Independent Women

[sinkwriter]

I was just reading this article by Dodai Stewart over on Jezebel.com, entitled "Film Schooled: The Truth About Women and Hollywood..." and it got me to thinking.

(I know. Dangerous, so dangerous.)

According to this article, movie executives don't seem to think there's a place for actresses over a certain age. (Heaven forbid there be films involving women over 30.) I quote: "What movie would you make for them?" asks our former studio chief. "They can't date anymore, they're all mothers. After a while, trying to extract the same story from the same tropes gets old."

Another quote: "These actresses? They're fucked. Good luck to Kate [Hudson] and Reese [Witherspoon]. When Cameron [Diaz] was getting cold, she bet on herself, took just a million dollars on Bad Teacher. But even that's not a romantic comedy. The mid-budget studio film -- what used to be the sweet spot for romantic comedy -- is getting painfully squeezed."

I don't deny that romantic comedies are so clichéd that it's tough to find a fresh new story in that avenue. But to say that women who are over 20-something and have personal lives and kids at home can't have interesting roles and that the only thing out there for women is a rom-com and once they're too old or already 'been there, done that' for that kind of role that they're done? That there's nothing for them? They're too 'old' for their characters to 'date'?

Is that the only type of role women are supposed to fill?

That's bullshit.

And why don't we see these things said about men? Tom Hanks has done rom-coms (Splash, You've Got Mail), and he has kids and a family, but he's still got plenty of roles available to him. He's not 'fucked.' He's not unable to 'date' in films. (And don't give me that Tom Hanks is talented and/or versatile, and these women aren't. Reese Witherspoon has won an Oscar too, and she's played some terrific roles, like in Walk The Line and Election.)

I just eyeroll the attitudes of movie executives in Hollywood. Isn't there anyone out there who's interested in building a studio that steps outside the box and offers stories and roles for men and for women that don't force them into stereotypes?

One former studio chief says this: "I think ... all the women in [Kate Hudson's] age group -- I would even include Reese Witherspoon -- need roles tailored for them and that those kinds of movies are not being written."

Why aren't they being written? If statistics show that women buy 50% of all movie tickets, why don't we see more films written with female roles in mind?

What makes a 'female role'? So, let me get this straight: men can play anything but women are relegated to playing mothers or romantic partners, and that's it? That's the extent of their stories to be told? (Unless, of course, they're terrorized victims, of physical or emotional abuse of some sort, needing to be saved by the leading male character. That seems to be the other cliché to be played by women.) And why do they assume that the only thing women want to see are romantic comedies?

Maybe new stories need to be written. And then made by smart, brave people willing to take chances.

I ask you, my dear LJ friends, what types of rich, in-depth, kick-ass stories would you like to see made with female characters? What would make you spend your hard-earned dollars in the theatre or to check out a new TV show? What would make you go, 'Wow, that looks interesting, I totally want to see that'?

Comments

[bardsmaid.livejournal.com]

I totally agree with your sentiments here. Why are men human beings with varied roles and stories, but women can only serve for romance or to be saved by male characters? Remember back when Good female characters running from danger invariably tripped and had to be saved/helped by a male character? At least that doesn't happen with any regularity anymore. Sheesh.

My mind isn't currently in the right mode to think up interesting types of stories, but in terms of movies already done, how about Driving Miss Daisy? Old woman, minority man, and a friendship story, not a romance, but it was great, and everyone loved it. Of course, this is just the type of movie stereotyped movie execs (and that needs to be qualified as male move execs) wouldn't give a chance to anymore. It's like the way TV has gone. Nobody wants to take a chance on anything thew; they only want to hand out more of what's already selling, which is a recipe for creative starvation (both on the producing and consuming ends.) What network these days would give something like XF a chance?

Okay, enough grousing for me. Time to switch gears before I lose my creative flow. I'm actually in the middle of starting to write something, and the title has something to do with the word 'yellow'. =:^o

[bardsmaid.livejournal.com]

Oops, sorry about the typos. For some reason I forgot to proofread.

[ladymidath.livejournal.com]

Sad to think that women still have a use by date.
There does not seem to be any strong roles for
women at all.

[leucocrystal]

Nothing new for Hollywood, of course. And minority women? Roles that aren't focused on straight, cis-gendered characters? Forget it. (Look at Aaron Sorkin. He's a tremendous misogynist, and yet he steamrolled critics and the box office - and nearly the Oscars, too - with The Social Network. I could write reams about all the things about that film that piss me off, but let's just say I'm not at all surprised the female characters - those that weren't just male-gaze objects - in it were generally so poorly written and treated. Also, they cast a non-Indian actor, since apparently there are none of those out there looking for work, to play an Indian character. In a story loosely based on real life. /rant)

Anyway, I hate to say so, but generally speaking, I can't have much hope for progressiveness in Hollywood. They've always been far too conservative for that (further illustrated in how they respond to online piracy and the sinking of their incredibly outdated business model, much like record companies do), and change seems VERY slow going. Hell, look at TV! Remember all the fantastic (successful) sitcoms there once were focused on non-white families a couple decades ago? You won't find those today. If anything, we're almost moving backwards.

As to women, we're pretty screwed still, too. Look at the American (totally unnecessary) remake of Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. (I'm not a fan of those books, but that's neither here nor there. The point is that the American film totally sexualizes the character of Lisbeth Salander, which is totally beside the point of her character.) I don't know what women have to do to get better opportunities, or even more opportunities in general, but generally it seems we're the only ones who care that it's even a problem. And that's not new either, but it still makes me sad.

P.S. Jezebel is a site that's pulled some pretty shady stunts themselves, but every now and then they do hit the mark. That said, I vastly prefer the videos from Feminist Frequency, and would highly recommend them.

[krazykitkat.livejournal.com]

There were much better film roles for women in 1930/40s. The wonderful "fast talking dames". Good short article here. I have the book, need to dig it out.

I think the best roles for women are in smaller independent films and tv. In terms of tv shows i need an amazing woman to really become involved.