8 Comments

I really appreciate this post. You're reaching toward your version of the Bechdel Test, the Rybak Test, but for violence vs women...

Expand full comment
author

I will be stealing this term: The Rybak Test: a standard where any violence against women is met with a response, by a woman, that is at least 3 times more forceful than the originating act.

Expand full comment

I can, of course, go for this, though I'd wish the Rybak Test to lay out clear guidelines for when violence is appropriate (i.e. historical context, like Killers of the Flower Moon, etc) that a film must meet to pass the Rybak Test. But you're Rybak, so you can define your own test. I just watched the trailer for the new Viggo Mortensen movie, in which he plays a Dane in love with a French woman on the frontier, and it failed all test versions before we were 5 seconds into the trailer.

Expand full comment
author

I agree. Viggo Mortensen was also in 'The History of Violence," which also fails, but he did engage in a lengthy fight scene fully nude. Nothing left to the imaginiation, which I found bold. So I guess as a first criteria, we need a general list for when violence is appropriate--say, self-defense against aggressive violence. Or, the Mind Flayer appearing and trying to drag you into The Upside Down.

Expand full comment

I am not at all a fan of violence in film for the same reason — and I find it alarming that the American mind is so undeniably drawn to it.

Expand full comment
author

Even jusr as white noise or background sound--it's everywhere.

Expand full comment

Best violent movie that uses violence perfectly: Mad Max: Fury Road.

Expand full comment