She gets a lot of undeserved hatred for the notoriously misunderstood high-heels thing, but ironically Claire Dearing might arguably be the greatest female protagonist I've seen in a movie since Aliens, in my opinion. And that's not because I'm an obvious Jurassic Park sperg.
Claire Dearing is real. That is to say, she behaves for the most part the way a real person might in the situations placed upon them. She has her strengths but most importantly she has her flaws. We as humans relate to and come to love characters with flaws because they remind us of ourselves, as flawed creatures. Often they are used as examples to show us that despite our shortcomings, we can be able to overcome our obstacles and do great things if we press ourselves to succeed.
My real point here is that flawed characters make good characters because they are relatable. And good characters prove relatable regardless of race or gender. This is non-negotiable fact, and it is important information for a writer to know if they are aiming to create compelling characters that their audience should care about.
Feminazis like those at TMS don't get this. They are too stupid to truly appreciate or understand the importance of believable character traits in storytelling and really are not qualified to make judgements on the matter. They think that any non-male character who is portrayed in a role (no matter how grand or minor) and makes a believable mistake consistent with reality must be bad or "sexist". Alternatively in their view a "good" female character can only be acceptable if she is completely in control of everything and never shows any true signs of weakness (and also talks down to/outsmarts/beats the shit out of a man who could clearly crush her in real life at least once at any point in the film), although sometimes even these rules don't apply if it is simply decided by the feminists in question that they don't. And because directors and writers listen to these idiots, whether out of fear, agreement, or just supposed popular demand, people get deprived of far too many potentially good stories and compelling characters because they are deemed "problematic" by a bunch of oversensitive cunts. Now we get shitty characters like Black Widow, Rey, and Alice Abernathy who border on arguably Mary-Sue levels of awfulness.
Claire is already a success when we first see her in Jurassic World. She has competently managed to oversee a multi-billion dollar theme park built around defying the laws of science itself for ten whole years, and once shit hits the fan and the island starts to delve into chaos, she proves herself invaluable in keeping everything from falling apart. But because she learns the valuable lesson that it's okay to compromise your persona as an emotionless business manager to save your fucking family from dying a violent death at the maw of a bloodthirsty genetic mutant, this movie is sexist, and you should not see it.
You can begin to understand why as a writer I have come to hate these people so much.
On a related note, I am choosing not to keep up with news about Jurassic World's sequel so that I might appreciate it more when it is actually released. However, based on what I have heard about it, in response to the unwarranted outrage over Claire in the most current installment, she is apparently going to "dominate" the sequel. This phrasing of her role genuinely concerns me as I would really prefer not to see another potentially great female character arc destroyed by deluded feminazis who think they aren't getting their way whenever they see a woman in a movie behaving like a real person. Especially when that character arc takes place within a franchise as important to me as this one.
