Is Hollywood Short of Female Power?
Filed under: Executive shifts, Newsstand, Politics
Where is the modern woman? A number of times of the last few years, I've asked friends to list films that center on modern, successful working women where floofy romance is the center of the plot. While I refuse to drown in the sappy romcom or family fare, I always have to have my blind eye ready when I want to watch something that in some way either reflects my life, or inspires me to push forward. I've ignored the outfits and silliness of Sex and the City, the sexual dysfunction of Laurel Canyon and just how old 9 to 5 is.Now, the New York Times has put out an article about Hollywood's Shortage of Female Power. I click on the link, expecting something similar to what I typed above, but that's not what I got. Perhaps it is best summed up with this: "While Hollywood has not stopped making films appealing to women and girls, as evidenced by recent and coming releases like Music and Lyrics, Nancy Drew and The Nanny Diaries, women here worry that the future will not be so bright." While I don't think I could knock the ever-tough Drew, since I grew up reading about her, that has to be one of the most reductive thoughts that I've read in a while. By now I'd think that women have come far enough to be more than a demographic itching for light romance and childcare. Yes, "female power" is lessening behind the scenes as a number of top, female studio heads like Gail Berman have left their positions. However, that's not synonymous with "female" floofyness.
But that's all that the Times discussion is based on. Another quote has producer Lindsay Doran saying: "You don't see companies saying, 'More than half of this population is women, we should design a slate to come up with movies like The Break-Up and The Devil Wears Prada.'" Maybe that's because women are more than flipping crazy ex-girlfriends or girls starving their already-thin frame to fit into the latest fashions? Could it be, perchance, that women want films that give them more credit? Give us balance, people!
SDCC Panel: Robert Rodriguez's 'Red Sonja'
Review: The X-Files: I Want To Believe
Live from SDCC: Preview Night Gallery!
Live from SDCC: Time to Get Our Con On!
Discuss: Wednesday is the New Friday
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg){kind=spacer}
_thumbnail.jpg "Watchmen Storyboards")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-27-2007 @ 5:19PM
Cath said...
Certainly there is no dearth of women in film school or the professions that lead to studio gigs. And people who complain that Hollywood puts out the same sexist crap, I note that student and indie films are no different. Recently, I went to an audition for a student film whose writer/director was a woman. The story was about the strife between a man and his son, with the wife an ancillary and undefined character. The writer/director said she intended to write about women and have strong women characters but didn't know how to go about it. But she was no different from the rest: almost all of the casting notices include secondary characters that could be gender neutral (doctors, lawyers, and the like) but are invariably seeking men. Nor are they open when you ask if they would consider a woman.
And yet you see more kick-ass female roles (though they still require the actress to be "hot") than in the past, and certainly women are increasingly in other professions. Perhaps we are simply in the doldrums until the next big paradigm shift.
Reply
4-27-2007 @ 5:26PM
bgdc said...
Nancy Drew = 1970s version of female characters. After 3 years of Veronica Mars (raped, best friend killed, ostracized, abandoned by drunk mother), Drew just seems too clean, wholesome and from a bygone era.
Reply
4-27-2007 @ 5:27PM
bgdc said...
BTW, The Break-up wasn't crazy and was one of the better films I've seen regarding relationships. Thank god for once hollywood didn't win and the couple didn't get back together. i wanted to dance for joy when it was crystal clear that relationship would never be repaired.
Reply
4-27-2007 @ 7:48PM
Aeb said...
I often think people who bemoan the lack of 'women's' films do so much more to damage and marginalize the image of modern women than the industry ever could. I mean, it's clear that women are underrepresented in the movie industry, in every area from crew to salary to leading roles. But when the author of the NY Times article cites "Nancy Drew" as one of the bright lights in the future of women in film and "Music and Lyrics" as proudly upholding the cause, something's a little wrong. If we are supposed to assume that films for women are
only fluffy romcoms, not only are we wrong, as women are clearly
voicing their dissent through the box office, but it's pretty
offensive to women, the implication being that there's something
wrong with us loving horror, action, suspense, and slapstick. Are
these all movies for men?
Reply
4-30-2007 @ 1:09PM
Kevin said...
I find the claim that the movie industry is sexist because it thinks that RomComs etc. are just for a women a little naive. That would imply that women are short changed when compared to men. However, the same thing is done to men when an action movie comes out. It implies that women want romance and men want mindless action. Both statements can be said to be sexist, and both are, but to say that the industry is only being sexist to women ignores the parallel attitude given towards "guys" films. The problem is that the attitudes seem to be true. RomComs do see a vast majority of their audience coming from the female gender, whereas as action movies gain blockbuster status by appealing to men. So while you may be upset about the statements it would seem that the belief behind them holds up under scrutiny.
Reply