Female leads in films

The early news on the new all-female ghostbusters movie is not especially encouraging, but there is so much misinformation on social media that it is not really clear how it will perform.

Action and SF movies can perform well with prominent woman characters, but the balance has to be good. I would list the following as good examples (not that I like all these portrayals, but they were at least believable and acceptable inclusions – even real additions to the film).

  • The character of Rey in the recent Star Wars movie. I have written about the movie and the character here.
  • The character of Ripley in the Alien movies (not a character I like, and there was an element of modishness, but Sigourney Weaver did well in the part.)
  • The character played by Linda Hamilton in Terminator 2. We see her exercising and developing fighting skills and cunning. She looks and acts believably.
  • Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia in the original Star Wars movie. She was an integral part of the film, and her being a “princess” gave her extra credibility with the audience. It was not a case of “who IS this chick?!”

I haven’t seen the new Ghostbusters movie (I liked both the earlier ones) and I probably won’t. But apart from not wanting to be assailed with pop feminism, I doubt that women can generally do knockabout physical humour believably. (Although “Elaine” used to do some quite well in the Seinfeld series.)

Of course, the real success or otherwise of the new female Ghostbusters will depend on a) the opportunity cost of making the film and b) how it will be received by the culture in the long run.

By “opportunity cost” I mean, what was lost in making this feminist-friendly version of Ghostbusters? Could a better movie have been made instead with a similar effort? Has the opportunity for a more successful Ghostbusters sequel been lost, temporarily or permanently?

By “received by the culture”, I am wondering if lines, scenes and images from the new film will be fondly remembered in future. There are lines and images which I certainly frequently recall with pleasure from the original two movies. Will the new movie become similarly beloved?

 

 

Advertisements

18 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by kneeledbeauty on July 18, 2016 at 10:42 am

    i am so over all these modern movies and TV shows with female leads. Most are not believable and there is a feeling some quota is being filled by creating such characters. Personally i think enough already. Why can’t we go back to old style movies that had Men in the lead and females supporting them? All the old movies i can remember created believable, likable female characters with dignity.

    i’m sorry, i just do not buy all these super fit, super strong, gun-totting, whisky-drinking females that can swear like troupers and still be desirable by the Men around them.

    Reply

    • Posted by Jim on July 19, 2016 at 3:39 am

      The problem with female leads these days is that they are not feminine. They’re almost all a very poor imitation of a man. The new Ghostbusters movie being the most obvious (and sickening) of the past year.

      I don’t mind a role like Betty Davis had in the 1941 movie The Little Foxes. But she wasn’t trying to be some 100 lb girl acting and fighting like she was some 6 ft 200 pound guy or like she was some science genius (which is far more rare than a male one). They constantly smart mouth and insult the men as if she’s some all-knowing goddess who must teach every man that he’s nothing more than an idiot without her. That’s funny since women would have no voice whatsoever if men didn’t allow it. Who built civilization? Was it women? Of course not. Since when have women ever done that?

      Now, why were women always kept “barefoot and pregnant”. Was this some kind of slavery men imposes on women? No, that’s just feminist propaganda. Then why was it this way? It’s very simple. It’s called “technology”. In the old days almost every job was excruciating, backbreaking work that most women couldn’t do. So they did the labor at home that their bodies could handle.

      Let’s think about what us men have done for women. They should be on their knees thanking men for making their lives so much easier over the centuries as we developed things like running water (plumbing), A/C, central heating, insulation, cars, and a million other things. Women can now get six figure paper pushing jobs in air conditioned, clean, safe buildings. Yet all most of them can do is bitch and moan about how evil and selfish men are. Hey, fucking cunts! Men DIED building much of the stuff we have now. Coal miners, fisherman, construction workers, policemen and so on.

      It completely amazes me how so many women can be so selfish, narcissistic, and ungrateful to even consider the idea that they’re “oppressed”. It’s disgusting. Maybe they need most of their privileges (yes, you people heard me…PRIVILEGES) taken away and be made men’s property like in ancient times so they can see just how easy they had it when men were fucking knocking themselves out trying to make these ungrateful cunts lives easier and more comfortable.

      I should add though that some of the blame falls at the feet of “men” who let the women out of their cages by allowing foolish women to do things like vote (which has perverted the democratic process). They were too cowardly to put their foot down and put their women in their place. They need to get their balls back.

      Still, this does NOT excuse women’s behavior since they’re still responsible for their own actions. If reason doesn’t work then in my view there’s nothing left but some good hard discipline. No, women don’t want it (we need to stop focusing on what women want and instead concentrate on what humanity NEEDS) but that’s not important. What is important is that they NEED it. Sometimes what humans want and what they need are not going to be the same thing.

      Reply

      • Posted by kneeledbeauty on July 19, 2016 at 4:18 am

        Jim, so much to love in what You have written here and i couldn’t agree with all of it, more. females do forget all we have are privileges, not rights. At every turn, we were given this or that ‘right’ because Men chose to and yes, it could easily be taken away gain and i personally think, it should be to teach females a lesson.

        i am not too sure about the democratic process, but i believe it began in Greece and was for Men who were citizens to vote, not females.

        i think what You say about females having cushy jobs and doing nothing but bitching is spot on. It reminds me of spoilt brats who become entitled because parents keep giving, never realising those who give can also take away. Indeed, society was so much better when females were kept out of public affairs and kept to the domestic sphere of running home, family and social networks.

      • Posted by Jim on July 20, 2016 at 7:13 am

        “i am not too sure about the democratic process, but i believe it began in Greece and was for Men who were citizens to vote, not females.”

        My point is that giving women the vote was a mistake. It has feminized the political process and it’s been a disaster.

      • Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 20, 2016 at 7:24 am

        Women voting is only really a problem when they vote selfishly or vote in politicians who pander to them. I would not say that women voting in Australia has been a problem. In fact they have had a broadly conservative effect at times.

        Attempts have been made to divide Australia on racial and sexual lines. But these have not been very successful here, unlike in America.

        The new Parliament of Australia has the fewest women members for quite some time, incidentally.

      • Posted by Jim on July 20, 2016 at 7:46 am

        From what I’ve heard from many Aussies Australia is awash in feminism. Having fewer women in office doesn’t help much if the male politicians pander to them, which they have to if women have the vote. You’re one of the very few who says different. Either you’re out of touch or they are.

        Here in the states and the Western world in general it’s been a total disaster. And it needs to go, period.

      • Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 20, 2016 at 8:34 am

        Feminism is mostly on the fringes in Australia. This has always been a masculine country. And still is. More so than Canada and New Zealand, for example.

        I did have the impression that our current Prime Minister was modelling himself on Justin Trudeau but he did badly at the latest election and he may have learned that progressive posturing and virtue signalling are not acceptable here. In any case, he has promoted men rather than women in his latest government.

        Affirmative action has not been adopted in Australia. Unlike in America. Family roles remain traditional according to official statistics and the labour market is quite sex-segregated.

        Moreover the ethos of the nation is masculine. Until the 1950s, men actually outnumbered women because of migration.

        Australia is a socially conservative country, a phenomenon I have tried to explain here:

        https://davidcollard.wordpress.com/2010/12/02/why-are-we-australians-so-socially-conservative/

        I have seen some of the Manosphere reporting on Australia and it does not always give a balanced impression.

  2. Posted by Zeta on July 23, 2016 at 1:55 pm

    “Feminism is mostly on the fringes in Australia. This has always been a masculine country. And still is. More so than Canada and New Zealand, for example.”

    Interesting that you say this, I got the distinct impression from the media (both mainstream and not) that Australia was as feminist as they come.

    I also read somewhere that affirmative action was adopted in the universities in OZ.

    Would it be possible to give some evidence to support your statements. I am not challenging you but considering the sorry state of other 1st world countries on this topic it is just a bit hard to believe that OZ escaped unscathed.

    Reply

    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 23, 2016 at 2:20 pm

      I can only report what I see around me. I have lived here all my life (I am 61) and I don’t find Australia to be a strongly feminist country.

      I am not aware of any systemic AA in Australian universities, apart from one recent bizarre case in the Maths department at the University of Melbourne.

      There is little or no AA in the business world.

      Reply

      • Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 23, 2016 at 2:22 pm

        I have, as I said, seen some reports on Australia on Manosphere blogs that are not very reliable. If there is a specific story or case or study you have found, please cite it and I shall respond.

  3. Posted by Zeta on July 23, 2016 at 2:55 pm

    Regarding films. To be successful a film has to be able to suspend our disbelief so that we can accept the premise, plot-line and action sequences in a movie.

    In some situations female leads can work because of the way the mood of the movie has been framed.

    For example “Trinity” in the Matrix series killing multiple men works because of the whole premise of the movie – she is operating in a virtual reality and programed to be a master of martial arts.

    But in most examples that I have seen it just doesn’t when, for example, you have a 50kg woman beating down and killing any number of men 2-3 times her weight. Especially movies that portray fighting in ancient times like “The Last Legion”, “Centurion” and “King Arthur (2004).”

    And the parts in “Game of Thrones” where you have Lady Brianna (or whatever her name is) killing numerous men and even defeating the Hound. And then the Sand Snakes of Dorne also strained my credulity. It says something that in that series my credulity is not strained by dragons but rather by female warriors.

    I have not even bothered to see the “Hunger Games” (not even as a free torrent download) when I found out what it was about and that it had a female lead.

    They should put a disclaimer at the beginning of the film (Ladies don’t try this at home.)

    Another thing that just doesn’t work is having female computer hackers think “Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” who can successful move millions of dollars of illegal funds from a criminals bank account to hers in the Caymans. Or that female computer expert in “24” first season. My mind just rejects that notion as much as a 50kg girl beating a sumo wrestler. Sure there maybe some geeky girls out there but a tiny percentage compared to the number of males doing the same.

    For many of the movies with female leads I would have to be on a psychotropic drug to accommodate such departures from reality. The female leads take away all enjoyment of the movie.

    Of course there is a certain class of male who enjoys watching “hot” women in such unrealistic roles and they do not hide their enthusiasm for it. I’m not one of them.

    Reply

    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 23, 2016 at 4:45 pm

      Yes. In such cases, they are presenting female mathematical geniuses that statistically barely exist. And sometimes this is so foolish as to become a running joke. For example, the Bond girl, Dr Christmas Jones, supposedly a nuclear physicist, was met with disbelief and derision.

      Reply

      • Posted by Zeta on July 23, 2016 at 6:43 pm

        Or even more incredulous casting Keira Knightley in the Imitation Game as being as good as or better than all the straight men, but not as good as gay Alan Turing.

      • Posted by Zeta on July 23, 2016 at 6:50 pm

        Before 10 girls are just as interested in science as boys, but after 10 it is different:

        “Year after year, I noticed the same trend. In “Junior Engineer” batches — boys and girls were close to 50-50%. In “Senior Engineer” batches, guess… the percentage of girls dropped to less than 10%! What is it that makes a nine-year old girl suddenly lose interest in engineering courses once she turns 10? There were no girls in most of our Robotics batches for the 10+ age-group. With great difficulty I got some girls to attend our 3-D Printing course and others on Product Design when we launched them first. It was equally difficult to get girls into our Senior Programming and App Development courses, although Junior Coding courses for the 7-10 age-group had a 50% girl population. And remember — by virtue of our centre’s location, we catered to a population comprising predominantly of the best techies and start-up entrepreneurs of India. So there was no reason to believe that such parents would discourage their daughters from enrolling in engineering courses.”

        http://tinyurl.com/jl7ylew

  4. Posted by Zeta on July 23, 2016 at 3:00 pm

    Nothing specific that I can remember just my general impression. Why would the Manosphere make such reports? Based on what? I have never been to Oz so I have no experience based opinion just what I read. And my impression from reading was that it is just as bad if not worse in Oz especially with that bitchy x-PM that you had. How did she get into power without feminism? What is explanation for that?

    Reply

    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 23, 2016 at 4:34 pm

      The number of women in Federal Parliament actually dropped after the recent election.

      Julia Gillard got into power initially because her party dumped a hated leader because of his personal style. She stupidly played the feminist card and was eventually dumped in turn. Her feminist tack cost her immensely in popularity.

      There is one prominent Manosphere blog which – I have noticed – appears to be written by an Australian who writes exaggerated stories about feminism in Australia. Sometimes people like to focus on negatives. If one looks at feminist sources, they do the opposite, often implying that women are still hideously oppressed (although mixing in gloating stories that imply the opposite too.)

      Reply

  5. Posted by Julian O'Dea on July 27, 2016 at 4:02 am

    Ghostbusters Reboot Flopped. Why it Deserved to Bomb For Its Marketing

    “Painting men as dumb when men represent over half the Ghostbusters fan demographic was idiotic. You don’t call the people you need to watch your movie “trolls” and expect to do well at the box office. Sony needed to win the male fans over and instead did everything possible to drive them away in a desperate attempt to appeal to misandric feminists.”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: