Manic Pixie Dream Girls

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Message
Author
User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Ruby Sparks (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, 2012)

#26 Post by matrixschmatrix » Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:10 pm

Andre Jurieu wrote:
matrixschmatrix wrote:... I don't think someone like Faye Wong in Chungking Express fits the bill.
Oddly, I actually thought she was the blue-print for the entire trope within modern cinema. She certainly precedes Dunst in Elizabethtown or Portman in Garden State, and while my memory of all 3 films isn't razor-sharp, I actually think they develop or explain Portman's character's behavior slightly more than they do Wong's (which I can't even believe I wrote down based on the quality of the movies in question).
Well absolutely the behavior's the same, but again, that could be said of Ruth Gordon in Harold and Maude. I suppose I may be playing something of a No True Scotsman game, but in my view the amount of time we spend with Wong and the feeling we get for her life and the way she lives belies any sense that she's a magical pixie who exists only to change Tony Leung's life- and a sense of desperation, or at least pathos, that underlies her superficial quirkiness. It's not expository, but I don't think exposition about backstories really helps much, which is why Garden State is such a rank example of the form. Chungking shares a boozy dreaminess amongst all its characters, and develops them all through time spent watching their actions; in that light, I don't think we have any less a sense of Wong as a real person than anyone else.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#27 Post by Michael Kerpan » Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:15 pm

warren oates wrote:I think it's even possible to see Celine and Julie this way vis-a-vis each other. The whole elliptical game that opens/closes the film is very MPDG. But so is their entire pursuit of the mystery of the house, in which they keep egging each other on. Different characters in the same situation might hesitate or at least express some kind of fear at what's happening to them. But in true MPDG fashion what others might fear becomes an opportunity for a glorious funfest. Not that I mean to reduce the film at all. Just that maybe, as with many things French, there's a deeper appreciation of this type of female energy happening, at least in Rivette's films.
I agree. Love on the Ground also features a rather similar dynamic, as does Up Down Fragile and Gang of Four (in a more subdued fashion).

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#28 Post by Zot! » Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:38 pm

So basically an ingenue with a substance abuse problem.

karmajuice
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:02 am

Re: Ruby Sparks (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, 2012)

#29 Post by karmajuice » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:43 pm

HistoryProf wrote:wouldn't she be more the opposite of the archetype?
Possibly. I think she starts out adhering to the archetype, but follows that archetype through to its logical, realistic conclusion. She certainly fits the type of "quirky girl who dyes her hair unusual colors and pulls male character out of shell", but her affectations serve as a cover for an unstable emotional life.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Ruby Sparks (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, 2012)

#30 Post by Zot! » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:05 pm

karmajuice wrote:
HistoryProf wrote:wouldn't she be more the opposite of the archetype?
her affectations serve as a cover for an unstable emotional life.
Those are the kind of characters the Onion references, certainly Holly Golightly and Lula from Something Wild have a realistic character arc. I'm starting to think this term isn't easy to define or very useful except to critique the paper-thin fetishised living MacGuffins from miserable indie dramas.

User avatar
gcgiles1dollarbin
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 3:38 am

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#31 Post by gcgiles1dollarbin » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:39 pm

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the unctuously whimsical non plus ultra of MPDGs: Amélie. Certainly it is this very updated archetype that has caused many to revile Audrey Tautou's character (and the film on the whole). I haven't seen it since it was released, but I remember enjoying it at the time, not realizing what a storm of apathy awaited its future among cinephiles. She was the ultimate impishly smirking cipher--all surface, no depth, enabling others, while all we know is that she has a heart defect and she's lonely. *Garsh...* I almost feel like Amélie was the decade's harbinger of all things mincing, twee, unapologetically girlish, charmingly nutty, replete with artsy-craftsy solutions to serious problems. And as for reciprocation, well, you just expect her to say, "It makes me happy to see you happy. And isn't that enough?" The justified way everyone bagged on the film in subsequent years, I felt like I must have been bat-shit crazy to like the movie, and I haven't dared watch it a second time. I did, however, have the misfortune of seeing À la folie... pas du tout, a craptastic movie that was kind of the Amélie version of the rom-com protagonist being sent to prison in that Onion article (reminiscent of 37°2 le matin, too). As if, "This is what we'd really do to insufferable MPDGs in a world intolerant to her buttercup wiles."

User avatar
Andre Jurieu
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#32 Post by Andre Jurieu » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:00 pm

matrixschmatrix wrote:... but in my view the amount of time we spend with Wong and the feeling we get for her life and the way she lives belies any sense that she's a magical pixie who exists only to change Tony Leung's life- and a sense of desperation, or at least pathos, that underlies her superficial quirkiness. It's not expository, but I don't think exposition about backstories really helps much, which is why Garden State is such a rank example of the form. Chungking shares a boozy dreaminess amongst all its characters, and develops them all through time spent watching their actions; in that light, I don't think we have any less a sense of Wong as a real person than anyone else.
Well, I think we're in agreement that the context of the scenario that defines the interaction/relationship between the male and female characters in question, the style of the film itself, and the type of attention the filmmaker provides for the character all make a big difference in how successfully a potential MPDG character is applied within a film. I think the big difference between these films, as you correctly pointed out, is that Wong is treated in an equal or balanced manner in comparison to all the other characters within Chungking. I guess her purpose within the film is not easily reduced down to solely enabling the male character to achieve some sort of breakthrough within his own life, though - from what I remember of the film - I do think it's the male character who achieves some sort of greater self-awareness within his own life, while Wong's character simply carries on unchanged. So, perhaps my agreement is more along the lines of an agreement that Wong Kar-Wai uses the MPDG far more effectively and treats the character in question with far greater respect by allowing her existence to not be merely defined by the character-arc of the male protagonist.

The only problem is that I doubt that Crowe and Braff ever intended their MPDGs to only serve as a muse/catalyst for their male protagonists, and they would claim that they attempted to develop the character with the same level of effort as they did their other characters (... cause, let's face it, none of the characters in these two movies are particularly well-developed). We could certainly argue that they weren't successful in their attempts and that their films are more superficial, but it's not as though Chungking is particularly dense. So, while Wong Kar-Wai might have achieved something far greater, via mood and atmosphere, with Chungking's sense of metropolitan life, especially when compared to Crowe and Braff's exasperatingly desperate attempts to construct the "great-emotionally-cathartic-scene-within-an-American-movie-without-any-real-honest-anguish", I'm not sure Wong's character isn't an example of the MPDG. She's just the a more fully-realized example, or an example of how to use the archetype/trope correctly.

Maybe this is really just about whether or not the the viewer believes that the MPDG label can only be applied if the character is superficial, or treated superficially.

karmajuice
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:02 am

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#33 Post by karmajuice » Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:29 pm

gcgiles1dollarbin wrote:I'm surprised no one has mentioned the unctuously whimsical non plus ultra of MPDGs: Amélie. Certainly it is this very updated archetype that has caused many to revile Audrey Tautou's character (and the film on the whole). I haven't seen it since it was released, but I remember enjoying it at the time, not realizing what a storm of apathy awaited its future among cinephiles. She was the ultimate impishly smirking cipher--all surface, no depth, enabling others, while all we know is that she has a heart defect and she's lonely. *Garsh...* I almost feel like Amélie was the decade's harbinger of all things mincing, twee, unapologetically girlish, charmingly nutty, replete with artsy-craftsy solutions to serious problems. And as for reciprocation, well, you just expect her to say, "It makes me happy to see you happy. And isn't that enough?" The justified way everyone bagged on the film in subsequent years, I felt like I must have been bat-shit crazy to like the movie, and I haven't dared watch it a second time. I did, however, have the misfortune of seeing À la folie... pas du tout, a craptastic movie that was kind of the Amélie version of the rom-com protagonist being sent to prison in that Onion article (reminiscent of 37°2 le matin, too). As if, "This is what we'd really do to insufferable MPDGs in a world intolerant to her buttercup wiles."
Amélie does fit the mold in certain ways, but she also diverges from it significantly. For one, she's extremely introverted, and her personality manifests in more subdued ways than your typically very extroverted MPDG. I also think it's unfair to call her "all surface", because I think her actions say a great deal about her hopes and her apprehensions and the kind of person she is. The film, after all, is largely about her inability to confront people directly. It also helps that she's the protagonist, and the romance only takes up a portion of the film; much of it is dedicated to her interactions with her neighbors, friends, and coworkers.

I don't think you're entirely off the mark, but I have a soft spot for the film and maybe your initial reaction wasn't entirely misguided. I think the antipathy certain cinephiles have toward the film has less to do with the film itself and more to do with its popularity.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#34 Post by Roger Ryan » Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:41 pm

gcgiles1dollarbin wrote:I'm surprised no one has mentioned the unctuously whimsical non plus ultra of MPDGs: Amélie. Certainly it is this very updated archetype that has caused many to revile Audrey Tautou's character (and the film on the whole). I haven't seen it since it was released, but I remember enjoying it at the time, not realizing what a storm of apathy awaited its future among cinephiles. She was the ultimate impishly smirking cipher--all surface, no depth, enabling others, while all we know is that she has a heart defect and she's lonely. *Garsh...* I almost feel like Amélie was the decade's harbinger of all things mincing, twee, unapologetically girlish, charmingly nutty, replete with artsy-craftsy solutions to serious problems...
Of course it comes down to tastes, but I continue to find Amélie to be a charming film. For me, Tautou's character escapes the more dreary cliches of a MPDG by showing how the many other characters she encounters are inspired without realizing she is the catalyst. The fact that she is initially unable to make a romantic connection or enjoy sex and, instead, focuses her attention on solving a mystery or two for her own satisfaction establishes her as the film's protagonist. We see the world through her eyes.

User avatar
Black Hat
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:34 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#35 Post by Black Hat » Wed Jan 30, 2013 6:45 pm

Garden State's the first that comes to mind with Natalie Portman but it's her Alice from Closer that reverberates for me when I think Manic Pixie Dream Girl.

User avatar
gcgiles1dollarbin
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 3:38 am

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#36 Post by gcgiles1dollarbin » Wed Jan 30, 2013 7:49 pm

karmajuice wrote: I have a soft spot for the film and maybe your initial reaction wasn't entirely misguided.
Roger Ryan wrote:Of course it comes down to tastes, but I continue to find Amélie to be a charming film.
It's good to hear that I was not alone in liking this film. This emboldens me to watch it again. And, yes, karmajuice, perhaps she is not conspicuous enough to the recipients of her favors and mischief to warrant a MPDG badge. I'm probably attributing the assignment too much to her eccentric charity and the art direction rather than the nature of her character's personality.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#37 Post by matrixschmatrix » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:25 pm

Andre Jurieu wrote:Maybe this is really just about whether or not the the viewer believes that the MPDG label can only be applied if the character is superficial, or treated superficially.
True enough. I think, to me, the term works better as a criticism than a description, as 'offbeat, quirky girl who induces change in a more straightlaced guy' is enormously broad, and would apply in some form to practically every twee indie movie out there . It's like the term 'magical black man' (or to use Lee's original term, 'super duper magical negro')- there are any number of movies that involve black people who positively influence the lives of white people in some way, but it's not useful to describe all such characters as magical black men/super duper magical negroes. If you reserve it for the Bagger Vances of the world, the point of the term and the kind of screenwriting it's attacking remains clear and potent.

User avatar
Jeff
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Ruby Sparks (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, 2012)

#38 Post by Jeff » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:32 pm

Andre Jurieu wrote:
Jeff wrote:How has this discussion gone without mention of Zooey Deschanel, who only plays MPDGs? She'd be pictured next to the term in the dictionary.
Though Zooey Deschanel has certainly taken a lot of criticism for being the most easily identifiable actress for these types of roles, I kind of respect her for embracing that aspect of her personality rather than subjecting us to a number of roles where she attempts to play against type. At least she's comfortable enough with her on-screen persona to make fun of herself and accept her limits.
Agreed. Also, she's super cute, so I forgive her.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#39 Post by Gregory » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:54 pm

gcgiles1dollarbin wrote:...while all we know is that she has a heart defect and she's lonely. *Garsh...* ...
It's probably worth pointing out that she doesn't have a heart defect, as the first few minutes explain why the character is so isolated and badly socialized (something that was lost on me the first time I saw it because I walked into the theatre about four minutes after it had started). There is something of a dark side to the story, which seems almost invisible in comparison to Delicatessen and City of Lost Children. I also like that Amélie is willing not only to commit random acts of kindness but also do a prank to mess with the head of someone who deserves it, which is something that reveals the character to be more than just a naive innocent. The point of her activities goes far beyond the standard rom-com to show some of the ways we can and do influence the world around us, a point delivered in a way that requires indulging Jeunet and following him into one of his storybook worlds. I'd give the film neither one star nor five stars, myself; all the effusive praise and the backlash both went too far.

As for Deschanel, she seems so middle-of-the-road, turning out one project after another that make me wonder about her career in relation to any sense of personal significance she has about herself as an actor and musician. She seems like someone who fell into some marketable and broadly relatable stereotypes, a major star who saw a niche for herself and affected a fairly shallow, "wacky" personality of "Oh, I'm such a dork!" If she wants to have a career that will be looked upon well in the years to come, I think she should challenge herself a bit more and resist further typecasting.
Edit: damn these typos
Last edited by Gregory on Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Professor Wagstaff
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:27 pm

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#40 Post by Professor Wagstaff » Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:12 pm

Jeff wrote:
Andre Jurieu wrote:
Jeff wrote:How has this discussion gone without mention of Zooey Deschanel, who only plays MPDGs? She'd be pictured next to the term in the dictionary.
Though Zooey Deschanel has certainly taken a lot of criticism for being the most easily identifiable actress for these types of roles, I kind of respect her for embracing that aspect of her personality rather than subjecting us to a number of roles where she attempts to play against type. At least she's comfortable enough with her on-screen persona to make fun of herself and accept her limits.
Agreed. Also, she's super cute, so I forgive her.
Since the discussion came up, I've been wondering about Silver Linings Playbook a lot and how Jennifer Lawrence's character would have been different had Deschanel been cast (she was an early contender for the role). Lawrence plays Tiffany as a blustering, angry, passionate person and, I think really sells the character as believable even as some of her actions veer on the edge of romantic contrivances. Her casting is a bit of a miracle as it feels ripe for disaster of the MPDG variety had it not been played by someone with such raw energy (I am looking forward to hearing more from folks who'd say she fits the MPDG mold perfectly).

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#41 Post by hearthesilence » Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:52 pm

I agree. That material could've been disastrous and given Zooey Deschanel's usual approach to these types of roles, I think she would've tipped the scales in the wrong direction. Jennifer Lawrence was a big reason why David O. Russell was able to get this over.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#42 Post by swo17 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:23 pm

If I'm being honest, Zooey D. hasn't really brought anything worthwhile to the MPDG table since Weeds Season 2.

User avatar
gcgiles1dollarbin
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 3:38 am

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#43 Post by gcgiles1dollarbin » Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:05 am

Gregory wrote:It's probably worth pointing out that she doesn't have a heart defect
That's right. My memory made her father's error.

User avatar
skuhn8
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Chico, CA

Re: Ruby Sparks (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, 2012)

#44 Post by skuhn8 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 3:22 am

Lemmy Caution wrote:I didn't realize it started from a critique of Elizabethtown. Now I'm oddly interested in seeing that film. There are a number of films with Manic Pixie Dream Girls.
Garden State a prime example. Many others listed elsewhere I haven't seen.
I find these two examples represent the nadir and the peak of this phenomenon. Kirsten Dunst going so utterly over the top trying to make dummy Orlando Bloom smile for nearly two hours was enough to put me off Dunst until Melancholia. Some of the laziest screenwriting I've seen.

I actually think Portman pulls off an endearing MPDG in Garden State, but I have to admit that I'm a shameless admirer of that film. But then perhaps she's too 'over-written' to be a true MPDG cipher?

User avatar
Murdoch
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:59 pm
Location: Upstate NY

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#45 Post by Murdoch » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:39 pm

I'll admit to enjoying Portman in Garden State as well. I think she works in the film since she isn't just someone that suddenly shows up to aid Braff but also a social reject who is a compulsive liar and suffers from epilepsy, and I always thought she clung to Braff not to bring him out of his depression - although she has that effect - but simply because she's found someone not turned off by her weirdness. Which is not to say she doesn't fit the MPDG mold, just that I don't think she's as terrible offender as others have stated since there appears to be this co-dependency between her and Braff whereas in other instances of the MPDG she is only there because the male needs her to do something and serves only as a catalyst.

User avatar
Steven H
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: NC

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#46 Post by Steven H » Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:05 pm

The TVTropes article on this is huge for what it's worth. Treats the character type pretty broadly.

User avatar
Andre Jurieu
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#47 Post by Andre Jurieu » Thu Jan 31, 2013 3:46 pm

Murdoch wrote:I'll admit to enjoying Portman in Garden State as well. I think she works in the film since she isn't just someone that suddenly shows up to aid Braff but also a social reject who is a compulsive liar and suffers from epilepsy, and I always thought she clung to Braff not to bring him out of his depression - although she has that effect - but simply because she's found someone not turned off by her weirdness. Which is not to say she doesn't fit the MPDG mold, just that I don't think she's as terrible offender as others have stated since there appears to be this co-dependency between her and Braff whereas in other instances of the MPDG she is only there because the male needs her to do something and serves only as a catalyst.
I'm in agreement on this, though admittedly I'm also completely biased when it comes to judging Portman. However, considering the overall tone and content of the movie, and how short-hand its character development tends to be, I can also understand how others would despise the character as the perfect example of the MPDG. My problem with the film has more to do with Braff's character and the rather shallow and manipulative methods used to evoke sympathy for his condition, without any real exploration of his problems beyond some rather under developed daddy-issues.

And I'm also in complete agreement that Russell really lucked out during casting by getting Lawrence over Deschanel. Who knows what kind of performance Russell could have drawn out of Deschanel - especially considering I have trouble imagining a scenario where she would be able to handle his techniques - but Lawrence's entire persona seems far more in-step with the character. Even if Russell were able to coax out an All the Real Girls-level performance from her, I still think Deschanel would have made the character far too fragile. As for Silver Lining Playbook applying the MPDG-trope, it may be evident, but I think it's slightly warped by the fact that Cooper's character already loves too deeply and lives far too freely, and in some sense, she's reigning him in. Actually, even by the end of the film, I'm not certain either of the lead-characters are entirely stable.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#48 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:02 pm

We actually used to have an Elizabethtown thread here before the weird pre-2006 board swipe a few months ago. I think it's a film that gets an unfair shake due to the baldness of its wish-fulfillment via Kirsten Dunst's love fairy. I won't deny that to my eyes Crowe does a good job of creating a massively appealing and inviting figure in Dunst's role, so much so that many people apparently recoil in horror at being so easily suckered into romantic comedy tropes. I'm not saying those who object to the film are objecting to their attraction to a fictional archetype, but I don't see anything wrong with admitting it does a good job of being goofy romance porn thanks squarely to the Dunst role. So do a lot of films before and since-- Elizabethtown just has the misfortune of doing it in a blatant and unapologetic fashion.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#49 Post by Mr Sausage » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:51 pm

These days people seem to have very little tolerance for idealizations (at least in new movies; with old movies people seem more accepting), especially gendered ones. There are probably a whole mix of feelings behind this, some more flattering than others, but I'm not sure that the reaction against Elizabethtown and Dunst in particular is the product (unless incidentally) of a hard lurch in the opposite direction after having been pulled in so easily. It probably has more to do with how we feel people ought to be, or at least how they ought to be represented in society, and what happens when we're presented with characters whose mode is closer to type, making them more generalized. So you get viewers who'll think, yes, that's how people ought to be, and they'll love it; and then you get those who think, no, I don't believe people ought to be that way, and they'll loathe it since people tend to understand idealizations as a form of social recommendation.

A lot of the criticisms in this thread (not necessarily reflecting the reality of this or that movie) come down to:

1. The character has no interiority
2. The character exists as a device to bring the male lead to self-actualization, and therefore owes her existence in the narrative to him.
3. The twee, zany, indie eccentric tone.

3. is a matter of taste and can be ignored. 1. and 2. show that people are worried about the social ramifications of this character type, ie. how we should be conceiving of people and representing them to the public.

User avatar
dustybooks
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:52 am
Location: Wilmington, NC

Re: Manic Pixie Dream Girls

#50 Post by dustybooks » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:27 pm

I haven't seen Elizabethtown but I did always feel that some of the scorn it received came from its chronological proximity to Garden State; I could be misremembering but weren't the trailers nearly identical? Elizabethtown was in production for so long that I'm pretty sure Garden State wasn't so much as a blip when it was written.

Only issue I have with Zooey Deschanel's typecasting is that The Good Girl indicates, to me at least, that she's funniest and most interesting in a very different type of role.

Post Reply