthy ones. And connected to this, the "toxic" in "toxic masculinity" is just a qualifier-- it doesn't mean that all masculinity is toxic, but that there is both toxic and healthy masculinity. Obviously people on either side of the argument misunderstand this to mean that all masculinity is toxic, but that isn't what the term was created to mean, nor is it even implied grammatically.
May I remind you that the term virtue comes from the latin word vires which can be translated to virility.
Idiotic etymological argument, but sure. The way we use the word virtue differs from the way Romans used the word virtus, and likewise our ideas of what is and isn't masculine also differ.
People stopped using toxic masculinity in the way it's meant a long time ago. It's now applied to damn near everything that is traditionally masculine. But I don't ever hear those kinds of people addressing 'toxic femininity' in any way shape or form.
@@Caleb6000 personally, I rarely hear people actually using the phrase anymore. could just be my circles. I do remember what seemed to me the heyday of the word and I agree that a large portion of people took the phrase and ran with it in a way that obliterated any nuance it could and should have held. i understand the impulse to react to that with the similarly simple "actually, masculinity is good", but i think that this is unproductive and misses the point that initial critiques of aspects of masculinity were trying to get at. if more people could understand that the concept of "toxic ____" doesn't mean that the thing itself is intrinsically & wholly toxic, then we could actually form useful critiques and address these issues instead of people getting all defensive.
@@lizardguy5323 Well yeah, that would be reasonable - but in amongst the thoughtful people who were genuinely trying to give constructive criticism on masculinity with the aim of improving it, there was *also* a crowd of misandrists who were just waiting for the right bandwagon to leap onto. Unfortunately, that happened to be the "toxic masculinity" bandwagon.
What you said about toxic masculinity and oxygen morons is exactly how I feel about it. Masculinity can not by it's very nature be toxic, as toxicity is bred from immaturity, and is therefore not masculine.
This may be the most important video i've seen
Great video, my friend!
So how about Waymond Wang in EEAAO (the happy, helpful one in the main universe)?
I think he's the hero we need more of in our current times.
And tbh I wonder if this video is more about heroism than masculinity?
some points- Hawks had a few movies in which women were assertive, I was a Male War Bride and Bringing up Baby, for example. -Most films made today by the mainstream American industry (''Hollywood'') are made for an adolescent audience. Up to the 1960s American film were made for adults. So you get films made for adolescent minds. American Graffitti may be a turning point for American films on this regard. -The transition from an industrial society to a post-industrial one: the idea of masculinity , what society expects of men, changed deeply within a few decades.The turnmoil we see in the post-industrial world today may have to do with with the inability of the culture to deal with this. The Ice Harvest is a film that deals with this. Heaven help us now as we move from the consumer society into the whatever is replacing it now. Rollerball may had something to say about that. PS- Bresson made A Man Esaped - '"A Man Escaped is blockbuster Bresson, a well-acted POW drama that builds with subtle, seat-gripping tension." So....
"It’s an interesting part of modern progressivism, that a huge amount of change is happening because corporations have identified where their bottom-line is best served,” - Tim Minchin
Tim Minchin should be required reading/watching in schools. There wouldn't be so many idiots.
a wise man once said that films are logos. and we've allowed the left to completely take over the film industry, and today's society is the result. morals>profit
And where is that?
Great material. Thank you for sharing!
I'd like to point out one thing though- while I think there's nothing necessarily wrong with a man being romantically direct with a woman, being a gentleman means respecting her boundaries too. And I don't like the idea of a man just grabbing a woman he likes and kissing her like in the clip. I don't think it'd be ok if a woman did this to a man either. Being manly does not mean disrespecting a woman's boundaries or just taking what you want from her. That's a harmful idea with harmful implications.
When it comes to romantic or sexual assertiveness, there's an appropriate limit.
I like that you point out that true masculinity isn't toxic because "being a man" is based on integrity and being a good, mature, responsible person who cares for and protects others, and is about holding yourself accountable for your actions.
Masculinity is first and foremost not what whiny women want it to be. Every man with any experience knows that the nice guy thing doesn't work and that it's gaslighting by whamen who don't want men to be dominant.
There are tons of females in modern movies and shows who don't respect any boundaries by men and who only exist to hummiliate men and push an agenda but that doesn't seem to bother you as much as men who are dominant or self-confident.
But she wanted him to kiss her. That's the point.
The whiny kind of, "But it was mean!" is exactly the kind of men we have today. It's no good, trust me.
I agree that people should respect each other's boundaries. But there are also times when a woman wants a man to take the initiative and be the one to lean in for a kiss.
@@candide1065who hurt you?
the old noir/hardboiled detective movies can be quite addictive to watch.
such direct and decisive characters feels like watching aliens.
I love this video lol great work sir 👍
Gary Cooper is maybe the actor who portrayed the most sane and mature masculinity
This was better than it should've been, and then some.
Delighted Oak got a look in 11:39 wholeheartedly agree
Great video, keep it up 👍
I think my favorite example of a good male role model, is Charles aka Pa from Little House on the Praire. Charles was hardworking, Godly, wise, compassionte, kind, didn't judge others He was such a good a father, that it left such imprint on me that that those are the qulites that I want in man. If there is anyone that a young man to look up to it's Charles.
there are two sports films in the mid 2000s that should be remembered, they got two great coaches portrayed by two outstanding actors (yes dwayne can be exceptional if given direction) that were the true alphas of their tribe,they molded the troubled kids playing for them,turned them into men
i'm talking about coach carter and of course gridiron gang which were based on true stories
never forget that scene when coach carter hugged that kid that ran with the gangs, he knocked on his door and broke down crying because his family member was shot,asked carter what he had to do and returned to the team
or that scene when coach porter's team got thrashed in a football game,and porter said he wouldn't trade his team for the other guys
that's what masculinity,direction along with a wealth of knowledge and experience can do to a troubled,angry teen
give them an outlet and a purpose
This video seems to misunderstand that "toxic masculinity" means a kind of masculinity that is toxic, not that masculinity is toxic. It refers to toxic traits that are associated with expression of masculinity. Back in the day punching a woman if she mouthed off was seen as a masculine man keeping control. Today many men think acting tough and getting into fights is masculine. That's toxic masculinity and it's very much a real thing. The idea that masculinity by itself can't be toxic is cool in concept but not realistic at all since masculinity is something that changes throughout different times and different cultures. I like the channel but this was lackluster.
Which is sad, because this video is a WONDERFUL expression of positive masculine characters, contrasted against negative characters who embody toxic traits that are BAD for men. It's just the final part where he says "I showed all of this but I refuse to understand the terminology I'm mad about."
It's a good video but i have to agree with you
4 Annoying Main Male Stereotypical Characters That Entertainment Companies Should Seriously Stop Showing:
1. The Creepy Sexual Womanizer
2. The Hyperfeminine Flamboyant Whiner
3. The Lazy Drunkard
4. The Macho Gangster Thug
4 Amazing Male Characters That Entertainment Companies Should Definitely Show:
1. The Clever Scientist
2. The Heroic Warrior
3. The Protective Family Man
4. The Successful Entrepreneur
Would like to see more about these older classic movies.
I liked Bruce Dern in SILENT RUNNING 1972. The man sacrifices everything for the greater good. Next Luthen Rael, ANDOR, "What have I sacrificed...Everything!"
The exemplary man died because culturally it was made uncool. In Indian Hindi Cinema there was the angry young man phase of cinema, representing the angst of that generation of men. Then came the romantic man in the 90s. Shifting political and cultural scenarios make the previous essential version of masculinity uncool. The "real man" as always remains a combination of desperation and ambition, trying to find a spot in society, with few happy moments with friends and family. Any movie about that I would like to see but it has to be done well.
This video was freaking awesome 🎉 👏
Anyway - "toxic masculinity" isn't a term saying that all masculinity is bad. It's just a term for a specific type of behavior - when men do stupid, destructive things for the sake of being seen as manly. Like when Tony Stark takes stupid risks for the sake of impressing other guys - that's toxic masculinity.
When Henry's Fonda's character in 12 Angry Men is strong and confident, that's not toxic masculinity - that's just plain old strength and confidence.
The problem is that you cannot so easily separate the obvious intent of the phrase from its more benign, retroactive apologetic definition.
Toxic masculinity does not refer to a guy doing a stupid thing and hurting himself trying to be cool in front of his friends. The "toxicity" of even that action would be debatable.
Toxic masculinity is saying that masculinity-forthrightness, aggression, emotional evenness, unabashed sexual interest in women-these are toxic.
Of course, this is retarded.
His point is there is no such thing as toxic masculinity cause masculinity isn’t toxic. People are toxic. And if certain men happen to be toxic, then it means they weren’t masculine to begin with. Cause they act like children not men. Masculinity can’t be toxic, Imo.
Again, you miss the meaning of toxic masculinity. That phrase doesn't mean that masculinity is toxic. It's specifically referring to a type of behaviour in which people do destructive, stupid things in order to seem manly.
@@natesmart9959bro back in the 50s it was seen as masculine to punch a woman if she mouthed off. You can’t just pull this catch-22 of “Masculinity is good, and if something’s not good, it was never masculine.” It’s an evolving cultural concept like any other.
@@ferghalicious1480 Exactly this, this video is awesome and it truly defines the how the figure of masculinity in movies should be. But saying there is no such thing as toxic masculinity is being delusional.
Spot on. Well done.
Movies need a good storyline. Period.
To me, it has to be Lee Marvin...do I have to say anymore?
Even when he was a low-down no-count in _Paint Your Wagon,_ he still managed to treat his friends and family with immense respect and fairness.
That shot of Ethan Edwards walking away from polite society at the end of The Searchers always gets me.
0:15 Yes. Exactly. When boys become teenagers they will learn the hard way that it doesn't work that way.
This video should be part of an elementary school curriculum.
What about Harvey specter from suits?
Haha, The Grey is one of my favorite movies. Great video, though. I'm really enjoying your channel.
10:50 Which film is it?
You're brave to say that in the middle of all these modernity shit
btw where are you from? I can feel a little accent in your language, and i think i'm from where you are from
I would have loved that Teddy biopic. Damn.
Please Make more of these.
Wisecracking, violent, seductive James Bond was the character that changed masculinity in films during the 1960s.
Good take,that said there is surely a middle ground between the idealised masculine character who always says the right thing and acts the right way(don't forget the Hayes Code in all of this)and the brainless killing machine with no heart of the post 1980's action flicks,I feel that the 70's were a sweet spot,the Bronsons,EastWoods and McQueens,were flawed realistic characters,yet maintained a certain nobility,it wasn't Rio Bravo anymore but it also wasn't Commando...as for Roosevelt I think that people like him lead to the current status of modern manhood,he was what you would call today a white knight,for instance he believed that men who laid a hand on a woman,deserved judicial corporal punishment,don't believe me?check it.
0:10 SINCE WHEN????
3:35 YES!
6:18 YES!
9:37 KNOCK KNOCK!
I'm gonna Kill the BEAR!
John Wayne starring in High Noon would be like Arnold Schwarzenegger taking the John Connor role rather than the Terminator.
Most adults DO NOT have emotional maturity lmao. While I can agree with some of your points, I think your insight into masculinity as a whole is very one-dimensional as well as delusional. Humans operate across a spectrum of principles and emotions and seldom remain fixed at one point. This video is also clearly biased and weirdly so. There's nothing emasculating about a suicidal or self-loathing man. That is a man in distress. And while I like a great many of John Wayne's films, I'd hardly call him an exemplary man of class. High Noon is a criticism of Hollywood and McCarthyism during that era of the Cold War. It's interesting you use both that movie as well as its counter-political argument, Rio Bravo, as an argument for "manliness" when you just previously referred to the act of "one-upmanship" as childlike and non-masculine as demonstrated by your choice of clips from Thor Ragnarok and Hobbs & Shaw.
I think his point is that the only time a man is portrayed as particularly masculine is when he's also suicidal, depressed and unsocial.
I don't think it was the one-upsmanship that he was calling out, but the childish way in which it was done. The characters banter like teenagers who think they're clever.
Your opening argument seems to boil down to, "But people are immature and dumb, so aspiring to an ideal is also immature and dumb," which I think is, with respect, immature and dumb.
@@SelrisitaiWell, aspiring to certain ideals such as the ones presented in the video is immature and dumb.
Couldn’t have put it better myself👍👍👍
where do I find High noon and Real men?
Using two scenes with the same dialogue with John Wayne and then juxtaposed with Arnold Schwarzenegger was a wonderful choice
3:33 THANK YOU!
Thank You good Sir , and Thank You for having the Balls to stand up against this toxic culture .
Amazing video
I saw Some Western Classic movies, 80s movies and 300 Film plus John Wick 1-4 are masculinity Movies.
Puss in Boots: Last Wish
Jurassic World: Dominion
Top Guns: Maverick
It’s because these movies you’re highlighting are not made for artistic purposes-for an exploration of the human condition-but as a socialisation agent in order to preserve the patriarchy: Man is strong, man saves woman, man is a protector of women; you women should be subservient to your man because, as you can see, he is far more practical and rational than you are.
I’m not saying that’s an awful thing… but I find it rather depressing that people cling so arduously to their masculine values without even truly realising that it’s been drilled into them to oppress the one they’re meant to love most dearly.
We shouldn’t go the complete opposite way and emasculate all males… but this is a part of the process: rationalism is met with romanticism; God is met with science, science is met in turn with God; values are preserved, torn and rebuilt with fervour; thesis, antithesis, synthesis.
My Favorite manda character is the Driver from Drive. What do u think about him?
By the off chance that you decide to make this video private....here is a reminder D O N 'T
In case I lose my mind I shall remember these words
Aragorn. Favourite man in Moviehistory
My favourite manly character is Roy Batty. Because he went to the other side of hate and found that he loved life itself, even as he died
Favourite manly characters: Atticus Finch (Gregory Peck) in 'To Kill A Mockingbird' (1962), Chen Zen (Bruce Lee) in 'Fist of Fury' (1972), Michael (Robert De Niro) in 'The Deer Hunter' (1978), Manny (Jon Voight) in 'Runaway Train' (1985), Ben Bugsy Siegel (Warren Beatty) in 'Bugsy' (1991), Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) in 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy (2001-2003), Alain van Versch (Matthias Schoenaerts) in 'Rust and Bone' 'De rouille et d'os' (2012) and Seán Cinnsealach (Andrew Bennett) in 'The Quiet Girl' 'An Cailín Ciúin' (2022).
Gregory Peck in Big Country is a perfect example of healthy masculinity.
Perfect Poignant Gorgeousness - Amen
Good to see the clips from the Fountainhead
Probably not my _favourite_ manly character but Clive Owen in Children of Men is basically just a normal guy who does his best to protect others and possibly saves mankind and in the end they kill him (spoilers) which is pretty damn masculine if you asked me. I really enjoyed this essay and I was also wondering what film is that clip with the woman clapping _"Violence! Woo!"_ from? 😅
Children of Men is terrific, but I still think Clive Owen's character is a bit too sad and unsociable...
I'm glad you enjoyed the essay and the film you asked about is "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" I'll talk a bit about it in my next video next week.
@@Moviewise Cool thank you! I'll have to watch it now; the synopsis reminded me of my parents 😅 Yeah you're right he's definitely sad and unsociable, though the whole movie is kinda sad with the dystopian future, and he was cheerful enough with his ex and the ping pong ball 😆 but yes he fits into your thesis nicely 😬
@@Moviewise Well, you know, the world is ending and all that.
@@ejtattersall156 And thus, the world needs men of good character and good courage more than ever.
I just released a video today about a kiss and a scandal. Naturally I stuck a bunch of clips in it: Hollywood kisses. I am not all that artistic as a film maker. A bit on the nose, I guess. But you do indeed have a point. Boys do kiss in Rom Coms and cartoons but girls initiate kisses way more now than they did when things were all black and white. Then again I put a bunch of clips in of women slapping men. Things may have changed for the better ... those clips were hard to find. But clips of men slapping women were very easy to come by. I suspect you would agree that clips of men forcing kisses on the ladies should be in black and white and not in colour. Greet video (again)!!
I would like your take on Rocky as a character and the franchise as a whole