Helen OHara
Posts: 3477
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.
|
Printable Version
The Twilight Legacy: How It's Changing Cinema - 
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