Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

The Twilight Legacy: How It's Changing Cinema

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Feedback] >> Empire Online >> The Twilight Legacy: How It's Changing Cinema Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The Twilight Legacy: How It's Changing Cinema - 12/11/2012 8:32:55 PM   
Empire Admin

 

Posts: 28903
Joined: 29/6/2005
Post your comments on this article
Post #: 1
Never thought of it like that - 12/11/2012 8:32:55 PM   
Brianfantana

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 3/5/2012
I can't say that I've seen Twilight, or wanted to, but I don't hate it, and have know problem with people who are fans of the franchise. I've never thought of Twilight shaping cinema, but it does seem to be the first of a new type of film. And if The Hunger Games movies are a by product of the Twilight films, well then I say hurrah for Twilight.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 2
Interesting Article - 12/11/2012 8:35:54 PM   
kisswithatear

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 10/9/2009
I liked it! But there is one thing I gotta contend with. If Twilight is going to create a new barrage of films aimed at female audiences can I just be worried that Twilight offers harmful and strange ideals for young women looking towards relationships. Same applies to 50 Shades. This is not a new argument and if you look online there are plenty of essays and arguments contending the central themes around these books which are that women will fall for the wrong guy who controls them, makes them feel like crap and then marry them and have really odd damaging sex with them. It would also help if the main female characters were anything but ciphers or Mary-Sues but they're not.

As far as impressive female characters go, that can inspire just as Harry Potter did (or even Hermione) it would be the Katniss Everdeen character from Hunger Games who has drive, determination but also a fragile disposition. What makes her so unique is that she is indeed a flawed but interesting character with drive and not one that succumbs to her hormones when it comes to men. She is her own person and the men in her life are not the centre of it.

What I hope Hollywood recognises in creating new films aimed at women is that these are of the sorts of characters that are important and near necessary to the cultural development of young girls. There aren't many role models for girls on TV or in cinema because as you say they're all a cipher or a trope concerning the male dominated populous. More importantly if they are more than that they are only concerned with which man they are going to get and how to make them happy (even if it means causing them deep sadness).

I just feel these books have a skewed perspective on what women want and what they are all like. I know it's complex and a demographic is a demographic only, its an idea of what people want not what everyone needs. These are just the thoughts I had. And I'd be much happier seeing films about women doing basically what men do

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 3
Speculation - 12/11/2012 10:27:21 PM   
btaylor25

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 15/5/2011
I strongly disagree with this article. I think it is patronising to assume that pre Twilight, women had next to no pioneering strength within film/tv. Ripley? Buffy? The Bride? Sarah Connor? Clarice Starling?! The list goes on.

Patronising and insulting to be honest. Twilight does not empower women. It works in the same way that 50 Shades of Grey does, despite what crowds of randy women claim. As sexually liberated as people think 50 Shades is, it is about a woman who willingly makes herself a contractual slave to a man. Twilight, is about a simpering teenager who jumps back and forth between pretty boy vampires and werewolves before waiting hand on foot on the decisions of the former before getting married at a young age, having unprotected sex (on her first time!) and having a baby before giving into the lure of the vampire cult. It sets a bad example ridiculously impressionable girls.

In terms of the "wave" it apparently makes, NO, I'm sorry but that's just making up patterns. For as long as there are strong, creative and fair minded people working within the industry, there will always be a voice for women.

If you want to hold a book adaptation franchise up in esteem, The Hunger Games is the way to go. Katniss Everdeen would mop the floor with Bella Swan. Strong, independent and selfless. The sooner Bella and co disappear into obscurity, the better. The same goes for 50 Shades of Shite.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 4
RE: Speculation - 13/11/2012 8:50:21 AM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3527
Joined: 15/9/2005
Hi Btaylor25,

If you actually read the article, you'll see that nowhere do I suggest that Twilight ITSELF is a strong representation of women onscreen or the model to go by (actually I think Kristen Stewart's Bella is a stronger character than she's given credit for but that's another discussion). The entire article discusses Twilight as a phenomenon, and the sad fact is that Ripley et al (and in fact if you're discussing strong women in cinema history, you'll need to go back to Davis, Crawford, Garbo and Hepburn to convince me, as those heroines you list are very much the exception and not the rule) did NOT prove a replicable model for box-office success. Twilight appears like it might, and has in any case woken studios up to a new audience in a way that Ripley and Clarice etc did not.

Your reading of both Twilight and 50 Shades seems, well, like you haven't read either. In 50 Shades, for all its MANY flaws, she does not sign the damn contract. Read the 50 Shades link in the article for my views on that. In Twilight, she is at least as much a force on Edward's decisions as he is on hers, and I am not clear why you're worried about girls getting mixed up in vampire cults since a) surely as a feminist you don't think your fellows are that stupid and b) there's no such thing as vampires.

My argument in this piece is, essentially, that The Hunger Games would not have been made as a film franchise without Twilight. If you love Katniss - and I certainly do - you have Bella to thank, like it or not.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to btaylor25)
Post #: 5
RE: Interesting Article - 13/11/2012 8:55:30 AM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3527
Joined: 15/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: kisswithatear

I liked it! But there is one thing I gotta contend with. If Twilight is going to create a new barrage of films aimed at female audiences can I just be worried that Twilight offers harmful and strange ideals for young women looking towards relationships. Same applies to 50 Shades. This is not a new argument and if you look online there are plenty of essays and arguments contending the central themes around these books which are that women will fall for the wrong guy who controls them, makes them feel like crap and then marry them and have really odd damaging sex with them. It would also help if the main female characters were anything but ciphers or Mary-Sues but they're not.

As far as impressive female characters go, that can inspire just as Harry Potter did (or even Hermione) it would be the Katniss Everdeen character from Hunger Games who has drive, determination but also a fragile disposition. What makes her so unique is that she is indeed a flawed but interesting character with drive and not one that succumbs to her hormones when it comes to men. She is her own person and the men in her life are not the centre of it.

What I hope Hollywood recognises in creating new films aimed at women is that these are of the sorts of characters that are important and near necessary to the cultural development of young girls. There aren't many role models for girls on TV or in cinema because as you say they're all a cipher or a trope concerning the male dominated populous. More importantly if they are more than that they are only concerned with which man they are going to get and how to make them happy (even if it means causing them deep sadness).

I just feel these books have a skewed perspective on what women want and what they are all like. I know it's complex and a demographic is a demographic only, its an idea of what people want not what everyone needs. These are just the thoughts I had. And I'd be much happier seeing films about women doing basically what men do


As I hoped I'd made clear in the article - but apparently not - Twilight's successors won't do well because they tell the same story but because they tell different ones aimed at the same audience. Hence Hunger Games' importance, because it brought in the same audience while telling a very different story, and I agree with you on all of that about Katniss (although I don't think there's anything inherently "harmful" about dealing with female sexuality on the page either)

I think stories of Twilight's "harmfulness" (and indeed 50 Shades) are sort of nonsense, in fact. Have a bit of faith in your fellow women's ability to know fantasy from reality. Men don't actually behave like James Bond just because they went to see Skyfall, and it's a rather patronising and patriarchal way of thinking to suggest that girls can't tell the difference between Edward and some bloke from their local school.

Anyway, that's not the point of this piece. I'm not arguing that Twilight's the best thing ever (read it again and see), just that its effects may be beneficial to women in cinema simply because of its success.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to kisswithatear)
Post #: 6
RE: Interesting Article - 13/11/2012 10:00:19 AM   
elab49


Posts: 54430
Joined: 1/10/2005
I think the problem generally is the issue of 'good films'. Games may not make good movies, although there might be the occasional 'enjoyable bad one'!, but many of the films mentioned in this aren't even 'enjoyable bad ones'. Harking back to your excellent piece on the baffling defences of Transformers 2, shouldn't the hope be for decent films not just female led ones? It didn't happen post-Mamma Mia, no matter the number of articles offering that up as a defence for that particular piece of tripe. And the male audience going to good female led films is old news - Aliens. I'd rather give a female relative a lump of coal for Xmas than most of that tosh.

I think Twilight's dubious themes remain a valid topic for discussion although I agree, and hope, the interp that it won't have an influence is true ( the new phrase 'slut-shaming' is simply depressing as was the ridiculous behaviour of those who couldn't separate a character from a person).  I'd still prefer that a book young girls are obsessed by wasn't trying to pass on those messages though. But I'm sure those who became obsessed with the Firth-Darcy went on to form realistic real-life relationships. so maybe from the audience side it's just Twilight was the latest to hang those fantasies on (and Meyer's dreadful writing and dodgy attitudes have no real effect).




< Message edited by elab49 -- 18/11/2012 3:16:53 PM >


_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 7
RE: Interesting Article - 13/11/2012 10:05:47 AM   
kisswithatear

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 10/9/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: Helen OHara


quote:

ORIGINAL: kisswithatear

I liked it! But there is one thing I gotta contend with. If Twilight is going to create a new barrage of films aimed at female audiences can I just be worried that Twilight offers harmful and strange ideals for young women looking towards relationships. Same applies to 50 Shades. This is not a new argument and if you look online there are plenty of essays and arguments contending the central themes around these books which are that women will fall for the wrong guy who controls them, makes them feel like crap and then marry them and have really odd damaging sex with them. It would also help if the main female characters were anything but ciphers or Mary-Sues but they're not.

As far as impressive female characters go, that can inspire just as Harry Potter did (or even Hermione) it would be the Katniss Everdeen character from Hunger Games who has drive, determination but also a fragile disposition. What makes her so unique is that she is indeed a flawed but interesting character with drive and not one that succumbs to her hormones when it comes to men. She is her own person and the men in her life are not the centre of it.

What I hope Hollywood recognises in creating new films aimed at women is that these are of the sorts of characters that are important and near necessary to the cultural development of young girls. There aren't many role models for girls on TV or in cinema because as you say they're all a cipher or a trope concerning the male dominated populous. More importantly if they are more than that they are only concerned with which man they are going to get and how to make them happy (even if it means causing them deep sadness).

I just feel these books have a skewed perspective on what women want and what they are all like. I know it's complex and a demographic is a demographic only, its an idea of what people want not what everyone needs. These are just the thoughts I had. And I'd be much happier seeing films about women doing basically what men do


As I hoped I'd made clear in the article - but apparently not - Twilight's successors won't do well because they tell the same story but because they tell different ones aimed at the same audience. Hence Hunger Games' importance, because it brought in the same audience while telling a very different story, and I agree with you on all of that about Katniss (although I don't think there's anything inherently "harmful" about dealing with female sexuality on the page either)

I think stories of Twilight's "harmfulness" (and indeed 50 Shades) are sort of nonsense, in fact. Have a bit of faith in your fellow women's ability to know fantasy from reality. Men don't actually behave like James Bond just because they went to see Skyfall, and it's a rather patronising and patriarchal way of thinking to suggest that girls can't tell the difference between Edward and some bloke from their local school.

Anyway, that's not the point of this piece. I'm not arguing that Twilight's the best thing ever (read it again and see), just that its effects may be beneficial to women in cinema simply because of its success.


I did read both your articles on Twilight and 50 Shades and their central themes and how women and young girls are reacting to them. And you're right that I should give the benefit of the doubt. Women are assertive enough to acknowledge that this is all fiction, that these ideas are not fact and that at the end of the day it's all for the benefit of entertainment,

I did rant quite a lot more to the end of my comment but I think it got cut off. I went on to say things like, if it benefits cinema then it's positive, and no one I knows actually pays attention to the themes of Twilight just enjoy the story. I actually ended on a conclusively positive note but oh well... I do agree with your statements. But I also wished to add my opinion on the shade of this impact. I personally find the statements these books make damaging but I look deeply into them. I'm not saying that other people don't, clearly they do as a local feminist organisation wanted to burn 50 Shades (they didnt but that was an interpretation!), but I just feel that personally they give skewed impression of what maturity and adulthood mean and what relationships can be.

I also mentioned, before I was cut off, that this is positive because it means if the market is open that film makers can indeed develop these ideas into something more free and different. A unique women's film that can be appealing to men because it allows for a fully fleshed out woman lead who cares about her femininity but also has aims and desires that can relate to anyone personally. That's what I'm excited for. Equality. Films where female characters are treated in a similar fashion to male ones, the ones where they can do whatever the hell they please, it's realistic and most importantly no one cares. The day when these articles, as positive and good as they are, are no longer necessary because it's actually happening! Where cinema has evolved and everyone is welcome. Any step towards that I'm for (and I actually liked the first Twilight film... It was ... good!).

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 8
RE: Interesting Article - 13/11/2012 10:16:34 AM   
elab49


Posts: 54430
Joined: 1/10/2005
With that in mind I'd go back to the good/bad argument. One interesting inclusion might be Salt where the female lead was originally a male one. While it might be a key plank in a discussion of a female character being treated just as a male would, it's such a poor film it'd probably be dismissed as you head back to the drawing board. 

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to kisswithatear)
Post #: 9
RE: Interesting Article - 13/11/2012 12:22:12 PM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3527
Joined: 15/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: kisswithatear
I did read both your articles on Twilight and 50 Shades and their central themes and how women and young girls are reacting to them. And you're right that I should give the benefit of the doubt. Women are assertive enough to acknowledge that this is all fiction, that these ideas are not fact and that at the end of the day it's all for the benefit of entertainment,

I did rant quite a lot more to the end of my comment but I think it got cut off. I went on to say things like, if it benefits cinema then it's positive, and no one I knows actually pays attention to the themes of Twilight just enjoy the story. I actually ended on a conclusively positive note but oh well... I do agree with your statements. But I also wished to add my opinion on the shade of this impact. I personally find the statements these books make damaging but I look deeply into them. I'm not saying that other people don't, clearly they do as a local feminist organisation wanted to burn 50 Shades (they didnt but that was an interpretation!), but I just feel that personally they give skewed impression of what maturity and adulthood mean and what relationships can be.

I also mentioned, before I was cut off, that this is positive because it means if the market is open that film makers can indeed develop these ideas into something more free and different. A unique women's film that can be appealing to men because it allows for a fully fleshed out woman lead who cares about her femininity but also has aims and desires that can relate to anyone personally. That's what I'm excited for. Equality. Films where female characters are treated in a similar fashion to male ones, the ones where they can do whatever the hell they please, it's realistic and most importantly no one cares. The day when these articles, as positive and good as they are, are no longer necessary because it's actually happening! Where cinema has evolved and everyone is welcome. Any step towards that I'm for (and I actually liked the first Twilight film... It was ... good!).


Totally agree with all of that. Up with equality! Hasta la victoria siempre!

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to kisswithatear)
Post #: 10
The Joss Whedon effect - 13/11/2012 2:45:58 PM   
rwoo

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 14/7/2008
I'm not overly qualified to comment on the piece, having avoided Twilight like the plague and not recognising many of the wave-riding series coming thereafter, but I'd say that the role of TV has possibly been overlooked.

I suppose I'm talking about the likes of Buffy and Alias, which were fantastic bodies of work in their own right - but perhaps laying the foundations for people of either gender to watch and enjoy shows centred around female characters. Buffy is probably also responsible for the regeneration of the pop culture cool of vampires which continues to this day, being an ingredient in making the Twilight Phenomenon.

On a similar theme, I can't help but notice a few similarities between "Hunted" (currently airing on BBC) and Alias - although Melissa George has switched from villain and taken the spot corresponding with Jennifer Garner's!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 11
Yeah, right - 13/11/2012 5:29:25 PM   
Normal Control


Posts: 82
Joined: 11/11/2012
This article was kinda long so I skimmed thru it but a point seemed to be that more media consumer products for women will result in better media consumer products overall. Is this some kind of joke? Hollywood constantly milks and exploits the worst traits in both sexes towards maximum profit via continuous crap output. The common denominator in most cases is consumer idealism, disguised or not. Would Batman be as popular if he was a homeless man sleeping rough? Would Bond be as popular if he tried to save taxpayer ££'s by shopping at TK Maxx? I haven't watched Twilight or read 50 Shades of Shite, but I'm guessing there's materialism stuff going on there too. I think conventional romantic ideals tie in deeply with consumerism, so that accounts for the likes of Titanic and Avatar being so popular.

The best movie I've seen in the last 10 years that had a female protaganist is Pan's Labrynth(sp?). I couldn't see the twi-tard generation rushing to watch something like that though - no consumerist message for their brains to unwittingly sponge off.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 12
Now that you mention it... - 13/11/2012 8:52:18 PM   
lynnsure

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 13/11/2012
I would never have thought of, or would like to have thought of, "Twilight" as having a positive effect on cinema. However, this is a pretty strong argument in some respects. And though it's a little offensive to equate the fans of Twilight to those of stronger franchises such as Star Wars, Star Trek, etc. it makes sense that those fans can be compared to the mania of more respected series. One thing that sort of brushed me a little wrong was that there was no mention of 'Lord of the Rings" as a wildly successful series, highly respected and appealing to both genders. To me, that is the perfect example of a series that falls in the sci-fi/fantasy genre that took its entire audience seriously, male and female alike. It recognized that women also enjoy amped up battles, special effects and dark creatures just as men can appreciate high drama, passion and strong female characters. Ok, admittedly there was a ton of eye candy for women, but beyond that...

In response to rwoo, I have to say that I totally disagree with "Buffy" being the flagship for the popular vampire genre. In my opinion, the current fascination can be traced back to "The Lost Boys" when hot, teenage vampires were seen as cool and mysterious. It was one of the first movies to ditch the old Dracula standard and give us modern, young vampires we could swoon over and even relate to. The cinematic nails in the coffin (so to speak) that solidified vampires as major parts of our current pop culture was the one-two punch of "Bram Stoker's Dracula" and "Interview With the Vampire." in 1992 & 1994 respectively. Both movies not only had awesome-looking vampires but painted them in such a way that was lush, romantic, sympathetic and vulnerable. Behind all of this, look to Anne Rice as the mother of the current vampire movement. "Buffy" was banking on an already established concept, not to mention its own roots that existed long before the TV

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 13
In a different light - 15/11/2012 12:32:58 PM   
Chan_Solo

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 17/3/2008
Oh Helen,

Every so often, you do a piece that makes me have a little think and this one has done the same. I do understand alot of of the points you make and sometimes the disdain of fans between the franchises TwiHards vs PotterHeads which would make a most excellent Running Man type gameshow, reminds me of the scene in Clerks 2 with Star Wars in the form of Randall against LOTR customer (minus vomit).

The main thing though that got my heart a flutter here is "then maybe they'll have the money to make Halo or The Authority"...That's the stuff that gets the heart racing.

Thanks again

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 14
Do we really need more Twilight coverage? - 15/11/2012 10:10:12 PM   
Quentin Black

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 2/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Helen OHara

If you actually read the article, you'll see that nowhere do I suggest that Twilight ITSELF is a strong representation of women onscreen or the model to go by (actually I think Kristen Stewart's Bella is a stronger character than she's given credit for but that's another discussion).

Hi Helen

While I agree on some points I feel like you're one of those people who feel like they have to justify their love of utter trash with overly long articles that throw around popular ideas like female empowerment in a very vague manner.

Twilight and Fifty Shades of Grey are undeniably popular but that isn't the same as actually being good. I have no problem with people who enjoy them and accept that they're guilty pleasures. What I do have a problem with are people who celebrate them as if they're misunderstood pieces of art that don't deserve the criticism they receive.

I could write an essay on all of Twilight's faults but I'll try and keep it to the point...

1) Twilight is poorly written wish fulfillment for teenage girls and horny women that not only sets the feminist movement back but sends a terrible message to it's target audience. A female protagonist who is a blank page for the reader to project themselves and who's main character trait is being plain and clumsy. A female protagonist who's life revolves around two attractive boys, one who's a controlling stalker who is mentally over a hundred years older than she is and watches her sleep at night while the other is a violent obsessive who falls in love with a newborn baby. A female protagonist who throws herself off a cliff and drives recklessly after a boy leaves her. A female protagonist who completely changes herself and her life to be with a boy. Does this sound like a well written role model that is empowering for women? No one is saying that girls everywhere can't separate reality and fantasy and are copying the actions of Bella but it can't be denied that it does create unrealistic and negative ideals for girls to follow and thus should not be celebrated.

2) Aside from terrible message it sends to young girls, Twilight has little to offer as a film. The weak plot and laughable dialogue is made worse by terrible acting, while the poor special effects and substandard designs fail to make up for the uninspired action.

Your tone gets a little too defensive when replying to some commenters, considering that you wrote this...

http://www.empireonline.com/empireblogs/words-from-the-wise/post/p889

...where you DO "suggest that Twilight ITSELF is a strong representation of women onscreen or the model to go by".

I do agree that the franchise has motivated studios to fund projects aimed at traditionally underrepresented demographics but for every Hunger Games you get Red Riding Hood and Beastly. The problem does not lie with studios undervaluing certain demographics but with studios misunderstanding what makes a good film in the pursuit of profit and misrepresenting both genders in an attempt to fit everything into a marketable formula. Twilight did create a change but it is still part of the problem. That is why Empire should be celebrating great films by writing long articles on why Clarice Starling is a great role model for women or how Ellen Ripley and Sarah O'Connor ushered in the concept of female lead action. Despite your excuses there are great female led films out there to this day (Kill Bill, Atonement, Hanna, Juno, Bridesmaids etc) that don't follow a formula and have found enormous success. Instead of bucking the trend to talk about great cinema all this article does is perpetuate the media frenzy over the Twilight phenomenon, encouraging readers to see the terrible films and studios to keep trying to copy the formula. With the reality TV celebrating stupidity and studios unwilling to bank on originality, the last thing we need is yet another article that celebrates the success of mediocrity as if it is a big win for women everywhere.

I know that Empire needs to be on top of coverage of the latest big blockbuster to draw in fans of the franchise and sell advertising space but pieces like this really harm the credibility of a magazine that I for the most part really enjoy.


< Message edited by Quentin Black -- 15/11/2012 10:11:55 PM >

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 15
RE: Never thought of it like that - 16/11/2012 9:08:30 AM   
Timon


Posts: 14584
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brianfantana

I can't say that I've seen Twilight, or wanted to, but I don't hate it




How open-minded!

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to Brianfantana)
Post #: 16
Here's hoping - 16/11/2012 11:39:12 AM   
Topper_Harley

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 5/10/2005
I am a middle aged man who has just come back from a twi-athalon showing of all five twilight films at my local cinema. I went because I enjoy that kind of event more than because I am a huge twilight fan, but I have actually quite enjoyed the films. Now I realise that probably qualifies me as a major sad-act, but the films, while they are never going to be classics, are certainly as good as or better than a lot of the 'summer blockbuster' films produced over the last thirty years (which I also go and see more often than not). To get to the point (finally!) I think this article is spot on, or at least I hope it is. If by waking Hollywood up to the female demographic means that focus is pulled back to story driven rather than action and effects driven films then everybody - male or female - wins. And if the hunger games and the upcoming warm bodies are anything to go by, I say bring it on!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 17
RE: Here's hoping - 17/11/2012 3:08:12 PM   
baerrtt

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 14/11/2007
I dislike the TWILIGHT franchise immensely and however much distaste I hold for those books/films Helen's point is a sound one that may positively restore the kind of cinematic balance that once existed.

What I mean by this is that it was once normal to see a female led movie, for example, topping it's release year's box office (SHANGHAI EXPRESS, I'M NO ANGEL, SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS, GONE WITH THE WIND, THE RED SHOES, CLEOPATRA, MARY POPPINS and the SOUND OF MUSIC were just some of these examples). And then the autuer led 'Golden Age' of the 70s rolled in where the likes of THE GODFATHER, JAWS and STAR WARS all claimed the all time record giving studio execs the belief, or excuse, that audiences would no longer turn up en masse for event movies headlined by female characters. For all the Ripleys, Starlings and Sarah Connors or even the existence of TITANIC for the most part the majors have held this notion and however some may disagree that has led to a maelstrom of articles and opinions from within and outside the industry since the 1980s that female centred narratives in motion pictures are in incapable of duplicating the kind of success their male counterparts have had the opportunity to do time and time again or the fear that they could dissapear altogether. What the success of the TWILIGHT franchise since 2008 has allowed for is the idea that putting a woman/girl front and centre in a BIG intended blockbuster should have always been a natural evolution of those aforementioned bygone eras where the idea that men or boys wouldn't turn up to see a movie starring the opposite sex didn't exist and in a year of THE HUNGER GAMES, PROMETHEUS, SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN and BRAVE or the possibility that when STAR WARS returns the central Skywalker will be female that's a good thing.

Yes we should all hope for much better movies but if TWILIGHT's legacy ends up being one of fixing something that should never have been broken a long time ago then it's worthy of respect in the long run.

(in reply to Topper_Harley)
Post #: 18
RE: Here's hoping - 17/11/2012 4:58:55 PM   
Quentin Black

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 2/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: baerrtt

I dislike the TWILIGHT franchise immensely and however much distaste I hold for those books/films Helen's point is a sound one that may positively restore the kind of cinematic balance that once existed.

What I mean by this is that it was once normal to see a female led movie, for example, topping it's release year's box office (SHANGHAI EXPRESS, I'M NO ANGEL, SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS, GONE WITH THE WIND, THE RED SHOES, CLEOPATRA, MARY POPPINS and the SOUND OF MUSIC were just some of these examples). And then the autuer led 'Golden Age' of the 70s rolled in where the likes of THE GODFATHER, JAWS and STAR WARS all claimed the all time record giving studio execs the belief, or excuse, that audiences would no longer turn up en masse for event movies headlined by female characters. For all the Ripleys, Starlings and Sarah Connors or even the existence of TITANIC for the most part the majors have held this notion and however some may disagree that has led to a maelstrom of articles and opinions from within and outside the industry since the 1980s that female centred narratives in motion pictures are in incapable of duplicating the kind of success their male counterparts have had the opportunity to do time and time again or the fear that they could dissapear altogether. What the success of the TWILIGHT franchise since 2008 has allowed for is the idea that putting a woman/girl front and centre in a BIG intended blockbuster should have always been a natural evolution of those aforementioned bygone eras where the idea that men or boys wouldn't turn up to see a movie starring the opposite sex didn't exist and in a year of THE HUNGER GAMES, PROMETHEUS, SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN and BRAVE or the possibility that when STAR WARS returns the central Skywalker will be female that's a good thing.

Yes we should all hope for much better movies but if TWILIGHT's legacy ends up being one of fixing something that should never have been broken a long time ago then it's worthy of respect in the long run.


1) It's a little strange that you say something was broken when you say yourself that Silence of The Lambs, the Alien franchise, the Terminator franchise, Titanic (not to mention Chicago, Kill Bill, many of Joe Wright's films, many of Jason Reitman's films etc) are incredibly successful films with a female lead in the front and centre.

2) Prometheus owes more to the Alien franchise and Ellen Ripley, Brave just continues the Disney tradition of female led animation and Snow White and the Huntsman wasn't very good. I'm not sure how Twilight gets any credit here.

3) The "restoration of balance" is not done by celebrating the fact that studios are making more terrible films like Twilight, Red Riding Hood, Beastly and Snow White and the Huntsman. It is done by celebrating great film with great, well written and well acted female characters like the ones I mentioned before.

(in reply to baerrtt)
Post #: 19
RE: Here's hoping - 18/11/2012 3:13:54 PM   
baerrtt

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 14/11/2007
The success of movies through the years like The Silence of The Lambs, The Alien franchise, Kill Bill etc did absolutely nothing to change the overall studio mentality that existed as regards to female characters in major movies front and centre. Those aformentioned pictures got made, got acclaim and drew money and yet if not to you it's pretty obvious to most that Hollywood still weren't making enough movies, well-written or otherwise, that dealt squarely with female characters in scenarios that traditionally male characters find themselves in. The success of TWILIGHT, like the films or not, has hopefully helped eliminate the reluctance studios had in greenlighting movies starring women/girls over a certain budget.

Until BRAVE Pixar despite two decades of feature film production hadn't done one single film with a female lead and Disney, overall, renamed a recent fairy tale adaptation (TANGLED) and centred the action on the male character in a cynical attempt as to not drive the boy audience away.

(in reply to Quentin Black)
Post #: 20
Thank you Helen - 19/11/2012 4:13:05 PM   
mirjam_f

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 8/9/2011
Wow, great article. Hope you are right and there's a real change coming and not just a hype thing.
I especially like where you said; So maybe it's not female leads that turn male viewers off, but bad female leads. I think that is really true.
So thank you for this Helen.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 21
RE: Here's hoping - 19/11/2012 9:09:16 PM   
Quentin Black

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 2/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: baerrtt

The success of movies through the years like The Silence of The Lambs, The Alien franchise, Kill Bill etc did absolutely nothing to change the overall studio mentality that existed as regards to female characters in major movies front and centre. Those aformentioned pictures got made, got acclaim and drew money and yet if not to you it's pretty obvious to most that Hollywood still weren't making enough movies, well-written or otherwise, that dealt squarely with female characters in scenarios that traditionally male characters find themselves in. The success of TWILIGHT, like the films or not, has hopefully helped eliminate the reluctance studios had in greenlighting movies starring women/girls over a certain budget.

Until BRAVE Pixar despite two decades of feature film production hadn't done one single film with a female lead and Disney, overall, renamed a recent fairy tale adaptation (TANGLED) and centred the action on the male character in a cynical attempt as to not drive the boy audience away.


1) Twilight is not an example of a film that has a "female character in scenarios that traditionally male characters" and with the exception of The Hunger Games and Snow White and the Huntsman (only one of which was good), neither are the films that haven been inspired by it. In fact the portrayal of women in the Twilight films is fairly offensive and damaging for feminism.

2) Simply repreating Helen O'Hara's point of view doesn't make it correct. If Alien and Aliens had not been successful then we wouldn't have the ass kicking version of Sarah O'Connor in Terminator 2 or Elizabeth Shaw in Prometheus. Without Kill Bill we wouldn't have had Hit Girl in Kick Ass, Hanna in Hanna or Shosanna Dreyfuss in Inglourious Basterds. Changes can be a lot subtler than simply churning out poorly made films built to fit a formula like all the Twlight inspired films have been.

3) Films of a "certain budget" tend to be action films and there is a very obvious problem with making action films where female characters find themselves "in scenarios that traditionally male characters find themselves in". There aren't many women like Gina Carano that can go toe to toe with men like Vin Disel, Dwayne Johnson and the cast of the Expendables movies. So you can't just simply put women in the same "scenarios that traditionally male characters find themselves in" because, regardless of political correctness, the audience have certain expectations regarding gender roles that have been ingrained into them by biology and society. It is easy to make an action film starring a male lead because their strength comes from their muscles and guns. It is more difficult to make a action film starring a female lead because their strength has to come from somewhere else and thus the characters have to be extremely well written in addition to having great action. Superhero comic books and their adaptations have this exact same problem. Films set before the 1950s that aren't about Joan of Arc and Elizabeth also have this problem. Very well written big budget action films are rare regardless of the gender of the protagonist, which is why characters like Ripley, Starling and The Bride are so rare and so memorable. It soon becomes clear that the writing and the source material are stronger factors in the lack of female led big budget blockbusters rather than demand or Hollywood's unwillingness to supply it.

4) Why should men and women even face the same problems and scenarios in films in the first place when they don't in reality? This isn't to say the situations that men and women find themselves in are mutually exclusive or that female characters should only put in scenarios related to love and girly hijinks. Rather, that you have conveniently ignored the multitude of incredibly successful films from non action genres like Juno, Mamma Mia, Chicago, The Help, Bridesmaids, Black Swan, Pride and Prejudice, Atonement, Winter's Bone, The Reader, Alice in Wonderland, Titanic, The Queen, Elizabeth, Cold Mountain, The Blindside, The Devil Wears Prada, Precious, The Kids Are Alright, Million Dollar Baby etc etc (I can list more if you want). So you are correct in thinking that it isn't obvious how "Hollywood still weren't making enough movies, well-written or otherwise, that dealt squarely with female characters".

5) Until Brave, Pixar had only made two films with human leads. What's your point? In the Pixar films the species of the characters have little to do with it let alone gender and most of their films have well written female characters that are central to the plot. Brave was a return to the Disney tradition of films with strong female leads (or co-leads) that took a hit when Pixar crushed the competition in the late 90s. Even then Disney still released Enchanted and The Princess and the Frog.

Like I said before, let us not celebrate the success of mediocrity as if it is a big win for women everywhere. The Twilight films have done nothing to improve how women are portrayed in film nor changed cinema for the better and saying they have is just a weak excuse to write an article to draw in fans of the franchise, perpetuate the media frenzy over these terrible films and sell advertising space.

(in reply to baerrtt)
Post #: 22
RE: Here's hoping - 20/11/2012 3:53:54 PM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3527
Joined: 15/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quentin Black
1) Twilight is not an example of a film that has a "female character in scenarios that traditionally male characters" and with the exception of The Hunger Games and Snow White and the Huntsman (only one of which was good), neither are the films that haven been inspired by it. In fact the portrayal of women in the Twilight films is fairly offensive and damaging for feminism.


I think there's a discussion to be had about Twilight's feminist credentials, and yes I did make the argument that the Bella in the FILMS is rather feminist-friendly because I believe that's true. For the record, I don't think the Twilight films are great at all, but they're no worse than any number of male-oriented films that get a far easier ride and far less abuse, and so I find myself defending them simply out of fairness.

Feminism wise, you could argue that Twilight tells the story of a woman who sees something she wants and goes to get it, not letting anything stop her. She ends up much stronger as a result, happy and incidentally in a position where she frequently has power over the thing she wanted in the first place (admittedly, here, a man). I don't think that's such a terrible message - if one chooses to read it that way. It's all about what you choose to take from it really.

quote:

2) Simply repreating Helen O'Hara's point of view doesn't make it correct. If Alien and Aliens had not been successful then we wouldn't have the ass kicking version of Sarah O'Connor in Terminator 2 or Elizabeth Shaw in Prometheus. Without Kill Bill we wouldn't have had Hit Girl in Kick Ass, Hanna in Hanna or Shosanna Dreyfuss in Inglourious Basterds. Changes can be a lot subtler than simply churning out poorly made films built to fit a formula like all the Twlight inspired films have been.


You just named pretty much ever decent female-led action movie in the past 20 years (and at least one of those isn't very good). They're the exception, not the rule.

quote:

3) Films of a "certain budget" tend to be action films and there is a very obvious problem with making action films where female characters find themselves "in scenarios that traditionally male characters find themselves in". There aren't many women like Gina Carano that can go toe to toe with men like Vin Disel, Dwayne Johnson and the cast of the Expendables movies. So you can't just simply put women in the same "scenarios that traditionally male characters find themselves in" because, regardless of political correctness, the audience have certain expectations regarding gender roles that have been ingrained into them by biology and society. It is easy to make an action film starring a male lead because their strength comes from their muscles and guns. It is more difficult to make a action film starring a female lead because their strength has to come from somewhere else and thus the characters have to be extremely well written in addition to having great action. Superhero comic books and their adaptations have this exact same problem. Films set before the 1950s that aren't about Joan of Arc and Elizabeth also have this problem. Very well written big budget action films are rare regardless of the gender of the protagonist, which is why characters like Ripley, Starling and The Bride are so rare and so memorable. It soon becomes clear that the writing and the source material are stronger factors in the lack of female led big budget blockbusters rather than demand or Hollywood's unwillingness to supply it.


You're arguing that it's simply unlikely that women would EVER fight orcs or aliens so it's inevitable that our social prejudices should be pasted on to fantasy kingdoms or the far future and we should assume that men will always be leads in action movies? I mean, I could understand if there was a preponderance of male characters in modern-day stories about the military, say, but big action movies where a regular person is thrown into the maelstrom? Doesn't have to be a man. Big action movies of the future? Doesn't have to be a man. Big fantasy action movies? Doesn't have to be a man.

quote:

4) Why should men and women even face the same problems and scenarios in films in the first place when they don't in reality? This isn't to say the situations that men and women find themselves in are mutually exclusive or that female characters should only put in scenarios related to love and girly hijinks. Rather, that you have conveniently ignored the multitude of incredibly successful films from non action genres like Juno, Mamma Mia, Chicago, The Help, Bridesmaids, Black Swan, Pride and Prejudice, Atonement, Winter's Bone, The Reader, Alice in Wonderland, Titanic, The Queen, Elizabeth, Cold Mountain, The Blindside, The Devil Wears Prada, Precious, The Kids Are Alright, Million Dollar Baby etc etc (I can list more if you want). So you are correct in thinking that it isn't obvious how "Hollywood still weren't making enough movies, well-written or otherwise, that dealt squarely with female characters".


Most of those were successful, sure, but it's simple and inarguable arithmetic that women are underrepresented onscreen, so simply listing a number of films where they get good roles doesn't really prove anything.

quote:

5) Until Brave, Pixar had only made two films with human leads. What's your point? In the Pixar films the species of the characters have little to do with it let alone gender and most of their films have well written female characters that are central to the plot. Brave was a return to the Disney tradition of films with strong female leads (or co-leads) that took a hit when Pixar crushed the competition in the late 90s. Even then Disney still released Enchanted and The Princess and the Frog.

Like I said before, let us not celebrate the success of mediocrity as if it is a big win for women everywhere. The Twilight films have done nothing to improve how women are portrayed in film nor changed cinema for the better and saying they have is just a weak excuse to write an article to draw in fans of the franchise, perpetuate the media frenzy over these terrible films and sell advertising space.


Re Pixar, their characters still have gender attributes (voices apart from anything else) and they never had a female lead until Brave. Brave IS a return to a Disney tradition that was crushed not by Pixar but by the perception that films with female leads did less well (The Lion King vs. Beauty & the Beast) which, and this is a whole other story, was mostly down to the Disney formula becoming calcified and the stories not being strong enough BUT which was seen as another "proof" that women don't go see films. The Princess And The Frog's "underperformance" led to Tangled being renamed so as not to put boys off - those are not exactly sterling examples of films aimed at women doing well. That's more an example of a studio being scared to aim their film at girls.

And as I made clear in the piece, this was not about "celebrating" Twilight. It's about the effect it's having on how bean-counters see their audience and how they make decisions as a result. The phenomenon of Twilight IS undeniably important, and if you think a discussion of that is "weak" then go about your business with my blessing - but I would submit that it's something a film fan should at least consider. It's really cute that you think this will sell advertising space though!


_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to Quentin Black)
Post #: 23
Hate It - 21/11/2012 6:57:01 AM   
jace007


Posts: 61
Joined: 14/5/2007
First of all, any article that sticks up for Twilight needs to have its sanity questioned. Girls flock to Twi-Douche because it's a love story, riiiight. Then why not watch Joss Whedon's more profound and much more believable Buffy the Vampire Slayer instead (her romance with Angel was a pivotal highlight). As for Hunger Games, why doesn't it get acknowledged that it ripped off Battle Royale, the much BETTER film? Just because these books were authored by women doesn't make them any more significant.

< Message edited by jace007 -- 21/11/2012 6:58:37 AM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 24
RE: Hate It - 21/11/2012 10:43:23 AM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3527
Joined: 15/9/2005
Jace, it's not about "sticking up" for Twilight; it's about looking past the love/hate at its effects on cinema. And you make this weird assumption that Twilight fans don't watch Buffy or whatever, which seems bizarre. Apart from anything else, a love of Twilight seems likely to lead them on to Buffy if they haven't come across it before (and it's entirely possible that younger viewers may not have seen it). As for Hunger Games having a resemblance to Battle Royale, what on Earth does that have to do with the argument in the piece? "Rip off" seems strong, and BR was hardly the first version of that story.

I didn't say anything about the significance of the author's gender anywhere in this article, so I'm a little baffled as to why you'd bring that up. Two of the books I mentioned were written by men, in fact - Warm Bodies and The Spook's Apprentice - so it's not like I made authorship an issue.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to jace007)
Post #: 25
- 21/11/2012 2:13:19 PM   
pollytechnic

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 27/10/2010
I only hope that any upcoming "female" franchises seek to actually empower teenage girls rather than picturing them as total saps who have no character of their own who are utterly defined by their relationships with men

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 26
RE: - 22/11/2012 1:07:57 PM   
r74nnn

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 20/10/2011

Good article, never really thought about in that way. Certainly changes my view on the whole Twilight franchise. I've never really thought that the Twilight would have any preference to the gender of their audience, just that it seemed to appeal more to women than men. With what you said regarding 50 shades and the hunger games and so on, its clear that there was a gap in the movie market that could be filled, if this in turn is what is keeping the cinema world afloat then we should appreciate it . Its seems that being macho is more important than being honest. Im a man, I enjoyed Twilight. I hope they dont set me on fire or throw me in a lake!!

(in reply to pollytechnic)
Post #: 27
The REAL Hunger ... - 22/11/2012 3:30:37 PM   
Nicky C

 

Posts: 652
Joined: 31/5/2006
... as the article points out, is for strong female heroes. Consider the fact that the Twilight and 50 Shades books are well known for being poorly written, but that they have been incredibly successful. We like to think that there is equality among the sexes but women STILL aren't having stories told for THEM. That hunger is so great that crap written by untrained, undisciplined bedroom-based writers is flying off the shelves and filling the cinemas. Some day, a real proper writer is going to write a Myth-based picture with a female Hero that's as high a standard as something like a Dark Knight or an Iron Man, and on that day the rest of the business will kick itself, because the movie will make much more money than your Batman (which still marginalises its female characters, especially Catwoman who's only purpose seems to be to give Bruce Wayne someone to run away with so he doesn't get lonely), as women fill the theatres to see a PROPERLY COMPELLING female Hero (i.e. NOT subservient to the love or instruction of a male) and men will turn up too because they love to watch kick-ass action and don't really care if it's a man or woman dishing out the pain. So, I think the article is right in that a doorway is opening, but it's still just a crack and not the swinging saloon door that men have enjoyed since cinema began.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 28
Hold up just a minute - 22/11/2012 6:25:15 PM   
Bazzonian


Posts: 1
Joined: 9/6/2012
From: Basingstoke
It's all well and good arguing over weather you think Twilight is good or not (I, personally, am a teenage girl who would much rather watch The Avengers or LotR), but I think we must all agree that this article has a point. While it may not be the best film in terms of narrative or technical flair, it has paved the way to making cinema more accessible to females and films with a female demographic. Therefore the Twilight franchise MUST be a good thing because it will hopefully be remembered as the film that led to the female led/ female targeted films that will follow. So although I've only seen the first two Twilight films (I soon decided it wasn't worth seeing the rest), I will still appreciate the franchise because it will undoubtedly lead to great films for females. Thank you Helen O'hara for making me see it this way.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 29
RE: Here's hoping - 23/11/2012 6:31:53 AM   
Quentin Black

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 2/10/2005
Hi Helen

1) I don't see many people writing articles on how the Taken films or Jason Statham's latest offering are misunderstood, important films and if you did you'd likely have a lot of people replying with equal vitriol. The point is we shouldn't be defending bad films, regardless of the gender of the lead, period.

Feminism wise you have a poorly depicted teenage girl whose life revolves around two inappropriate, dangerous and slightly abusive boys. She endangers her life and the life of others when she doesn't get to be with the older boy (mentally he is older by centuries, which is made extra creepy by the fact that she was a minor when he met her), a tactic that works. Instead of being accepted for who she is she ends up changing herself and her life to be with this boy, in the process becoming this perfect being that the world revolves around like it was her destiny. This is hardly a healthy and positive message to send to young girls.

2) You've seemed to have missed the point I was making to Baerrtt. I'm not saying that having female leads in an action based film is not possible due to social prejudices. I clearly point out a number of great thrillers and action films with female leads. I'm stating a fact that good action films with female leads are harder to make because they require better writing, while male lead action films can be successful with the right star and big explosions (especially in the 80s). Great writing in action films is quite rare, regardless of the gender of the lead. Source material and the quality writing is a larger factor in the imbalance between male and female leads in successful action films than the perceived lack of demand or any unwillingness to supply it. An article about how crucial the writing process is for these upcoming adaptations in determining how successfully they portray and appeal to the female demographic would have more credibility.

3) The point I prove with that list is that women are not underrepresented in film, they are underrepresented in certain genres for a number of reasons, some of which I and others have mentioned. The arithmetic is arguable because you don't ever explore the factors that correlate to where and how women are underrepresented, why they are underrepresented and how women should be represented. Your perceived notion that more equals better is a rather faulty one and your supporting ideas based around popular hot-button topics like feminism seem to be deliberately vague.

4) Even after Lion King they attempted to make female lead films for a number of years (Pochahontas and Mulan being the most notable) and it just so happened that they weren't very good or very successful. There a number of factors in the decline of the Disney tradition of female leads, one of which was the continual success of Pixar after Lion King came out. The Princess and the Frog was a brave return to tradition which was well received and example of how studios do want to make films that respect the female demographic. It just so happens that Pixar are very, very good at making great films and so Brave is simply a better film and thus performed better than most of Disney's output since the Lion King.

5) In writing this article you are celebrating Twilight by perpetuating the media frenzy that just encourages more people to see it. The fact is the "bean-counters" still don't see the female demographic in the way they should and in trying to copy the Twilight formula are making more bad films that don't do justice to women in any way. The evidence that you use for your argument is The Hunger Games, but the positive depiction of women in that film has far more to do with the strength of the source material and adaptation. Unless more important factors like the writing are addressed no amount of money throwing is going to fix how women are portrayed in film and we will just end up with more poor formulaic attempts to cash in like Beastly and Red Riding Hood. The studios still won't respect the female demographic so long as they can make some extra money by patronizing women by superficially altering the genre and throwing some steamy thrills in to the romance. This is why it is all the more important to write articles and promote well written films that do present women in the right way instead of writing articles like this that celebrate mediocrity.

What I find cute is that you don't think your readers realize that an article like this is designed to draw in a certain fan-base to increase visits to the site, which in turns creates more profit for the magazine. I get it. Empire is a business. You could have wrote about how the strength of the adaptation and portrayal of Katniss Everdeen is leading the way for a new wave of film, only mentioning Twilight in passing, but seeing as Twilight is out you have crank up the hype for the fans. It's just a shame you get defensive over the article to the point of downplaying the importance that icons like Ripley and Clarice had on film. They, for reasons that I have mentioned, maybe the exception to the rule in specific genres and their influence may have been subtler but they, like I and many others have mentioned, have done far more for how women are portrayed in film and are far more deserving of such an article.

Twilight is Stephanie Meyer's immature teenage fantasy that depicts women in a negative way and justifying one's enjoyment of it (which people are entitled to) as if it is a misunderstood important film and it's success is a big win for women everywhere, is ridiculous and frankly lazy "journalism".

< Message edited by Quentin Black -- 23/11/2012 7:16:35 AM >

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Feedback] >> Empire Online >> The Twilight Legacy: How It's Changing Cinema Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125