changing representation of women in film

[AJ1]

Anyone have any thought's about this?

My thoughts:

Things that have changed: 'final girl' in horror films, the females are now much more assertive and masculine, as opposed to the 'pure/virgin' view of girls in 80's/90's horror films

Iconic female roles have changed, i.e.- Bond girls have also become less feminine and more masculine, and are now able to captivate Bond and to an extent dominate him (Eva Green-'Vesper' in Casino Royale)

The growing appearance of 'strong women' in films such as Erin Brockevitch/ and Meryl Streep...

Also changes with women in the industry, women directors/producers are becoming more recognised, illustrated by recent success of Mamma Mia! director- Phyllida Lloyd. A pivotal moment- Coppola's recognition as Best Director at the Oscars for her film 'The Piano'. Could this change in women behind the scenes reflect a change in women on screen?

(I am also interested in any views about the changes in British films and their representation of women)



Supporting/Opposing views are welcome!!

Thank you

[narabdela]

Coppola best director for "The Piano" ??????????????



Further research is advised methinks.

[batman]

I wouldn't call Eva Green masculine .... she uses her femininity to seduce Bond.

[CaptainWaggett]

name='AJ1']Anyone have any thought's about this?

My thoughts:

Things that have changed: 'final girl' in horror films, the females are now much more assertive and masculine, as opposed to the 'pure/virgin' view of girls in 80's/90's horror films

You've not seen the Alien series then?

[penfold]

Or the Terminator series??

[GRAEME]

name='AJ1'] A pivotal moment- Coppola's recognition as Best Director at the Oscars for her film 'The Piano'.

Jane Campion won an Australian Film Institute award for Best Director for The Piano.



Sofia Coppola was nominated for Lost in Translation (2003) but no woman has ever won (only she, Jane Campion and Lina Wertmüller have ever been nominated!). Her Oscar was for the screenplay.

[AJ1]

Yes, sorry- Meant Campion for Best Director, and Coppola for 'Lost in Translation'



Do you think this success of women behind the scenes of films will continue to grow?

[batman]

name='AJ1']

Do you think this success of women behind the scenes of films will continue to grow?

There have always been successful women behind the scenes in films. It is not a new phenomenon.

[narabdela]

name='AJ1']Yes, sorry- Meant Campion for Best Director

Still wrong! Campion did not win a Best Director Oscar for "The Piano" She was nominated. She won a screenplay Oscar, and certainly wasn't the first to do so.

[CaptainWaggett]

There have always been 'strong women' in films - why not have a quick look at the IMDB credits of Bette Davis, Katherine Hepburn, Margaret Lockwood, Googie Withers etc. You might also want to glance down the thread titles in this section - there are many other discussions on this subject some of which you may find useful. And this Screenonline article might show you that women did actually work behind the camera before the 1990s. If anything there are fewer interesting roles for women now than in the 1940s and 1950s - how many female character actors get to play major roles nowadays?

[penfold]

And fewer still than in the early 30's...not the genre you're looking at, but I've just finished watching a film from '32 where the central character, played by Ruth Chatterton, is the CEO and owner of a successful car factory. Her best line ?



"I know for some women, men are a household necessity; myself, I'd rather have a canary."



If you saw Chicago, then be aware that the original film, from '28, was far funnier, far racier, and had stronger women characters than the musical.

[MB]

(Sorry this is long - but a lot of people seem to be asking the same question, in slightly different ways...)



I think people are encouraged to view the emancipation of women as a linear progression - and that the representation of their role in society is clearly demonstrated in popular culture..but it isn't as straightforward as that...



There were some superbly cast women and solid roles in films from the thirties/forties..Lauren Bacall, Bette Davis..



As Ruby Wax (not my favourite person, but she made a good point) said "The 60s? Progression for women? It seems to me that it was a whole lot of progression for men and the women were just supposed to feed two babies on their titties at once whilst people watched.. What was progressive about that...?"

Even my own dear character Modesty Blaise - a woman who 'travelled through continents nameless..' emerged in film - in the mid-sixties - as a dopey sex kitten.



Followed, of course, by the progressive 70s and the seminal 'On the buses' (oops not looking for a row!) a period when getting your tits out for the lads was sold as 'freedom' for women. There is a vile scene in 'Mash' (the film, very popular, seen as being 'progressive' in terms of how subject matter was shown - 1970) where a group of men stand around and laugh at a naked woman who has made the mistake of trying to be treated as an equal..without a hint of introspection from any of them..

And yet this was the heighth of hard core 'feminist' revolt.



God am I glad I wasn't a young woman then..certainly my grandmother felt better respected by men than my 'sixties/seventies' youthful mother and her sister did. Both suffered from eating disorders, visible perception disorders due to this crap - I think the sixties/seventies were a real low point for women and little wonder it pushed some of them out bra burning..I'd look to the forties as a guide to showing greater respect.



In terms of educational and work possibilities - yes there has been a progression in terms of possibility, but the mechanism behind the ability to fulfill those roles has a lot of holes..



But, the respect that many young men show to women these days has always been present, I think...in decent people. Thats all it is..never mind 'feminism' or any other labels you want to attach. It is just about having some thought for other people - 'If they have the ability - they should be given the chance'.



And, of course- it depends which part of the world you're in..it is still legal to sell 8 year old girls for marriage in some countries.



In our society, we are currently living in a 'dip' - an era where it is seen as 'OK' again for women to be marginalised in retaliation to 'PC' madness (a term that, of course, is never used by the people who are accused of employing it) and funny for someone to write 'slag' across their arm whilst they are out at night (as noted in several papers recently.)



The current crop of popular films are pandering to the idea of women as pathetic morons (as a result of the 90s backlash to 70s/80s 'feminism') who just want a man who looks good in his boxers.



It seems to me that the leads in popular TV are far more realistic and effective - Lost, House, Gray's Anatomy..



Now that is an interesting essay..why is that happening..?

[penfold]

I think there has been genuine, and general, progress, and more or less linear, with leaps in progress around the war years, and the late sixties....but the depiction of it has been more complex; while there were still strong roles (and strong actresses to play them) in Hollywood, they didn't have the freedom in the forties that they did in the early thirties, before Breen started to enforce what had been a code generally ignored prior to'34. Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, Joan Blondell, Barbara Stanwyck....alll actresses that emerged pre-code; if they hadn't had that opportunity to grow pre-34, would they have been as great in the forties as we remember them?? The enforcement of the Hays/Breen code set Hollywood depiction of female characters back decades, from the mid 30's to the 60's, and malignly influenced it in any other producing country hoping to sell their films in the US....as a result you see scenes and sequences in 1932 Warners films you wouldn't see again until the sixties.

[MB]

Hays Code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Interesting... essential reading for any film student.

[penfold]

And this set has some fine examples, and a documentary on the subject. Fourth volume in the series is imminent.....

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/TCM-Archives-Forbidden-Hollywood-Collection/dp/B000YRY7VC/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1241602107&sr=1-2]Amazon.com: TCM Archives - Forbidden Hollywood Collection, Vol. 2 (The Divorcee / A Free Soul / Night Nurse / Three on a Match / Female): Norma Shearer, Lionel Barrymore, Clark Gable, Bette Davis, Barbara Stanwyck, Ruth Chatterton, Joan Blondell, Ann[/ame]

[AJ1]

Thank you for your comments and links to more resources, they have been very helpful.



And I agree that the success for women behind the scenes is not a new phenomenon, but was wondering about any views to whether women's success will continue to grow, as it has done? possibly to a point where women directors/producers match the number of known/successful male directors/producers?



Could the unbalanced ratio of men:women working behind-the-scene's in the film industry be responsible for the majority of protagonists in films being male, with female supporting actors?

[thatllbetheday]

name='AJ1']Thank you for your comments and links to more resources, they have been very helpful.



And I agree that the success for women behind the scenes is not a new phenomenon, but was wondering about any views to whether women's success will continue to grow, as it has done? possibly to a point where women directors/producers match the number of known/successful male directors/producers?



Could the unbalanced ratio of men:women working behind-the-scene's in the film industry be responsible for the majority of protagonists in films being male, with female supporting actors?

Not entirely. Men like to see men as the lead in movies but so do women. I don't think female stars exactly play supporting roles depends on the movie genre. In romantic comedies it's generally 50/50. Age rather than gender seems play a more deciding factor in the number of female roles. After 40, unless you're Meryl Streep, forget it.

[Steve Crook]

name='thatllbetheday']Not entirely. Men like to see men as the lead in movies but so do women.

Maybe most men do, some of us are quite happy to see aa female lead

Age rather than gender seems play a more deciding factor in the number of female roles. After 40, unless you're Meryl Streep, forget it.

Or Helen Mirren, or Judi Dench, or Maggie Smith, or ...



Steve

[rjd0309]

name='AJ1']Could the unbalanced ratio of men:women working behind-the-scene's in the film industry be responsible for the majority of protagonists in films being male, with female supporting actors?

Let's not forget that film is a BUSINESS. It would be extremely naive to assume that films with male protagonists merely reflect the male viewpoints of male producers and directors. If films with female protagonists made lots of money, then that's what the industry would be churning out.



And there ARE some good films with female protagonists -- but that's not really the point. The point is to MAKE MONEY. Films are generally made with a specific target audience in mind. If you're making a film for an audience of teenage boys, then you're probably going to include car chases, explosions, and lots of female nudity -- not because of any perceived imbalance in the ratio of men-to-women working behind the scenes, but because it's what your target audience wants to see. And since teenage boys represent the largest ticket-buying segment of the population, a great many films are made for that target audience.



Put simply, the choice of a male or female protagonist is determined by a film's PROFIT POTENTIAL based upon its TARGET AUDIENCE. Any perceived male/female imbalance in film personnel is a non-issue.

[MB]

Well it depends what kind of film...and film maker..It was interesting to hear Mike Leigh's attitude to fund raising. You don't have to be a slave to the moneylenders to produce something that people want to see..