Day Eleven: I Hate You, Manic Pixie Dream Girl

I have been ready, for about 10 years now, for the reign of terror of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl to end.

The MPDG, a term first coined by Onion film critic Nathan Rabin, described her as a “bubbly, shallow cinematic creature that exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures.”  This girl always looks cute, even in the rain. She's ready to skinny-dip on a dime, and dance like no one is watching (but everyone is, and of course, they love her). She's a free spirited fairy type. Her eccentricity never comes off as creepy, but always slightly cute, sexy, and utterly harmless. In addition to this upsettingly spot-on description, Rabin provided examples, such as Kirsten Dunst’s character in Elizabethtown and Natalie Portman in Garden State. I thought about this the other day, when UPN re-aired Garden State, a movie I had loved at the time, largely for its soundtrack, that I now found to be kind of ridiculous and indulgent. And Natalie Portman, who is an actress I really do like, annoyed the shit out of me. But maybe that's just what coming-of-age films are? Is telling the story of how we grew up indulgent? How we became adults? If I write the movie script of my life, would someone say the same thing? Probably. But my soundtrack would be just as good, (if not better) than Braff's. Y'all would listen to that in your car all the time! As for the movie... I don't know. I was surprised how much I no longer identified with something I'd once adored. And if men think that every time we fail or fall is cute, then what chance do we have of ever being really accepted at face value?

There is a new film out, Ruby Sparks, that I'm interested in seeing (after The Campaign and The Bourne Franchise Reboot with Mr. Adorable Jeremy Renner of course). In the trailers, Zoe Kazan (who also wrote the script, props where they are due) plays Ruby like a page from the MPDG textbook (which is obviously doodled with hearts in a Lisa Frank Trapper Keeper) but according to critics "is seeking to critique the archetype more than indulge it. “Quirky, messy women whose problems only make them endearing are not real,” one observer tells Dano’s character, adding later, “You haven’t written a person. You’ve written a girl.”

I could not agree with that statement more.
Quirky, messy women whose problems only make them endearing are not real

I've met the real MPDG. More often than not, she's depressed. Like seriously, importantly depressed. She has strained or imagined relationships. She doesn't like herself much at all. Her facade, the mania is a front for all the unhappiness. This girl creates situations far removed from her actual life so she doesn't have to go there. And it's not cute. It's sad, and really uncomfortable.

I yearn for the day when Manic Pixie Dream Girl meets her arch-nemesis, Level-Headed Stable Reality Lady. Can we write about her? Where is her star vehicle? Growing up is messy and ugly. I may write about a lot of the cute and funny shit I do, but there are moments of real horror, things I'm ashamed of and would rather not revisit - but these are many of the cornerstones and experiences that make me a real woman - not some dream manifest who's always in a good mood, or can dance in the rain in some floaty white dress and look freaking absurd. I am deeply flawed. And I worry that if this is the woman, the girl, who is being presented in media, that young women will think that it is in fact they who have to put their dreams on hold so their man-child boyfriend can learn something about himself. If she's not on her cutest, most adorable behavior, maybe her man will leave her. Why rock the boat, when you can be docile? Why doesn't her life matter? Doesn't she have something better to do than teach her man about the joys of living? Maybe she should get out and do some living herself.