deconstructing the good woman/bad woman dichotomy in the tdk trilogy

ah, dichotomies, the bane of every person who isn't a... well, actually dichotomies hurt everyone, but i'm not here to talk about real life ones (atm anyway). i here to talk about the one i mentioned in my last post: the good/bad dichotomy in chris nolan's female characters. (i'm only focusing on the tdk trilogy because i haven't seen any of his movies outside of it except inception.)

like i said, this thing is really, really false. even without factoring characters and characterization, i can tell that the thing was something inadvertently made up by the fans. it probably started as them pointing out a flaw and now they're trying to stick all the girls in there. "but frankie, but frankie, why is it so easy to put them in there at a first glance though?" that's answered easily: it's because nolan doesn't write enough women. when you make a series of three movies with a big cast of characters you should have more than six females among them. that even number makes it more than easy enough to separate them into dumb groups without a second glance. for two, this dichotomy in general ignores nolan's work deconstructing yet another dichotomy: the one between good and evil. also, misogyny, because you sure don't see anyone trying to force the male characters into these limited moral spaces!

but yeah, to the girls. i mentioned the four main female characters in my other post - rachel, anna, selina, and talia - and how they 'fit' into the dichotomy. of course, it doesn't work that easily. for one, three of these four girls slide around the grey area more than batman does, really. rachel is the only girl that can be called good, but that's because she dies before she can be forced to do things that would put her into the grey area as well. the good/bad thing really flattens the characters into two-dimensional caricatures of the things nolan actually wrote.

i wanna talk about talia next because she's the only one who might fit into the 'bad' category, but even then it's only because she doesn't care about what her father really stood for - if she did she would be an antivillian like her dad and bane. her revenge makes her a bit more shallow in terms of morality compared to selina and anna.

i like anna because she's one of the characters that sits right in the grey; she's a cop on the mob's payroll but it's only because she wants to help her mom. she has a hand in rachel's death but it was unknowingly. she refuses to sit firmly in the 'good' or 'bad' area - she's the epitome of what nolan was trying do, really.

selina is a fun one as well, because she's also firmly in the grey; she's a jewel thief, but only because she can't get any higher in life because of her record. she has no qualms with killing, but the only people she kills are people who are endangering her (of course, us having spent so much time with batman skews our perspective on this). she even has a sort of code when it comes to her stealing. she's a darker shade of grey, but still grey nonetheless.

and this isn't even counting the fact that to put the dichotomy in effect you have to erase the three neutral female characters from the story: barbara gordon, judge surillo, and talia's mother. all three put into the plot of one of the movies in some way but aren't there enough (or are too dead) to reallly have an established moral compass.

like i mentioned above, the real problem here is the fact that there are only seven of these guys amongst a sea of complex male characters. let's not make it worse by trying to erase pieces of their characterization, please?

subverting tropes with c. nolan

okay guys.

so yesterday there was a post on my tumblr dashboard about how the marvel movies do better than the dark knight trilogy at portraying women. i'm not really here to talk about that rn, because i made a lot of posts about it on my blog already (here, if you wanna see them idk), but i'll just tell you that i agree with the sentiment but literally every argument, while they do apply to the portrayal of women in media, doesn't apply to the tdk trilogy. but, like i said, that's not what i'm here to talk about. while i was talking about that i mentioned that the only time nolan really did something interesting with his female chars was in inception. i mentioned how in his movies if there are two female chars one is usually good and one is bad and that's annoying, we all know that. in inception he subverts that with both of the girls.

there are a lot of ways to interpret inception, but the two most popular are the theories the one where mal was right (cobb is in some super deep dream state), and the one where she's wrong (she's really dead). there are others, and even within those two there are separate subtheories, but i'm gonna focus on these two supertheories for this.

in the movie, mal is presented as a sort of villain: not only does she get in the way of jobs, she has no problems with killing them in the one occasion where death has some kind of weight in a dream. she's dangerous, and it's only because cobb confronts her that the team can complete the job. ariadne, on the other hand, is the team's architect, and is one of the most important members of the team even before she makes cobb take her into the dream with them. she builds the mazes, and is the one who sees through cobb and actually takes initiative to do something so that the team won't be compromised by mal in the field. from what i've said above, you can deduce that they fall neatly into the categories most female characters do in a nolan story: ariadne is the good one, and mal is the bad one, right?

but it's not that easy.

to say that mal is the 'villain' and that ariadne is some kind of 'hero' is grossly simplifying both women.

in the case of ariadne, it's a bit simpler: if you've seen inception more than once while simultaneously having an internet connection, you know that the team aren't heroes. you don't have to look far to see it; miles straight up calls cobb wanting ariadne to work with them corruption. she's not neutral, but ari isn't exempt because she's new either. she's not the good one, she's just another person helping the protagonist.

now onto mal. there are two things that need to be put out there right now: 1, mal is still the antagonist. antagonists don't have to be evil, nor do they have to be villains, they just have to be against the protagonist, and she is. 2, mal does qualify as an anti-villain: on the sliding scale of anti-villains, she's a solid type four. 

however, like i said, to say that she's a villain at all is still simplifying the character a lot, and when you really look at it she doesn't really fit into the list of 'bad' women in nolan's films.* first off, her MO is super important. her whole motivation in the movie is getting cobb to realize that the world he's living in isn't real, and that he needs to come back home. whether you agree with her or not, that's not really that villainous or evil or even that bad. her means are more than a bit dodgy, let's be honest here, but in the end she doesn't want to ruin their job, she's just willing to do it if it'll get her husband to wake up. 

secondly, you have to take into account that mal isn't real. (this is where subtheories can make things mucky, but let's work under assumption that in both theories she's a projection.**) sure, she gets in the way of the crew at times when they're trying to work, but she's a projection, and an extension of cobb. take away all the layers, and the thing that's really getting in the way of the team is cobb's subconscious. ariadne says as much when cobb stops her from asking him about the layout. so, really, if you're really pressed about inception not having a villain, it does have one: it's cobb.

"but frankie, but frankie, cob can't be the villain! he's the protagonist!"

i said it above, but i'll say it again: the antagonist isn't always a villain, and the villain isn't always the antagonist. the protagonist can be evil just as easily as your antagonist can be good; heck, sometimes they're both evil, and sometimes they're both alright folks! protagonist is just term that means 'person/people we're following'. that's it. it doesn't mean 'hero' or 'good guy' or anything else, just that. mal is an antagonist because she's opposing cobb, but cobb is the villain because he's really the one getting in the way - also, not to mention the little stunt he pulled with not telling everyone about limbo. if you want to take it even further, you could say that cobb is the antagonist as well, since mal is an extension of him. 

so, in reality, the nolan dichotomy doesn't work here, as the 'good' woman isn't really good, just on our side, and the 'bad' woman isn't even real.

* my real problem with the good/bad dichotomy is that it's actually false (they all are, lbr). going off of the four nolan films that i've seen, it seems like it works - rachel is the good one and anna ramirez is the bad one, selina is the good one and talia is the bad one - but that completely ignores a) the nuances of the last three (rachel is a bit too saintly, but that's for another day), and b) the other three women who have some kind of presence in the dark knight and the dark knight rises. this is something i ought to discuss in a separate post though.

** there's a subtheory within the 'mal was right' camp that says that she was the real thing, and that she was really there and all that jazz. i'm not really here to argue that that was wrong, because i needed to make a point, but i will say that if that was the real mal why was she acting that way???

internet, we need to have another talk about barbie

hello! i'm here to reply to a post i made about barbie last, like, may or april (maybe even march) on my other blog. i'm mostly doing this because i've become a lot aware of the problems plaguing our society as a woman, and while my post had good intentions it did get a little misguided. so let's have at it, shall we?

original post found here

i highly doubt that barbie i the reason that so many girls have low self esteem and want to attain impossible figures. it makes sense on paper, but think about it. barbie is, first and foremost, a toy. she's made of plastic. also, there's the fact that there are pressures from the media to look like what's desirable, like the ladies in the magazines. and guess who's not in the magazines. of course there's probably people out there who do want the look like barbie, but don't blame everyone's low self-esteem on a doll. or at least think about it. 

so i'll admit, i still stand by this a little bit. but i'm not going to deny the fact that, yeah, barbie has probably hand an impact on girl's self-esteem and self image. but the thing i still stand by is this: you can't blame everyone's low self-esteem on a doll. you can't. it's never as simple as that.

that being said, i do believe that barbie is the source of some negative self image issues. but one things that's nice about the mattel company is that they recognize this and change barbie to help combat these problems. today's barbie has a much different body shape than barbies i had as a child specifically because of this. they;re trying t make barbie as good a role model as they can and making sure she has something close to and attainable body shape is definitely a step in the right direction. but let's not erase people' struggles by saying that barbie has never caused someone to feel bad because they can't look like.be as good as her.

barbie doesn't come in pink packaging and lots of pink (not only pink, but lots of pink) clothes because she's meant for girls. this is something called characterization. over the years mattel has turned barbie from just a fashion doll into full fledged character. she has a whole family, likes and dislikes, she even has an entire name. so it makes sense that barbie would have a favorite color right? and guess what that color is? pink. 

let's not kid ourselves here; the color of barbie's packaging has, at least in the past, had something  to do with marketing towards little girls. it is true that barbie has turned into a character over the years, but you can't just deny that marketing pink to little girls was never a thing because it's barbie's favorite color.

nowadays the packaging for barbie dolls has included other colors depending on the series/doll line the toy belongs to and whether or not said doll is barbie. the packaging for barbie's friends has less pink in it. and, even better, they don't take the pink off for ken dolls, which is really cool. but these are recent things that came along with the developments of barbie's characterization and the creation of actual personalities for her friends, and we shouldn't pretend that it's not.

(aside: this is one of the things the bratz always had going for them. the very first bratz dolls came in dark blue boxes, as did the boys. mga, the company that makes bratz, doesn't pander to to girls, and they acknowledge their male fanbase, which is nice.)

and probably the most important thing, barbie is not a slut, nor is she dumb. the movies have established that. for one, being a slut isn't even such a bad thing, let alone something that you call a cartoon character. also 'slutty' isn't a style of dress, it's a lifestyle choice (for lack of better word). and to top that off, barbie doesn't dress in what is traditionally thought of as 'slutty'. a regular barbie's style is probably best described as feminine, and the clothes are not overtly revealing. and there isn't really any evidence to prove that barbie is 'dumb'. there's the whole 'math is hard' thing, but not everyone is good at math, you know? it's not a sign of stupidity. besides, barbie has had what seems like a hundred jobs, which means she's qualified for every one. 

this is the one that has the strongest argument. barbie's not a slut, but what really needs to be acknowledged here is the fact that a) being a slut isn't a bad thing and b) people are slut-shaming a doll because of they way she's dressed. how sad is that? literally slut-shaming a toy. the bratz got this one flung at them a LOT when they first came out. but it's just so upsetting that people are slut-shaming a  female, real or fictional, because of the way she dresses. that's not even mentioning that barbie's clothes are in no way provocative."but look at the hem lines/length of her shorts!" you might say. well to that i say, "who cares?" really, why is it so bad for a girl to wear a short skirt/dress or short shorts? many people own clothes just like that,  but when it's a doll it's suddenly a problem?

of course it needs to be said that very real people deal with this stuff everyday, and honestly it's not fair.just the very notion that we should according to what might or might not appease a man is insulting, and it's even worse that we're imposing this on our kids. barbie's clothes reflect the style of the times. that's all it is, that's all it ever will be. and there's nothing "slutty" about that.

(aside: congrats to mattel and mga for not caving to the peer pressure on that point. i'd rather my kids (if i had them) get their fashion trends from dolls rather than magazines. i'm serious; a lot of fashion magazines are special editions or spin offs of the same magazines that bash celebrities, which teaches really bad attitudes and behaviors. barbie is never gonna spy on britney spears from a bush from the latest scoop. who would you trust?)

ghost type pokemon

let's get right into this with haunter. from the pokemon stadium pokedex entry:

If you trip and fall for no apparent reason or hear a sound when no one is around, it may be a Haunter. 

and from the yellow entry:

By licking, it saps the victim's life. It causes shaking that won't stop until the victim's demise.

the entries from silver and the gen 3 games mention the licking as well. the gen 3 entries also come right out and call it dangerous. it's also mentioned that haunter hides in the dark, and that the feeling of being watched when alone in a room is a haunter staring at you. it's final form, gengar, is much more of the same. from the yellow pokedex:

A Gengar is close by if you feel a sudden chill. It may be trying to lay a curse on you.

other entries mention that it loves to pretend to be people's shadows and then scare them, and that it waits in dark corners, so tat it can steal life energy from a passerby. the diamond entry also mentions that it may cool the surrounding air by 10 degrees. gastly, the first form from this line, is much less mischievous, but is still pretty dangerous.

gen 2 only added one new ghost pokemon, misdreavus. this is pokemon loves to play tricks on people. from the silver pokedex:

It loves to bite and yank people's hair from behind without warning, just to see their shocked reactions.

and from the ruby/sapphire pokedex:

Misdreavus frightens people with a creepy, sobbing cry. The Pokémon apparently uses its red spheres to absorb the fearful feelings of foes and turn them into nutrition.

it's very easy to see how it got it's name.

in gen 3, we start to come across some of the darker ghost pokemon. shuppet, is one of these. from the ruby and sapphire pokedexes:

ruby: Shuppet is attracted by feelings of jealousy and vindictiveness. If someone develops strong feelings of vengeance, this Pokémon will appear in a swarm and line up beneath the eaves of that person's home.

sapphire: Shuppet grows by feeding on dark emotions, such as vengefulness and envy, in the hearts of people. It roams through cities in search of grudges that taint people.

already, they're moving away from the slightly more playful ghosts of the first two generations. it gets a bit darker with banette, it's evolved form. from the gen 3 pokedexes:

ruby: Banette generates energy for laying strong curses by sticking pins into its own body. This Pokémon was originally a pitiful plush doll that was thrown away.

sapphire: A cursed energy permeated the stuffing of a discarded and forgotten plush doll, giving it new life as Banette. The Pokémon's energy would escape if it were to ever open its mouth.

emerald: An abandoned plush doll became this Pokémon. They are said to live in garbage dumps and wander about in search of the children that threw them away.

it's creepy enough that it curses people by sticking pins in its body, but it holds a grudge against the kid that threw it away. could it lay curses on children?

dusclops is another gen 3 ghost. from the ruby pokedex:

Dusclops's body is completely hollow - there is nothing at all inside. It is said that its body is like a black hole. This Pokémon will absorb anything into its body, but nothing will ever come back out.

i think that's all that needs to be said.

one last ghost for gen 3. shendinja is one of the evlolved forms of nincada the other being ninjask. what makes this pokemon different (and quite peculiar) is that it nincada doesnt actually evolve into it. it appears when nicada evolves into ninjask if the player has a free spot in the team and extra pokeballs. from the gen 3 pokedexes:

ruby: Shedinja's hard body doesn't move - not even a twitch. In fact, its body appears to be merely a hollow shell. It is believed that this Pokémon will steal the spirit of anyone peering into its hollow body from its back.

sapphire: Shedinja is a peculiar Pokémon. It seems to appear unsought in a Poké Ball after a Nincada evolves. This bizarre Pokémon is entirely immobile - it doesn't even breathe.

emerald: A peculiar Pokémon that floats in air even though its wings remain completely still. The inside of its body is hollow and utterly dark.

 apparently, shedinja is the shell that a nincada shed when it evolved that turned sentient. literally the ghost of a pokemon, of sorts. it is unique in that way.

gen 4 brings a few new ghosts to the table. drifloon and drifblim are two interesting ones. from the gen 4 pokedexes for both:

pearl (drifloon): It tugs on the hands of children to steal them away. However, it gets pulled around instead.

platinum (drifloon): Because of the way it floats aimlessly, an old folktale calls it a "Signpost for Wandering Spirits."

platinum (drifblim): At dusk, swarms of them are carried aloft on winds. When noticed, they suddenly vanish. 

 in the almia region, these two pokemon can carry people over obstructions and to higher ground.

spiritomb is another interesting pokemon form this gen. from the gen 4 pokedexes:

diamond: A Pokémon that was formed by 108 spirits. It is bound to a fissure in an Odd Keystone.

pearl: It was bound to a fissure in an Odd Keystone as punishment for misdeeds 500 years ago.

platinum: Its constant mischief and misdeeds resulted in it being bound to an Odd Keystone by a mysterious spell.

this pokemon is found at the hallowed tower at route 209. it's interesting that even though the tower is in ruins (it looks more like a large pile of rocks) and the keystone displaced, the pokemon is still entombed.

gen 4 also has the final evolved forms of duskull and misdreavus, mismagius and dusknoir. from the pear entries for both:

mismagius: It chants incantations. While they usually torment targets, some chants bring happiness.

dusknoir: The antenna on its head captures radio waves from theworld of spirits that command it to take people there.

gen 4 also has froslass and rotom. giratina, one of the dragon trio of sinnoh, is also half ghost.

gen 5 brings, in my opinion, some of the creepiest ghost pokemon yet. i'll start with the litwick line. one thing all three pokemon have in common is that the flames on their bodies are use to steal the spirits of people, which is how they stay burning. while lampent takes spirits from those on the verge of death, chandelure will kill people and take their souls, leaving the body behind.

frilish and jellicent are two more disturbing pokemon. while frillish isn't so bad, though it uses a very troubling method to find food, jellicent causes more trouble. from the black pokedex:

The fate of the ships and crew that wander into Jellicent's habitat: all sunken, all lost, all vanished.

the white entry mentions that its favorite food is life energy.

two other ghosts are yamask and cofagrigus. from the gen 5 pokedex entries for both:

yamask-

black: Each of them carries a mask that used to be its face when it was human. Sometimes they look at it and cry.
white: These Pokémon arose from the spirits of people interred in graves in past ages. Each retains memories of its former life.

cofagrigus-

black: It has been said that they swallow those who get too close and turn them into mummies. They like to eat gold nuggets.
white: They pretend to be elaborate coffins to teach lessons to grave robbers. Their bodies are covered in pure gold.

i think it's worth mentioning that these are my least favorite ghost pokemon. these two are the only two that are the actual spirits of dead creatures

the last two gen 5 ghosts are golett and golurk. these are two pokemon supposedly left behind by advanced civilization and powered by an unknown power. they were made to protect the people who made them. it's interesting that these pokemon are ghost type, as most ancient pokemon are psychic type (excluding fossils)

that's all for ghost pokemon. i'm not sure what my next post will be about, but i hope you enjoyed it!

dark type pokemon

i'm gonna preface this post by saying that in japanese, the dark type is called the evil type. that should tell you about some of the stuff we're in for today.

the dark type didn't come into being until gen 2, so we'll be starting there. the first pokemon i'm touching on is murkrow. from the gen 2 pokedexes:

gold: feared and loathed by many, it is believed to bring misfortune to all those who see it at night.

silver: It is said that when chased, it lures its attacker onto dark mountain trails where the foe will get lost. 

right off the bat, murkrow doesn't come across as a  very nice pokemon. the page does mention, however, that the misfortune is more likely to fall on pokemon it's battling than humans. it has been known to steal shiny things, from people and even other pokemon. another gen 2 dark type is the psuedo-legendary tyranitar. from the crystal entry: 

In just one of its mighty hands, it has the power to make the ground shake and mountains crumble.

this is not surprising. the pokemon has a wide moveset, which includes some elemental moves (thundershock, surf), as well as some dragon type moves. they are always eager to battle. luckily, they are very rare in  the wild. other gen 2 dark types include umbreon, sneasel, houndour, and houndoom.

with gen 3 we get the infamous absol. well, it's infamous in-universe anyway. from the gen 3 entries:

ruby: Every time Absol appears before people, it is followed by a disaster such as an earthquake or a tidal wave. As a result, it came to be known as the disaster Pokémon.

sapphire: Absol has the ability to foretell the coming of natural disasters. It lives in a harsh, rugged mountain environment. This Pokémon very rarely ventures down from the mountains.

emerald: It sharply senses even subtle changes in the sky and the land to predict natural disasters. It is a long-lived Pokémon that has a life-span of 100 years. 

absol's infamy is actually misattributed. as it said in the sapphire entry, the pokemon has the ability to sense when natural disasters are coming. it tries to warn people of them but it usually arrives just as it's happening, making people think that it's presence is what caused it. some absol even live in places constantly plagued by disaster, like giant chasm.

sableye is an interesting pokemon, to say the least. they live in caves and caverns, eating the rocks and gemstones it finds there. it's eyes look like gemstones, and there is a crystal growning on it's chest. it's eyes glow in the dark, and some people think that they can steal people's spirits when they do this.

gen 4 has the legendary pokemon darkrai. it's species is listed as 'pitch-black' and it's special ability is 'bad dreams'. this should tell you more than enough about this one, but i'll go ahead and give you it's pokedex entry from pearl:

Folklore has it that on moonless nights, this Pokémon will make people see horrific nightmares.

darkrai earns it's reputation. what makes it worse is that darkrai doesn't mean to do this, and only does it as a defense mechanism. in battle, it uses a move called dark void, which can pull the opponent into the void and put it to sleep. you can guess what its dreams must be like. this move works on humans too.

gen 5 has a variety of dark types, including sleek and mysterious liepard, the brutal krookodile, and the psuedo-legendary hydreigon. krookodile can crush a car with it's jaws, and hydreigon is easily triggered, using it's three heads to destroy the landscape. liepard is said to appear and disappear randomly. it's unevolved form, purrloin, steals things from it's trainer and uses it's cuteness to earn forgiveness.

a complete list of  dark types can be found here.

dragon type pokemon

today we're taking a quick look at some dragon types. all of the pokemon that will be featured in this post are all half types. here is a link to the complete list of dragon types.

for starters, it's worth mentioning that there are only 29 dragon type pokemon in all. out of that,only 8 of them are pure type, and 9 of them are legendaries. this type is very rare and very powerful.

i'm going to start this list off with dragonite. it's a pseudo-legendary, one of only six to have that title. it's also extremely rare, and can only be obtained by trade, evolving a dragonair, or going to dragonspiral tower (in b&w). from it's red/blue pokedex entry:

An extremely rarely seen marine Pokémon. Its intelligence is said to match that of humans.

pokedex entries from later games mention rescuing drowning humans and storm-batterered ships, and that it can fly around the globe in just 16 hours, despite it's size. the crystal entry mentions that there may be an island where only they live, though it's not mentioned in any of the other games. it's a very and friendly pokemon. the rest of dragonair's evolutionary line are also dragon type.

the only dragon type in gen 2 is kingdra. in gen 3 there are 3 legendary dragon types: latios and latias (mentioned in my second psychic type post) and rayquaza. rayquaza is one of the most important legendary pokemon, as it is the only one who can calm  kyogre and groudon when they begin to fight. using an ability called air lock to negate any effects they might have on the weather or environment. it i the only pokemon with this abailty. from it's sapphire entry:

Rayquaza is said to have lived for hundreds of millions of years in the earth's ozone layer, above the clouds. Its existence had been completely unknown because it lived so high in the sky.

gen 3 also has the pseudo-legendary salamence and it's evolutionary line, altaria, vibrava, and flygon.

with gen 4 come the creation trio, dialga, palkia, and giratina. myths say these pokemon appeared when the universe was formed, and represent time, space, and antimatter, respectively. all three are extremely powerful. a page on the trio is here. other dragon types from this gen include garchomp and it's evolutionary line.

gen 5 brings another trio of legedary dragons, the tao trio. reshiram, zekrom, and kyurem. reshiram and zekrom were apparently created during a conflict in unova's history. from the trio's page:

The origins of Zekrom and Reshiram are told in legends, as they were once a single powerful Dragon Pokémon used by twin heroes in order to create the Unova region. But the brothers each sought something different in life — truth for the older brother and ideals for the younger — and they began to argue, then fight, over whose side was right. The single dragon, in response, split into two Pokémon: Reshiram, who sided with the older twin, and Zekrom, who sided with the younger twin.

The two dragons were equally matched as they battled and neither conquered the other. As a result, the brothers set aside their differences and equally declared that there was no right side, either. But the sons of the heroes resumed the fight, and Reshiram and Zekrom destroyed the region with their fire and lightning powers. They subsequently disappeared afterward.

these two are very important to the world, as they help the main character beat the game's villian. you are required to catch one to further the main plot line.

kyurem has much different, and much darker past. from the trio page:

Kyurem's origins are much different than those of the other two. The third dragon came down to the Pokémon world from an icy meteor and crashed into a place called Giant Chasm. An old legend in Lacunosa Town describing Kyurem claims that it would take people and Pokémon away from the town and eat them; this is why the town is now surrounded by a giant wall.

 the other gen 5 dragon types are the haxorus line, druddigon, and the pseudo-legendary hydreigon and it's evolutionary line.


my next post will cover dark type and then after that i'll move on to ghost type (!!!)

psychic pokemon, pt 3 (gen 4,5)

moving on to the last to gens today!

gen four comes out of the gate strong with 5 legendary psychic pokemon (the lake guardian trio, cresselia, and victini). all four have some great mythology behind them.

bronzor is an interesting pokemon because of it's connection to the ancient world. from the diamond entry:

Implements shaped like it were discovered in ancient tombs. It is unknown if they are related

 this is also pretty interesting:

X-ray photos were taken to check its body structure. Nothing appeared, however.

 and that makes me wonder what bronzor is. it's evolved form, bronzong, is equally mysterious.

other psychic pokemon from this gen are chingling, mime jr., and gallade.

gen 5 starts off with a deceptive little pokemon called munna. its super cute, but don't let that fool you. munna is the unova's own version of drowzee. its even called a dream eater pokemon. that being said, munna is a bit more pleasant that drowzee, asthetically at least. from the white pokedex:

It eats the dreams of people and Pokémon. When it eats a pleasant dream, it expels pink-colored mist.

that's just cute. it's evolved form, musharna, is just as good.

next are elgyem and beheeyem, two alien pokemon. elgyem's pokedex entries:

black: It uses its strong psychic power to squeeze its opponent's brain, causing unendurable headaches.

white: This Pokémon had never been seen until it appeared from far in the desert 50 years ago.

the shout out in to the roswell incident is nice. beheeyem's pokedex entries:

 black: It can manipulate an opponent's memory. Apparently, it communicates by flashing its three different-colored fingers.

white: It uses psychic power to control an opponent's brain and tamper with its memories. 

the black entry is another shout out, this time to the original war of the worlds film. extraterrestrial pokemon are always interesting.

the last pokemon is sigilyph, another ancient pokemon. from it's black entry:

They never vary the route they fly, because their memories of guarding an ancient city remain steadfast.

the ancient city may or may not be the desert resort, since that is the only place they are found. then again , the desert resort might be the remains of a more current city.
other gen 5 psychic pokemon include the gothita evolution line, the solosis evolution line, and darmantian and meoletta depending on the form.

and that's all for the psychic mons! next we'll talk breifly about dragon types, and then it's on to the dark type.