ThirdMan wrote: ↑March 27th, 2018, 1:22 pm
I'm satisfied that Kojima intentionally objectifies his female characters
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you on this, but I'd also like to draw attention to the difference between Style and Substance. A female character being drawn in a needlessly sexualized way is often in bad taste and
visually objectifying. But if that same character also happens to be written as a complex human being with her own values and motivations, strengths and weaknesses, then she is not
thematically objectified. And this is where most of Kojima's female characters are located: at the crossroads between questionable style and narrative substance. The Boss is the most obvious example, but even characters like Naomi Hunter, Meryl or EVA are written as memorable and unique human beings with their own character arcs and have arguably more narrative depth than the overwhelming majority of video game protagonists.
I think it's a mistake to conflate these two separate factors and judge them as one singular entity. On the other side of the spectrum, there are plenty of films and games with one-dimensional female characters whose only purpose is to be biologically female (love interests or mothers) without any other defining traits, despite being clothed in a much more modest way. Is this somehow less objectifying and more respectful? I personally don't think so.
I don't think it's very fair to simply point at a screenshot of a MGS character and say "See? Kojima's being misogynistic again!" Optics are undoubtedly important, but they also don't tell the whole story. Is it really progressive to potentially ignore the quality of a character's writing and reduce her to an easy screenshot to argue against?
A juvenile approach to sexuality isn't inherently bigoted. Saying "Here's this really interesting character that I think will enrich my story! Oh and btw, she has tits because why not, right?" is going to make me roll my eyes a little, but I don't see any hatred in that whatsoever. And I'd much rather have that than a respectably dressed character who is kept silenced in the background. Aren't actions more important than looks?
It's like sex scenes in movies, really. Yes, most of them are creatively bankrupt and serve very little purpose other than to titillate the audience, but if the rest of the film is substantial enough, I'll gladly sit through them in order to get to the interesting parts. And I would argue that actual living actors are often being put in uncomfortable situations during conventional movie productions, something which is almost a non-issue in virtual video games.
With all that said, I'll fully admit that he has completely dropped the ball on that topic several times. I just object to sweeping judgments that devalue nuanced analysis.
ThirdMan wrote: ↑March 27th, 2018, 1:22 pm
he lacks the nuance of the thing he'll never be, a good storyteller.
Like with the above, I completely understand where this is coming from, but I also think it's important to not simply cherry-pick the evidence that support this claim while ignoring the rest.
Without going into too many, potentially spoilery details, MGS3 has one of the most incredible uses of color that I've ever seen being used in a story. A simple lily petal changing from white to red to white again, together with the interwoven cultural significance it holds (from the western view of white as a symbol of Purity and red as a symbol of Death, juxtaposed with the Japanese perspective of white being the color of Death and red representing the awe-inspiring Sun), in order to underline how the two contradicting interpretations of a single event would effectively impact the decades to come. All being presented within a well-edited cutscene without a single line of dialogue drawing attention to it, contrary to popular belief. If that's not nuance, what is...?
The same game also manages to subtly hint at a specific character's parentage without ever outright pointing it out, resulting in most first-time players missing out on that particular plot line and its thematic significance. I certainly did.
It also utilizes the drastically opposed nature of its two main antagonists as a way of underlining the ambiguous nature of the third part of the antagonistic triumvirate, which helps with recontextualizing the entire series' lore.
To say nothing of the game's very protagonist being hinted at being on the autism spectrum, something that most stories completely shy away from (especially action stories with a determined male protagonist in his physical prime) unless explicitly drawing attention to it.
(And let's just say there's a lot more where that came from.)
Now, I'm not saying Kojima's verbose storytelling and overindulgent editing problems aren't rightfully infamous, I just don't think it's fair to judge things at face value without bothering to dig a little deeper. He can be nuanced and subtle, but when he does, people rarely pick up on it because that's simply not what they expect.
ThirdMan wrote: ↑March 27th, 2018, 1:22 pm
What I'm missing is the context. I bounced off all of the post-PS1 Metal Gear games and probably don't know enough about his overall thematic goals to be able to place that scene in its proper context, however unsubtle it may be.
I'm not exactly sure how to interpret "bounced off", but in any case I'll say that it's usually a good idea to play (or read, or watch...) a work or series of works to completion before formulating criticism or putting an unfavorable label onto an author. One informed opinion, regardless of outcome, is worth more than a hundred uninformed ones.
And while it may go beyond the scope of this particular conversation, I'd like to point out that while we are all growing older and becoming more and more set in our ways, a good critique is rarely being formulated beforehand or built on preconceived notions. I say this not to have a go at anyone, but as an acknowledgment that I am very often guilty of it myself.
ThirdMan wrote: ↑March 27th, 2018, 1:22 pm
Has he got a great story in him like many of his celebrated compatriots? Could he ever write a female character to match those of Ozu or Mizoguchi?
As far as I'm concerned, he has done so already. MGS2 and 3 especially have made me question my worldview and things that I might have taken for granted otherwise. They've made me cheer, cry, and most importantly, think. It's just that his great stories and interesting characters also come with a lot of baggage and ballast that can understandably put some people off. They're great and powerful without being
elegant. A good story doesn't automatically mean good storytelling, and vice versa.