Bechdel Test Movie List

Yes, this passes the test and is a lot of fun as well. Reccommended for the depiction of a strong lady physicist who is good looking and serious about her work but still has fun and doesnt go totally to pieces when her god vanishes.

I just saw this, and other than a few exchanges where the two main female characters swap techno-babble (about a phenomenon strongly linked with Thor), I don't remember the women having any conversation about something other than a man

It passes, though barely. The two human female characters (the physicist and her assistant) talk about the physicist's work and the assistant's iPod being stolen by SHIELD.

I can't remember either of their names, but they were given in the movie.

Yes, the IPOD scene is essentially it, and while the females are talking to each other, there is a man in the conversation--he just happens to not have a line between the two lines spoken by women.

So it's a squeaker at best.

It passes. It's not "squeaking" though the cracks either. Darcy Lewis, Jane Foster speak to each other quite a few times about events occurring in the movie, often with her making remarks intended as comic relief. Such as her not wanting to die for collage credits, or responding to Jane talking about how she lost years of work saying it sucks for her too because she lost her iPod.

There is a very deliberate attempt to make this film much more sex and race diverse in spite of the original comic having all white characters. Efforts like this deserve our accolades, not condemnation.

Props to phildog: this movie got a lot of heat before it was out for some severely dumb reasons of not keeping close enough to how the characters were depicted in the comics. From what I know, they were white guys! Oh, and one female...Keeping it faithful meant that retro-awful sexism/racism that is much too lightly put on the screen in an effort to stay "faithful": Thor walked that fine line between satisfying fanboys and satisfying Bechdel testers and the like quite well in my opinion. However, I never mind more Bechdel-approved interaction and such in the next one!

Phildog and Sarah, I'm in agreement with author Charles R. Saunders that introducing more female and ethnic characters in a Thor movie is a perfectly solid idea: the way they did it, however, was token, confusing and artificial, and ultimately patronizing. Taking a formerly white character and making him black for the big screen instead of taking an existing black character and adapting him for cinema speaks less of a genuine interest in introducing racial diversity, and more of shallow demographic box-ticking.

Honest attempts to integrate minorities in a way respectful to the original source material (and if you read the comics, there are plenty of opportunities to introduce multiple ethnicities and females) should be applauded: meaningless token gestures should not.

The movie satisfies the criteria; minimally, but it counts.

As for the race thing, I suspect these reviewers are speaking of Heimdal (the black guardian) and Hogun (the Asian warrior). Those are both from the comics. Heimdal is a shapeshifter who is sometimes white, sometimes black... And sometimes a dragon. Shogun has always been Asian.. He's the last surviving member of an Asian version of the Norse gods whose people were wiped out by a Genghis Khan type conqueror. He took refuge with the Aesir.

It's just ignorance of the source material, but Odin forbid a critic ever read a superhero comic.

@Arthur "other than a few exchanges" -- That means it passes. Rules is rules. "there is a man in the conversation" -- that's not a rule breaker. It could be two women and a dozen men talking, as long as the women talk to each other and the subject matter isn't men. One of the appeals of this test is that it is *objective*. And by including even movies that are "squeakers", the point of the test is made: women are given short shrift by filmmakers.

Ever think that tests/sites like this might actually hurt the cause they purport to crusade for.

Take what 'Al Harron' said about ticking boxes and meaningless token gestures..

Ever think that having more than 2 female characters leading a squad of marines in a vietnam movie might not really be feasable?
Or that not many people (speaking for myself as a white-male) can really identify with G.I.Jane appearing in every movie and sitting down to have a conversation with her buff friend, G.I.Juliet...
and that in other films, set in for example.. Medieval times, where women were confined to house duties and the men went around brutalizing everything with swords that again.. It might not really be feasable to show women in an 'equal' role. Since one didnt exist in the period.

Crusading for this 'cause' might end up getting equal amounts of female roles in the movies but if they dont serve a purpose other than to keep things 'equal' and end up making the movies padded out with unneeded shit so it harms the movie overall.. Well, you're shooting yourself in the foot really.

Not that i am in any way implying that women dont deserve an equal role... But if your trying to prove that Die-Hard would've been better if bruce willis had an off-duty female cop partner, or his wife running around with him. I think you need help.

Good site for pointlessness but since i couldnt find anywhere else to bring it up i thought id just post my rant here.

PCgoneMad, you misunderstand the purpose of this test. The purpose of the test isn't at all to comment on the quality of any one movie or to comment on whether any one movie is feminist or not. Anybody using the test for that purpose is misusing it. A movie can pass this test and be awful and horribly sexist (SuckerPunch?), or a movie could fail this test and be a cinematic masterpiece with messages that no feminist would object to (Up? Wall-E?).

The purpose of this test is just to show a pattern -across- movies. The pattern is that, when taken as a whole, the medium of film does not include female characters and interactions as often or as positively as it includes male characters and interactions.

Um, this is probably the wrong forum for it, but what racial diversity? Sure, they took a moment to add to the Asgardian cast, but this was filmed in NEW MEXICO. There wasn't a Native American or Mexican American anywhere to be seen. As for the women, the two coworkers did have conversations other than about men; sadly, the Asgardian women did not. At least there were 4 named women, and conversations were being had at all, unlike a lot of movies on the list. This passes.

This movie passes.
Pity that the conversations between the men weren't as entertaining.
As a comic fanboy I love seeing great talent like Natalie Portman in superhero movies. I only wish the male actors (esp. Loki) could have been anywhere near as interesting.

" But if your trying to prove that Die-Hard would've been better if bruce willis had an off-duty female cop partner, or his wife running around with him. I think you need help. "

I know this isn't a Die Hard review, but I couldn't help but say something regarding your comment- why couldn't John McClane have been a woman? You're absolutely right, inserting extra characters would have not worked with the plot of the movie, but there is no reason in the script for the lead to be a man. And that's why the Bechdel test exists. It's important we critically think about what we are viewing.

I don't think it passes. There's three female characters but I don't think Sif ever talks to Jane or her assistant and Jane and her assistant mainly talk about Thor or the phenomenon which he arrived in. The only time they might have had a conversation on something else was after SHIELD takes Jane's research

I think this movie definitely passes. Darcy Lewis, Jane Foster, Sif, and Frigga are all named characters, and Darcy and Jane talk about science, research, and have little comedic asides several times in the movie.

The argument that they talk mostly about the event that Thor arrives in is irrelevant for two reasons; first, it's not about him (period). Second, in the beginning, they have absolutely no knowledge that a man is going to come through - they're just focusing on an interesting scientific phenomenon.

(Also, as far as Jane being a Manic Pixie Dream Girl - in many ways she does the opposite of teaching the brooding dude to lighten up. Jane teaches Thor grounding, humility, and the ability to care about others, making him a deeper and more noble character in the process. I think that's actually a pretty awesome lesson for men AND women.)

I think this movie passes. The movie happens to be about a male and named after a male, but offers strong female characters who do more than simply support him.

The characters' names are: Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings). Let's not forget Sif (Jaimie Alexander) and how she refuses to let Thor take credit for *her own* success.

Jane is studying the event in the beginning of the movie. As Dedicatedfollower467 said, they didn't know it was Thor coming through/causing it. Additionally, Jane clearly indicates that the anomaly presented more than a dozen times before. In the pre-sequel world, we don't know if that is related to the Asgardians using the bridge (making it possible for her to register the activity) or if others are using it or what. She's there to study that, not the guy.

@Rini - What about Isabel (Izzy), the cafe owner? While it's unfortunate that most of her lines got cut, some didn't, and she's in the movie. She is presumably a Mexican-American business owner.

Regarding the other man in the conversations: That's Erik Selvig. If you've seen "The Avengers" since this movie, then you know he's important. He's like a dad to Jane (her own presumably dead or missing based on the dialog between Erik and Thor). In this film, much of what he does is to support Jane - and antagonize her. This guy is her mentor, and she respects him a great deal, but even he is telling her that her theory is out there. By the time "The Avengers" rolls around, he is actually using her theory in his research. Basically without Jane's work, the entire MCU timeline would not go down the way it did, and that isn't dependent on her relationship with Thor. The fact that she helped him learn a bit of humility helped, but all of that is secondary to her job and he doesn't seem to expect anything different.

So yes, the movie technically passes. But beyond that, I think it's important to look at the spirit of the movie. Not only does it pass, it passes within the first few minutes. All the women keep their clothes on (no low necklines, even) and Thor is the one who is borderline-objectified when he takes his shirt off.

The only thing that bothers me is that according to all the movie synopses and everything, Jane is doing post-doctoral research. However, Coulson calls her "Ms. Foster" even though he is trying to appear respectful (as SHIELD confiscates her stuff). I feel like she should have corrected him on that point even though she was upset about him taking her stuff.

The two human female characters - Jane Foster and Darcy Lewis are seen early on, bickering about SCIENCE. Theres also the Non-sexualised Asgardian warrioress Sif and the time when Frigga tries to fight off a Frost Giant. Also large amounts of female gaze instead of mens gaze. Look up feminist reviews of the film for further analysis.

They talk about the radio in the beginning.