Quick, name a few recent popular movies where the two top-billed stars are female.
Here’s a miscellaneous survey I just did, tallied by gender of top billed/second billed star:
| M/M | M/F | F/M | F/F | |
| 20 biggest movies of 2007 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 biggest movies of 2006 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 biggest movies of 2005 | 11 | 7 | 2 | 0 |
| 20 biggest movies of 2004 | 10 | 9 | 1 | 0 |
| 20 biggest movies since 1977 | 15 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| IMDb Top 20 of All Time | 15 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
There were about 110 movies with a male lead and 5 with a female lead. Of the second-billed females, nearly all are written as love interests of the first-billed man. There were over sixty movies in the sample with two male stars top-billed. The only movies with two top-billed female roles, on the other hand, were The Devil Wears Prada and Scary Movie 4.
My cousin has been working on tallying (by hand!) all movies with two top-billed female stars. She reports that there are staggeringly few of them, and the roles fall mainly in two genres: mother-daughter bonding movies and horror films. Hollywood is not creating female heroes.
Suppose we had a generic Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer movie with some evil organization (say, a shadow government headed by Dick Cheney or whatever) bent on destroying something (say, the internet). Who would you rather see battling their way through the system to stop them — another basic Bruce Willis/Denzel Washington/Vin Diesel character? Or River Tam, Sarah Connor, Lola from Run Lola Run, or Beatrix Kiddo? Not only could the film industry suck less in the examples it sets, we could have some awesome movies.
Notes: If anyone wants to expand my list into a more comprehensive and authoritative survey, I’d love to see the results. I did my tally by hand, using The Numbers for the basic lists and stars, plus IMDb and Wikipedia to get a consensus on billing order.
Newsflash for everyone: 90% (and that’s a conservative estimate) of all people are stupid. Don’t believe it? Just scroll up the page and start reading, then count the number of times you catch yourself thinking, “What a dumbass.” Any movie that makes the top 20 does so primarily because it has enough mass appeal (read “boobies and explosions”) to attract a significant chunk of stupid people.
So I ask: why is it so important for a F/M or F/F movie to be popular in order for it to be a good movie? A few of you have stated this already (though not as bluntly), but there are plenty of good F/M and F/F films out there – they just aren’t huge box office hits. Who cares? They’re good movies. People who aren’t stupid will enjoy them. Stupid people will continue to be stupid. Welcome to reality.
(P.S. – Also, the fact that I didn’t see “Heaven” mentioned yet proves to me that most of you don’t know what constitutes a good film to begin with”)
Kill Bill 1 & 2
Flightplan
Alien franchise
Foxfire (yes, it’s indie)
Tomb Raider franchise
Juno
Just off the top of my head, mind.
I would personally like to see river tam kick cheneys ass to save the blaggo-blag.
I think it’s funny how the example F/F F/M movies people have posted are being continuously repeated, and most don’t even fit into the original point of this blag post.
Also, it looks like I was right. And it may happen sooner than 10 years. Here comes taking a shot at F/M by copying from Japan. The F/F stories may be soon to follow. Profit?
DreamWorks to make ‘Ghost in the Shell’ in 3-D
http://www.variety.com/VR1117984029.html
If this movie can generate the success Spiderman did, I’d say more Hollywood folks would be willing to roll the dice on F/M F/F movies.
I go out of town and look what happens!
I’m not good at staying interested in research, but I was surprised to note that no one mentioned Jim Cameron in regards to this topic. I know he’s not working the way he used to be, but every one of his films have very strong female leads. I’ve seen Aliens noted, Terminator, but don’t forget True Lies, Titanic, etc., as part of his work.
Anyway, not important because the original scope was Biggest Movies recently, and ol’Jim has been sleeping (until this mo-cap thing he started a year ago) on the job. I think the question that filmmakers should be asking becomes something like “How do I tell a story that will interest the unwashed masses without simply inserting a woman into the role written for a man?” and see what answers we can come up with. It’s less easy than it seems, and movies like Tomb Raider have done it only to limited success (theoretically and financially).
I dig this thread.
> Most XKCDs are from a male perspective (a heteronormative one, at that)
Actually, most of the stick figures are asexual alternate-universe aliens who regularly have or consider consensual union with any and all types of sentient and semisentient life.
And the ones with long hair? They’re not necessarily women.
Remember rule b.99.1?
http://xkcd.com/330/
Actually, those characters were both women (though one was a Twilek with congenital damage.)
…In reality, the point is well taken. I just feel playful.
-F
Does AVP count? It seemed to have a strong female lead as the trekker to take them through the ice caves and what not. Also she battled the Aliens with the Predator, I think that’s a pretty strong lead despite the movie not being all that good.
Uh…Hollywood is making the movies that make them the most money. They have done market research that indicates generally (and there are exceptions) both men AND women moviegoers would rather see leading men in action-hero type roles. That’s all. There is no big sexist conspiracy.
Men tried to do their own version of “The View”, and it failed miserably, becuase men AND women TV watchers generally don’t want to see men in a talky-talk show. I’m a man and you don’t see me bitching about it. I accept what the market will bear, and what it won’t.
I question the heterosexuality of any man who enjoys watching things blow up and people kick ass and does not want to watch hot chicks blow things up and kick ass.
Also, my 10 year old son, who is not particularly a feminist — mostly a gamer and geek — thought Starbuck was the best character on new BSG because “she is the best pilot” when he was 7, and has apropos of nothing declared that there should be more female Lego people. So I also question the belief that boys will not watch things with female main characters. I think this is an attitude that is fed to boys by adults, and that if a story with female main characters is marketed correctly to boys (that is, marketed as “Things blow up! Exciting stuff happens! Awesome martial arts!”, not “The empowering story of a girl who learns how to blow stuff up”), boys will watch it and like it.
So to sum up:
1. heterosexual men should like to watch women kick ass, because it’s hot chicks kicking ass! C’mon, every straight guy I know loves this shit.
2. boys should be okay with children’s movies that contain female main characters as long as the female main characters are cool and get to kick butt.
3. this is not reflected in what movies are actually made.
4. therefore, the industry is either consciously or unconsciously sexist. (Consciously sexist is “Who wold believe in a woman who can kick ass? We’d better make our action hero a *man* with superpowers, because a *man* with superpowers is totally believable.” Unconsciously sexist is “I want to make a movie just like all the other movies out there, except with my little twist on it, a movie that I would have found appealing when I was a boy or a young man” — never thinking “What if my little twist was that the main character is female?” because men just don’t think about women’s issues, and if you’re copying everyone else in a sexist industry that’s what you’re going to get.)
BTW, given that human beings are responsible for product creation, it is not at all unreasonable that a product which would sell like hotcakes if created well and marketed well won’t actually be created, and if created won’t be created well, and if created well won’t be marketed well, because humans are people with biases. In Japan, girls eat up comic books about people with super-powers, and boys love to read comics and watch cartoons about hot women kicking ass. In America, we assume that girls won’t like comic books, so we don’t make them for girls, so girls don’t read them, so we assume the reason we don’t make them is that girls don’t read them. You should *never* assume that the reason no one makes a product is that it won’t make any money; in a conservative industry such as movie-making (I mean conservative as in “not risk taking”, not conservative as in Republican), a new thing that *might* make a ton of money probably won’t be made just because being a new thing,it can’t prove that it *will* make a ton of money.
>>[AHL]What about the opposite? Do narrow definitions of ?what women like? or ?what men are good at? also hurt men and women alike? Funny, why does the tone change simply by moving the genders?
I don’t think the tone does change. Assumptions about “what women like” mean that you get godawful relationship coaches (yes, women too) and pickup artists and what have you going around telling men that they need to put on some sort of act to attract a woman. Assumptions about “what men are good at” means that if they aren’t good at that thing (football, in my experience) they are somehow less of a man (bullshit).
>>Assuming that men and women are stereotyped as exact opposites in all cases is nonsensical and is basic correlation/causation confusion.
I didn’t mean to imply that those/all stereotypes were automatically exact opposites, but I can see that I did. My examples were poorly chosen off the top of my head at some ungodly hour of the morning. Try substituting these ones, again off the top of my head: “women like bad boys,” “women are emotional,” “men like women who like sports,” “men are led around by their dicks.”
But you just made a good couple of posts, AHL, and thanks for replying to mine with a generally kind tone. I appreciate it.
>>[Poore]A few of you have stated this already (though not as bluntly), but there are plenty of good F/M and F/F films out there – they just aren?t huge box office hits. Who cares? They?re good movies. People who aren?t stupid will enjoy them. Stupid people will continue to be stupid. Welcome to reality.
…My first instinct is to say, “very true, very true.” Lots of good indie stuff, especially. But I guess I’d like to believe that if Hollywood gave more chances, budgets, and publicity to good F/M or F/F films, then more people would see them than would otherwise. Some of those people might be “stupid”/unquestioning of ingrained sexism (I think that’s what you were going for), but a lot of people, if given the chance to see a good movie, will see it and like it. Case in point: Juno. Passes the Bechdel-Wallace test with flying colors, and everybody I know, men and women alike, had at least something good to say about it.
I think MY problem with a lot of “women’s movies” is that, um, they are “women’s movies” and not just “movies.” I mean, I like them, but I can only ever watch them when I’m in the mood to think about Issues (which are generally depressing). I’m thinking Mona Lisa Smile here, North Country. I can’t wait ’til we, as a culture, get to the point where a woman can just…be the lead in a movie. Without it being a big deal or creating expectations, a la “chick flicks,” about what that movie’s going to be like.
So yes, I want more River Tams and VI Warshawskis and Junos. I don’t think I’m crazy or a conspiracy theorist or ignorant of the basic facts of life and nature for saying there’s not a lot of well-publicized, high-budget movies about women, but I think it’d be nice if there were, and that they’re not automatically worse than movies about men!
Two guys have already mentioned Descent, which has an all female cast (something I found surprising and quite pleasing, even for a horror flick).
However *cynical hat* there was a lot of rock climbing in the movie – maybe it was just an excuse to look at butts.
[b]Poore Said[/b]
[i]So I ask: why is it so important for a F/M or F/F movie to be popular in order for it to be a good movie?[/i]
Because popular movies have a hand in both reflecting and, more importantly, [i]creating[/i] culture.
It can be the best movie in the world, but if only 12 people ever see it, it has no effect on culture, and so it [i]doesn’t matter[/i] for the purposes Randy is discussing.
….fucking bbcode/html.
Try listing A-list actresses vs. A-list actors. The only A-list actress I know of is Julia Roberts. The problem is that the women needed for female parts are more-or-less replaceable. I haven’t seen the woman in King Kong in anything else, Austin Powers, Jenny in Forrest Gump, Braveheart, etc… Most of these movies just require the woman to be beautiful, and be “obtained”. These requirements can be met by any number of women in Hollywood. It’s nobody’s fault. These are the kinds of stories people pay to go see.
They need to get more Tilda Swinton out there, she’s one of my favorite female leads since Orlando, and she was really great in Michael Clayton, even though she was a supporting actress.
I don’t understand how you drew up this list
Both JUNO and ENCHANTED finished in the top 20 films for 2007 and you have a zero listed under the F/M column?
how are your “20 biggest movies” being chosen? and if you’re choosing them randomly you can find any statistic you want.
also the IMDB statistic is meaningless since IMDB voters are clearly a specific demographic —it’s easy to see a very young male “fanboy” (sorry if that sounds pejorative) aesthetic preference there, and that demo does indeed prefer male stars and male stories.
but you’re right that box office favors the same.
i like how in everyone’s excuses as to how the fact that there are few movies with non-stupid female characters isn’t sexist, the reasonins are in and of themselves…
SEXIST.
kids, when trying to disprove someone else’s point, don’t say something that proves it.
Cadence, just wanted to say “word” to everything you’ve said and if you want to join me in hunting down Julius and kicking his ass, face or any other part of his anatomy, I’m sure we could come up with a decent screenplay after we’ve finished
<Women just don’t kick ass in the real world, so portraying otherwise on-screen fails to engage audiences.
I can’t believe you guys have just let this one pass.
Very few men “kick ass in the real world” in the way portrayed in the movies. Yes, women are physically predisposed to not developing the same sort of musculature that men can, but movie-men are not kicking ass in a realistic way, either (Die Hard, anyone?). It is, of course, hyper-masculine and awesome to watch orgiastic displays of blood and guts and men drenched in sweat as they save a building from terrorists (and poor Bruce Willis’ character wouldn’t even have been there in the first place if his presumptuous wife had just stayed in the kitchen! Preferably barefoot, if not also pregnant, of course), but keep in mind that no single man has ever single-handedly averted mankind’s destruction at the hands of dirty commies. Furthermore, these movies are created with special effects; Bruce Willis’ sweat dampened tee shirt and bloody brow were the products of buckets of water and paint.
So who does kick ass in the real world? Soldiers, maybe. Has anyone informed you? Both men and women may enter the U.S. Army.
What about nurses? Doctors without Borders? Hey, guess what? Both genders are members of those professions.
Rock climbers? One of my favorite people in the world rock climbs in her spare time. (Her. Did you notice?)
Archery? Another friend of mine does that. She’s a pretty good shot.
River Tam has been mentioned multiple times. Why? Because she is just as hardcore in real life as she is in Serenity and Firefly (well, probably minus the psychic powers, but you never know). I don’t know if anything can possibly kick more ass than a ninja-ballerina (literally. I mean, her legs go so high she could even kick the asses of giants).
Your comment, sir, is sexist bullshit. I don’t think I’d like you very much if I met you.
Not all women are hypocritical in this “post-feminist” period, as you put it. I hardly even know where to begin to reply to this remark – but I think that I am not alone among women in as fervently desiring that men recognize me as just as capable as they are of paying for my own dinner, my own movie ticket, opening doors for myself, and walking on my own two legs. Any man that suggests otherwise is likely to get a swift kick to the balls in addition to a stern talking-to.
Women do not need to be coddled. The sooner everyone pulls their heads out of their asses and realizes it, the sooner we have less women like Julian describes in addition to less assholes like Julian who are willing to lump all of the “fairer” sex into that category.
I should have been doing homework right now, but…you were wrong. I had to.
ETA: Sorry, I got your name wrong, Julius.
it wasnt a huge movie.
but i vaguely remember “pretty persuasion” being FF.
god, that was a messed up movie.
well done though, very well done.
not an action movie. or a horror. or even a romance.
“but keep in mind that no single man has ever single-handedly averted mankind’s destruction at the hands of dirty commies.”
Ronald Reagan.
Calm down, it’s just a joke.
This is a very interesting set of comments showing how contentious gender and gender roles are. With both men and women struggling within certain straightjackets.
I was going to try to post something insightful (as if I could) but most of what I wanted to say has been said already in some form by Dauri, KitaC et al. All I can add is another 1 datapoint of personal opinion.
I don’t like either the male or female stereotypes prevalent in US top 20 action movies. For that matter I don’t tend to like the plot in them either nor the fact that I am expected to switch off my brain for 2 hours. If I had to judge the state of the world using only top 20 grossing movies in the US I’d be a very depressed man indeed.
Luckily, this isn’t the world I live in.
One quick think I feel I should mention. Stereotypes are a straightjacket and most of us have been indoctrinated (not quite the right word but *shrug*) to respond to certain questions with certain stock answers. When people are asked to generalise or speculate about things they don’t know enough about they tend to fall back to stereotypes or “everyone knows” style answers (heck find myself doing this as well).
I’m sure that if we steered the discussion towards men or women they know you will get a more nuanced set of responses. I see a variation on this with several “I know my friends and myself are not like this but people in general…”.
hmm, rambled on semi-incoherently and the entire edifice doesn’t hang together properly, ah well, I probably shouldn’t write comments at 2am in the morning after failing to get to sleep.
3.1415926535 8979323846 2643383279 5028841971 6939937510 5820974944 5923078164 0628620899 8628034825 3421170679 8214808651 3282306647 0938446095 5058223172 5359408128 4811174502 8410270193 8521105559 6446229489 5493038196 4428810975 6659334461 2847564823 3786783165 2712019091 4564856692 3460348610 4543266482 1339360726 0249141273 7245870066 0631558817 4881520920 9628292540 9171536436 7892590360 0113305305 4882046652 1384146951 9415116094 3305727036 5759591953 0921861173 8193261179 3105118548 0744623799 6274956735 1885752724 8912279381 8301194912 9833673362 4406566430 8602139494 6395224737 1907021798 6094370277 0539217176 2931767523 8467481846 7669405132 0005681271 4526356082 7785771342 7577896091 7363717872 1468440901 2249534301 4654958537 1050792279 6892589235 4201995611 2129021960 8640344181 5981362977 4771309960 5187072113 4999999837 2978049951 0597317328 1609631859 5024459455 3469083026 4252230825 3344685035 2619311881 7101000313 7838752886 5875332083 8142061717 7669147303
whenever the topic of leading women in films is brought up I usually start imagining hundred and one bad films like tomb raider. All of those films in which female roles simply aren’t created or a best well created. For the million and one Transformers where there is some random chick plopped in to hike up ratings with her bust. Personally these films make me gag and I avoid them but I know many people who don’t. I have many friends who say “Uuuh Doomsday! Lots of mindless violence and explosions and female eye candy, I can’t wait.” I don’t believe there is anything wrong with this, people like simple things. Girls are no exception they a catered to with male eye candy all the time as well and they eat it up just as do the guys.
I think one issue is that it is simply easier to make a simple movie, and the profit ratio is good. so we will always have those typical action Rambo movies, or sex/action Tomb Raider movies that don’t paint women in a strong light.
Now ignoring that market and focusing on movies that actually try to achieve something more I’d say there is a clear lack of female lead films. I believe it has something to do with the lack of well known talented female writers, directors, etc. It is very difficult to portray a sex that you simply do not belong to. Then again as mentioned before it was only 45 years ago that the feminine mystique was written. Hopefully with some time and progress there will be an equal amount of Shawshank Redemptions as there is Amelie.
P.S. yes I know Amelie has a male director and is not an American film but for the point of a well made film with a strong developed female lead it came to mind quickly and surely deserves it.
Pingback: : : untitled : : » Blog Archive » Recent Links of Interest
Quick final addition:
Would I be happy if restricted to a stereotypical (say US 50s or Japan 90s) male gender role? No
Would I be happy if restricted to a stereotypical (say US 50s or Japan 90s) female gender role? No
Do I treat men and women the same way? No, due to potential of certain things happening with a woman which I am not interested in pursuing with men it would be a barefaced lie if I stated otherwise.
Are women inherently more competent than men at certain things or vice-versa? How the heck should I know and what qualifies me to make any statement on this? I know plenty of both men and women who are far better at certain tasks than me andI a better at certain tasks than other men and women.
Are men more successful than women in today’s society? Awkward question. One observation I would make is that while men are more likely to be at the top of the heap these days they are also more likely to be at the bottom of the heap as well (look at prisoner numbers for example). meh I wish I still had an Athens login, there were several papers that came up on Google which might (or might not) have made me able to state more substance.
Tomb Raider is a different case because Lara Croft wasn’t exactly created to be a realistic character in her own right. Croft exists because the game developers realized guys were tired of staring at other guys all day while playing games and so gave them a big pair of boobs to stare at instead.
“I can’t believe you guys have just let this one pass.”
Homelesshobbit: I can’t believe you didn’t read the million and one comments which already rebutted Julius before you added your own.
to C. D. Boch:
We’re talking about male role models in films, which may be a different issue from male role models in academia – although that difference in itself is part of the problem. If at the high school level boys are losing interest in their studies, part of it may be because movies are portraying the scientist/academic figure in a negative light. We ARE seeing more films where the “boffin” role is filled by a woman, but unfortunately in many of them it’s a throwaway part where she just shows up, spouts some jargon, and the men go off and do the asskicking.
Although I don’t really see much of this myself, since the area I’m in (life sciences) seems to be pretty well balanced genderwise in the USA.
I wasn’t implying tomb raider was to be a realistic character simply an example of the genre of movies that uses big boobs as the main box office draw, for exactly the reason you stated.
The big boob appeal isn’t really relative to the realism of the character they are attached to. (The realism of the boobs however…)
Pan’s Labyrinth had three female leads, being the girl (the protagonist), her pregnant mother that she was saving, and the general’s servant, who was secretly aiding the counterrevolutionaries, including her brother. Perhaps it wasn’t listed because it is a foreign film?
Not sure if this was mentioned before, as I dont have time to read all 300+ comments, but that chick from Run Lola Run is named Franke Potente (she dated Elijah Wood interestingly enough, but moving along), and here’s some fun facts
She was also in another movie by the same director called The Warrior and the Princess (which I like better than RLR, but I digress) and she played more or less the damsel love interest of Benno Furman, though I’m not sure if she was billed first or not.
More interestingly she played the love interest of Jason Bourne in the Bourne Identity. Infact, I don’t think she’s played a leading role in any American made film.
(btw, another good f/f, Mulhollund Drive, though I dont think anyone GOT that movie)
As for the glass ceiling in Hollywood, its ridiculous! The reason no one believe that women can act is because VERY few women are viewed as legitimate actresses until they’re old. They aren’t given an opportunity to BE good actresses, because there are never any parts written for them. If you look at many of the Oscar nominees for best actress and supporting actress, its almost always either a woman older than 40 or a prepubescent girl.
Pingback: Horse be staring at that cart like WTF you’re in my way « Fugitivus
Um… what about Deathpoof? That was a kickass movie. Resident Evil? Heroes (TV show) I think there are definitely movies with female heroes. Do they do well or not, that depends on the audience.
Its also important to note that “kickass women” are different from “kickass men”. Women heroes are always seen as sexy because they can kick ass when male heroes are just serious brutes.
I mean you can replace Stallone or Schwarzenegger with buff women but many men would agree that they’d prefer a clean cut sexy woman hero versus a buff brute woman hero. I think the male and female counterpart heroes are not necessarily in the same genre and so that table is not valid.
YOU’RE SO RIGHT. Also, I really got into the idea of a “River Tam Beats Up Everyone” movie.
Also, I can see what Dilip is saying, but that’s not really the point. The point is that, sexy or not, there are squillions of male-lead movies and two female-lead movies. Now, I’m a heterosexual female, so I love seeing flicks like 300 and Die Hard 4, because I get my semi-naked-man kicks as well as my action needs fulfilled. But still, Joss, get onto that River Tam action flick!
300 is still my favourite movie, though. I am pro-male nudity!
>>Dilip: “I mean you can replace Stallone or Schwarzenegger with buff women but many men would agree that they’d prefer a clean cut sexy woman hero versus a buff brute woman hero.”
Uh… You know, I’m not sure there are really any women in my generation/age group (18-25) that would want to see Stallone or Schwarzenegger in anything. Especially if they take their shirts off -shudder-. If you haven’t noticed, men like Matt Damon, Bruce Willis, The Rock, Sean William Scott, Keanu Reeves (enh), and Will Smith are getting all the action roles these days (throw outs to George Clooney and Brad Pitt). Why? Because they’re usually *witty/intelligent,* relatively hot (take or leave Matt and Keanu), and can act/pull off the roles convincingly. Quite unlike anything Stallone or Mr. Universe could ever hope to achieve, in my opinion. Women like their eye candy, too, we just have higher standards than men sometimes. ^_^
Also, my thought on Tomb Raider? Bad movie, great star/role. Honestly, if I were to accept anyone as my role model, it’d be Lara Croft. 10 reasons why:
She likes playing games with men when they’re on an equal playing field.
1) She kicks ass, literally.
2) She’s smart and has a valuable influence on society.
3) Even though she’s rich, she still does stuff with her life (anthropology/archeology).
4) She’s acts like a real woman, in that she lets herself cry when something upsets her, but doesn’t let it interfere with what she’s doing. She can damn well wait until afterwards.
5) She doesn’t let her emotions sabotage her (Tricked by my love interest gone bad? Cry while I watch him die… I’m not going to save him from himself. And I’m certainly not going to sacrifice myself to be with him.).
6) She’s rich; she has/rides horses; she has a mansion with a suspension swing like thing in the foyer; she has guns and bows and other relatively awesome projectile weapons.
7) She fights robots. For fun. (Who the hell wouldn’t rather do that than go to the gym???)
9) She’s confident and sexy, but still kind, compassionate, and friendly.
10) Her library is GIGANTIC. And she _reads_ the books in it. -lust- (after the library, chill.)
For all that the movies were pretty sub-par, I still feel like they did MASSIVE justice to Lady Croft in not weakening her unduly. Really, she did have some weak moments, but who doesn’t? Expecting her to be 100% strong/all-knowing is unrealistic… How many Bond girls backstab him (well, obviously not literally… Bond’s too good to be stabbed in the back, most of the time)? We don’t expect the male action roles to be 100% invulnerable, desiring that of Croft is unfair.
Also: River Tam’s appeal is not that she’s a female kicking ass. She alone manages to exude the closest thing to gender-neutral that you will see in Hollywood. I’m not saying this is her appeal as an actress. But her ability to seem wholly focused on a single thing or to be almost completely unaware and aware simultaneously is simply fascinating. Zoe was a much better strong female role, to the point (almost) of wearing the pants in the marriage without being absolutely fucking obnoxious about it (Everybody Loves Raymond, anyone?). Kaylee was just charming any way you look at it; not everyone’s perfect.
Anyway… There’s my little bits of commentary on two semi-popular media undertakings. Cheers.
(When rambling is my Captcha… How appropriate.)
Lola rennt! I’m not the on;y crazy one for knowing about the best german movie ever!
I always thought the music video for Yellowcard’s “Ocean Avenue” was a pretty amusing little rip-off of Run Lola Run.
So, what category does “The Parent Trap” fall into. Its a female/female, however, both women are the same woman.
I believe parent trap falls in the genre of films that must not be named
I know this discussion probably isn’t being looked at anymore but how can you forget Mean Girls and Saved, both hilariously funny movies. Now that I think about it though, whenever I mention that to people they always look at me funny or make fun of me.
There’s a few others too that fall a little lower on the list. Stick it was a mostly female cast as was Ice Princess, not exactly blockbuster movies but they both earned about a 6/10 on IMDB.
There is a clear bias towards male leading characters but none of these center around mother daughter relationships and none are horror; just throwing it out there.
The issue of films starring women in a complicated issue. It’s great to try and count films with two female leads, but keep in mind there are so few films with one female lead so two is pushing it. Here are some statistics that I’ve compiled on the issue:
• In 2006, only 3 movies in the top 50 starred or were focused on women. (EW)
• In 2006, less than a dozen of the 307 films eligible for an Oscar were women driven (EW).
• In 2007, only 5 of the top 50 films starred or were focused on women.
• Of the 150 films nominated for best picture from 1977-2006, only 5.5 were directed by women (USC).
• Of the 6,833 single speaking characters in the film nominated for best picture from 1977-2006 only 27.3% were females. (USC)
• In 2007, women only comprised 15% of all directors, executive producers, writers, cinematographers, and editors working on the top 250 grossing films (San Diego State)
It’s time to have a real conversation of the lack of roles and the lack of film written by and directed by women because the numbers seem to be getting sadder and sadder.
For more on issues related to women and hollywood please check out my site here: http://womenandhollywood.blogspot.com/
Thanks
Melissa
Wow, Melissa, interesting how those numbers sound similar to percentages from the video game and card game industries.
An interesting point using random unreliable polls: Votes from females on IMDb
http://imdb.com/chart/female
Here, Amelie is 9 and Silence of the Lambs is 13, where they show up at 49 and 24, respectively, on the male poll.
Also, just for laughs but also to make a point, check out the Bottom 10 movies of both. Atleast all genders can unite in hating Paris Hilton, but the male list shows mostly failures in the M/F and F/* genres.
So the question is, are there more male viewers of movies? Do men spend more at the theaters than women? I would have thought no, but if this is how the tastes (currently) swing, then it’d be hard to convince people to make F/* movies. Assuming money-making as a large factor, it’s clear why most would avoid a bottom line outlook that starts with a disadvantage.
But I still think there’s going to be change. Even the ever present “sex sells” concept isn’t as efficient in Hollywood as it could be. We can’t seem to find the right balance for sexy fanservice in America, nor are risking to find it, so main female characters mostly are unbelievably over-the-top promiscuous, or unbelievably lame.
It’s just a matter of time before someone hits the right formula for the US.
I find this to be really interesting…and go river tam!!!
http://www.salient.org.nz/arts/film/the-top-10-female-movie-heroes (list of the top female movie heroes (go River Tam, but also, The Bride from Kill Bill)
Presumably you need a male and female lead, otherwise the two leads just don’t connect with each other.
Studios are a commercial business- they spend a lot of money, they want low risk features that will probably profit. They’re not going to risk losing a ton of profit to gradually shift our cultural perceptions of gender roles, nor should they. They’re a business. You don’t go into a nail salon and rant about how they should be catering to men so that our culture is more comfortable with manicured men. It’s a business, it looks at trends to make money, it’s not their responsibility to challenge the established norm.
We need to teach gender equality, and all real world values, at a more personal level than the theater. A blog discussion is a good place to educate ourselves about other views, but not to affect change.
Women take everything so personally.
>>>and it’s pretty clear that River Tam (and not Captain Mal or some other character) is the main character in Serenity,
In Serenity, Malcolm Reynolds is absolutely the lead character, with backup from his diverse and wacky crew.
River Tam is the Football.
The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media works to get more females and more varied portrayals of both female and male characters into movies, TV, and other media aimed at kids 11 and under. Check out our research at http://www.thegeenadavisinstitute.org/research.php .
I am in the process of posting research (under Resources on that page) by Dr. Stacy Smith of USC’s Annenberg School for Communication on gender and Academy Award winners. Shoot me an email and I’ll send you a copy!