Master’s Thesis

“This Is a Forced Feminist Agenda:”

IMDb users and their understanding of feminism negotiated in the reviews of superheroine films

Author: Alžběta Budirská Supervisors: Johan Höglund and Jukka Tyrkkö Examiner: Magnus Levin Date: 31. 5. 2021 Term: VT2021 Subject: Linguistics and Literary Studies Course code: 5EN10E

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently,

using only the sources listed in references.

……………………………………………..

Bc. Alžběta Budirská

Abstract

The thesis examines how users of the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) negotiate feminism in their reviews of four superheroine films – Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, Birds of Prey:

The Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn, and Wonder Woman 1984. By combining critical discourse analysis with methods of corpus linguists, this corpus-based study of over 18,000 reviews analyses the frequency of the topic of feminism in the reviews, words and topics associated with it and the way the reviewers reflect broader mediated discourse over the four films, and the role of IMDb as a space for these reviews. The findings show that feminism is still understood as an anti-male movement where female-led films are shielded from criticism by the mainstream media by the virtue of the lead’s gender, the superheroines are criticised for being overpowered particularly where they have no equal male supporting character and that perceived feminist messaging is usually written off as a forced political agenda or as an insincere cash grab made by corporates which effectively use feminism for promotion. It also reveals IMDb as a highly polarised platform where the users leaving 1- and

10-star reviews are generalized as representatives of different sides of the political spectrum

(antifeminist vs feminist, conservative vs liberal) regardless of the actual content of the review.

Keywords Feminism, IMDb, Superhero films, Reviews, Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, Birds of Prey,

Wonder Woman 1984

Acknowledgment

I would like to thank my two supervisors, Johan Höglund and Jukka Tyrkkö for their patience with my stubbornness and their encouragement to keep tweaking this thesis. Another big thank you belongs to my sister Lucie without whom I would not be able to finish this degree.

Your support is appreciated and cherished. Finally, thank you to all the lovely IMDb users who comment on films. Whether you are funny, spiteful, trolling, or being genuinely enthusiastic, all of your opinions mattered to me because without you this thesis would not exist.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 1

2. Theory and Context ...... 8

2.1. Feminism ...... 8

2.1.1. The fragmentation of feminism ...... 8

2.1.2. From postfeminism to popular feminisms ...... 11

2.1.3. Trolling and the language of online antifeminism ...... 14

2.2. Framing and understanding feminism...... 16

2.2.1. Mediated presentation of feminism ...... 17

2.2.2. Negotiating and understanding feminism by the general public ...... 19

3. Methodology ...... 22

3.1. Aims and research questions ...... 22

3.2. Methods of analysis ...... 22

3.2.1. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) ...... 23

3.2.2. Corpus linguistics ...... 25

3.2.3. Corpora compilation ...... 27

4. Analysis ...... 30

4.1. General corpora overview and median word count ...... 30

4.2. Distribution of FEMINISM and FEMINIST ...... 32

4.3. Qualitative analysis...... 36

4.3.1. Tone and presence of feminism ...... 36

4.3.2. Topics ...... 43

4.4. Collocations ...... 60

5. Discussion ...... 65

6. Conclusion ...... 72

References ...... 74

Appendix I. Topics in superheroine films ...... 83

Appendix II. Glossary of topics ...... 85

Appendix III. Collocate LogDice scores ...... 89

1. Introduction

When Wonder Woman entered the cinemas in 2017, it was the first female-led superhero film since 2005’s unsuccessful Elektra. Meanwhile, male superheroes have launched new cinematic universes and grossed billions of dollars in the box office – Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) which includes Iron Man, Captain America, and Black Panther among the many others, and

DC Extended Universe (DCEU) with Superman, Batman, and, finally, Wonder Woman. Since the conception of both universes, thirty-two films have been released. Out of the thirty-two, only four have a female lead: Wonder Woman (2017), Captain Marvel (2019), Birds of Prey:

The Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn (2020) and Wonder Woman 1984

(2020).

This imbalance between the number of male and female superheroes did not escape scrutiny from media and academia and due to their visibility and scarcity superheroine films became more than just entertainment. They became tests for female representation onscreen, for female professionals offscreen, Hollywood’s embracement of the re-emerging feminist movement, as well as the audience’s acceptance of all of the above. While the film industry evaluates the success or failure of superheroine films by their box office results, paying for a movie ticket is not the only way the audiences voice their interests and opinions.

The aim of this thesis is to examine how users of the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) evaluate superheroine films in regards to female representation and feminism and if they reflect upon the existing discourse provided by other media. By analysing the user reviews, there is a unique opportunity to gain insight into how IMDb users navigate broader societal context that influences the film industry in a space that is created for expressing one’s opinion of a film. Is feminism a topic present in reviews of all four films equally and how is the topic distributed across the rating scale? Do viewers recognize the presence of feminism in the films and if so, what is their attitude towards feminism? What vocabulary do they use to describe feminism and its messages? What topics do they associate with feminism and do these topics reflect the ones brought up by the media prior to the films’ release? What role does IMDb itself play in the negotiation of feminism? These research questions seek to explore a new

1 perspective on the topic of feminism which comes from a space that is not created specifically for the discussion of politics and social movements and yet such discussion is a part of IMDb.

It is necessary to first consider the context of the era the films were created in to be able to evaluate the reviewers’ reactions and reflections of the public discourse of that time. Wonder

Woman was the first female superhero film to be directed by a woman. Moreover, with a budget of $150 million it was the most expensive film ever to be shot by a woman. Patty

Jenkins, despite her decade-long experience in film and television, was seen as a gamble

(Siegel, 2017). Jenkins thus not only had to prove her directing skills, but her film also had to succeed because previous superheroine outings Elektra (2005) and Catwoman (2004) were box office disappointments and were used as evidence of “female-driven superhero films as box office poison” (Brannon Donoghue, 2019, p. 8). If Wonder Woman flopped, Jenkins would prove that female directors do not have enough experience to helm big budget films and reinforce the stereotype that profitable female-driven films are exceptions to the rule (p. 9).

Thankfully, Wonder Woman opened to a new record box office weekend for a live-action movie with a female director and outgrossed the previous three DCEU films at the domestic box office

(ibid.). However, the film’s release also meant a whole new topic of discussion – what kind of character is Wonder Woman and is she and the film by extension feminist?

James Cameron, the director of Titanic (1997) and Terminator (1984) called Diana

Prince (Wonder Woman’s civilian name) “an objectified icon” in comparison to his character of Sarah Connor from the Terminator movies and the whole film “a step backwards” (Harris,

2017). Jenkins responded by saying that there is no “right and wrong powerful woman” because women do not have to always be “hard, tough and troubled to be strong” but can also be “attractive and loving” (Jenkins, 2017). Furthermore, while Jenkins said she was not making

Wonder Woman as a feminist statement, her lead actress Gal Gadot saw Wonder Woman as

“a feminist, of course” (Miller, 2020; Sperling, 2017). Whether she is or is not is up to debate that spans well beyond Patty Jenkins and Gal Gadot and is ongoing even after the release of the sequel Wonder Woman 1984 (2020).

2 The arrival of Captain Marvel (2019, directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck) into the

MCU marked the first female-led superhero film in this particular franchise and grossed over a billion dollars at the box office. Yet unlike Wonder Woman, Carol Danvers’s origin story sparked controversy already during its promotion. Posters for the movie which showed Captain

Marvel’s face were “fixed” to make her smile, “a digital extension of the ‘smile more’ harassment that women hear all the time” (Abad-Santos, 2018a). The lead actress Brie Larson’s reputation as an activist involved in Time’s Up movement and her calls for bigger racial and gender diversity in film criticism also led to backlash. Larson’s statement that she does “not need a 40-year-old white dude” to tell her his opinion of A Wrinkle in Time (2018), a movie that “wasn’t made for him”, was misrepresented as Larson targeting white men and claiming that Captain Marvel was not made for them either (Abad-Santos, 2018b). Though Larson clarified that she wanted to bring “more seats up to the table” rather than taking any away, her comment led to extensive review bombing of the film on Rotten Tomatoes and accusations of

Larson being sexist (Dumaraog, 2019). Online trolls tried to tank the film’s rating weeks ahead of Captain Marvel’s release to which Rotten Tomatoes responded by banning non-critics from rating films before they opened (Sharf, 2019). As Nate Jones comments in his Vulture article, the downside of troll firestorms that accompanied films like Ghostbusters (2016) and Captain

Marvel is that “they force people who care about gender equality to spend large amounts of time and energy defending movies that aren’t always worth the effort” because it is only “the trolls and Disney’s marketing department who are both united in pushing the message that

Captain Marvel is feminism incarnate” (Jones N., 2019). Nevertheless, no controversy stopped the film’s financial success.

The third female-led superhero film Birds of Prey: The Fantabulous Emancipation of

One Harley Quinn (2020) was directed by Cathy Yan. It was introduced as the first female superhero R-rated film (meaning restricted to audiences under 17 without parental or adult supervision) and included the first all-female multiracial team on screen. Harley Quinn, the lead character introduced in the previous DCEU film Suicide Squad (2016), was promoted as being “extremely over men” due to her recent breakup with the well-known DC villain Joker

3 and thus her titular emancipation hinted at her future transformation (Crucchiola, 2020).

However, since Birds of Prey underperformed during its box office run that was cut short by the Covid-19 pandemic, the hurdle that Wonder Woman successfully overcame was brought back into the discussion. Director Cathy Yan expressed her disappointment with the box office narrative that implied that perhaps the audiences “weren’t ready” for a film like Birds of Prey and mentioned the extra burden she faced as a woman-of-colour (Davids, 2020). In fact, the casting of Black Canary was attacked by racists because actress Jurnee Smollett is black while the comics character is traditionally portrayed as white (Labonte, 2020). Furthermore, Harley

Quinn is a criminal and an antihero and not a superheroine in the ranks of Carol Danvers and

Diana Prince who are aspirational leaders. In his article with the apt name “The unfair pressure for Birds of Prey to be a great feminist superhero movie”, Abad-Santos argues that Harley

Quinn is “very careful not to miss its female-empowerment-moment beats” and while she does commit crimes, it is not out of malice but rather in the protection of herself (2020). He elaborates that the film seems to suggest that Quinn would never become a villain if she never met the Joker and thus the film does not let Harley be her reprehensible, human-disaster self but a forced role model for women (ibid.). Female-led superhero films are thus continuously examined through box office lenses and their representation of women both behind and in front of the camera.

Wonder Woman 1984 was set to release in June 2020 but was postponed due to the

Covid-19 pandemic and the worldwide cinema closure. Its release in December 2020 was anticipated as a test of the new system of film release when it premiered both in cinemas and on the streaming service HBO Max. That itself was a significant change since it was the first time there was no window between a film’s cinema run and the possibility of renting it at home

(Kafka, 2020). The film was mired in controversy after its release because of its “warped morality” when one of the plotlines included body-snatching of a random man’s body for Steve

Trevor’s returned soul which Diana proceeded to have sex with and which led to multiple discussions of whether or not this was a sexual assault done by a female superhero (see

4 Di Placido, 2020; Hadadi, 2020). As such, it is no surprise that the complicated gender politics of superheroine movies are examined not only in mainstream media but also in academia.

In academia, the superheroine films are analysed as feminist or postfeminist texts (see

Cocca, 2021; Jones, 2018) as well as significant milestones in the context of media and culture

(see Brannon Donoghue, 2019; Curtis, 2020; Kirby, 2020). Academic research is mostly continuing the tradition of feminist film studies of female action heroes (which superheroines are part of) and which has been mostly preoccupied with the visual representation of action heroines on screen (see Schubart, 2019; Tasker, 2012) as well as content analysis (see Brown,

2011, 2015; Waites, 2007; Schubart, 2007). There is, therefore, a plethora of interpretations of the aforementioned films already in existence yet neither media nor academia had not taken into consideration what the films’ audience has to say on that matter apart from the very vocal trolls.

For the purpose of this analysis, reviews from IMDb are particularly helpful as the website is the most popular and biggest aggregator of film user reviews on the internet. A great deal of research has been done using a variety of datasets obtained from IMDb. For example, user ratings are analysed as a predictor for box office success (see Hsu, Shen, & Xie, 2014), a combination of attributes such as genre, MPAA rating, number of votes and user ratings is used to predict the popularity of a movie (see Abidi, Xu, Ni, Wang, & Zhang, 2020), and the

“Connections” section of the film is used to classify the most influential movies in film history

(see Canet, Valero, & Codina, 2016). In terms of user reviews, Liesbet van Zoonen analyses the performance of political self in reviews for films and TV series about politics and concludes that “popular films and series about politics can function as a resource to present one’s ideas in a public setting” (2007, p. 544), and Juha Ridanpää (2014) studies the political nature of humour in The Dictator (2012) and argues that IMDb is a stage on which political performances are enabled and offers a possibility for individuals to become political actors (p.

146). Jahna Otterbacher’s study compares corpora of reviews written by men and women in their writing style, content and metadata features to predict the author’s gender and reveals an existing gender bias on IMDb where the reviews written by women and marked as most

5 “helpful1” share stylistic similarities with male-authored reviews (2012). Following up on

Otterbacher’s work, Karen Boyle’s study (2014) compares reviews of male-led comedy The

Hangover (2009) with female-led Bridesmaids (2011) in regards to gendered commentary.

Boyle identifies IMDb as a space for male reviews where male-led films escape gendered scrutiny whereas whether or not female-led films work for men is at the heart of the debate about the film. These studies thus show that IMDb is a male-gendered website where the users come to express their political selves. This observation is important due to this study’s focus on female-led films and feminism.

With the exemption of Otterbacher, who uses computational methods to analyse over

30,000 reviews but does not focus on their content, the research into user reviews is mostly conducted on a smaller scale from 286 (Ridanpää), 549 (van Zoonen), to 1426 reviews (Boyle).

This limitation occurs due to a small number of reviews published for the analysed films/TV series but enables qualitative analysis of each review. However, the scope of this research is much larger with over 18,000 reviews collected. Since the qualitative analysis of such a large number of texts is well beyond the capacity of a single researcher, there are two options of proceeding – sampling the reviews prior to any analysis and creating four sample corpora (or collections of texts) or analysing the data first by using corpus linguistics tools and identifying relevant reviews for the qualitative analysis. Choosing the second option, the tool in use is the online corpus compiler Sketch Engine which enables its user to compile their own corpora and provides multiple tools for analysis from simple word search to looking at trends in usage.

The approach of this study draws on critical discourse analysis (CDA) as well as corpus linguistics (CL), both of which are described in more detail in the methodology section (chapter

3.2). Egbert & Baker define the combination of two or more independent methods used to answer the same research question(s) as methodological triangulation and argue that triangulation has benefits that reach beyond determining the validity of one method by

1 IMDb users can rate their reviews by voting Yes or No depending on whether they found the review helpful. As per IMDb’s guidelines, “helpful” does not necessarily imply the review was “positive” or “favourable” or matches the opinion of the user rating it. The aim of the feature is “to help valid, well- written reviews surface at the expense of less interesting ones” (IMDb.com, n.d.).

6 confirming its findings by using a different method (2020, p. 6). While CDA is triangulatory in itself since it undertakes contextual analyses in order to interpret, explain and critique findings, CL methods can identify frequent or salient linguistic features which are then subjected to a more detailed qualitative analysis (p. 8). The methods are thus complementary and can result in a greater number of findings than using a single approach (p. 13). In contrast to previous research into IMDb user reviews, this thesis is novel both in the scope of analysed data as well as in the methodologies in use.

The arrangement of the study is as follows: chapter 2 provides the necessary theoretical background into feminism and the way it has developed and transformed in recent decades, particularly in the context of the rise of social media and online activism. Research into presenting and understanding feminism in the media and by the audiences is also discussed in this chapter. Chapter 3 lays out the aims and research questions of the study and describes the methods used and the data for the study. Chapter 4 is the main body of this thesis – the analysis. The analysis is divided into qualitative and quantitative parts in which all four films are cross-analysed. Finally, chapter 5 is a discussion in which the findings are presented in relation to the research questions and previous research, implications of the present study, possible limitations and suggestions of further research, followed by chapter 6 with a concluding overview of the findings.

7 2. Theory and Context

This chapter aims to provide a short overview of feminism and to underline the difficulties of understanding the term from multiple perspectives. Firstly, it follows academic debates and classifications of feminisms to the current era with a short discussion of online misogyny and feminist backlash. This serves as a context for some of the language and terms that may appear in the corpus. Secondly, it surveys the field by introducing research into how people outside both media and academia understand and negotiate feminism.

2.1. Feminism

The feminist movement underwent major shifts over the last 30 years. It went through fragmentation and backlash to a stasis where it was effectively presumed “dead”. The recent revival of the movement in the era of social media provides new sets of challenges where backlash does not have to come as a mediated debate over published bestsellers but a vicious commentary and organized attacks by online misogynists. The evolution of feminism is thus intertwined with the evolution of antifeminism. Since this thesis looks into IMDb reviews as space where feminism is negotiated in the context of superheroine films, understanding how feminism and antifeminism are expressed nowadays is crucial.

2.1.1. The fragmentation of feminism

If one searches for the definition of feminism, the answer appears to be very straightforward.

The definition in Oxford English Dictionary states that in its modern usage, it means the

“[a]dvocacy of equality of sexes and the establishment of the political, social, and economic rights of the female sex” (2019). However, as a deeper look into feminism uncovers, there are and have been many feminisms that sometimes complement or oppose each other. For example, when discussing the fragmentation of feminism in the 1970s and 1980s, Liesbet van

Zoonen identifies socialist, radical and liberal feminisms as those that withstood each other as to the crucial source of women’s oppression, whether it was capitalism, patriarchy, or sexism; but shared their assumptions of a determining last instance or rather the cause of women’s oppression (2011[1994], p. 3). In contrast, black feminism, psychoanalysis, poststructuralism

8 and postmodernism pointed out and critiqued the overwhelming focus of these three dominant perspectives on white middle-class Western women and the concept of the universal experience of womanhood and oppression (ibid.). In particular, the experience of women of colour differed in questions of family, reproductive rights and the history of white women’s privilege. For women of colour, family represented a refuge from oppression and racism rather than a cornerstone of women’s oppression as it did for their white counterparts; and they were forced into sterilization and abortion rather than being denied it (Gill, 2014[2007], pp. 27-28).

This fragmentation deepened in the 1990s when authors of popular books, such as

Katie Roiphe’s The Morning After (1993) or Rene Denfeld’s The New Victorians (1995), proclaimed themselves as feminists but also attacked second-wave feminism and portrayed it as a “didactic and monolithic structure bent only on stifling dissent” and rejected its valorisation of the female victim figure (Gamble, 2006, p. 39). The divide happening during the 1990s under the scrutiny of the media resulted in new terminology applied to these new feminists and their perspective. Backlash feminism (after Susan Faludi’s Backlash (1991) detailing negative depictions of feminism in the media, politics, and popular press), postfeminism, and third-wave feminism are the most prominent concepts (Projansky, 2001, p.

71). Postfeminism and third-wave feminism in particular are both used as descriptors of the era and, like feminism itself, both are contested terms.

Third-wave feminism as a term seems to be centred around a generational divide and thus revitalization and continuation of feminism rather than its repudiation. Indeed, in the eyes of third-wave feminists, postfeminism encapsulates a group of young and conservative feminists that are positioned explicitly against and critiquing the second-wave feminists

(Heywood and Drake, qtd. in Le Masurier, 2007). Third-wave feminism differs from its predecessor because it accepts pluralism and hybridity, it takes into account the criticism of second-wave’s essentialism and attempts to deconstruct it and understands that oppression is not the same for all women. According to Gamble, third-wave feminism is capable of describing

“a position from which past feminisms can be both celebrated and critiqued, and new strategies evolved” whereas postfeminism is not (2006, p. 45).

9 Postfeminism as a term originated in the 1980s in the news and other popular media and was used as “indicative of joyous liberation from the ideological shackles of a hopelessly outdated feminist movement” and the media claimed the label for many of the backlash authors (e.g., Naomi Wolf, Rene Denfeld, Camille Paglia) many of whom have not claimed the term for themselves (Gamble, 2006, p. 36). Postfeminism did not come with the identifier of being a “postfeminist”. It is rather “a set of discourses that move back and forth between the popular and the scholarly” and it is often interrogated through media criticism of television and film texts with female protagonists, such as Sex and the City, Bridget Jones’ Diary, or Ally

McBeal (Lumby, 2015, pp. 602-4). Angela McRobbie in her analysis of Bridget Jones’ Diary argues that postfeminism “positively draws on and invokes feminism as that which can be taken into account, to suggest that equality is achieved” and thus implies that feminism is no longer needed (2009, p. 12). She explains this as a “double entanglement”, the co-existence of neo-conservative values concerning to gender, sexuality and family life, with processes of liberalisation regarding choice and diversity in domestic, sexual and kinship relations (ibid.).

In contrast, Ann Brooks understands it as an “intersection” of feminism with other “post” movements such as postmodernism, poststructuralism and postcolonialism which leads to enrichment of feminist theory rather than its denunciation (qtd. in Lumby, 2015, p. 603).

In short, postfeminism is understood in three ways – as antithetical to feminism, as a historical generational shift, and as an epistemological break. Furthermore, Rosalind Gill argues for conceiving postfeminism as a “sensibility” where postfeminism media culture is the critical object because of “a number of recurring and relatively stable themes, tropes and constructions that characterize gender representations in the media in the early twenty-first century”, such as the focus on individualism, choice, empowerment, consumerism, self- surveillance, and commodification of difference (2014[2007], pp. 254-5). Consequently, while postfeminism and third-wave feminism coexist in the same era, Gill argues that the media culture is postfeminist and needs to be analysed as such and the media cannot be omitted from further discussion of feminism because, as Andrea Stuart says, “feminism comes at most of us through the media” and whether or not it names itself as feminism, it is through the media that

10 the vast majority of women learn their feminism (1990, p. 30). It is precisely with the rise of the new popular social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, that feminism once again starts significantly shifting during the 2010s.

2.1.2. From postfeminism to popular feminisms

In her 2011 essay, Catharine Lumby surmises that during the 2000s she has been asked fourteen times to speak on the topic “Is Feminism Dead?”. During the last such panel, she asked everyone in the audience who considered themselves a feminist to raise their hand. After seeing the sea of arms up in the air, she said: “Take a look around you. Feminism is alive. Now can we please talk about something else?” (p. 95). This anecdote underlines the repetitiveness of feminist discussion since a similar question was asked multiple times already during the

1990s, even in the title of Andrea Stuart’s article “Feminism: Dead or Alive?” (1990). Thus, it seems rather surprising that a mere three years later, in 2014, media culture was filled with moments that saw many celebrities identifying themselves as feminists (from Beyoncé, Emma

Watson, to Benedict Cumberbatch) to publishing of books such as Chimamanda Ngozi

Adichie’s We Should All Be Feminists (2014) and Roxanne Gay’s Bad Feminist (2014), both of which were bestsellers (Jackson, 2020, pp. 1-2). Answering this influx, celebrities like Lady

Gaga and actress Shailene Woodley refused to identify as feminist and sometimes conflated feminism with misandry (Hannah & Taylor, 2015, p. 125). The interpretations of feminism are thus still contradictory and complicated all the while celebrity feminists are often criticised as representing “watered-down” and “commercialized” feminism despite there being no

“‘authentic’ feminism that exists beyond its celebrity manifestations” (ibid). Nevertheless, celebrity feminists also have the possibility of contributing to the public understanding of feminism precisely due to their platform and visibility.

In her book Empowered: Popular Feminism2 and Popular Misogyny, Sarah Banet-

Weiser (2018) talks about feminism being popular now in three senses: it is circulated in

2 Banet-Weiser is not the first to use the term popular feminism. Andrea Stuart defined it precisely as the feminism that is all around us – on the radio, in the newspapers, on TV. In short, it is feminist content in all popular media (Stuart, 1990).

11 popular and commercial media (Instagram, Twitter) as well as broadcast media, it is being liked or admired by like-minded people and groups, and it is also a terrain of struggle where competing demands for power battle it out and thus some feminisms become more visible than others (p. 1). She elaborates that media-friendly expressions such as a celebrity or corporate feminism achieve more visibility than expressions of feminism that criticize patriarchy, racism and violence. Those are more obscured and therefore popular feminisms do not challenge deep structures of inequities (pp. 4, 11). In this, Banet-Weiser’s popular feminisms incorporate what

Catherine Rottenberg calls “neoliberal feminism”. Rottenberg argues that neoliberal feminism not only fails to offer a critique of neoliberalism but also spawns a new feminist (rather than female) subject who is distinctly aware of current inequalities between men and women, yet at the same time disavows the social, cultural and economic forces producing this inequality, and accepts full responsibility for her own well-being and self-care (Rottenberg, 2014, pp. 419-20).

As an example of neoliberal feminism, Rottenberg analyses Sheryl Sandberg’s bestseller Lean

In (2013) which is a self-proclaimed feminist manifesto yet also asks its readers to change themselves and overcome their internal obstacles for a successful career and garnered the attention of media varying from the New York Times to Al-Jazeera (pp. 418-9).

Nowadays, there is a markedly different attitude towards feminism which once again becomes a viable identity that people claim. Popular feminism also embraces feminist values and ideologies and, unlike postfeminism, recognizes existing gender inequality. However,

Rosalind Gill argues that postfeminism is still very much present because while popular feminism appears as an identity that is “stylish, defiant, funny, beautiful, confident, and it

‘champions’ women” in actuality it promotes a postfeminist sensibility with similar themes and tropes (2016, p. 625). Banet-Weiser agrees that postfeminism remains dominant and visible but points out that postfeminism and popular feminism are mutually sustaining. Despite their surface differences and utilizing different subjectivities to become visible, it is visibility that is paramount for both (2018, pp. 20-1).

This does not mean that all visible feminisms are uncritical of societal issues. As the rise of the #MeToo movement in October 2017 shows, celebrity feminism has the potential to

12 become globally visible. After the New York Times exposé of decades of allegations of sexual harassment by Harvey Weinstein, actor Alyssa Milano tweeted a post inviting women who had withstood sexual assault to tweet #MeToo (Jackson, 2020, p. 4). The post gained worldwide traction and the following campaign “provided important spaces for a wider range of women to participate in public debate on sexual harassment, sexism and rape culture” (Gill & Orgad,

2018, p. 1318). However, the movement was also criticized for the exclusion of women of colour. The phrase “me too” was originally coined by black activist Tarana Burke in 2006 yet

Milano was initially widely credited for it. The initial contribution of women of colour was not acknowledged. Furthermore, the lack of acknowledgement underlined the already existing disparity in white feminists’ responses to harassment when it is perpetrated against white female actresses as opposed to black female actresses and the white feminists’ failure to see that harassment against black women as both racialized and gendered (Onwuachi-Willig,

2018, pp. 111-2). Similarly, the failure of including other oppressed populations, such as working-class women, transgender people, queer people, and disabled women were also points of criticism (Gill & Orgad, 2018, p. 1319; see Johnson III & Renderos, 2020). There is also a question of who can to speak out. Dubravka Zarkov and Kathy Davis note that the most visible women of #MeToo are powerful, famous celebrities, journalists, TV personalities, and members of political elites and their sheer number prevents too great sanctions that less privileged women may face (2018, p. 5). These criticisms aimed at the #MeToo movement underline the struggle between popular feminism and those feminisms resisting to be media- friendly and uncritical, namely those that are of colour, non-heteronormative, non- cisgendered, and intersectional.

It should be noted that not all critical responses towards popular feminism come from other feminists. Banet-Weiser argues for the existence of popular misogyny which is also becoming increasingly visible and circulated to a wider audience. It has a range of forms, such as an increase in death and rape threats expressed on social media platforms towards women3,

3 For example, the widely documented #Gamergate pointed against feminist critic Anita Sarkeesian, and developers Zoë Quinn and Brianna Wu. See Condis, 2018; Hathaway, 2014; Cross, 2014.

13 to revenge-porn websites, a rise of men’s rights organizations or an increase in global sex trafficking of women and girls (Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 33). Yet in the current popular iteration of misogyny, there is a claim that masculinity and patriarchy are under threat and that there is a need to take something back from the hands of women and feminists (p. 35). Banet-Weiser argues that popular feminism and popular misogyny have entered a dynamic where the more popular feminism becomes, the more reactionary popular misogyny gets and identifies the rise of violent and hateful trolling targeted on women as an example of popular misogyny (pp. 166-

7).

2.1.3. Trolling and the language of online antifeminism

In her book This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things (2015), Whitney Phillips states that the definition of trolling is becoming increasingly fuzzy as mainstream media attributes such a variety of behaviours to trolling that the concept has become almost meaningless (p. 153).

While the media describe trolling as an antagonistic, hateful, ever-present online danger without providing any sort of definition behind the term, within the internet communities it became a name given to someone who disagrees with one’s opinion and thus a way of attacking and dismissing anyone who goes against the majority of opinion in a given space (Condis, 2018, p. 18). Phillips argues that trolls merely mirror the already racist, misogynist, and homophobic discourses of mainstream media and for every article condemning trolling behaviours, there will be a thousand trolls happy to rise to the media’s occasion (p. 158). However, Phillips also admits that trolls are “gendered male, are raced as white, and are beneficiaries of a certain degree of economic privilege, and that the vast majority of their targets are members of underrepresented or otherwise marginalized populations” (p. 164). Although, due to the online nature of trolling, it is impossible to know what race or gender trolls actually are, it is their behaviour that is coded as white and masculine. Megyn Condis argues that by valuing traits traditionally considered masculine such as calm self-possession and objectivity, gender becomes the conceptual field upon which the game of trolls is played because when one fails to present these traits, one cannot be a troll but can be trolled (2018, pp. 34-5). Rather than identifying trolls as misogynists, however, Condis argues that trolls “imagine themselves as

14 trickster figures and adopt a persona that is rude and obnoxious (or perhaps simply ignorant) to entertain themselves and their friends by infuriating others” (p. 34). What is more harmful, in her eyes, is the widespread acceptance of trolling by the Internet and the general opinion that trolling, particularly the type aimed at women, is an inevitable part of life on the Internet and a risk that women knowingly take when they go online (p. 35). This attitude shifts the responsibility for their online experience solely on women and other victims of trolling behaviour, among which feminists are one of the targets.

While it would be inaccurate to claim trolls to be explicitly antifeminist, there are other visible and vocal groups that position themselves against the movement and usually consist of men’s rights activists (MRA) or members of alternative right (alt-right) who are mostly white, mostly male middle-American radicals who share ties with white supremacists (Condis, 2018, p. 101)4. Within the so-called “manosphere” hundreds of websites exist covering a range of topics: from support for father’s rights and custody rights to pick-up artists and normalization of rape and sexual violence (Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 117). They are united by their belief that

“feminism has been so successful that men are now the second sex, and men have to stand up for their rights” but rather than actually helping men, they are more preoccupied with making sure women and feminists get their comeuppance (Condis, 2018, p. 99). Indeed, on a popular but now no longer active MRA website Return of Kings5 the “About” section explains that

“masculinity is being increasingly punished and shamed in favor of creating an androgynous and politically-correct society that allows women to assert superiority and control over men” and lists socialism, feminism, cultural Marxism, and social justice warriorism as aiming to destroy the family unit and impoverish the state (About, n.d.). Both Condis (p. 99) and Barnet-

Weiser (p. 119) name the websites Return of Kings and A Voice for Men as the hotspots of manosphere which came up with their own new vocabularies that address the injuries

4 For a more thorough discussion of manosphere and networked misogyny, see Marwick & Caplan (2018). 5 This website is officially on a hiatus since October 1, 2018, its founder Roosh Valizadeh is however still active on his personal website.

15 feminism dealt them and help to create the feeling of community. For the sake of clarity, some of the terms are listed here:

• Incel – an involuntary celibate man, who feels that women owe him sex but is unable

to seduce women.

• SJW – social justice warrior, a derogative label for people advocating equal rights and

other socially progressive views.

• Anti-Slut Defense (ASD) – women who claim to have been raped because they were

incapacitated.

• Negging – the way of subtly insulting a woman to lower her self-esteem for easier

seduction.

• Virtue signalling – a performative act of self-righteousness, mostly attributed to

feminists and SJWs.

• Beta, cuck, mangina – describing men who betray their gender by advocating feminist

positions.

(Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 119; Condis, 2018, pp. 100-1)

Moreover, MRAs and the alt-right recruited some of its members from trolls, and they also adopted some of the strategies how to deal with accusations of racism and sexism by claiming that anything too extreme or offensive is simply the work of some unaffiliated trolls and thus not to be taken seriously as a belief of the movements (Condis, 2018, p. 105).

However, by using the trolling as an excuse as well as an explanation for their behaviour, they complicate navigating online interactions and ultimately render any distinction between trolls and actual extremists meaningless. Both groups may express the same sentiments for the sole purpose of hurting their targets and feminists are one such target.

2.2. Framing and understanding feminism

The following section presents an overview of the last two decades of research into how feminism is portrayed in the media and how it is understood by the general public. Since media is the source through which many people learn of feminism for the first time, the way in which feminism is framed by the media may explain the attitudes and conceptions of feminism

16 provided by the responders of the in-depth interviews and questionnaires analysed by feminist scholars who research (dis)identification and negotiating feminism. It should be noted, however, that scholars tend to focus on women and girls and their understanding which creates a research gap where the male perspective is not sufficiently covered by studies into the language of online misogyny, as that is a rather extreme position. This overview is necessary to provide context for possible attitudes towards feminism and provides established stereotypes and vocabulary used to describe feminism and feminists. Furthermore, studies into the mediated presentation of feminism, while analysing different aspects of the presentation, utilize methodologies that are also employed in this thesis.

2.2.1. Mediated presentation of feminism

Research conducted by Lind & Salo (2002) consists of content analysis of transcripts of 35,000 hours of television and radio content aired on ABC, CNN, PBS, and NPR from May 1993 to

January 1996 (p. 212). Their focus on electronic media rather than text acknowledges the importance of television as a source of news and by focusing on the language they underline the importance of language in constructing the social reality. They created a corpus and aided by Wordlink, Lind & Salo studied collocations6 of FEMINISM and FEMINISTS through six guiding frames – demonization, personalization and trivialization (focus on appearance, style, or personal qualities), goals (civil, reproductive, workplace rights), victimization, agency, and site of struggle (variety of locations of feminist activities) – and then cross-compared the results with collocates of WOMAN and WOMEN. They conclude that feminists are portrayed differently than “regular” women and are less often trivialized and framed as victims and more often framed as having agency. With that in mind, however, only the goals of the movement frame is more likely to be applied to feminists than the personalization and trivialization frame which means that feminist’s appearance and marital status still matter to the media. Feminists are also more likely to be demonized and associated with words such as jerks, bitches, radical, or

6 Collocation is “the above-chance frequent co-occurrence of two words within a predetermined span, usually five words on either side of the word under investigation” (Baker, P. et al., 2008, p. 278). See section 3.2.2. for more details.

17 bad. Interestingly, by framing the feminists as found in the public sphere (media and the arts, politics, religion), Lind & Salo argue, feminists are not quite “real” and “regular” and as such the audience might assume that feminism and its concerns are not relevant to regular people

(pp. 224-5).

Similar content analysis of news stories by Carolyn Bronstein (2005) using five frames

(demonization, personalization and trivialization, goals and rights, victimization, agency, and

“feminism lite”) focused on the textual presentation of third-wave feminist as compared to their second-wave predecessors. The data set was considerably smaller and consisted of 94 news stories published between 1992 and July 2004. Her findings show that second-wavers are considered “strident”, “mannish and unattractive” while third-wavers are “feminine and pretty” and they take feminism “with a grain of salt” as opposed to serious second-wavers (p.

795). In general, the texts framed the two waves as static and opposing forces where the

“feminism lite” frame supports the interpretation of the movement as frivolous that “endorses nothing more than being and doing whatever makes one feel good” thus echoing the focus on choice and individualism of postfeminism (ibid.). The presence of Bronstein’s category of

“feminism lite” in the media suggests that there is something like “authentic” or “real” feminism that is not present in the third wave.

Another corpus-based study conducted by Jaworska and Krishnamurthy (2012) focuses on British and German media and the collocation profiles of FEMINISM. The researchers compiled two separate corpora and used a reference corpus for representation comparison. In their findings they conclude that there is a strong tendency for negative portrayal of feminism in both corpora and that there is a general association of feminism with the past, therefore framed as “outdated, and no longer relevant” (p. 423). In British media, there are more references to sexuality and homosexuality in particular, while the German media positioned feminism more within academia than in the socio-political sphere. Jaworska and

Krishnamurthy concur with the previous studies in the field that feminism is marginalized in the media and portrayed rather negatively.

18 The most recent study by De Benedictis, Orgad and Rottenberg (2019) focuses on the coverage of #MeToo in British media which they analyse by using content analysis. They position the #MeToo movement as reinvigorating feminist goals and activism. Exploring a coverage of a 6-month period, they accumulated 3450 newspaper articles and by sampling obtained the final 613 texts. Their study is not corpus-based, all the relevant coding (positive, negative, mixed/balanced, unclear) was done manually. When discussing the distribution of articles per publication, they point out that the biggest daily newspaper The Sun devoted

“strikingly little” coverage to #MeToo (only 5 % of the sample) and this finding serves as “an important caveat to the general enthusiasm about the ostensibly heightened visibility and widespread embrace of #MeToo within the broader context of the growing popularity of feminism” in the media (p. 725). Their following analysis in peaks in coverage leads to the understanding that three major events during the 6-month period are linked to the movement’s initiation with Alyssa Milano’s tweet, the Golden Globes award ceremony, speech from Oprah Winfrey and the black dress code as a sign of solidarity, and the 2018 Oscars and

International Women’s Day protests. The authors conclude that overall, the coverage seems to corroborate the critiques of #MeToo as a movement that helps to reinscribe a dominant version of feminism, one that forefronts white women who have economic, social, and cultural capital.

2.2.2. Negotiating and understanding feminism by the general public

Pamela Aronson (2003) conducted in-depth interviews of 42 women aged between twenty- three to twenty-four and a variety of races (33 % of participants were of colour), backgrounds, occupations, and relationship status. She identifies several attitudes towards feminism in dividing her respondents into corresponding groups. For those who identified as feminists, it was viewed primarily as an ideology of equality and “social justice” and they largely came to see themselves as feminists after taking women’s studies courses (p. 913). The second group were feminists who further qualified their support but distanced themselves from negative associations of feminism as being angry, radical, or alienating men. The third group distanced themselves from feminism because it goes “too far”, or as a result of negative perceptions such as lesbianism and, again, separation from men, or while endorsing many of its principles.

19 “Fence-sitters” support feminist issues but focused on evaluating the ideologies and stereotypes associated with feminism but would not classify themselves as feminists or non- feminists (p. 916). The last group had no opinion on the topic or had substantial difficulty defining the term. For some, feminism was an activist approach that addressed discrimination and thus did not have personal relevance. Aronson concluded that none of her respondents was antifeminist in their views and that they seem to be passive supporters rather than active agents.

A similar study based on 40 qualitative interviews with a group of German and British research participants was conducted by Christina Scharff (2011). Again, only women were interviewed. Scharff suggests that the association of feminism with unfemininity, man-hating and lesbianism is not merely a negative stereotype, but goes hand-in-hand with performances of gender and sexuality (p. 472). For several respondents, feminism and femininity and femininity and lesbianism are mutually exclusive. In order to be feminine, one cannot be feminist and/or lesbian. While there are acknowledgements of stigmatizing generalizations being made, some respondents reject feminism solely on assumptions of feminists “burning the bras and [being] anti-man” (p. 465). Another theme of dis-identification was a perceived distance from feminism in relation to class. Working-class women see feminists as distant from their daily reality and focusing on irrelevant issues. Furthermore, several respondents who identified themselves as feminists also distanced themselves from man-hating and unfemininity. Scharff observes that race, class, sexuality and gender identity variously intersect with feminist disidentification but also with religious identification and cultural context and thus all play a role in negotiating feminism.

A bigger study with three college student samples (of all genders) was conducted by

Ogletree, Diaz and Padilla (2017) via a 13-item Social Roles Questionnaire (SQR) and a 22-item

Ambivalent Sexism Inventory. The first sample was evaluated based on five themes, two positive (“equality/respect”, “rejection of patriarchy/traditional gender roles”) and three negative (“negative feelings toward men”, “women with a problem”, “preferential treatment”).

When describing a feminist, 84 % of answers included an “equality/respect” theme while 8 %

20 were coded for negative feelings towards men and another 6.5 % for women with a problem

(e.g., “closeminded”, “bitchy”, “crazy”, “angry”). Overall, women were more likely to consider themselves a feminist and defining a feminist as someone who supports gender equality. Men were more likely to define feminists as women who hated and resented men. Participants defining feminists as man-haters were more likely to agree with traditional gender roles and both benevolent and hostile sexism.

21 3. Methodology

In this chapter, the aims and research questions are re-introduced. Furthermore, the methods of analysis are discussed as they are the tools necessary for answering the research question.

The manner of data collection, as well as the corpora compilation process, is the last part of this section.

3.1. Aims and research questions

As stated in the introduction, the aim of this thesis is to examine how users of the IMDb evaluate superheroine films in regards to female representation and feminism and if they reflect upon the existing discourse provided by other media.

The research questions that aim to fulfil the aim of this thesis are as follows:

1. Is feminism a topic present in reviews of all four films equally and how is the topic

distributed across the rating scale?

2. What is the users’ attitude towards feminism and do they recognize the presence of

feminism in the films?

3. What vocabulary do they use to describe feminism and its messages?

4. What topics do they associate with feminism and do these topics reflect the ones

brought up by the media prior to the films’ release?

5. What role does IMDb itself play in the negotiation of feminism?

Due to the nature of the research questions, both quantitative and qualitative approaches are used in answering them.

3.2. Methods of analysis

The overview of previous research into negotiation and mediated feminism shows that a combination of methods is rarely in use. Corpus-based studies tend to focus on collocation analysis while content analysis is done manually and presents data based on coding and close reading of sampled texts. The research into IMDb reviews in particular is mostly qualitative rather than quantitative due to its smaller scale. Due to the size of the corpora this thesis is dealing with, only qualitative analysis is impossible. The combination of more methods of

22 analysis offers a more comprehensive picture of how the IMDb reviewers express themselves in their comments while making the scope of the analysis manageable.

3.2.1. Critical discourse analysis (CDA)

Norman Fairclough (2013) defines CDA not just as an analysis of discourse but as a part of some form of systematic transdisciplinary analysis of the relation between discourse and other elements of the social process which also includes some form of systematic analysis of a text.

Moreover, it addresses social wrongs in their discursive aspects and possible ways of righting or mitigating them (p. 11). The critical aspect requires considering the text under analysis within its wider social, political, cultural, and historical context as well as issues such as intertextuality and interdiscursivity (Baker P., 2010, p. 123). This is a relevant observation as this thesis does not merely look at what the reviewers say but also takes into account the current mediated presentations of feminism and the existence of new antifeminist terminology.

Baker (2010) notes several analytical frameworks of CDA which take place at several different levels. At the linguistic level, features such as agency (objects vs humans as social actors), nominalisation (agent is not present), lexical choice (using terms that contain evaluations), hyperbole (attempts to emphasize or exaggerate), etc. are examined (p. 122).

Other levels include considering how various argumentation strategies are used in texts, processes of production and reception, typical and atypical recipients of the text, intertextuality and interdiscursivity, and texts’ wider social, political, cultural and historical contexts (pp. 122-

3). Since all these levels of analysis rely on close reading of the texts, and CDA addresses social wrongs, it assumes a position on the topic and is, therefore, more susceptible to bias. Mautner notes that one of the persisting criticisms against CDA is that it “supposedly cherry-picks small and unrepresentative data samples to suit researchers’ preconceived notion about hidden ideological meaning” (2012, p. 34). This is prevented by the use of corpus linguistics methodology which makes it possible to study larger quantities of data thus avoiding the risk of drawing conclusions from small and unrepresentative data samples (see section 3.2.2.).

23 CDA benefits from combining quantitative and qualitative methods because they help to “mitigate each other’s short-comings” (Baker P., 2020, p. 86). While CL is used for quantitative analysis and identifying relevant texts, the qualitative analysis is conducted in multiple steps which involve reading each review multiple times to understand its overall tone, the topics related to feminism and whether the user identified the film as feminist. Reading the entire text rather than the immediate context of FEMINISM or FEMINIST also enables discerning irony if it is present and a general attitude of the reviewer. For the purpose of this multi-level analysis, a coding table was designed and each review containing FEMINISM or FEMINIST was entered into it (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Coding table for Captain Marvel reviews

Rating User Tone Yes or No Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Scene Film Context 1 STAR CM_Review_1 unclear unspecified fake feminism Marvel's poor attempts to sell pseudo feminism with its products, that I wouldn't even call films 1 STAR CM_Review_2 negative yes forced feminist crap 1 STAR CM_Review_3 unclear unspecified Wonder Woman I's not about not being feminist I just have standards 1 STAR CM_Review_4 unclear yes marketing target audienceplot Alita: Battle Angeltoo much relying on subtext, it's too busy trying to be a feminist film that it forgets to be a superhero movie, Marvel (disney) trying to capitalize in the current zeitgeist. It's casual fan base which underwrites the financial viability of these movies not the fringe elements. When you dogmatically service these elements specifically, on one side or the other, you risk marginalizing the culture we love by forcing out this casual fan base 1 STAR CM_Review_5 positive yes strong female character this rubs feminism in your face, one of the worst mary sues in history with OP powers 1 STAR CM_Review_6 unclear yes strong femaleBrie character Larson target audience Wonder Woman,Alita:BattleThe main character Angel never really struggles, doesn't have any flaws. The narrative wasn't "made for me" (white, male and able-bodied) meaning that I'm not really qualified to critique it in the eyes of Brie Larson's intersectional feminism 1 STAR CM_Review_7 unclear yes political correctnesstarget audienceman-hate sexuality Politically correct, men lie to her, she is the victim, a whole lot of political BS. Please feminists with a "kind of feminist superhero", the are even rumour that the captain is a lesbian 1 STAR CM_Review_8 positive yes marketing A lot of dialogue used to bring in feminist themes was truly cringe-worthy - it felt forced, unimaginative and awkward. A backward step for feminism. 1 STAR CM_Review_9 unclear unspecified rating 1 STAR CM_Review_10 unclear yes very feminist oriented and needs to remind you of that every few minutes

In the first step, the attitudes towards feminism were examined. Drawing on De

Benedictis, Orgad, & Rottenberg (2019), the reviews are coded as positive if they show

“commendation/appraisal/valuing/appreciation/recognition” of feminism and/or its representation, and negative if they demonstrate or include “substantial criticism/derision/cynicism/dismissal” of feminism (p. 723). If the tone cannot be conclusively determined the review is marked as unclear and if the tone is balanced or includes some positive and some negative commentary, it is coded as ambivalent. Since the coding is conducted by a single researcher, it was decided to err on the side of caution and avoid overinterpreting the user reviews but rather mark them as unclear.

The second step determined whether or not the reviewer considered the film feminist.

Taking the second review from Figure 1 as an example, its first sentence states: “I’d give it a 5 if it wasn’t full of forced, feminist crap”. As such, the review was coded negative in tone and yes for the presence of feminism. CM_review_5 is positive in tone and acknowledges the

24 presence of feminism but it is still a critical review overall with the user claiming “I love women empowerment but seriously this film rubs feminism in your face, one of the worst mary sues in history with OP powers, shes [sic] never in danger, you feel all she has to do is blink and every villian [sic] dies” and thus introducing the topic of strong female character. The topics did not have predetermined umbrella terms, they were unified in the second round of going through the data (for all the collected topics and their definitions see Appendix I and II).

Furthermore, any referenced scene or film was also noted down but only if it was relevant to feminism. For example, one reviewer notes:

What was painfully obvious is the multiple feminist angles the movie took.

From playing the song ‘I’m just a girl’ when a girl is kicking as [sic], to pretty

much all male characters from past memories being villains… today’s politics

have no place in a superhero movie, and they for a big part ruined this one!

This review was coded as negative in tone, yes for feminist presence. Man-hate and politics were determined as topics and No Doubt (the band whose song was used in the scene) and flashbacks as scene references.

3.2.2. Corpus linguistics

Corpus linguists (CL) is a primarily quantitative methodology that enables the researcher to analyse larger quantities of data and thus offers “a reasonably high degree of objectivity” since any counting and sorting of linguistic patterns is provided by software and based on statistics

(Baker et al., 2008, p. 277). The computational aspect of CL prevents the need for sampling the

IMDb reviews and enables finding the relevant reviews among all of them.

Sampling is conducted in cases where the dataset is too large for the capacity of the researcher’s time and resources, thus by application of a sampling method the number of texts is reduced. Sample corpora seek to be “balanced and representative within a particular sampling frame which defines the type of language, the population, that we would like to characterise” (McEnery & Hardie, 2012, p. 8). In the context of user reviews, the reviews would have to be collected across all ratings but to be representative, the proportion of reviews for each rating category must be taken into consideration to avoid having a corpus consisting

25 largely of very negative or very positive reviews. For all four films, the sampling method would have to be the same for the corpora to be comparable. The resulting number of reviews discussing feminism in any capacity and their subsequent analysis would thus be representative of the corpus in question. However, by using tools provided by corpus linguistics, all collected reviews are examined and thus reviews discussing feminism can be identified and qualitatively analysed. This also prevents potential bias on the part of the researcher in the selection of the reviews. From the many different CL methods of processing and evaluating the data, frequency count and collocation analysis are the ones used in this study.

The frequency count provides the number of instances of something that occurs in a corpus. The word under analysis is referred to as a node (Brezina, 2018, p. 67). For the sake of this study, the nodes are FEMINISM and FEMINIST and the number of all occurrences of them is referred to as raw frequency. However, the raw frequency cannot be used in the comparison of multiple corpora because their sizes might differ. Therefore, it is necessary to analyse the relative (or normalized) frequency (McEnery & Hardie, 2012, pp. 49-50). Relative frequency is calculated as follows:

raw frequency relative frequency = × basis for normalization number of tokens in corpus

In this case, the number of tokens is the total number of words in each corpus or subcorpus and the basis for normalization is commonly one million but can be smaller based on the size of the corpora (Brezina, 2018, p. 43).

Collocation is defined as “the above-chance frequent co-occurrence of two words within a predetermined span, usually five words on either side of the word under investigation” (Baker

P. et al., 2008, p. 278). A collocation, e.g. angry feminist, typically consists of a node (feminist) and a collocate (angry). And in the case of the nodes FEMINISM and FEMINIST, collocates will help to answer the question of words associated with feminism. The significance, or the strength, of the co-occurrence is tested by a significance test which allows researchers to assert whether the results of their analysis are statistically significant. The significance test used in

26 this study is LogDice which favours collocates which “occur exclusively in each other’s company but do not have to be rare” (Brezina, 2018, p. 70). The theoretical maximum of a logDice score is 14, in the case when all occurrences of X co-occur with Y and all occurrences of Y co-occur with X, but typically the value is less than 10. Value 0 means that there is less than 1 co-occurrence of XY and negative values mean no statistical significance. Since a logDice score does not depend on the total size of a corpus, it is ideal for the comparison of corpora of different sizes (Rychlý, 2008). The tool in use for obtaining all the relevant aforementioned statistics is Sketch Engine. Sketch Engine is an online text analysis tool that allows users to compile their own corpora or work with over 500 ready-to-use corpora, and it also uses algorithms for identification of typical, rare, unusual or emerging usage (Lexical Computing, n.d.).

Since the search for nodes also identifies the text the node is found in, Sketch Engine is crucial for finding the reviews containing FEMINISM or FEMINIST for a more thorough study.

The collocations do not provide context for the usage of the two words and it is thus impossible to evaluate whether feminism is referenced positively or negatively. As Baker and Levon point out:

the weakness of a singular corpus approach to discourse analysis is that focus

on collocates or other patterns based around word frequencies may mean

that in some cases a purely descriptive analysis emerges which does not

attempt to provide interpretation, critique, or explanation for the patterns

found.” (2015, p. 231)

Therefore, it is necessary to implement a qualitative approach as well to produce a balanced study which is the reason for the methodological triangulation of this thesis.

3.2.3. Corpora compilation

For the purpose of this thesis, four specialized corpora were created. The Wonder Woman

Corpus (WW), the Captain Marvel Corpus (CM), the Birds of Prey Corpus (BoP), and the

Wonder Woman 1984 Corpus (WW1984). All the reviews come from IMDb and as per the

“User review guidelines” the minimum length for reviews is 50 characters and should be

27 written only in English (IMDb.com, n.d.). While IMDb enables its users to post several reviews of the same film, it is not condoned officially, as IMDb guides its users to edit their ratings and reviews if their opinion changes (IMDb.com, n.d.). There is also an option to report duplicates if necessary. Therefore, the only reasons for review exclusion were 1) language other than

English, 2) duplicate reviews, and 3) a user reviewed a different film (this occurred seven times in WW when the newest reviews mistakenly assumed that they were reviewing Wonder

Woman 1984).

The reviews were collected manually into separate text files and stored into separate folders based on their rating. This simplified the data collection and made it more transparent.

It should be noted, however, that the overall number of reviews as provided by IMDb does not correlate with the sum of reviews as divided into separate ratings. For example, the official number of reviews for Birds of Prey on the day of collection was 2492 reviews. The sum of reviews filtered by ratings is 2483. These reviews may have no rating but there is no filter to access them.

IMDb provides a demographic breakdown for user ratings but not for user reviews.

While rating shows that the majority of users tend to be male, which is further supported by studies by Boyle (2014) and Otterbacher (2012), there is no way to verify the user’s gender even if it is self-assigned. Therefore, gender is not reflected upon within the reviews but it is important to note that IMDb itself is very imbalanced in terms of gendered participation.

Furthermore, though the users post their reviews on a public website and with the intention of being read by other users, they are collected and stored outside of IMDb for the purpose of this research. The users thus cannot delete their work from the compiled corpora nor is it possible to ask for the permission of thousands of reviewers. Following Boyle, the online identities of individual users are protected by not disclosing their usernames nor dates of individual reviews

(2014, p. 34).

After the collection of reviews was finalized, the texts were uploaded to Sketch Engine for final corpus compilation. See Table 1 for an overview of the four corpora and final word counts.

28 Table 1. Corpora size statistics

Wonder Woman Wonder Woman Captain Marvel Birds of Prey 1984 Reviews Words Reviews Words Reviews Words Reviews Words

1 STAR 292 44,976 1,083 91,333 461 32,609 1,819 115,109

2 STARS 127 19,326 475 62,472 202 19,634 939 87,851

3 STARS 127 23,091 433 63,713 178 18,954 806 79,214

4 STARS 107 25,289 421 67,062 174 24,344 578 68,656

5 STARS 168 37,130 486 75,077 209 32,729 478 61,167

6 STARS 184 43,737 549 87,968 206 35,063 417 67,130

7 STARS 252 67,324 780 129,437 266 46,409 376 53,560

8 STARS 341 102,246 1,041 134,145 282 39,869 323 43,408

9 STARS 323 83,406 739 74,668 160 21,372 207 25,521

10 STARS 428 77,360 1,228 104,710 346 33,465 481 42,995

Total 2,349 523,885 7,235 890,585 2,484 304,448 6,424 644,611

29 4. Analysis

In this section, all four corpora will be analysed both individually and collectively. Each subsection focuses on different points of analysis. The first subsection presents a general overview of the corpora in the context of IMDb ratings and critical reception of the films as well as median word counts for reviews. This is followed by the distribution of FEMINISM and

FEMINIST across ratings and corpora. The third section provides an overview of coding feminism as negative or positive in the reviews. This subsection includes a qualitative analysis of the reviews and examines the presence of feminism in the films and the topics about feminism that the users discuss most frequently. The third subsection analyses collocations of

FEMINISM and FEMINIST in all corpora. The corpora are analysed in chronological order based on the year of the films’ release from the oldest to the most recent, thus starting with Wonder

Woman (2017), followed by Captain Marvel (2019), Birds of Prey (2020) and ending with

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020).

4.1. General corpora overview and median word count

The CM and WW84 corpora are noticeably larger than WW and BoP in the number of individual reviews (see Table 1). This is slightly surprising considering that Wonder Woman was the first superheroine film released in the 2010s as well as an origin story for an already established character. The film also has 579,674 ratings on IMDb but less than 0.5 % of users left a review. Captain Marvel has 457,950 ratings and 1.58 % of users reviewing the film. In contrast, Birds of Prey with 175,174 ratings accumulated responses from 1.42 % of users and

Wonder Woman 1984 with 176,076 votes and reviews from 3.65 % of users7. Notably, the last film is also the newest (premiered in December 2020) yet it also accumulated the highest number of responses from the viewers. This might correspond with the critical response to

Wonder Woman 1984. Looking at its scores from Metacritic, a website that collects reviews from critics and assigns scores to their reviews and applies a weighted average to summarize the range of their opinions, the film received mixed or average reviews based on 57 critic

7 All the rating numbers were collected on 25 March 2021.

30 reviews and its score is 60 (Metacritic, n.d.). While Birds of Prey also achieved 60 and Captain

Marvel 64 (generally favourable reviews), it is a significant drop from Wonder Woman’s score of 76. Compared to its predecessor, Wonder Woman 1984 did not do well among IMDb users either as the overwhelming number of 1-star reviews shows. IMDb also displays weighted averages for user ratings. Wonder Woman achieved 7.4 stars while the sequel 1984 only 5.4.

Birds of Prey have 6.1 and Captain Marvel 6.9 stars. Nevertheless, the percentages of users leaving a review are particularly important because they underline that the vast majority of

IMDb users do not write reviews and any conclusions driven from the analysis of data come from data provided by a fraction of users.

Comparing the total number of reviews and word counts of the corpora also shows that

WW is not the smallest corpus despite having the fewest texts. In fact, looking at the 8-star reviews of WW and WW1984 reveals that despite having only 18 reviews more, the word count difference is over 50,000 words.

Table 2. Median word count per review

Wonder Woman Wonder Woman Captain Marvel Birds of Prey 1984 1 STAR 87.5 53 45 43 2 STARS 104 84 54 49 3 STARS 111 89 62.5 56 4 STARS 178 95 81.5 61 5 STARS 149.5 104 93 69 6 STARS 162.5 98 108.5 77 7 STARS 205 103.5 98.5 94 8 STARS 198 80 85.5 89 9 STARS 170 69 71 81 10 STARS 111.5 53 56.5 77 Overall 144 75 71 58 Note. Shades of green indicate higher medians and shades of red the lower ones.

Table 2 reveals that word counts per review are decreasing with each film despite the uneven number of reviews. For the comparison, a median was used rather than an average to prevent skewing the overall numbers with outlier reviews that are either extremely long or short.

31 Moreover, the WW corpus has the highest median word count per review out of all films with a difference of 69-86 words. Interestingly, the lowest rating has also the shortest median word count in all four corpora and the longest reviews can be found predominantly in the middle ratings 6-7 with consistency. The length of reviews lessens again with the most positive ratings.

While the overall reception of the film might influence the length of the review (e.g., the user feels the need to explain their position more thoroughly), further research would need to be done to support such a claim.

4.2. Distribution of FEMINISM and FEMINIST

The aim of the distribution analysis is to get a general overview of the frequency of the nodes and thus the topic under discussion. While the ratings are taken into account, it is not prudent to assume that usage of the nodes in a negative review also indicates negative context for the node itself. Rather, the distribution within the corpora illuminates the trends in the usage of the nodes and whether or not feminism was a topic discussed by a specific group of reviewers or whether it appeared regardless of their reception of the film.

It should be noted that the node FEMINIST is used as a lemma in the context of this research. A lemma is a group of all inflectional forms that have the same base and differ only with respect to grammar (Brezina, 2018, p. 40). Thus, in this case, the singular feminist and plural feminists are both included in the search for the node and the results are thus combined.

The node also includes the usage of feminist as an adjective and a noun.

In order to compare the frequencies of nodes across corpora, the relative frequency was calculated for each node with the basis for normalization of 100,000 (see section 3.2.2. for the used equation). The frequencies are divided according to the ratings and there is also an overall relative frequency for the whole corpus.

Table 3 illustrates the intricacies of looking at both raw and relative frequencies. For example, the CM corpus has both the highest raw and relative frequencies yet this conjunction is not the rule as is revealed by a more thorough examination of more data. 1-star reviews have the highest scores for both (32, 35.04), yet 8-star reviews, while having only three raw hits less

(29) have much lower relative frequency (21.59) which is even below the total score for the

32 whole corpus. Similarly, WW1984 has both 5 raw hits for 1 -star and 10-star reviews yet due to the much lower word count of 10-star reviews, the relative frequency is much higher. In this corpus in particular the usage of FEMINISM drops drastically compared to its predecessors despite it being the second biggest corpus and the node is used in either very positive or very negative reviews. The BoP corpus has the highest relative frequency in 10-star reviews followed by 4, 1, and 2-star reviews. WW peaks at 20.58 with 6 stars, followed by 9 stars, 1 star and 3- star reviews with very narrow differences. CM is the only corpus where the top 3 relative frequency scores are all within the 1-5 stars. While the overall usage of the node is considerably higher in this corpus, it is more prominent as a topic within negative reviews. All four corpora have a very different distribution of the node, WW1984 being the only corpus where all the raw hits are 6 and below.

Table 3. Raw and relative frequencies of FEMINISM

WW CM BoP WW1984 Rating Raw Relative Raw Relative Raw Relative Raw Relative 1 STAR 8 17.79 32 35.04 8 24.53 5 4.34 2 STARS 3 15.52 13 20.81 4 20.37 6 13.96 3 STARS 4 17.32 18 28.25 1 5.28 0 0.00 4 STARS 4 15.82 11 16.40 7 28.75 1 1.26 5 STARS 5 13.47 21 27.97 5 15.28 4 5.83 6 STARS 9 20.58 15 17.05 5 14.26 2 3.27 7 STARS 9 13.37 22 17.00 6 12.93 1 1.49 8 STARS 13 12.71 29 21.62 8 20.07 2 3.73 9 STARS 15 17.98 13 17.41 3 14.04 1 2.30 10 STARS 9 11.63 19 18.15 10 29.88 5 19.59 Total 79 15.08 193 21.67 57 18.72 27 4.19 Note. The darker shades of green indicate higher relative frequencies.

Table 4 uncovers a slight variety of trends in the distribution of FEMINIST. The overall usage of the node is considerably higher both in raw and relative frequencies for the first three corpora. Again, WW1984 has a low occurrence of the node with most of the hits being under

10 and a majority of them appearing in 1 and 2-star reviews, rising again in 10-star reviews.

Overall, the top relative scores occur in very negative reviews across all four corpora, therefore

33 there is a higher tendency to discuss feminist topics among reviewers who are critical of the films. Again, BoP has higher relative frequency scores even in the positive reviews in contrast to WW and CM and the node is thus more evenly distributed across ratings. Even though there is a drop between 1- and 10-star reviews, it is not nearly as drastic as the drop in WW relative frequency. Moreover, although it is the smallest compiled corpus, BoP has a very similar relative frequency to CM. CM and WW share the pattern of distribution where the scores for

FEMINIST are lower in the very positive ratings in contrast to the very negative ratings.

Table 4. Raw and relative frequencies of FEMINIST

WW CM BoP WW1984 Rating Raw Relative Raw Relative Raw Relative Raw Relative 1 STAR 39 86.71 63 68.98 27 82.80 11 9.56 2 STARS 12 62.09 42 67.23 12 61.12 14 32.56 3 STARS 18 77.95 30 47.09 10 52.76 7 7.97 4 STARS 9 35.59 27 40.26 6 24.65 7 8.84 5 STARS 14 37.71 40 53.28 10 30.55 4 5.83 6 STARS 15 34.30 40 45.47 13 37.08 0 0.00 7 STARS 17 25.25 65 50.22 24 51.71 3 4.47 8 STARS 20 19.56 56 41.75 14 35.12 5 9.34 9 STARS 27 32.37 30 40.18 10 46.79 2 4.61 10 STARS 16 20.68 44 42.02 17 50.80 4 15.67 Total 187 35.69 437 49.07 143 46.97 57 8.84 Note. The darker shades of green indicate higher relative frequencies.

However, raw hits do not take into account the possibility of individual users using the node multiple times in one review. In order to clarify the distribution of the nodes in the individual reviews, the nodes were combined and if FEMINISM or FEMINIST appeared in the review it has been counted only once. As table 5 shows, the number of reviews using the nodes is between 6.5 to 7.5 % and in the case of WW1984, it is only 1.1 %. This means out of all the users choosing to review the films, feminism rarely appears as a topic. It should also be noted, however, that if the users chose to use “girl power” or “gender” or “empowerment” rather than the nodes in question to talk about the topic, those reviews cannot be included as the search is

34 done specifically for FEMINISM and FEMINIST and thus the actual number of reviews discussing those topics is probably higher.

Table 5. Distribution of FEMINISM and FEMINIST in individual reviews

WW CM BoP WW1984 Rating All Hits % All Hits % All Hits % All Hits % 1 STAR 292 32 11.0 % 1,083 81 7.5 % 461 28 6.1 % 1,819 15 0.8 % 2 STARS 127 10 7.9 % 475 39 8.2 % 202 14 6.9 % 939 15 1.6 % 3 STARS 127 12 9.4 % 433 38 8.8 % 178 11 6.2 % 806 7 0.9 % 4 STARS 107 11 10.3 % 421 36 8.6 % 174 10 5.7 % 578 7 1.2 % 5 STARS 168 12 7.1 % 486 45 9.3 % 209 14 6.7 % 478 6 1.3 % 6 STARS 184 14 7.6 % 549 41 7.5 % 206 15 7.3 % 417 2 0.5 % 7 STARS 252 17 6.7 % 780 61 7.8 % 266 21 7.9 % 376 3 0.8 % 8 STARS 341 24 7.0 % 1,041 60 5.8 % 282 19 6.7 % 323 7 2.2 % 9 STARS 323 24 7.4 % 739 39 5.3 % 160 9 5.6 % 207 3 1.4 % 10 STARS 428 20 4.7 % 1,228 46 3.7 % 347 22 6.1 % 481 7 1.5 % Total 2,349 176 7.5 % 7,235 486 6.7 % 2,483 162 6.5 % 6,424 72 1.1 % Note. the darker shades of green indicate higher percentages

In contrast to the frequency counts, the WW corpus is the one with the highest percentage of individual reviews using the nodes. 11 % of the 1-star and 10.3 % of the 4-star reviewers used the nodes and based on the percentages, feminism was more likely to come up in negative reviews. Here, the pattern shifts for CM corpus. While the relative frequencies were the highest in 1- and 2-star reviews, it is the users rating the film with 5 and 3 stars that mention the topic the most. For both WW and CM corpora, 10-star reviewers are the ones least likely to discuss feminism. BoP has again a very similar proportion of reviews to CM. However, 7-, 6-, and 8-star reviews are the ones with the highest percentages of users using the nodes and there is no difference between 1- and 10-star reviews. Finally, WW1984 has only 1.1 % of users who reflect on feminism. The majority of reviews are within negative ratings yet proportionally, 8- star reviewers were the most active followed by 2- and 10-star reviewers.

To summarize the findings, BoP is the only corpus where the nodes appear both in positive and negative reviews, and also achieves similar normative scores as much bigger corpora. WW1984 is the outlier corpus, where the nodes are infrequent and though the relative frequency may go to 32.56, it appears only within one rating group. It is also the only corpus

35 where the nodes do not appear in certain rating groups at all (FEMINISM in 3 stars and FEMINIST in 6 stars). WW corpus has the highest percentage of individual reviews including the nodes, the frequencies based on the size of the corpus, however, put it in third place. CM is the biggest corpus in size and the nodes appear most frequently both in raw and relative scores.

Predominantly, the nodes occur in negative reviews for this corpus. Comparing CM to BoP, both corpora have similar total relative frequency scores as well as proportions of reviewers using the nodes.

4.3. Qualitative analysis

Using the results from previous analysis, all the individual reviews with FEMINISM or FEMINIST present were evaluated through close reading. This analysis followed several steps and included marking tone, presence of feminism, topic(s) under discussion, and relevant scenes from the film (see section 3.2.1.). This section presents a more thorough look into the corpora.

4.3.1. Tone and presence of feminism

Determining the tone is related strictly to the nodes as they are used in the text. Even if the overall tone of the reviews is overwhelmingly negative, that does not necessarily result in a negative attitude towards feminism itself. Unless the reviewer specifically addresses feminism and expresses their opinion, it is unclear what their standpoint is. Therefore, the majority of the reviews are marked as unclear in their attitude towards feminism. In some instances, the users express themselves to be neither pro nor against feminism, not caring for either side of the spectrum. In these instances, their attitude is marked as ambivalent. Users who express mixed emotions over feminism oscillate between acknowledging its positive impact on women or society around them but also express discomfort when it becomes too much or on the nose. And lastly, a positive attitude towards feminism is signified by embracing feminist identity and embracing feminist messaging and goals.

Table 6. Review tone across corpora

Tone WW CM BoP WW1984 Ambivalent 3 17 0 1 Mixed 0 10 4 2

36 Negative 33 112 36 20 Positive 46 41 15 11 Unclear 94 306 107 38

As is clear from Table 6, identification of ambivalent and mixed attitudes towards feminism is rare. Looking at proportions of the tone distribution (see Chart 1), the unclear tone is dominant in all four corpora and over 50 % of all reviews cannot be classified in tone.

Negativity is easier to identify and in fact, 19 % - 28 % of all reviews tend to express a negative attitude towards feminism. The WW corpus is the only outlier whose reviewers see feminism more positively than negatively (26 % to 19 %). WW1984 follows with 15 % of positivity while

CM and BoP reviews display positive tone only in 8 % and 9 % of all texts respectively. In the case of WW1984 however, the ratio of positive to negative reviews is flipped in comparison to the WW corpus – 15 % to 28 %. Since Wonder Woman 1984 is a sequel, one might expect some level of consistency since the leading character remains the same, yet that is not what happens.

Chart 1. Proportional tone distribution across corpora

Analysing whether or not the films are considered feminist or not offers a more thorough look into the users’ mindset. Similarly to the tone marking, if a user acknowledges

37 feminist messaging in a film, it is marked as yes, disagreement with any feminist presence is marked as no. If a clear opinion cannot be extracted, the reviews are marked as unspecified.

Table 7. Reviews marking the films with regards to feminism

WW CM BoP WW1984 No 45 89 24 18 Yes 80 294 103 29 Unspecified 51 103 35 25

Table 7 shows that in contrast to tonality, identifying films as feminist is frequent across all four corpora. Proportionally, between 21 % - 35 % of users do not specify whether they do/not see any feminist undertones. Users claiming that there is none are in the minority, moreover, it is more common not to specify than deny any feminist messaging. Here WW and

WW1984 are almost identical in 26 % and 25 % of reviews saying those two films are not feminist. Also, only 45 % and 40 % of the users claim Wonder Woman and Wonder Woman

1984 are feminist in contrast to 60 % in CM and 64 % in the BoP corpus. Captain Marvel and

Birds of Prey again share similarities. Only 18 % and 15 % of reviews respectively do not find the films feminist.

Chart 2. Proportions of reviews identifying films as feminist

38 Taking ratings into consideration (see Chart 3), it becomes clear that in the CM, BoP and WW1984 corpora, 1-star reviewers identify the presence of feminist messaging in the highest numbers. Then the numbers start dropping but in the CM and BoP corpora they spike again in 7-star rated reviews and again start decreasing. Only in the WW corpus are there more positive than negative reviews that identify the film as feminist. In the no category, CM sees a steady incline from 5 stars up with a culmination in 8-star reviews. Interestingly, roughly the same number of users from both sides of the spectrum (16 × no, 14 × yes) give the film 9 stars.

BoP is the only corpus where more 10-star reviewers do not see the film as feminist than do and it also has the trend of the more positive ratings in the no category. The WW corpus has 1- stars reviewers evenly split into all three categories: 10 × no, 11 × yes, 11 × unspecified. While the WW1984 corpus has the least amount of texts, there are no reviewers rating above 8 stars who claim the film is not feminist. It is also the only corpus with the highest proportion of texts that do not specify whether or not the film is feminist. Thus, all three categories frequently overlap within ratings.

39

Identification of films as feminist across ratings across feminist as films of Identification

. .

3 Chart Chart

40 For a complementing perspective to the identification across ratings, the overlap between tonality and feminist identification clarifies whether or not the reviewer’s attitude towards feminism influences the final rating of the film (see Table 8). Chart 4 shows that over

100 reviews are marked for negative tonality and positive identification. Since 60 of the yes reviews have a 1-star rating, there is a significant chance that feminism is one of the reasons

Captain Marvel is criticized. In all four corpora, negative tonality rarely occurs with no presence of feminism (under 10 instances in all corpora with WW having 9). Once again, BoP and CM are similar in the distribution pattern with negative/yes categories being the most prominent followed by positive/yes. Notably, WW1984 is the only corpus where the positive/no category has more texts than positive/yes. Again, the WW corpus differs from the three other corpora with more positive/yes reviews than negative/yes. This is the possible explanation behind the spike of yes in the positive ratings of Wonder Woman. Similarly, the positive/no category which is the largest of all four corpora despite their varying sizes might be indicated in the split in opinion across 1-star reviewers.

Table 8. Overlap between tonality and feminist presence in the films

WW CM BoP WW1984

Positive/Yes 26 34 13 3

Positive/No 16 4 2 6

Negative/Yes 23 103 30 12

Negative/No 9 7 4 4

Finally, reviewers whose attitude could not be determined usually did identify the films as feminist or with feminist messaging (see Table 9). In CM and BoP corpora, more texts are in the yes than in the unspecified category. The no category has the lowest number of texts in all four corpora. In contrast, the WW and WW1984 corpora have more unspecified identifications than positive ones.

41 Table 9. Unclear tonality and identification of feminist presence in the films

WW CM BoP WW 1984

Unspecified 44 91 33 19

Yes 30 139 58 11

No 20 76 16 8

Chart 4. Correlation between tonality and presence of feminism in the films

Note. All charts have different scales for an easier visual comparison of the correlation.

42 4.3.2. Topics

Since all four films show variation in the topics discussed with feminism the results are presented separately for each corpus. This variation can be linked to plot points, publicity around the film or even casting. Even the shared topics across corpora are not discussed in each corpus separately to avoid repetition unless the findings offer different perspectives on the topic (see Appendix II for an overview of all identified topics and Appendix III for their short definition). Referenced scenes and films are also included.

4.3.2.1. Wonder Woman

Since the WW corpus was the first one to be examined, the topics were not pre-established and multiple varying keywords were initially used to convey the gist of the review. These were all later collected and unified to avoid synonymic expressions. Some statements, such as “another feminist crap being shoved down our throats” were not marked with any topic unless they were evaluated in any way, as they are opinions and were marked previously for tone and presence of feminism. Similarly, some reviews included multiple topics and there are some overlaps between the selected labels.

Table 10. The most frequent topics in the WW corpus

Topic Reviews Percentage Feminist character 23 13 % Representation 23 13 % Criticism 19 11 % Balance/equality 13 7 % Sexualization 13 7 % Rating 12 7 % Female lead 11 6 % Man-hate 11 6 % Romance 11 6 % Strong female character 11 6 % Subtle feminism 11 6 % Target audience 8 5 % Fake feminism 6 3 % Note. Only topics above 5 mentions are included.

43 Table 10 shows only 13 out of 27 topics that were identified during the close reading to illustrate the variability of the usage of both nodes in the reviews. Representation is connected to the film’s director Patty Jenkins, the first superheroine film in over a decade, and the representation of women. For some, feminism is something to be expected from the combination of a female superhero and a female director and it can also be a reason to be

“pleased”8 about the film in general. Representation in itself is understood as feminist when a female lead and female director are included. Some users even ponder the “need” for a woman with superpowers when there are so many other literary female figures that can be empowering and thus question the calls for representation of women in the current most popular genre. Other reviewers insinuate that it has been so long since feminists had a strong female role model that they will take anything even if it is “garbage”. The starved feminists are thus established as a target audience. The gender of Patty Jenkins and Wonder Woman can be considered feminist “propaganda” akin to other feminist movies such as Atomic Blonde (2017),

Ghostbusters (2016), or Salt (2010). In this sense, female leads are described as inherently feminist and that can be both good and bad, depending on the viewer’s attitude towards feminism. This is, unsurprisingly, a contested point since just because the lead happens to be a woman it does not mean the film is feminist.

Therefore, the female lead (and representation in itself) can be also utilized as a “selling point” for audiences and also as a defence against any criticism. The reason being no feminists

“would dare to speak ill of such a historic piece of entertainment” and the professional critics are held hostage if they want to keep their “woke points” and not to be considered as “anti- feminist”. The argument that the positive reviews are a direct consequence of a female lead is used repeatedly and some users specifically point out that “we can’t call bland run of the mill superhero movies for masterpieces, because the lead doesn’t have male genitalia” because the lead’s gender is not an “out of jail free card for the entire movie”.

8 As mentioned in the section on corpora compilation (3.2.3.) all the quotations from user reviews are anonymized and thus the user names are not referenced.

44 In the discussion of Diana as a character, her armour plays a significant role. It becomes a point of criticism amongst users who claim that Wonder Woman is not a feminist nor a strong female character because she is heavily sexualized. She is nothing more than “a piece of meat in a sexy armor” which is also referred to as “battle-bikini”. The focus of the film is “on the sexiness of costume design rather than on depth of character development” and that does not correlate with feminist messaging. In her characterization, she is downright anti-feminist because she is uneducated and portrayed as “an indestructible barbarian with a good heart”.

Others blame feminism for erasing “her original weaknesses” because they were not “politically correct” and seeing it as ironic that “the role model praised by feminists is that of an impervious pretty girl with no personality”. In this sense, she becomes the embodiment of the strong female character trope.

As a character trope, the strong female character is described as brave with a take- charge attitude, exceptional intelligence, willpower and not stereotypically feminine woman who does not need to be rescued by any man (The Take, 2020). Thus, she can easily become reduced only to her physical strength as the source of power and her lack of flaws and weaknesses makes her shallow and do not permit any character development (ibid.). Some see

Diana exactly like this and blame feminist influence on the film for the portrayal of a world where “women can do everything and the men are just bumbling idiots”. In the positive understanding of the character, Wonder Woman is “tough, but also a woman” or in other words

“physically badass as well as kind hearted”, a female protagonist who is the “engineer” of her destiny.

There is another feature of the film that problematizes Diana Prince as a strong female character – her romance with Steve Trevor. Can she be the “empowered and groundbreaking feminist figure” when she makes out with “the first dude she met after knowing him for

2 days”? The movie tries to be “super feminist” but feels very much like a “chick flick” because what male superhero would choose love? According to these reviewers, if a film wants to be feminist, the heroine should not have a love interest but rather just a friend and/or partner.

45 Some even see Steve Trevor as the character driving the plot or stealing the show and thus undermining any feminist messaging.

The feminist character encapsulates references to Wonder Woman’s history from her comic book origins as well as ties of her creator William Moulton Marston to the suffrage movement. In one instance, Steve Trevor is described as a “feminist enough to joke about his manhood” when he says he is “above average”. Trevor in particular comes up in the topic of balance/equality as an “awesome character” in a movie about feminism which shows the female character as an individual who can stand beside her male counterparts. He and Diana

“need each other” to succeed unlike in other superhero movies which “take a stab at feminism” where the woman is the only person powerful enough to defeat the villain. Trevor being a “strong character” comes as a welcome surprise and as proof of the film being “equal” to everyone.

In contrast, some viewers see the film as man-hating because the Amazons are portrayed as “superior to men who are essential for procreation and useless otherwise” or, again, express their surprise over the film not featuring “feminism and making men the bad guys” or even promoting “lesbianism”. There is also a distinct sense of mockery of feminists when a user pictures the feminists eagerly anticipating this film only to be given a heroine who

“isn’t sexually aggressive, preferably lesbian, [a] full-time advertisement for feminist righteous indignation at everything male” and “horror-of-horrors! falls in love with a man”. Feminism thus comes with the expectation of men being portrayed badly and as inferior to women.

Therefore, if the reviewers do not discern man-hating in the film, it cannot actually be feminist.

A complementing category is a subtle feminism. It is seen as a plus that the film does not “push feminism too hard” and the plot is not “overwhelmed by feminist sentiment” nor is the messaging “dogmatic”. The previously mentioned balance/equality between the male and female characters enables users to enjoy the film precisely because it does not feature “extreme feminism” of man-hating. This is also where Ghostbusters come into play as a point of comparison for Wonder Woman because the all-female remake fails in keeping feminism from being “radicalized” and is full of “male bashing”. If the feminist messaging manages to remain

46 within the limits of not being too much, it is “more effective than any polarizing, dogmatic diatribe, and yields many of the film’s moments of sneaky humour”. Naturally, it is difficult to determine where the line between subtle and extreme feminism is and what can be considered as man-hating or not.

Criticism is invoked when professional critics set up expectations for the film. Either they write “how well this movie deals with issues like feminism” or create a buzz that the film is a feminist “symbol”. The news and entertainment outlets also embrace the current feminist movement and therefore it is “simply culturally and politically ‘correct’ to be in love with this movie”. The media thus partakes in a “campaign of positivity” in which fake positive reviews flood the internet and thus stop the “inevitable negative backlash” against Wonder Woman.

Even within IMDb, the positive ratings are described to be a result of a “feminist agenda” or

“politically correct” people claiming they love the film solely for the main character’s “PC feminist characteristics”. 10-star ratings are “feminists having a field day” and are sometimes aided by DC “fanboys” to generate profit. Overall, it is not even “PC to rate the first and only feminist comic movie badly”. The bad ratings can be similarly explained by the users being

“anti-feminists (mainly males)”. Thus, in the eyes of some of the users, IMDb also becomes a place where people express their political leaning by boosting or tanking the ratings of a film that is claimed to be feminist by mainstream media.

Finally, there are three scenes mentioned by multiple users. The bath scene, the boat scene, and No Man’s Land. The bath scene shows Steve Trevor bathing in a pool of water and just when he gets out, Diana walks in. In a reversal of usual roles, she is clothed while Trevor is nude. Diana looks at his body and an exchange follows:

Diana: Would you say you’re a typical example of your sex? Steve: I am … above average. D: What’s that? S: It’s a… Steve looks down at himself before realizing she is not referencing his penis. S: Oh! Um. It’s a watch. (Jenkins, 2017, 0:29:32) This scene is understood both as proof of Steve Trevor being feminist enough to joke about his body but also as an example of a double standard because if there was a woman in Trevor’s

47 position “all hell” would break loose. This scene is the best example of what some see as the film trying “too hard to be a feminist movie by objectifying men”.

The boat scene again features only Diana and Steve. Getting ready to sleep on a boat,

Steve initially refuses to sleep close to Diana and she finds that bemusing. He proceeds to explain that in his culture and out of the confines of marriage, it is not polite to presume. They discuss marriage and due to the nature of Diana’s birth (she was sculpted from clay by her mother and brought alive by Zeus) reproductive biology and sex.

Steve: Do you know about that? Diana: I’ve read all 12 volumes of Clio’s Treatises on Bodily Pleasure. S: All twelve, huh? D: Mmm-hmm. S: Did you bring any of those with you? D: You would not enjoy them. S: I don’t know, maybe. D: No, you wouldn’t. S: Why not? D: They came to the conclusion that men are essential for procreation but when it comes to pleasure…. unnecessary. (Jenkins, 2017, 0:40:30) This scene is understood as a sign of the feminist part of the film and a sign of the Amazons’ supposed superiority over men who are “useless otherwise”. “Feminists must have loved that scene” or maybe even promoted it into the storyline which only proves the “haughty of bitterness” of the particular writer. However, the scene can also be understood as a reference to Teri Garr’s famous comment in Tootsie (1982) “I’m responsible for my own orgasm” and thus be seen as an empowering moment for Diana. It can also suggest that she is “simplistic and one-dimensional and stupid understanding of things is predicated upon Chris [Steve] sleeping with her. Gee, thanks, Feminism.” The boat scene thus shows feminist hatred towards men as well as women’s sexual empowerment and an anti-feminist sentiment of the character needing to experience sex with a man in order to learn.

The No Man’s Land sequence shows Diana entering the trenches of WWI and learning that people from the village on the other side of the No Man’s Land have been taken as slaves.

The piece of land cannot be crossed due to German machine guns and barbed wire and the stalemate has been going on for over a year. After being told the impossibility of the task, Diana

48 decides to cross it herself. Emerging from the trench and dodging bullets, she takes on all the fire and enables Steve and his team of fellow soldiers to cross it (Jenkins, 2017, 1:12:38). The scene reminds some users of the Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) character

Eowyn who screams “I am no man!” and kills the Witch King who cannot be killed by a man.

It also lets Diana show how “emotion can be used as strength” when she inspires the men to follow her. According to one user, the emotionality allows her to disagree with the men around her and thus her show of compassion is understood as a feminist layer of her character. Yet the ease of her crossing also “trivializes the fighting and efforts of the soldiers in WWI” and glorifies violence perpetrated by Diana. Even worse, it fails to portrays her as a “feminist icon” because she enters the battlefield like “a fashion podium” with a costume that leaves most of her skin uncovered.

All aforementioned scenes can be seen simultaneously as feminist and anti-feminist.

Based on the reviews, the role reversal with a nude man being observed by a woman and joking about his body is both subversive and proof that feminists merely want to equal the playing field by objectifying men. The comment that men are unnecessary for pleasure but essential for reproduction is reductive and sexist towards men yet it also shows a woman’s sexual autonomy over her body where she is the one responsible for her pleasure. And finally, a single superheroine crossing No Man’s Land in her sexualizing costume undermines the hard work of men around her yet portrays her as a beacon of inspiration because she makes her own decision despite their doubt.

4.3.2.2. Captain Marvel

In contrast to the WW corpus, none of the topics occurred in more than 11 % of reviews. Only

31 distinctive topics were identified and from those only 14 had more than 10 hits.

Table 11. The most frequent topics in the CM corpus

Topic Reviews Percentage Brie Larson 52 11 % Criticism 46 9 % Man-hate 43 9 % Marketing 36 7 %

49 Female lead 35 7 % Strong female character 34 7 % Subtle feminism 30 6 % Politics 29 6 % Rating 28 6 % Plot 27 6 % Target audience 27 6 % Feminist character 26 5 % Gender switch 14 3 % Fake feminism 12 2 % Note. Only topics above 10 mentions are included.

Surprisingly, Brie Larson is the most frequent topic of discussion. Unlike Gal Gadot, who is not singled out in the WW corpus, Larson frequents the reviews due to her self- identification as a feminist. Her “overly dramatic feminism” made the film worse for several reviewers but also required them to put her “extreme anti man feminist agenda” or “her obvious political and feminist leanings” aside to review the film. She is sometimes credited for the feminist messaging of the film but due to her comments made during the promotion of the film before its release (see Introduction), she is also putting some of the viewers off the movie.

Her “virtue signalling by telling white males not to watch it” creates low expectations when the viewers expect to dislike the film rather than enjoy it. She can also be the reason to lower the film’s rating after one user found out that Larson is a “toxic feminist and a horrible person to work with”. Her stance can also be disparaged as “setting feminism back 5 decades” and an

“insult” to the feminist community. However, her presence and openness are seen as the reason for the film’s low ratings in the eyes of more positive reviewers.

Marvel marketing the film as a feminist piece is mentioned in relation to Larson’s comments. It is seen as a cynical cash grab with Disney “trying to capitalize on the current zeitgeist” and a “publicity stunt” which is “abusing feminism” and was “built on the success of

Wonder Woman”. The insincerity of the marketing creates the idea of Captain Marvel as a character who is a “champion of human rights, instead of a soulless money making machine that bastardizes the good name of feminism to entice customers”. On the same note, the film

50 might have feminist and/or girl power messaging but it is a “shallow, corporate, glad-handing” type of feminism that boils down to “slogans and insults like ‘human male: harmless’”. As such, the marketing can put off both feminist and anti-feminist viewers. The marketing campaign and Larson’s comments created an “extremely ‘feminazi’ image for the movie” which leaves even viewers who “hate” feminism and enjoyed the movie “disappointed” with Marvel’s strategy and recommending Marvel to “re-evaluate their [Marvel’s] marketing team”. Due to the marketing strategy of Captain Marvel, the studio focused on a new target audience and alienated part of their original fanbase.

Again, in connection to Brie Larson’s comments about critics, this film is described as not been made for “white, male and able-bodied” viewers and has become everything “the male comic book crowd that was helping to make Marvel the powerhouse that it is decades ago” feared it would – “another franchise pimped out to the social justice weenie crowd”. The course

MCU took with this film is then seen as a sort of betrayal of the original fans and an insult particularly since the majority of the people that collected and read the original Captain Marvel comics are now white and middle-aged men. “Why should not I be annoyed that a comic from my childhood got changed into a feminist platform?” is a question that some of the users and fans are asking. The new fans the studio was trying to entice are “female hipster non binary type feminist” or simply “women and little girls”. Thus, the film “panders to every possible demographic. The teenage feminists, the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement, the LGBTQ community” except for white male audience which then takes it as a personal affront.

Captain Marvel also changes how the film can be consumed. Its infusion with politics makes it more of a “political protest about supposed social issues” than a good movie, particularly when there is “simply no need” for the “shoehorning of crass feminist/SJW politics into the story”. Real-world politics “if not handled correctly like Black Panther have no place in comics movie”. There is a distinct sense of “movies just can’t be movies anymore” because politics take out the entertainment and escapism of the film. This cry for apolitical superhero films also serves as an identifier of “American right-wing Trump Trolls” who are against the

“theme of inclusion and representation”. Yet again, there is a discussion of how much is too

51 much in the inclusion of politics. For some, the film is “too busy trying to be a feminist film that it forgets to be a superhero movie” with a plot that is “bent entirely around this SJW and feminist view”. The weak plot of the movie which forces or pushes the feminist themes not only cheapens the message but also uses them in an “attempt to mask” its shortcomings. This masking of weaknesses with feminist messaging then effectively impacts criticism of the movie, particularly the negative one.

Users criticising the film express the belief that the film “can and should be criticised without political insinuations” while also fear that any negativity will be understood as

“a complaint of the feminist aspects of the movie and a direct reflection of Brie Larson” or simplified into sexism. The film’s messaging thus shields it from objectivity and is used as a counterargument. The divide created by this movie boils down to “the bad things about it aren’t important because it’s feminist” and conversely “the movie IS bad solely because it’s feminist” and was well in process before the film’s actual release. While some blame the controversy on

“the same toxic, sexist segments of fandom who have been venting their rage online about

‘their’ franchises being taken over by women”, some point to the studio and Larson. As a consequence, this divide makes some users question the value of reviews that are written based on personal politics rather than the film’s qualities.

Users who are not in the outer margins of the rating scale tend to point out that “the lowest and highest ratings for this movie both seem biased by their reaction to the not-so- subtle feminism in this movie” and specifically, it is the “Right Wing” that “attempted to review bomb” the film on Rotten Tomatoes and “Left Wingers” doing the same thing “except in the opposite direction by over-praising this movie”. Both sides are thus effectively “claiming the same thing” with different perspectives. This undermines the worth of both 1- and 10-star ratings, however, as one user argues “the aim of absurdly low vote is to destroy, whereas the aim of an only-slightly-high vote is to promote” and sides with the promoters.

52 In contrast to Diana Prince as a character, Carol Danvers is often described as the strong female character in the most negative sense. The term “Mary Sue9” is used multiple times to denote that “she is never in danger” and is very “overpowered” without any weaknesses which automatically removes the stakes from the film. Carol has “the same generic cocky attitude” as any other strong female character while “the average woman does smile and fake laugh at everyday misogyny because SHE can’t fire ‘photons’ out of her fists when faced with a threat”. Danvers, in the eyes of her critics, does not have to overcome any obstacles and thus ends up without any character development – she starts out just as powerful as she finishes.

This is also what often makes her a feminist character because while there are other characters within the MCU whose powers come from Infinity stones (such as Vision, Scarlet

Witch, Doctor Strange), they are “no match to the might of feminism powering Captain Marvel” who is considered the most powerful superhero within the MCU. This is also linked to the gender switch category. Some reviewers note that “SJW feminist types think a woman is only strong when she acts like a caricature of a hyper masculine man” and thus strip Carol of her femininity and cram “every stereotype of male heroes from yesteryear” into her. Conversely, if

Carol was switched for a man in the role, nothing about the movie would change which speaks for the universality of the film rather than for a feminist agenda. In some instances, the role of her mentor comes into play. While originally Captain Marvel was a male character and became a mentor to Carol before she assumed the mantle, her mentor Mar-Vell in the film is also surprisingly a woman which suggests that “looking up to a man is unthinkable” for a feminist heroine and that “men aren’t allowed to inspire, mentor, influence or empower women”. It is particularly in regards to men where the film is perceived to push “too hard” as some reviewers argue is exemplified in several scenes.

The film shows the majority of Carol’s backstory through flashbacks, as she recovers her memories, and those flashbacks are split into two scenes. The first sequence shows her as

9 Mary Sue as a character originated in Star Trek fanfiction in 1973 as an idealized placeholder character for the author. Mary Sue (or Gary/Marty Sue for male self-inserts) is usually exceptionally beautiful and talented in an implausibly wide variety of areas and lacks any realistic character flaws (TV Tropes, n.d.).

53 a girl racing in go-karts and speeding up to the point she crashes and is told off by her father, as a cadet in the army where the male soldiers laugh at her during physical exercises when she fails, and another pilot asking her: “You do know why they call it a cockpit?” (Boden & Fleck,

2019, 14:07-15:57). The second sequence of flashbacks elaborates the first and shows Carol always standing up after her failures with voices in the background discouraging her (1:29:24-

1:30:32). These scenes are the example of the blatant “in your face” feminism where all the men in her life from her father to her coaches are constantly berating her. It is “annoying” because they are all white men and that is also the reason why it is likened to “(white) man- hate” moments. The “cockpit” tidbit is “the most laughable” instance of “preachy feminism” but also “the funniest joke” in the movie. In the negative reading of the feminist influence on the movie, (white) men are her only obstacle to overcome to ultimately become the most powerful of them all. However, Carol’s flashbacks are also “remarkably well-thought out metaphors for what girls and women have to deal with every day” and her standing up over and over is an “electrifying moment that will resonate with women and girls everywhere”. The second most referenced scene was a fight scene when Carol gets her full powers and fights her former teammates accompanied by No Doubt’s “Just a Girl” song (Boden & Fleck, 2019,

1:34:27-1:35:35). It is “absurd”, “unsubtly banging the Girl Power drum” and “undercuts the whole idea of actually promoting women” because it focuses the fight on Carol’s gender.

Finally, the film was most frequently compared to Wonder Woman, which is unsurprising considering it is its direct genre predecessor. For the most part, Diana Prince was

“feminine” and “showed emotions” and also more subtle in the delivery of the messaging. Due to these reasons, the majority of the comparisons were favourable towards Wonder Woman.

Another female-led film, Alita: Battle Angel (2019) was also recommended. The negative references focused on the Star Wars franchise and The Last Jedi (2017) which also “shoves feminism” in the face of the viewer. According to these negative comparisons, both the MCU and Star Wars are being destroyed by films with an agenda.

54 4.3.2.3. Birds of Prey

The BoP corpus is dominated by a single topic, man-hate. Whether or not the film expresses actual misandry or portrays all male characters as bad, weak, and incompetent, was the most frequent discussion in reviews. Compared to the previous corpora, the number of topics is also much lower. Out of all 27 topics, only 10 were mentioned in more than 5 reviews. The films referenced by users are more varied than in previous corpora but there was rarely any mention of a specific scene.

Table 12. The most frequent topics in the BoP corpus

Topic Reviews Percentage Man-hate 51 31 % Female lead 18 11 % Target audience 17 10 % Rating 15 9 % Strong female character 12 7 % Criticism 10 6 % Fake feminism 10 6 % Subtle feminism 10 6 % Representation 9 6 % Violence 7 4 %

While the users do not always agree whether or not any man-hate was portrayed in the film, they feel the need to address it due to the high number of negative reviews mentioning it.

The men in the film are all “perverts”, “terrible”, “useless, stupid, misogynistic, evil, or some combination of all”. The lack of any male character with positive traits is considered as a sign of the film’s feminist values and is to be expected with female-led and directed films. Violence became a topic due to the final fight between the united female characters fighting off masses of the villain’s henchmen without difficulty. It is ironic that “feminists protray [sic] violence as a part of toxic masculinity and enact the same to reflect women empowerment”. The final fight also leads to the discussion of strong female characters that seems to go hand in hand with man-hate.

55 The women of the film are seen as infallible “Mary Sue” characters and their prowess in combat is described as borderline unrealistic. They are not shown to have any martial training, rather they are “kicking butts with feminism and if you don’t like it, you must hate women”. Yet again, this reading is not universal. Just because they are beating up henchmen, they are not necessarily feminist. Harley Quinn herself is not a “Perfect Strong Feminist Role

Model who is nearly robotic in her perfection” but a messy anti-hero. The fact that there are multiple prominent female characters with Harley Quinn being the narrator also does not equal pushing a “feminist narrative”. The fighters “happen to be females” and someday it might not matter anymore and the film will “just be judged as a movie”. It is worth noting, however, that race also comes into play within the topic of female leads because the cast is multi-racial.

This is referred to as “alphabet representation for no reason” because there is no “relation to the comics character” and is understood as a “method of trying to tastelessly involve everyone so that no race feels left out”. Simply put, the fact that some of the comic book characters have a different race in comics than in the film is understood as a direct consequence of the feminist movement’s influence on the film.

The combination of female director Cathy Yan and screenwriter Christina Hodson is also a signal of inevitable feminist messaging that goes as far as an “all lead female soundtrack”.

Yet as one user points out, “there are literally dozens of male-led superhero movies. Off the top of my head, I can only think of three female ones. Including this one. So why are people acting like women are trying to take over Hollywood?” Women being represented on and off-screen thus can be used as a point of criticism and sometimes it is specifically Hollywood feminists who are “trying to shove this woke stuff into our brains”. There seems to be a special subgroup of feminists within the film industry who are focused on making “Girl Power” films. On another level, Hollywood uses feminism in the “wrong”, “silly, unsophisticated, and way too commercial manner” which is what happens when “huge corporations ‘adopt’ causes”.

It is mostly in the context of whether feminism was subtle or not where comparisons to other films emerge. If the film’s feminism is “too much” it is worse or as bad as the “nauseating”

Captain Marvel and Charlie’s Angels (2019). Charlie’s Angels are described as full of “rampant

56 misandry, intersectional feminism, and gender studies” so when Birds of Prey are different it is both a relief and a surprise. Wonder Woman is used as an example of a film that was better because of its lack of agenda. In contrast to previous corpora, Charlie’s Angels are the most referenced film and Ocean’s Eight (2018), an all-female spinoff is also mentioned.

A good rating for Birds of Prey is a result of a “boost from liberals” who automatically like the film because of its female leads or because of its “feminism agenda or empowerment or something”. However, there is a much stronger sentiment against the very negative ratings.

Users leaving 1-star reviews are “cellar-dwelling comic book fans” or “women-hating

‘nonhelpful’ clicking basement dwellers”, “angry boys”, “incels with their banana hammocks in a bunch”, or simply “antifeminists”. Their gender seems to be obvious, yet there is also a joined discussion of whom this film is intended for. Apparently, not for people who are “male, straight, conservative and over the age of five”. For some users, the film is made for feminists and its enjoyment is based on the viewer’s gender. The feminist or empowering messaging targets the film to a “crowd that will ensure it better reviews, at the expense of the only sorts who would excitedly pay to see a Suicide Squad-type stinker in theatres. Nerds like that tend to be the most offended at inclusive, anti-patriarchal platitudes, so why alienate the only people who would’ve secured financial success?” Therefore, there is an implication that the negative reviews are made exactly by the aforementioned nerds, comic book fans who live in their parents’ basement

(which is also a common stereotype associated with this subculture) because the studio was counting on feminist messaging to bring in the profit due to positive reviews rather than the comic book fanbase and furthers the idea of fandoms as anti-feminist or downright women- hating spaces.

4.3.2.4. Wonder Woman 1984

Since WW1984 is the smallest corpus, only 21 topics have been identified and only five of them have more than 5 hits. Similarly to the BoP corpus, man-hate occurs in the highest percentage of reviews followed by romance. WW1984 offers a different perspective on romance than the

WW corpus and man-hate triples in contrast to the first instalment.

57 Table 13. The most frequent topics in WW1984

Topic Reviews Percentage Man-hate 13 18 % Romance 11 15 % Gender stereotypes 9 13 % Feminist character 6 8 % Plot 6 8 %

The film’s plot seems to have been written by “radical feminists during their period” and served rather as their “war cry” than a film to be enjoyed. Except for Chris Pine’s Steve

Trevor, all men in the film are portrayed as “horrible creeps” or “lecherous ogre[s]” and “any time a man has the audacity to compliment a beautiful woman, he will be looked down upon as a slimeball, roughly on par with cat-calling construction workers or rapists” which is the signal of the movie being “staunchly feminist”. This stance, however, is called out in few reviews as proof of the film’s hypocrisy. When Steve Trevor comes back from the dead due to

Diana’s wish, his soul inhabits the body of another man. Diana “arguably rapes” this unnamed man when she and Steve use his body to have sex even though he cannot give his “explicit consent”. Not only would feminists be “asking for the director’s head” if the roles were reversed, but this shows a double standard in which sexual assault against men is deemed acceptable while verbal sexual harassment against women is the only one “framed in a manner of condemnation”.

Steve’s romance with Diana also takes on a significantly larger role in her life than in

Wonder Woman. Diana, the feminist icon, is still in mourning almost 60 years after his death and she has to give him up again (renounce her wish) in order to regain her powers and save the world. The film presents her “as an emotional wreck in need of a man, not really helping the modern portrayal of strong, independent women”. Although the film has two prominent female characters, the second one being Barbara Minerva, it is filled with gender stereotypes about women.

If Diana is in “need” of her man to feel joy in life, Barbara “wants to be strong, sexy, and she goes on to wish to basically fit into society’s expectation of a woman”. Her transformation

58 into her attractive self means she stops wearing glasses and wears tight-fitting clothing and becomes “a bad example for feminism”. Moreover, Barbara wishes for Diana’s powers and thus their potential friendship pivots into “women just being jealous of each other”. Both of them thus depend on romance and validation provided by men. This sequel “undoes” Wonder

Woman as “the best feminist superhero” in the eyes of several viewers. Yet being a feminist icon does not mean that Diana’s every story has to be about “breaking the glass ceiling or standing up to a metoo metaphor” rather than just saving the world as her male colleagues do.

59 4.4. Collocations

The final part of the analysis consists of examining collocations of the nodes FEMINISM and

FEMINIST. For each film, collocates were collected and categorised according to their grammatical relations. When analysing FEMINISM and FEMINIST as nouns, the categories examined are modifiers of X, verbs with X as an object, and verbs with X as a subject. FEMINIST as an adjective is categorised into modifiers of X, nouns modified by X, and X and/or. For clarity, the logDice scores and frequency scores are omitted from the presented tables but are accessible in Appendix III. All collocates across corpora are combined and presented together and their context is taken into consideration because while the collocate itself might be carrying negative connotations that do not mean it was used in a negative way.

While there is not a lot of overlap between collocates of FEMINISM, several of the collocates are synonymic in their meaning. In the modifiers category, many pertain to time –

3rd wave, century, modern, present-day, wave – and thus discuss what is understood as the current evolution of feminism. Feminism is also very unsubtle and there are multiple collocates with very negative connotations – blatant, extreme, extremist, massive, nonstop, not-so- subtle, preachy, radical, toxic – which suggest that feminism is a huge force that is constant, unrelenting and potentially dangerous. There are also instances of mockery with MUH which is, according to Urban Dictionary, an “alternate spelling of ‘my’” used to ridicule something that people one disagrees with constantly talk about (2019). Furthermore, the sincerity of feminism in the reviews is called into question with fake, Pop and unreal. Yet some of the collocates are terms such as intersectional, diversity or patriarchy that are common in the discussion of feminism even in academic circles. On the more positive side, proud, pro and subversive show that not every user is against feminism and does not have to agree with the assessment that it is too on the nose.

Table 14. Collocates of FEMINISM

Category Collocates

Modifiers of FEMINISM 3rd-wave, blatant, century, correctness, diversity, extreme, extremist, fake, feminism, intersectional,

60 mansplain, massive, misandry, modern, MUH, no- emotion, nonstop, not-so-subtle, patriarchy, Pop, preachy, present-day, pro, proud, radical, real, slit, spot, subversive, thanks, toxic, unreal, wave, way, whole, woman

Verbs with FEMINISM as an object abuse, approach, be, bundle, criticize, define, dislike, do, expect, flaunt, force, hate, have, land, love, patronize, promote, push, rage, regard, rub, set, shove, show, state, strip, tackle, understand, use

Verbs with FEMINISM as a subject affect, be, come, destroy, do, enter, extend, feel, have, need, offend, people, power, propound, put, ride, ruin, run, say, shove, take, tank Note. Collocates in bold appear in more than one corpus.

The second category clarifies that feminism is forced, pushed, and shoved onto the viewers. The violence of the verbs in use including raging implies that there is a resistance against it as it is very much unwelcome yet unavoidable. However, since feminism can be also abused and used there is a connection to the insincerity expressed with the modifiers.

Feminism may be also stripped and therefore disregarded from the films. Approaching, tackling and understanding feminism means that there was an attempt made at including the topic regardless of what the result is. It is also connected to strong emotions. Verbs such as dislike, hate and love feminism are all in use, however, the negative emotions together with the violent verbs point to hateful feelings being much more prevalent.

Similarly, feminism comes or enters the discussion and proceeds to destroy, offend, ruin, shove, take, and tank the films in question for the fans. However, feminism can also power and run and while that still marks it as a strong force, it does not necessarily have to be negative. Yet feminism also needs something. Looking at the concordance lines, it is revealed that Wonder Woman is how feminism needs to be done but at the same is not what feminism needs. And even though feminism extends beyond women and propounds a breath of values, the way it affects the films is mostly negative.

Table 15 shows what the users perceive feminists of being and doing. In very much the same way, they are too passionate about their cause and borderline dangerous – angry,

61 extreme, fanatic, hard-core, in-your-face, on-the-nose, out-of-criteria, radical, toxic, uber and ultra-radical. Their age is implied not only by teenage but hipster and third gen. Since hipsters are a 21st-century subculture and third gen and third-wave feminists are synonyms, the feminists in question are being active now. Their presumed sexual orientation is lesbian and the typical feminist is “all mouth and no substance”. There is also a special category of

Hollywood feminists and Tumblr feminist, which in the latter case refers to a social website, and they can also be male.

Table 15. Collocates of FEMINIST as a noun

Category Collocates

Modifiers of FEMINIST active, actual, alleged, angry, binary, crass, disgusting, extreme, face, fanatic, forced, gen, generation, hard- core, hipster, Hollywood, in-your-face, least, Lesbian, male, near, non, nothing, on-the-nose, open, out-of- criteria, outspoken, over, pseudo, radical, real, teenage, third-wave, toxic, Tumblr, type, typical, uber, ultra-radical

Verbs with FEMINIST as an object annoy, appease, be, bias, delude, get, guess, have, keep, know, leave, please, prove, show, teach

Verbs with FEMINIST as a subject anticipate, be, condemn, decide, get, grab, have, influence, look, make, man-hating, message, need, praise, promote, spout, think, try, use, want, watch Note. Collocates in bold appear in more than one corpus.

Due to the image of feminists as violent, it is no surprise that they need to be pleased, appeased and kept “happy”. They can even promote their ideas to be incorporated and influence the messaging in the film. Brie Larson “wanted to spout feminist hate” and ruined all

Marvel films in the process. They are deluded and biased, their judgement thus clearly cannot be trusted though they are ready to execute it. According to the reviewers, feminists can both condemn and praise a movie depending on whether or not it delivered what they anticipated.

FEMINIST used as an adjective answers the question of what it is that the feminists are trying so hard to force (see Table 16). They have their own agenda, propaganda and campaign going on and the results can vary between crap, garbage, and trash. In more neutral language,

62 there is a feminist angle, theme, narrative or perspective to be seen in the films. And while the modifiers show that it can be sometimes too much, it can also be not feminist. It should be noted, that many of the negative sounding nouns are also used as a rebuttal. Captain Marvel

“is not feminist propaganda”. The reviewers may merely repeat the language of others and use it to contradict their opinions. Feminist dream, fantasy and Utopia sound decidedly more positive before the wider context reveals a feminist wet dream. Wonder Woman and Birds of

Prey are both results of such a dream. The home of Diana Prince, Themyscira, an island populated solely by women, then becomes a feminist Utopia because men are not wanted in feminism. More accurately, feminist equals anti-male and man-hating because feminists live in a fantasy of how men actually behave and portray them as leering catcallers.

There are also feminist heroes and icons to be found, usually in Wonder Woman. In some instances, Diana Prince is the groundbreaking, important and “quintessential feminist icon from the comic realm” that the first film either “tries and fails to submit” or downright undermines in the sequel where nothing is aspirational. Not every collocate is negative, the resulting film may be feminist and light-hearted, witty and even “entertaining feminist punch”.

Table 16. Collocates of FEMINIST as an adjective

Category Collocates

Modifiers of FEMINIST also, certainly, clearly, decidedly, explicitly, heavily, much, not, overly, really, staunchly, so, too, unabashedly, vaguely, very

Nouns modified by FEMINIST agenda, angle, anything, apotheosis, approach, aspect, bent, bit, BS, campaign, claptrap, comment, commentary, crap, dream, drive, extremist, fantasy, feature, feel, film, garbage, Ghostbusters, happening, hero, horrorshow, chick, icon, idea, ideal, ideology, influence, line, manifesto, masterpiece, message, metaphor, moment, movement, movie, narrative, overtone, perspective, philosopher, piece, pile, plea, point, position, propaganda, PSA, psycho-dogma, punch, push, revision, side, solution, stance,

63 statement, stench, stuff, tangent, theme, tome, trash, undertone, Utopia, vibe, viewpoint, worth, writing

FEMINIST and/or … anti, Antifa-inspired, anti-male, aspirational, blatant, coherent, cringeworthy, current, devout, driven, entertaining, extreme, faux-woke, forced, full, graphic, groundbreaking, hot, ideal, important, inclusive, light-hearted, man-hating, many, minor, obvious, occasional, political, progressive, proper, pseudo, pure, quintessential, radical, right, righteous, schmaltzy, sociopathic, strong, subtle, terrible, total, ultra, violent, wet, whole, witty Note. Collocates in bold appear in more than one corpus.

Overall, feminism seems to be an extra message inserted into the films and based on the collocates, its influence is negative. Yet surprisingly, feminists themselves are presumed to have a lot of power and influence since they can demand such themes to be included and studios, apparently, specifically make those films to appease them. The feminist movement thus seems to be dangerously violent and full of radical and extreme personalities. Still, the reviewers mock them, while the others debate whether feminism is what is actually in the films and has not been abused for marketing purposes or co-opted and emptied of its intent.

Nonetheless, the collocates illustrate how important it is to look for context in which these words are used to get the full picture.

64 5. Discussion

As is clear from the collected data, less than 3.5 % of users who rate the films also leave a review.

The release date of the film does not seem to be in correlation with the number of published reviews, since Wonder Woman 1984 accumulated almost triple the number of user reviews in three months since its release than Wonder Woman in three years. The reasons why the sequel is discussed more than its predecessor would warrant a closer look into all the reviews. Despite its size, the WW1984 corpus had the lowest number of reviews qualitatively analysed since the topic of feminism came up only in 1.1 % of them.

Looking at the distribution of feminism within the corpora and the frequency of its occurrence show how important is the normalization of the frequency scores due to the very different sizes of the compiled corpora. Particularly when comparing CM and BoP corpora (the biggest vs the smallest corpus) it becomes clear that the frequency rates are very similar.

However, even frequency scores, raw or relative, do not give the full picture and individual texts have to be taken into account since repetition can and does occur.

The focus on two nodes was a necessary limitation due to the scope of this thesis, however, it prevented a more thorough insight into feminism in the context of empowerment, gender, girl power, or sexism, since these terms are related but not interchangeable. Some users also differentiate between political correctness, woke culture, SJWs and feminism.

Furthermore, while methodological triangulation is implemented in order to convey a multi- layered analysis, this thesis is a single researcher project. The coding of topics and tonality would have benefited from multiple perspectives. Despite these limitations, the thesis still highlights the way feminism is discussed on IMDb. Some users rather use it as a judgement

(“this movie is a feminist agenda”), or a point of comparison to other films, such as

Ghostbusters or Charlie’s Angels that are described as being full of man-hate. Many of these reviews would probably fall into what Banet-Weiser describes as popular misogyny (2018, p.

33). The arguments that Captain Marvel ruined the MCU in the same manner as The Last Jedi ruined Star Wars makes it seem that women are taking over franchises long dominated by men and pushing them out. The particularly loud outcry over Brie Larson’s comments and the

65 focus on race and gender she marks as overrepresented in film criticism seems to echo the sentiments of the manosphere which claims that women are asserting their superiority over men (About, n.d.). The review bombing in itself is classified as trolling and several reviewers note that Carol Danvers is a character who is overpowered and superior to men.

The focus on the gender of the leading character and the director (where applicable) shows that some reviewers understand such representation as inherently feminist. A female lead in this sense equals a feminist lead. There is also a sense of slight paranoia that the character’s gender is used as a shield against negative criticism because any critical response may be understood as a sign of the reviewers’ misogyny. While such reading is often countered by pointing out that the lead happens to be female and in the case of Captain Marvel her story is a universal heroic narrative, Carol Danvers was promoted by the studio as an empowering superhero. The leading characters are female rather than happen to be female, their scarcity in the genre still makes them noticeable.

The topic of man-hate resonates with the argument of popular misogyny that masculinity and patriarchy are threatened by feminists (Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 35). All the films are under scrutiny for the way men are portrayed in them. While Wonder Woman is spared a lot of criticism due to her romantic subplot, the sequel is more criticised for portraying men, except for Steve Trevor, as catcallers and rapists-to-be. In Captain Marvel, the men are portrayed as obstacles for Carol Danvers. The switched gender of her mentor into an older woman seems to imply that for Captain Marvel, no man is good enough to look up to. Based on the reviews, the worst example of man-hate is Birds of Prey. Although nearly all of the characters are in fact criminals, the absence of a good male character serves as proof of its feminist messaging. The final fight between the all-female team and all-male henchmen where the women defeat the men with what some see as unearned ease drives home the point that feminist heroines cannot be weak and it is their gender that makes them powerful.

Furthermore, the topic of violence within these films which is used as a response to verbal sexual harassment becomes a point of contention where the punishment is more severe than the crime.

66 These topics together with the collocates that show the very negative associations with feminism echo the findings of research into negotiating feminism. Firstly, the discussion over the development of Barbara Minerva in Wonder Woman 1984 underlines that the connection between feminism and femininity is uneasy since she attempts to fit within the society’s standard of a woman and her clothing choices makes her a bad example for feminism in the eyes of some reviewers (Scharff, 2011, p. 472). Lesbianism is also invoked in the discussion of

Diana and the Amazons of Themyscira and thus the association brought up by Christina

Scharff is still very much present (ibid.). Carol Danvers also plays into the stereotype of a masculine feminist character in the eyes of the reviewers because she is tough and unsmiling.

Moreover, there is a continuing tendency to demonize feminists who are described as radical, extremists and sometimes downright violent people who push their agenda into films.

Lind & Salo’s argument that feminists are not quite “real” and “regular” is mirrored by the notion of “Hollywood” feminists as a specific branch (2002, pp. 224-5). Brie Larson thus becomes a representative of this feminism and her words are both taken out of context and blown out of proportion. She is demonized by some users as someone with power and influence over the final film with feminist messaging put in at her request. Feminists are thus still described as women with a problem as found by Ogletree, Diaz, and Padilla (2017, p. 1578).

They are biased and deluded and get preferential treatment by studios that create films specifically to appease them and other marginalized groups at the expense of the original fans of the franchises. This perceived influence of feminists over huge conglomerates such as the

Walt Disney studios is however questioned by users who see it as an instance of fake feminism.

Again, echoing Banet-Weiser’s words of commodity feminism as the one which is more media-friendly and thus more visible (2018, p. 4), superheroine films are also perceived as cynical cash grabs that feed on the current cultural zeitgeist. Captain Marvel in particular is criticised for fake feminism that reduces feminist issues into slogans and girl power moments such as playing “Just a Girl” in a fight scene. The fact that Captain Marvel was marketed as a feminist film and Birds of Prey as a tale of emancipation after a break-up is reflected in the frequency of identification of both films as feminist. Over 60 % of users see both films as

67 feminist in contrast to 40-45 % for the Wonder Woman films. Wonder Woman is the only film whose reviewers express a more positive attitude towards feminism than a negative one but they are also less certain in its identification. This suggests that both Wonder Woman films are evaluated more carefully and conflictingly than the other two. Wonder Woman was never promoted as a feminist film and Patty Jenkins publicly stated she does not see the character as a feminist (Miller, 2020). The marketing campaign for Captain Marvel and Birds of Prey thus might play a big role in the evaluation of the films because there is already a provided guideline by the films’ producers into how to perceive it.

Moreover, the divide over the reading of Wonder Woman as a feminist film in the 1- star ratings underlines the uncertainty among the reviewers of how a feminist character looks like. Whether it is a discussion over her armour and whether it is too revealing and sexualizing her or her romance with Steve Trevor. For some users, Diana and Steve complement each other and thus achieve a truly equal relationship, for some she is dependent on Trevor. In this reading, she does not fit into the picture of what Catherine Rottenberg calls a “new feminist subject” because while Diana, through her excursion to London, does acknowledge the inequalities between men and women in the early twentieth century, due to her different cultural background and dependence on Trevor she cannot be fully responsible for her own well-being and self-care (2014, pp. 419-20). In this sense, Carol Danvers in Captain Marvel is more easily identifiable as a feminist precisely because her struggle is caused by external forces which she overcomes by herself and unlocks her full powers.

Furthermore, the presence of Brie Larson among the frequent topics in the CM corpus as well as the marketing strategy of the studio shows that the films are not evaluated in a vacuum. Both media and the promotion of the films influence and inform the opinions of viewers well before the films are released. They create expectations about messaging in the films and the more blatant the message the stronger the push back. That is not to say that studios should avoid feminist messaging or marketing the films as feminist. After all, the outcry

68 over Brie Larson’s comments nor the marketing harmed the film’s box office in the slightest10.

However, it polarizes the reviewers who either call for depoliticizing of the superheroine films or purposefully down-rate the film because of its ideology that does not fit into their worldview.

Another notable instance is the occurrence of race as a topic where the multiracial cast is present. While Wonder Woman features a multiracial team of supporting characters and

Captain Marvel has two black supporting characters (Samuel L. Johnson as Nick Fury and

Lashana Lynch as Maria Rambeau), the multiracial team of Birds of Prey is more central to the narrative and thus the topic is more prominent. Collocates such as intersectional do suggest that the current feminism is not considered as “white” as was its previous iteration, however, racial diversity is rarely a positive point in the reviews. Some IMDb reviewers consider it as a part of the feminist agenda and thus criticize changes to the characters not only through the lenses of gender but also of the race even though all of the leading characters are white women.

Finally, all films have identifiable story beats that were evaluated based on their perceived messaging. Wonder Woman’s boat scene, bath scene and No Man’s Land, Captain

Marvel’s flashbacks and “Just a Girl” fight, Birds of Prey’s final confrontation and Wonder

Woman 1984’s sex scene and Barbara Minerva’s wish were all eye-catching to the users and they all have in common a focus on gender dynamics. Whether it is a discussion about gender roles and sexual norms in Wonder Woman where Diana also crosses the land hundreds of men could not, or Carol Danvers defying, again and again, the mockery and discouragement from the men around her. Carol’s determination translates into realizing her full potential and power. In Birds of Prey, the final fight is the only instance of cooperation between the female characters. They have to join forces and together a team of women defeats the all-male henchmen. Finally, in Wonder Woman 1984, Diana’s inability to move on after losing Steve decades into the future and her willingness to choose him over her powers lead to an

10 Early predictions estimated $100-150 million opening weekend in the USA depending on how conservative they were (see Mendelson, 2019; Robbins, 2019) and claiming numbers over $75 million to be considered a success. Captain Marvel earned $153 million domestically and with the 6th best opening worldwide with $302 million its profits totalled $455 million (Rifkin, 2019).

69 assumption that her wellbeing depends on Steve. Additionally, Barbara Minerva wishing to be like Diana where her physical transformation into an attractive woman is portrayed as taking off glasses and wearing form-fitting clothing is not only superficial in its delivery but also undermines the only female friendship on the screen. All these scenes are ultimately about relations between men and women hence the possible interpretation depends on the reviewer’s personal opinion of how these relations work and how they should work.

Furthermore, van Zoonen’s argument that popular films can function as a resource to present one’s ideas in a public setting is not only pertinent to films about politics (2007, p.

544). The review section of superheroine films becomes a battlefield between the feminists and anti-feminists who boost or tank the ratings depending on their side of the political spectrum.

Based on the ratings, anti-feminists are winning the race as the number of 1-star reviews collected for the CM and WW1984 corpora shows. However, this simplification of the ratings has serious implications for users who want to give the film 1 star. In the eyes of the opposite side of the spectrum, they become angry incels, cellar-dwelling toxic fanboys, or boys who need to grow up. While there is no question about the presence of online trolls and misogynists in the reviews, this stance suggests that none of the 1-star opinions is worth listening to because their only argument is their bigotry. Similarly, 10-star reviews are seemingly written by uncritical feminists who will blindly promote anything with their agenda. They are also often labelled as liberals, SJWs, or even leftists. While differing opinions are to be expected in film reviews, personal political leanings influence not only the reviews and ratings on IMDb but also how the reviews are interpreted. Hence many reviewers feel the need to include disclaimers or acknowledge that they ignore the political messaging in the film to produce an objective review and often recommend other IMDb visitors to avoid both sides of the culture war. Thus, IMDb is not only a stage where political performances are enabled as argued by

Juha Ridanpää (2014, p. 146) but, within the genre of superheroine films, space where it is expected and where one’s political leaning is assumed based on their rating.

This very polarised space of IMDb in itself becomes a limitation when we take into consideration the demographic breakdown of its users which is also well documented by

70 previous research. Female voices are underrepresented on IMDb and the self-identification of users is unreliable since it cannot be verified. However, the upside of such gendered space would be for further research into the language of popular misogyny. Since the views on superheroine films can be very gender-based but IMDb in itself is not a part of the manosphere, it is a platform where both sides come to attack each other and thus research into how each side presents itself in a place where users cannot respond to one another in a comment thread could be enlightening. Moreover, there is also a possibility of users posting multiple reviews under a different username (and indeed some such duplicates were revealed during the qualitative analysis) and that is the risk when collecting large quantities of data of anonymous users.

Regarding the genre in question, films like Black Panther and Joker (2019) would present interesting follow-up studies into the culture of the IMDb review section. Since Black

Panther is the only black superhero film (though there are more announced and there is allegedly a Captain America 4 in pre-production with the black hero the Falcon assuming the mantle) and Joker was controversial for its counter-culture narrative, the reviews might be particularly telling if IMDb users may also be coded as dominantly white as well as male.

Similarly, the soon to be released Black Widow (2021) film and Thor: Love and Thunder

(2022) in which the character of Jane Foster is anticipated to wield the power of Thor will both provide ample opportunity to continue this research.

71 6. Conclusion

This thesis aimed to examine the evaluation of four superheroine films – Wonder Woman

(WW), Captain Marvel (CM), Birds of Prey (BoP) and Wonder Woman 1984 (WW1984) – by reviewers on the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) and to study the viewers’ stance towards feminism as a presence in the films and topics related to it. The data for the study consisted of over 18,000 collected user reviews from the films’ profiles on IMDb which were compiled into four corpora. By utilizing a combination of critical discourse analysis with corpus linguistics, this methodological triangulation proved fruitful in producing a wide variety of findings.

Firstly, feminism as a topic was featured in reviews of all four films to varying degrees.

And there is no pattern in its distribution across ratings that would unify findings across all review corpora. If reviewers presented their stance on feminism in a way that could be clearly discerned as positive or negative, they tended to be more negative. 19 – 28 % of users expressed negativity towards feminism and this attitude was prevalent in the reviews of CM, BoP, and

WW1984. In fact, the WW corpus is the only one whose reviewers with a positive attitude towards feminism outnumber the negative ones and the users’ identification of Wonder

Woman as a feminist film is split evenly into the 1-star ratings and increases towards higher ratings. In contrast, the CM and BoP corpora have over 60 % of users identifying both films as feminist and predominantly in the 1-star rating. The rating distribution implies that the presence of feminism is a positive feature for Wonder Woman but to the detriment of Captain

Marvel and Birds of Prey ratings. Wonder Woman 1984 is scrutinized by the users for feminist messaging to a much smaller degree, only around 1 % of reviews mention the topic at all.

The analysis of topics related to feminism shows that they do reflect the general media discourse. For example, there is a discussion of representation and sexualization of the lead character in the WW corpus, while Brie Larson and feminist marketing feature heavily in the

CM corpus. The topic that is shared in all corpora, man-hate, covers a range of attitudes from

“women are better than men” to “all men are evil” also points back to academic research on understanding feminism and proves that the stereotype of a feminist as a man-hating individual is still ongoing. Similarly, the analysis of collocates revealed very negative

72 associations with feminism that range from radical and extremist to the downright violent persona of a feminist. Agenda and propaganda are used across corpora to describe feminist ideals. If they are detected in a film, they can destroy it for the viewer. In this instance, the films are labelled as feminist trash or garbage. It should be noted, however, that several reviewers use these negative collocates as rebuttals when they claim the films are not feminist garbage or filled with feminist agenda.

Finally, the findings further reinforce the idea of IMDb as a stage where users adopt and play out their political personas (Ridanpää, 2014, p. 146). While this happens across all the ratings, the commentary on 1- and 10-star ratings by users themselves acknowledge the polarized political divide within IMDb. Put simply, one side claims that the lowest ratings come from misogynists and bigots, while the other that the highest ones come from misguided feminists. This understanding of these two particular rating categories as a playing field for personal politics renders them meaningless for users who want to read an unbiased opinion of the films. More importantly, even users who might dis/like the films for any other reason face the implication that their rating will be understood as a sign of their political identity. As such, the ratings are no longer representative of a film’s qualities, rather IMDb becomes a place where 1- and 10-star reviews are the extended battlefield between the left and the right and the feminists and the anti-feminists.

73 References

Abad-Santos, A. (2018a, September 20). Not even Captain Marvel is safe from the "smile more"

catcall. Vox. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/20/17883030/captain-marvel-brie-larson-smile-more

Abad-Santos, A. (2018b, June 14). Brie Larson calls for more women and critics of color to be

writing about movies. Voc. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/6/14/17464006/brie-larson-representation-

film-criticism

Abad-Santos, A. (2020, February 17). The unfair pressure for Birds of Prey to be a great

feminist superhero movie. Vox. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.vox.com/2020/2/17/21128048/harley-quinn-birds-of-prey-feminist-

joker

Abidi, S. M., Xu, Y., Ni, J., Wang, X., & Zhang, W. (2020). Popularity prediction of movies:

from statistical modeling to machine learning techniques. Multimedia tools and

applications, 79, 35583-35617. doi:10.1007/a11042-019-08546-5

About. (n.d.). Retrieved from Return of Kings: www.returnofkings.com/about

Aronson, P. (2003). Feminists or "Postfeminists"?: Young Women's Attitudes toward

Feminism and Gender Relations. Gender and Society, 17(6), pp. 903-22.

doi:10.1177/0891243203257145

Baker, P. (2010). Sociolinguistics and Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University

Press.

Baker, P. (2020). Analysing Representations of Obesity in the Daily Mail via Corpus and Down-

Sampling Methods. In J. Egbert, & P. Baker (Eds.), Using Corpus Methods to

Triangulate Linguistic Analysis (pp. 85-108). New York and Oxon: Routledge.

Baker, P. et al. (2008). A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis

and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK

press. Discourse & Society, 19(3), pp. 273-306. doi:10.1177/0957926508088962

74 Baker, P., & Levon, E. (2015). Picking the right cherries? A comparison of corpus-based and

qualitative analyses of news articles about masculinity. Discourse & Communication,

9(2), pp. 221-36. doi:10.1177/1750481314568542

Banet-Weiser, S. (2018). Empowered. Durham: Duke University Press. blahiojjsd. (2019, January 31). Muh. Retrieved from Urban Dictionary:

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Muh

Boden, A., & Fleck, R. (Directors). (2019). Captain Marvel [Motion Picture].

Boyle, K. (2014). Gender, comedy and reviewing culture on the Internet Movie Database.

Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 11(1), pp. 31-49.

Brannon Donoghue, C. (2019). Gendered expectations for female-driven films: risk and rescue

narratives around Warner Bros.' Wonder Woman. Feminist Media Studies, 1-17.

doi:10.1080/144680777.2019.1636111

Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics in Corpus Linguistics: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Bronstein, C. (2005). Representing the Third Wave: Mainstream Print Media Framing of a

New Feminist Movement. Journalism & Mass Communication Quaterly, 82(4), pp.

783-803. doi:10.1177/107769900508200403

Brown, J. A. (2011). Dangerous Curves: Action Heroines, Gender, Fetishism, and Popular

Culture. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.

Brown, J. A. (2015). Beyond Bombshells: the new action heroine in popular culture. Jackson:

University Press of Mississippi.

Canet, F., Valero, M. Á., & Codina, L. (2016). Quantitative approaches for evaluating the

influence of films using the IMDb database. Communication & Society, 29(2), 151-172.

doi:10.15581/003.29.0.151-172

Cocca, C. (2021). Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel: Militarism and feminism in comics

and film. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Condis, M. A. (2018). Gaming masculinity: trolls, fake geeks, and the gendered battle for

online culture. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.

75 Cross, K. (2014). What 'GamerGate' Reveals About the Silencing of Women. Rewire News

Group. Retrieved from

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2014/09/09/gamergate-reveals-silencing-

women/

Crucchiola, J. (2020, January 9). Harley Quinn Is Extremely Over Men in the New Birds of

Prey Trailer. Vulture. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.vulture.com/2020/01/birds-of-prey-trailer-margot-robbie.html

Curtis, N. (2020). Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel: The (Dis)Continuity of Gender

Politics. The Journal of Popular Culture, 53(4), 926-945. doi:10.1111/jpcu.12942

Davids, B. (2020, April 3). 'Birds of Prey' Filmmaker Cathy Yan Reflects on Box Office and

Scene She Fought For. The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/bird-prey-director-cathy-yan-

reflects-box-office-narratives-1288457

De Benedictis, S., Orgad, S., & Rottenberg, C. (2019). #MeToo, popular feminism and the news:

A content analysis of UK newspaper coverage. European Journal of Cultural Studies,

22(5-6), pp. 718-38. doi:10.1177/1367569419856831

Di Placido, D. (2020, December 28). The Warped Morality Of 'Wonder Woman 1984'. Forbes.

Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danidiplacido/2020/12/26/the-warped-morality-of-

wonder-woman-1984/?sh=276480f13e23

Dumaraog, A. (2019, February 22). Brie Larson Clarifies Her Inclusivity Comments in Captain

Marvel. ScreenRant. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from https://screenrant.com/captain-

marvel-press-tour-inclusivity-brie-larson/

Egbert, J., & Baker, P. (Eds.). (2020). Using Corpus Methods to Triangulate Linguistic

Analysis. New York, Oxon: Routledge.

Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. New York:

Routledge.

76 Gamble, S. (2006). Postfeminism. In S. Gamble, The Routledge Companion to Feminism and

Postfeminism (pp. 36-46). London and New York: Routledge.

Gill, R. (2014[2007]). Gender and Media. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Gill, R. (2016). Post-postfeminism?: new feminist visibilities in postfeminist times. Feminist

Media Studies, 16(4), pp. 610-630. doi:10.1080/14680777.2016.1193293

Gill, R., & Orgad, S. (2018). The shifting terrain of sex and power: From the "sexualization of

culture" to #MeToo. Sexualities, 21(8), pp. 1313-1324. doi:10.1177/1363460718794647

Hadadi, R. (2020, December 25). Sorry to This Man Who Is Not Chris Pine in Wonder Woman

1984. Vulture. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.vulture.com/2020/12/sorry-to-this-man-who-is-not-chris-pine-in-

wonder-woman-1984.html

Hannah, H., & Taylor, A. (2015, February 12). Introduction: feminism and contemporary

celebrity culture. Celebrity Studies, 6(1), pp. 124-127.

doi:10.1080/19392397.2015.1005382

Harris, H. (2017, August 24). James Cameron Says Wonder Woman Objectified Its Star, Is a

'Step Backwards' From Sarah Connor. Vulture. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.vulture.com/2017/08/james-cameron-wonder-woman-sarah-

connor.html

Hathaway, J. (2014). What is Gamergate, and Why? An Explainer for Non-Geeks. Gawker.

Retrieved from https://gawker.com/what-is-gamergate-and-why-an-explainer-for-

non-geeks-1642909080

Hsu, P.-Y., Shen, Y.-H., & Xie, X.-A. (2014). Predicting Movies User Ratings with IMDb

Attributes. In D. Miao, W. Pedrycz, D. Ślȩzak, G. Peters, Q. Hu, & W. Ruizhi (Eds.),

Rough Sets and Knowledge Technology (Vol. 8818, pp. 444-453). Springer.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11740-9_41

IMDb.com. (n.d.). User Review Guidelines. Retrieved from IMDb: IMDb.

https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/contribution-information/user-review-

guidelines/GABTWSNLDNFLPRRH?ref_=helpsrall#

77 IMDb.com. (n.d.). What does it mean if I found a user review helpful or not? Retrieved from

IMDb: https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/track-movies-tv/what-does-it-mean-if-i-

found-a-user-review-helpful-or-

not/G4YY5P5XP2KJ349M?ref_=helpms_helpart_inline#

Jackson, S. (2020). "A very basic view of feminism": feminist girls and meanings of (celebrity

feminism). Feminist Media Studies, pp. 1-19. doi:10.10180/14680777.2020.1762236

Jaworska, S., & Krishnamurthy, R. (2012). On the F word: A corpus-based analysis of the media

representation of feminism in British and German press discourse, 1990-2009.

Discourse & Society, 23(4), pp. 401-431. doi:10.1177/0957926512441113

Jenkins, P. [. (2017, August 25). James Cameron's inability to understand what Wonder

Woman is, or stands for, to women all over the world is unsurprising. Twitter.

Retrieved from https://twitter.com/PattyJenks/status/900917648015405062

Jenkins, P. (Director). (2017). Wonder Woman [Motion Picture].

Johnson III, R. G., & Renderos, H. (2020). Invisible Populations and the #MeToo Movement.

Public Administration Review, 80(6), pp. 1123-26. doi:10.1111/puar.13209

Jones, N. (2019, March 9). Captain Marvel Is a Grounbreaker for the MCU, and Also Not a

Great Movie. Which Matters More? Vulture. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.vulture.com/2019/03/captain-marvel-backlash.html

Jones, P. (2018). Diana and the World of Men: a character network approach to analysing

gendered vocal representation in Wonder Woman. Feminist Media Studies, 20(1), 18-

34. doi:10.1080/14680777.2018.1510846

Kafka, P. (2020, November 19). It took pandemic to change the movie business. Vox. Retrieved

April 24, 2021, from https://www.vox.com/recode/21575382/wonder-woman-1984-

hbo-max-pandemic-theater-home

Kirby, P. (2020). Battle Scars: Wonder Woman, Aesthetic Geopolitics and Disfigurment in

Hollywood Film. Geopolitics, 25(4), 916-936. doi:10.1080/14650045.2018.1510389

78 Labonte, R. (2020, August 5). Birds of Prey's Black Canary Actress Used Racist Backlash To

Fuel Her Character. ScreenRant. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://screenrant.com/birds-prey-black-canary-jurnee-smollett-racist-backlash/

Le Masurier, M. (2007). My Other, My Self. Australian Feminist Studies, 22(53), pp. 191-211.

doi:10.1080/08164640701361766

Lexical Computing. (n.d.). Sketch Engine. Retrieved from www.sketchengine.eu

Lind, R. A., & Salo, C. (2002). The Framing of Feminists and Feminism in News and Public

Affairs Programs in U.S. Electronic Media. Journal of Communication, 52(1), pp. 211-

28. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02540.x

Lumby, C. (2011). Past the Post in Feminist Media Studies. Feminist Media Studies, 11(1), pp.

95-100. doi:10.1080/14680777.2011.537037

Lumby, C. (2015). Post-feminism. In C. Carter, L. Steiner, & L. McLaughlin, The Routledge

Companion to Media and Gender (pp. 600-610). New York: Routledge.

Marwick, A. E., & Caplan, R. (2018). Drinking male tears, language, the manosphere, and

networked harassment. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), pp. 543-559.

doi:10.1080/14680777.2018.1450568

Mautner, G. (2012). Corpora and Critical Discourse Analysis. In P. Baker, Contemporary

Corpus Linguistics (pp. 32-46). London, New York: Continuum.

McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McRobbie, A. (2009). The Aftermath of Feminism: Gender, Culture and Social Change.

London: SAGE.

Mendelson, S. (2019, February 8). 'Captain Marvel': The Realistic Box Office Prediction.

Forbes. Retrieved May 25, 2021, from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2019/02/08/box-office-captain-

marvel-brie-larson-black-panther-jude-law-samuel-l-jackson-avengers-

mcu/?sh=1e8325d82d2a

79 Metacritic. (n.d.). About Metascores. Retrieved April 5, 2021, from Metacritic:

https://www.metacritic.com/about-metascores

Miller, N. (2020, December 19). Who's that Gal? Wonder Woman returns, just don't call her a

feminist. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/who-s-that-gal-wonder-woman-returns-

just-don-t-call-her-a-feminist-20201216-p56o21.html

Ogletree, S. M., Diaz, P., & Padilla, V. (2017). What is Feminism? College Student's Definitions

and Correlates. Current Psychology, 38, pp. 1579-89. doi:10.1007/s12144-017-9718-1

Onwuachi-Willig, A. (2018). What About #UsToo?: The Invisibility of Race in the #MeToo

Movement. The Yale Law Journal Forum, 128, pp. 105-20.

Otterbacher, J. (2012). Gender, writing and ranking in review forums: a case study of the

IMDb. Knowledge and Information Systems, 35(3), pp. 645-64. doi:10.1007/s10115-

012-0548-z

Oxford University Press. (2019, March). feminism, n. Retrieved from OED Online:

www.oed.com/view/Entry/69192

Phillips, W. (2015). This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship

Between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Projansky, S. (2001). The Postfeminist Context. In S. Projansky, Watching Rape: Film &

Television in Postfeminist Culture (pp. 66-89). New York: NYU Press.

Ridanpää, J. (2014). 'Humour is Serious' as a Geopolitical Speech Act: IMDb Film Reviews of

Sacha Baron Cohen's The Dictator. Geopolitics, 19(1), pp. 140-60.

doi:10.1080/14650045.2013.829819

Rifkin, J. (2019, March 10). Captain Marvel Launches w/ $455.0M Global Opening, 6th-Best

Ever. Retrieved from Boxoffice Pro: https://www.boxofficepro.com/captain-marvel-

global-opening-455-0m/

Robbins, S. (2019, March 9). Weekend Estimates: Captain Marvel Soaring Higher, Further,

Faster to $150M+ Domestic, $400M+ Global Debut. Retrieved from Boxoffice Pro:

80 https://www.boxofficepro.com/weekend-estimates-captain-marvel-mcu-domestic-

global-higher-further-faster/

Rottenberg, C. (2014). The Rise of Neoliberal Feminism. Cultural Studies, 28(3), pp. 418-437.

doi:10.1080/09502386.2013.857361

Rychlý, P. (2008). A Lexicographer-Friendly Association Score. RASLAN, 6-9.

Sharf, Z. (2019, February 26). Rotten Tomatoes Bans User Reviews and Comments Before a

Film's Theatrical Release. IndieWire. Retrieved May 24, 2021, from

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/02/rotten-tomatoes-bans-user-reviews-before-

film-theatrical-release-1202047488/

Scharff, C. (2011). 'It is a colour thing and a status thing, rather than a gender thing':

Negotiating difference in talk about feminism. Feminism & Psychology, 21(4), pp. 458-

76. doi:10.1177/0959353511419816

Schubart, R. (2007). Super bitches and action babes: the female hero in popular cinema,

1970-2006. Jefferson: McFarland & Company.

Schubart, R. (2019). Bulk, breast, and beauty: negotiating the superhero body in Gal Gadot's

Wonder Woman. Continuum, 33(2), 160-172. doi:10.1080/10304312.2019.1569382

Siegel, T. (2017, May 31). The Complex Gender Politics of the 'Wonder Woman' Movie. The

Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/complex-gender-politics-wonder-

woman-movie-1008259

Sperling, N. (2017, May 18). Gal Gadot: 'Of course' Wonder Woman is a feminist.

Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from

https://ew.com/movies/2017/05/18/gal-gadot-wonder-woman-feminist/

Stuart, A. (1990). Feminism: Dead or Alive? In J. Rutherford, Identity: Community, Culture,

Difference (pp. 28-42). London: Lawrence & Wishart.

Tasker, Y. (2012). Spectacular Bodies: Gender, Genre and the Action Cinema. Oxon, New

York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.

81 The Take. (2020, November 28). The Strong Female Character Trope, Explained. Retrieved

from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6SYfG5Fh2I

TV Tropes. (n.d.). Retrieved from Mary Sue:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue van Zoonen, L. (2007). Audience reactions to Hollywood Politics. Media, Culture & Society,

29(4), pp. 531-47. doi:10.1177/0163443707076188 van Zoonen, L. (2011[1994]). Feminist Media Studies. London: SAGE.

Waites, K. (2007). Babes in Boots: Hollywood's oxymoronic warrior woman. In S. Ferris, & M.

Young, Chick Flicks: Contemporary Women at the Movie (pp. 204-220). Oxon, New

York: Taylor & Francis.

Zarkov, D., & Davis, K. (2018). Ambiguities and dilemmas around #MeToo: #ForHow Long

and #WhereTo? European Journal of Women's Studies, 25(1), pp. 3-9.

doi:10.1177/1350506817749436

82 Appendix I. Topics in superheroine films

Topic WW CM BoP WW1984 Total

abuse 1 1

balance/equality 13 5 5 23

body shape 3 3

box office 1 2 3

Brie Larson 52 52 criticism 19 46 10 4 79

disability 1 1

double standard 2 2

emotions 1 5 6 fake feminism 6 13 10 1 30

female friendship 3 3 female lead 11 35 18 2 66

feminism 2 2 feminist character 23 26 1 6 56

Gal Gadot 1 1

gender roles 4 1 9 14

gender switch 3 14 4 21

intelligence 2 1 3 man-hate 11 43 51 13 118

marketing 2 36 4 42

media 1 1

patriarchy 4 3 7

plot 27 4 6 37

political correctness 1 4 1 6 politics 3 29 4 1 37

race 2 4 6

racism 2 1 3

rape 1 3 4 rating 12 28 15 3 58

representation 23 5 9 37

romance 11 1 11 23

self-actualization 3 1 4

setting 3 9 12

83 sexism 1 2 2 5 sexuality 4 2 4 10 sexualization 13 2 1 16

Steve Trevor 3 3 strong female character 11 34 12 2 59 subtle feminism 11 30 10 1 52 target audience 8 27 17 3 55 toxic masculinity 3 1 4 violence 1 7 8

William M. Marston 3 3 Grand Total 204 492 203 77 976

84 Appendix II. Glossary of topics

The following section lists all the identified topics and provides either a short definition if they were used multiple times or an example in the case of single usage. In case that the topic was only used in one corpus, the name of the corpus is provided in parenthesis.

Abuse. (BoP) The theme of feminism fits professional film critics. It involves with the portrayal of Harley Quinn as being a discussion of how the films should be abused by Joker. criticized and how one’s political stance

Balance/equality. Refers to gender should/not influence the reviewer. equality and cooperation between genders Disability. (WW) Points out the wider which is not always identified as a feminist discussion about feminism which omits to goal (e.g., users identifying themselves as mention the film’s portrayal of disabled egalitarian rather than feminist). It is also people though it is also burdened by norms used to point out the dynamic between and stereotypes. male and female characters. Double standard. (WW1984) Addresses

Body shape. (CM) Comments focusing on the hypocrisy of behaviour of the female

Brie Larson’s body, either criticising the lead when sexual harassment and assault focus on it or pointing out the standard of on men is played off is portrayed as evaluating superhero bodies based on acceptable. muscularity in men. Emotions. Understanding emotionality as

Box office. The presence of feminism is a gendered trait that the lead characters harmful or beneficial to the box office. either display or not. Emotions are usually

Brie Larson. (CM) The actress is seen as incompatible with feminism. identified as a feminist or spreading Fake feminism. Identifying the feminist feminist messages both in and outside the messaging as fake or insincere. Either due film. to the studio/corporation behind the film

Criticism. Refers to a wider debate over using feminism for marketing purposes or the films in the media but also within IMDb due to the messaging being sexist and anti- and also to published reviews by feminist despite its branding.

85 Female friendship. (WW1984) The masculine gender roles and whether or not friendship between two accomplished they subvert society’s expectations or fulfil women is based on talking about men and them. being jealous of each other, thus portraying Gender switch. Arguing the differences a negative stereotype of friendship between in reception were the lead/director male or women which is not feminist. pointing out the universality of the

Female lead. Focuses on the gender of the experience of the character. Also used to leading character. Either the lead discuss characters whose gender differs in character’s gender is used as a signifier of the film adaptation and the reasoning feminist messaging, or the equation female behind it. lead == feminist film is refuted by claiming Intelligence. Implies that feminists have the lead happens to be a woman. low intelligence or that they presume that

Feminism. (WW1984) Discusses multiple the audience would be stupid enough to fall topics that feminism is supposedly for feminist messaging. promoting from man-hate to lesbianism. Man-hate. All men are portrayed as bad

One reviewer discusses feminism as a or downright evil (usually related to themes communist tool and argues women are of sexual harassment). They have no natural communists without men. redeeming qualities and are inferior to

Feminist character. Acknowledges the women. In a more mellow version, they are original comic books character’s ties to portrayed as incompetent and relying on feminism due to its history, author, or the female character for solving the storylines, or identifies the superheroine as problem. a feminist character in the movie. Marketing. Using the female lead and/or

Gal Gadot. (WW) The actress is seen as a feminist messaging as selling points by the perfect figurehead for “real” feminism studio regardless of the delivery. because of her work ethic and passion. Media. (WW) Mentions pro-feminist

Gender roles. Discussing whether the American media without any other context. characters fit into the feminine and

86 Patriarchy. Films are identified as Rape. Related to man-hate and presenting fighting against patriarchy or male all men as rapists or on par with rapists dominance, usually lacking nuance. The when they catcall a female character. Also portrayal of the patriarchal system can be used in the discussion of double standards seen as exaggerated by the reviewers. and the sexual encounter Diana Prince has

Plot. The messaging overwhelms the film in her storyline with a man’s body that is to such an extent that it seems devoid of occupied by her dead boyfriend’s soul. plot or the plot only serves as a vehicle for Rating. Unlike criticism, the rating is feminist elements usually to the detriment specifically linked to IMDb itself and the of the lead character. way users discuss different rating

Political correctness. Equates feminism categories as furthering different kinds of with political correctness or understands agendas and personal politics. feminism as a part of political correctness Representation. Users acknowledge not agenda. only the female lead but also the production

Politics. Argues that politics should not be team or side characters. Usually connected part of a film or that they should not be to a female director, screenwriter, or taken into account while criticizing the said a character of colour. movie. Romance. The existing romantic storyline

Race. Discussion of characters of colour between the lead character and and seeing them as a representation of the a supporting character can be seen both as film’s politics, particularly if the race differs surprising and welcome with feminist from the comic book portrayal. messaging or as antifeminist.

Racism. Observations that man-hate is Self-actualization. Seen as empowering directed specifically towards white men and when a character can do anything by the as such the film is discriminatory. In one virtue of their own abilities and hard work. instance. In one instance (WW1984) Setting. The period the film is set in is the related to disappointment over the racist reason for the feminist messaging and as portrayal of the Middle East. such the themes are period-appropriate.

87 Sexism. Its display in the films is overdone Subtle feminism. Feminist messaging is and unrealistic when it is targeted towards noticeable but not too forceful or on the the female leads. Also used to describe the nose. films as sexist (be it misogynist or Target audience. Feminists are seen as misandrist). the audience the film was specifically made

Sexuality. Usually used in arguments that for. They are usually preferred along with feminism promotes lesbianism. The female other marginalized groups. Such targeting leads are evaluated whether or not they are comes at the expense of other parts of the coded as lesbians or rumoured to be audience. lesbians. Toxic masculinity. The film is seen as

Sexualization. Revealing costuming of showcasing toxic masculinity while the female character marks them as an enacting the same to battle it. Typically object or “eye candy” for the benefit of the includes the lead’s violent responses to

(male) audience. Full body armour is harassment. Sometimes used to refer to the considered preferential because for some users leaving negative reviews. users half-naked women contradict Violence. Invoked while discussing the feminist messaging. treatment of male characters in the films

Steve Trevor. (WW) The supporting where verbal abuse is answered with character is seen as driving the plot and physical violence. Women beating up men outshining the female lead. His dominating are understood both as a feminist message onscreen presence does not fit in with as well as improper feminist positions. a feminist narrative. William Moulton Marston. (WW) The

Strong female character. A label used author of Wonder Woman whose ties to the for characters that are seen as suffragette movement are discussed by the overpowered, flawless, and superior to users as a part of the character’s origin. men. In contrast meaning, a strong character is not necessarily physically strong but well-written and developed.

88 Appendix III. Collocate LogDice scores

Table 17. FEMINISM as a noun

The Wonder Woman Corpus The Captain Marvel Corpus The Birds of Prey Corpus The Wonder Woman 1984 Corpus Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score subversive 1 10.820 intersectional 2 10.300 unreal 1 10.300 extremist 1 13.000 present-day 1 10.750 toxic 3 10.190 intersectional 1 10.300 3rd-wave 1 13.000 thanks 1 10.680 fake 3 9.940 MUH 2 10.300 diversity 1 13.000 pro 1 10.540 feminism 2 9.910 mansplain 1 10.300

proud 1 10.540 modern 2 9.620 preachy 1 10.300

radical 1 10.410 cringe- 1 9.320 service 1 10.300 inducing

blatant 1 10.350 slit 1 9.320 misandry 1 10.240 FEMINISM century 1 10.190 no-emotion 1 9.320 spot 1 10.240 extreme 1 10.040 Pop 1 9.320 wave 1 10.140 fake 1 9.750 nonstop 1 9.320 patriarchy 1 10.140

massive 1 9.090 correctness 1 9.320 extreme 1 10.140 Modifiersof way 1 8.850 not-so-subtle 1 9.300 modern 1 8.110 woman 1 7.630 whole 1 7.090 real 1 6.770

strip 1 10.820 shove 4 10.760 promote 2 11.470 set 1 7.560 tackle 1 10.600 promote 3 10.160 force 2 10.350 do 1 4.960

state 1 10.540 force 6 9.920 shove 1 10.350

FEMINISM criticize 1 10.240 push 4 9.690 approach 1 10.140 dislike 1 10.140 bundle 1 9.240 hate 1 8.180

asobject regard 1 9.790 flaunt 1 9.240 use 1 7.900 define 1 9.750 patronize 1 9.210 love 1 6.770

Verbs with Verbs push 1 9.710 abuse 1 9.210 do 1 6.080

89 understand 1 8.500 rage 1 9.190 be 9 5.770 expect 1 8.090 land 1 9.160 have 1 4.610 show 1 7.190 rub 1 9.160 have 2 5.000 be 4 4.00

propound 1 11.830 shove 3 11.230 destroy 1 11.190 offend 1 12.190

extend 1 10.820 people 1 9.830 ruin 1 10.350 enter 1 11.300 run 1 9.830 tank 1 9.750 have 1 5.390 ruin 1 9.870

know 1 8.280 ride 1 9.610 be 5 4.650 have 1 4.300 assubject need 1 8.050 affect 1 9.500 be 2 2.330 do 1 4.960 power 1 9.440 be 2 2.690 ruin 1 8.460

FEMINISM put 1 8.200 take 1 6.880 say 1 6.300

come 1 6.270 Verbs with Verbs feel 1 5.970 Table 18. FEMINIST as a noun

The Wonder Woman Corpus The Captain Marvel Corpus The Birds of Prey Corpus The Wonder Woman 1984 Corpus Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score out-of- 1 10.600 angry 4 11.320 radical 1 12.680 pseudo 1 11.830

criteria

T lesbian 1 10.600 in-your-face 2 11.090 nothing 1 10.820 overt 1 11.670 hard-core 1 10.600 hipster 1 10.190 Hollywood 1 10.680 Hollywood 1 11.540

ultra-radical 1 10.600 crass 1 10.190 radical 1 11.300 FEMINIS Tumblr 1 10.600 fanatic 1 10.190 near 1 11.300 third-wave 1 10.600 outspoken 1 10.140 extreme 1 10.540 alleged 1 10.540 on-the-nose 1 10.140 least 1 9.480

active 1 10.540 uber 1 10.040 real 1 6.940 Modifiersof gen 1 10.540 disgusting 1 10.040 generation 1 10.540 binary 1 9.790

90 radical 1 10.240 extreme 1 9.610 sorry 1 10.040 forced 1 9.480 teenage 1 9.410 type 1 9.320 face 1 9.270 toxic 1 9.060 non 1 8.930 male 2 8.620 open 1 8.400 typical 1 8.040 actual 1 7.890 nice 1 6.960

delude 1 10.820 please 1 9.440 appease 1 11.990 appease 1 11.670 T overplay 1 10.820 keep 1 7.560 please 1 10.680 guess 1 9.120

bias 1 10.410 leave 1 6.970 have 1 4.630 be 5 4.030

FEMINIS annoy 1 10.090 know 1 6.440 be 2 3.600 have 1 3.620 teach 1 9.910 show 1 6.420

asobject prove 1 9.570 get 1 5.180 keep 1 8.380 be 12 4.710 Verbs with Verbs be 10 5.330 have 1 3.030

condemn 1 10.600 spout 1 11.670 man-hating 1 12.410 try 1 7.310

anticipate 1 10.540 nod 1 11.410 watch 1 8.930 make 1 5.750 promote 1 10.470 praise 1 11.410 need 1 8.790

grab 1 10.470 message 1 11.190 try 1 8.230

assubject

T praise 1 10.040 influence 1 11.090 be 1 2.330 decide 1 9.140 want 1 7.340 use 1 8.550 look 1 6.710 FEMINIS think 1 8.180 get 1 6.080 try 1 7.770 get 1 6.700

make 1 6.410 Verbs with Verbs have 4 6.310

91 Table 19. FEMINIST as an adjective

The Wonder Woman Corpus The Captain Marvel Corpus The Birds of Prey Corpus The Wonder Woman 1984 Corpus Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score Collocate Count Score decidedly 1 11.190 explicitly 3 11.190 overly 1 10.000 staunchly 1 12.680

certainly 1 8.250 unabashedly 2 10.790 clearly 1 9.060 vaguely 1 11.830

clearly 1 8.240 overly 3 9.970 much 2 7.560 heavily 1 10.300 too 2 6.560 too 3 6.210 too 2 7.310 too 1 4.930

really 2 5.560 very 3 5.450 FEMINIST

Modifiersof also 1 5.250 so 3 5.260 not 4 4.030 not 5 3.140 movement 7 10.710 agenda 52 11.800 agenda 9 11.050 icon 2 10.790 propaganda 6 10.560 propaganda 26 11.230 movement 6 10.660 influence 2 10.680 agenda 5 10.390 message 13 9.930 propaganda 5 10.420 movement 2 10.410 icon 3 9.780 movement 9 9.830 ideology 2 9.270 trash 2 10.190 message 4 9.360 tone 5 8.800 undertone 2 9.230 anti-trump 1 10.140 worth 2 9.020 theme 4 8.540 statement 2 9.190 plea 1 10.140 narrative 2 8.920 overtone 3 8.350 vibe 2 9.040 Ghostbuster 1 10.140 propagandist 1 8.300 undertone 3 8.320 crap 2 9.020 tome 1 10.140

utopia 1 8.300 angle 3 8.240 message 2 8.840 ideal 1 10.040

stench 1 8.300 narrative 3 8.240 bit 2 8.650 metaphor 1 9.950 revision 1 8.300 view 3 8.220 film 9 8.330 solution 1 9.750

FEMINIST philosopher 1 8.300 stuff 4 8.220 manifesto 1 8.310 statement 3 8.180 bent 1 8.310 piece 3 7.960 extremist 1 8.310 side 3 7.780 toxic 1 8.310 PSA 2 7.780 tangent 1 8.310 apotheosis 2 7.780 BS 1 8.310

Nounsmodified by claptrap 2 7.780 push 1 8.300

92 psycho- viewpoint 2 7.770 dogma 1 8.300 ideal 2 7.770 drive 1 8.300 stance 2 7.740 horrorshow 1 8.280 masterpiece 2 7.710 campaign 1 8.270 crap 2 7.590 position 1 8.250 idea 2 7.380 happening 1 8.230 aspect 2 7.350 dream 1 8.220 comment 2 7.290 commentary 1 8.200 moment 5 7.260 vibes 1 8.200 movie 37 7.160 punch 1 8.190 writing 2 7.140 chick 1 8.190 point 2 6.930 pile 1 8.180 film 9 6.640 anything 1 8.160 line 2 6.460 fantasy 1 8.150 hero 2 6.020 trash 1 8.130 approach 1 8.130 feature 1 8.110 feel 1 8.100 theme 1 8.030 perspective 1 8.010 garbage 1 7.970 radical 2 10.820 political 5 10.400 right 2 10.950 aspirational 1 11.540

devout 1 9.950 whole 4 10.250 faux-woke 1 10.140 occasional 1 11.540

schmaltzy 1 9.950 obvious 3 9.940 pseudo 1 10.140 minor 1 11.300 /or

wet 1 9.950 extreme 2 9.670 radical 1 10.140 coherent 1 11.190 and Antifa- progressive 1 9.950 driven 2 9.670 inspired 1 10.140 violent 1 11.090

righteous 1 9.910 blatant 2 9.660 anti-male 1 10.140 lighthearted 1 11.000 FEMINIST quintessential 1 9.910 forced 2 9.460 man-hating 1 10.140 subtle 1 11.000 extreme 1 9.910 many 2 7.740 progressive 1 10.140 anti 1 10.820

93 groundbreaking 1 9.870 ultra 1 10.090 important 1 10.750 anti 1 9.830 sociopathic 1 10.090 ideal 1 9.830 cringeworthy 1 10.090 current 1 9.830 proper 1 10.090 subtle 1 10.090 wet 1 10.090 inclusive 1 10.090 pure 1 10.040 obvious 1 10.000 total 1 9.950 graphic 1 9.950 hot 1 9.790 strong 2 9.750 witty 1 9.710 full 1 9.500 terrible 1 9.480 entertaining 1 8.380

94