DOA: Dead or Alive: The Movie: The Unofficial Creepy Misogynist Commentary Track

The gushing quote on my copy was “The movie Charlie’s Angels should have been!”, which cleverly doesn’t specify what, precisely, it actually was that Charlie’s Angels should have been, allowing you to fill in the blanks yourself. So if you think that Charlie’s Angels should have been…

• …straight to DVD.
• …shorter.
• …bereft of a sequel.
• …lacking a scene where John Cleese appears alongside somebody from Friends, purely for fear of the universe self-destructing out of shame and embarrassment.
• …directed by somebody other than the future producer of Search for the Next Doll.
• …made without Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore and Lucy Liu in the lead roles, thus giving them time to do something interesting instead.
• …made with a former Neighbours actor-turned-pop star with a fake British accent in the lead, if only to continue the traditions laid down by Street Fighter.

…then you are in luck, ma’am, because DOA: Dead or Alive delivers on all these counts and more. It even has Eric Roberts in it, playing a mad scientist who’s going to upload the fighting styles of the world’s greatest martial artists into a pair of hi-tech glasses. Yes, just like Joe 90. A lesser writer might have added “…but more wooden”, except he’s by far the best thing in it. Sadly, he’s isn’t on screen much, because the movie is – to quote the DVD making of – “about women kicking ass”.

Except, hang on, let’s look at this statement for a second, because it gets to the heart of the problem. To be sure, DOA: Dead or Alive has women kicking ass in it, but is that what the movie is actually about…?

In the grim darkness of the far future there are NO GIRLS ALLOWED

Since the last time I wrote about this it ended up on Digg and people thought I had something against the game itself, I just want to begin by saying that I think 5th edition is the best so far. Instances where there used to be two or three minor variations on the one mechanic – weapons that used the flamethrower template hit everything they touched, but weapons that used the circular blast template could miss things they were only partially covering if you rolled a 3 or less, for example – now use the same rule every time. It’s also much less arbitrary and more intuitive, so, for example, rather than having to work out whether a unit is visible by using tables and height categories, you simply look from the perspective of the attacker and decide if they’re sufficiently obscured or not. Changes like this mean you’re forced to cooperate with your opponent rather than play purely to win, which is going to be a problem in competitive tournaments unless they start giving every table its own referee, but will also make friendly games faster and easier to manage. It’s become less competitive and more role play-like, with the emphasis on playing with people rather than against them. This is a wise move, since the creative, world-building aspect has always been the primary drawcard, not the mechanics. The artwork is beautiful, ditching the remnants of the older “embarrassing, self-consciously gritty comic book from 1993″ look and turning into William Hogarth meets Heironymous Bosch.

Good. Right. Cocks.

Shut the FAQ up

“It’s a sad day for male feminists” specifically laments some dude over at Feministing, and non-specifically lament various other dudes I’m also not linking to. Never mind that a woman’s been sexually assaulted by a rape crisis counsellor with the keys to her bedroom, we have important stuff to deal with!

* * *

BRUTISH, STUBBLE-ENCRUSTED KYLE PAYNE FAQ FOR MEN

1. Will Kyle Payne make it harder for male allies to be taken seriously?

Since men are by default taken more seriously than women on all subjects up to and including menstruation, it’s unlikely to have a measurable impact on your life. Your concern for the victim is touching, by the way.

2. Will ignoring the victim in favour of droning on about how difficult this has made my life make it harder for male allies to be taken seriously?

Depends on who you’re trying to impress.

3. Being expected to prove my credentials and earn people’s trust vs. A widespread sense of betrayal and insecurity. Which is worse?

Take an intelligence test on 1D20.

4. Other than the obvious stuff about how hard our lives are, what can men learn from this?

That there’s a reason you’re held to a certain standard. It’s not even a very high one, for fuck’s sake, and it’s gotten even lower since Creek Running North shut down. Again, a rapist managed to work as a rape crisis counsellor. I think that might be the more pressing issue here, yes?

* * *

I’m predicting that Kyle Payne becomes the Warren Farrel of 2030. “Before his involvement with the Fathers’ Rights Movement, Kyle Payne served a women’s rights advocate, social justice educator, writer and activist. He now dedicates his time to challenging the bias against men in the American legal system…”

Is Anna Valarious the worst action heroine of all time?

Faux Action Girl

A supposedly modern heroine who, under closer scrutiny, doesn’t live up to her reputation. An Action Girl with very low standards you would never hold a male hero to: a Faux Action Girl. She’s established from the very beginning as a powerful, capable hero… and never does anything heroic. She has a well-grounded reputation as a strong fighter in her field… and always fails in the line of battle. Her talents and skills are well known to fellow characters but rarely if ever seen by the viewers.

Quoted from the TV Tropes Wiki. I assure you, escape is quite impossible.