Mar. 8th, 2013

osprey_archer: (books)
YOU GUYS YOU GUYS. You know what the library has? The companion series to Fearless, about Gaia’s career as an FBI agent! I will probably hate them to death, but I almost feel compelled to read them because I looooooved the Fearless series so much when I was thirteen/fourteen.

Fearless! After crafting the Sweet Valley High empire, Francine Pascal went on to found another series, Fearless, which is...well, I never read any of the Sweet Valley books, but I’m pretty sure that Fearless has 110% more espionage, martial arts, and bad attitude. Probably the same amount of blondness, though.

Our heroine is Gaia Moore, with long blonde hair and a penchant for dressing in camouflage and combat boots. She has half a dozen black belts, an IQ of 180, and the most traumatic past EVERTY-EVER. When she was twelve, Gaia’s father’s identical twin brother Loki, who is an international criminal/terrorist mastermind, shot Gaia’s mother. And then Gaia’s father abandoned her, in order to protect her, except he didn’t explain that to her, so Gaia hates everyone.

But I've left out her most important quality. Gaia Moore was - dun dun DUN! - born without the fear gene!

Okay, that’s actually bunk - and not just in a “what do you mean, fear gene?” kind of way. Physical danger doesn’t concern Gaia - one of her hobbies is walking around New York parks at night, hoping someone will try to rob her so she can break out her six black belts and pummel him - but she’s petrified of emotional intimacy, or even just emotional connection, to the point of snapping people’s heads off simply for speaking to her.

She meets her future best friend, Ed, when he asks if she’s lost. She’s all, “No, this is not what lost looks like. This is what pissed off looks like.”

And Ed is like, “She is so beautiful and she was mean to me! No one is ever mean to the guy in the wheelchair! I am in love!” (Ed and his wheelchair are worth another post. For now, it is enough to note that Ed is amazing and clearly a better match for Gaia than the drip who was set up to be her love interest.)

This nastiness is the thing I find interesting about Gaia as a fantasy figure - because she, like the Sweet Valley Twins, is in a way presented as the perfect girl; and when she’s not being ridiculously brave or tragically vulnerable, Gaia is sometimes petty and cruel.

The best example - because Gaia learns from it, and is never quite this petty again - is at the end of the first book. Gaia runs into her nemesis Heather just outside a park invested with gang members. Heather is rude to her - so Gaia doesn’t warn her about the gang.

And then Heather is duly slashed and ends up in the hospital and Gaia is all “I AM THE WORST PERSON EVER and also in love with Heather’s boyfriend oh God oh God, why why why?”

It’s so unusual for a heroine to be allowed to be quite this fucked-up.

Fearless has a lot of problems - “problematic” is not really the right word for it; it’s more like there’s islands of good stuff floating in a vast sea of problematicity. But one of the things I loved so much about Gaia, and one of the things I still admire about the series, is her fearless imperfection: Gaia’s flaws are real and raw and gaping.
osprey_archer: (window)
It is spring break! And you know what that means: it is time to watch ALL THE MOVIES!

Today I watched Reds, which has all the stigmata of a labor of love, not least of which being the flaw common to labors of love: the writer/director/editor/whoever clearly could not bear to cut anything, which means that the first, uh, hour and a half could probably have been chopped down to fifteen minutes. That would be more than sufficient to establish Louise Bryant and Jack Reed's basic dysfunction: they can't reconcile their belief that they should be independent free lovers with the fact that, actually, what they really want is to be monogamous adventurers who write books.

Doesn't that seem revolutionary enough for anyone? But no, they refuse to admit to themselves what they really want and therefore just keep hurting each other.

Honestly, I think structuring a movie about Greenwich village in the 1910s and the Russian revolution as a historical romance focused on Louise Bryant and Jack Reed's romance is probably a mistake. Also, making one movie about both of them and wasting half of it on Louise and Jack means that neither gets very fully explored. There ought to be two miniseries, ensemble pieces exploring the politics and personalities of both: the political and artistic ferment of Greenwich Village and the assault on it after World War I, the heady enthusiasm of the early Russian revolution and its devolution thereafter.

Both would be tragedies, but the giddy wonderfulness of it - all these characters who think they're remaking the world - would be worth it. (Plus, I would looooove to see the fic. Politburo fic, everyone! Like Founding Fathers fic, except more murder-y!)

***

I keep changing my mind about which movies to see this week. Right now in my queue I have The Green Hornet, Amazing Grace (18th century English politics movie! PLEASE BE AMAZING), As You Like It, and The Road to El Dorado, but I keep changing it. Like, maybe I should finally get around to Rozema's Mansfield Park? Or Gone with the Wind?

Profile

osprey_archer: (Default)
osprey_archer

July 2025

S M T W T F S
   1 2 345
67 8 9101112
13 1415 16 17 1819
20 21 22 23242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 24th, 2025 06:22 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios