I really hope this isn't true...

[trinityvixen]

...or I have some DVDs to break when I get home.

Forget even the feminism angle on this stupidity. How many different times have we, the audience, been told what we are or are not tired of? Too many super-hero movies! No one wants to see biographical films any more! Nobody watches things with subtitles! Too many people are paid to analyze what must be statistically insignificant deviations in movie-theater attendance. That, coupled with the general decline in theater attendance warrants this level of freak out and reactionary response? Hog shit.

And now I get mad like a good feminist. Let's name the thiry-billion or so movies that tanked this summer or opened to less than stellar box office that featured male leads. There was one just last week--The Kingdom. Or is the fact that even one female was in that mean that that failure was the fault of the womyns? This shit annoys me all over the place--when something doesn't work well for you, chances are 100-to-1 against that it was the fault of this one thing. In this case: the women. As if actresses in Hollywood didn't have enough shit to worry about with their all being required to be anorexic and nude as often as possible to even get any play. Fuck this shit, man.

Comments

[moonlightalice.livejournal.com]

Remind me to discuss this with you at some point? I have always been fascinated by this idea. The truth of the matter is that it isn't that women don't draw audiences--it's that all the parts for women suck. Meryl Streep was talking about the films she did when she was young? They just don't MAKE those anymore. How many movies have you seen recently that have truly nuanced, complicated, conflicted roles for women--roles with DEPTH that require a delicacy and craft that few actresses can deliver? It's not that these actresses aren't OUT there--it's that the PARTS aren't out there. There's no "demand" (WHATEVER THE FUCK THAT MEANS because who the hell decides this?) for those roles anymore. Women are the dumb bitches, the bossy know-it-alls, the old hags. Types types types.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

There are better roles on television, though compared to what's available in movies, that's not saying much.

But, no, the truly nuanced roles are on the small screen these days. It's probably why there's been a reverse exodus back to TV from movies from some notable big-name actresses (Glenn Close comes to mind).

And yes, you've mentioned the dearth of good roles. This has been a steady progression since the 60s. That's why there are no real starlets of the old school. No one caters to the likes of Elizabeth Taylor, for example. Not any more.

[arcane-the-sage.livejournal.com]

My only comment is: Did no one in the WB even see The Invasion? I mean the SUCK was coming off the film so bad my head nearly exploded........ and I've only seen it in ads. I imagine a male lead would have made it worse. To add insult to injury, didn't they steal the plot largely from They Live?

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

No, Invasion was yet another (third? fourth?) remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. They changed the title so it wouldn't seem like it for some reason even though several of the remakes have been pretty good and the name recognition would have served them better.

But no: it was all Nicole Kidman's fault.

[droidguy1119.livejournal.com]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/brave_one/news/1678780/

I'll give you that he probably said something like it, although do you really believe anyone in charge of a movie studio could actually think it would even, aside from whatever else it raises, be logistically possible to never make another movie with a woman in the lead?

But on the other hand, I also really hate Nikke Finke. Really, really, really hate her.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I'll give you that he probably said something like it, although do you really believe anyone in charge of a movie studio could actually think it would even, aside from whatever else it raises, be logistically possible to never make another movie with a woman in the lead?

Actually, yes. I believe he said something exactly like this. Because you cannot mistake the sexism still inherent to the way actresses are treated and put forward professionally and personally versus how actors are. The respect is not the same, and the roles are never quite as good for the ladies as the men.

I mean, look at the quote from the studio suit who is thinking he's somehow damage-controlling:

As for Neil Jordan's brainy twist on the vigilante genre, "The Brave One," Robinov said he is "proud of the movie," which Foster continues to support around the world. "It's tricky," he said. "It may have been too rough for women, and we didn't get the reviews we had expected."

Emphasis mine. Short of displaying a penis growing out from between her legs, an actress of comparable skill to any great actor (and there are many such actresses, many languishing in unsuitable roles these days) should be able to pull off any character's complexity. So, even when he's saying "No no no, no one even thinks anything that sexist..." he's being sexist. So he's not making the strongest case for this rumor not being true.

[droidguy1119.livejournal.com]

I meant he probably blamed women-led movies to WB's failure this year and said "why do we even make them" but I really doubt he ever thought he could get away with not making them ever again. He's still an idiot but this is almost inevitably a misinterpretation of his words because I don't buy that he, even for a second, really thought they could get away with no more female movies and not piss off millions and millions of people around the world.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

He's still an idiot but this is almost inevitably a misinterpretation of his words because I don't buy that he, even for a second, really thought they could get away with no more female movies and not piss off millions and millions of people around the world.

That's just it, though. Do I want to consume product from a company where they think this shit and would be even so stupid as to let it slip out into the media? Because whether or not they enforce this policy is irrelevant if the head guys are at least contemplating it or are going to end up shying away from action movies with female leads as a result. Sexism is no less insidious than racism--you don't have to burn crosses on my lawn if you've still favor rhetoric about welfare queens and use the n-word. If you still think it at the back of your mind, you are still a racist.

I'm a pessimist, too, so there's no way I think that he can be thinking this and not have it affect policy somehow. So, if this studio beef hates female-led pictures, he's not going to enable his studio to greenlight them without tremendous hurdles being surmounted that male-led pictures won't face. That means the already dire situation of poor roles for women, the lack of diversified characters (not to mention body types) will only get worse. Even if it were only the action/thriller pictures, you lose the heroine of those movies and even though she's usually the cookie-cutter babe a la Lara Croft, at least she was one more archetype (if not actual character).

Sigh. There's just no way anyone would have said this about a man. That's what gets me. Someone says it about a woman and they leap to say it was taken out of context (note: they don't say something quite like it wasn't said) and rush to show off a slew of movies with women in them, none of which are the sort of big-promotion, weekend-dominating blockbuster types of the ones that were threatened with this remark. It's very telling about just how sincere the original remark probably was (regardless of how feasible enforcing it would ever be).

[droidguy1119.livejournal.com]

Slightly off topic, I think in any attempt to overcorrect this problem of not enough films for women Hollywood is digging its own grave. Since there are just generally not enough films for women, the films for women (and by women) that are greenlit are not enough of the Batman Begins/Eastern Promises variety and more of the Catch and Release/Friends With Money variety that are unlikely to attract a wide audience. Equality is the key -- what Hollywood needs is not a knockout script/movie that attracts women, but a knockout film by women, about women, that attracts everyone. I think everyone is guilty in that neither men or women make much of an attempt to find out what the rest of the audience is interested in and the result is manly action movies and girly romances when with a little work it would be easy to get everyone into both of them.

What do you think would help?

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I don't think any of what you said is wrong. The problem is that studios are not writing parts for women, movies about women from the point of view of women. They're more interpretations of women that men have. A more authentic approach, with the inclusion of female POV wouldn't hurt. The fact that films need to be better to attract audiences period in addition to all the things you mention is something they have yet to address.