Women at the Movies: We’re Not There?

Simple biology will tell you that men and women are different creatures but for decades women have been fighting for the same opportunities as men and though I’m sure this particular debate would not likely make the top ten list of concerns for turn of the century suffragettes, it is one of concern to me and likely a large portion of women; even if they don’t realize it.

This all started as a rant after having read a post by Anne Thompson over at Variety titled “Summer Movies: Women Want Sex and the City”. That simple title caused me pause. The last time I checked (this morning) I was still a woman and I didn’t feel the need to see Sex and the City. I won’t begin to understand what Thompson intended with that title but that statement started to boil the blood. It was, however, Manohla Dargis’ article ”Is There a Real Woman in This Multiplex?” in the New York Times, which Thompson referred to, that pushed me over the edge.

To summarize, Dargis’ is referring to the apparent lack of films aimed at women which are opening this summer. Among the comic book centric action heroes, there are few films directly aimed at women. On the one hand I sincerely sympathize with Dargis’ view and on some level, I wholeheartedly agree with her. I too want to see films with female leads and heck, even comic book films with female title characters (where is the long gestating “Wonder Woman” adaptation?). I can’t, however, help but wonder if viewers aren’t doing it to themselves and more importantly if this notion that women and men want different things from their movies is completely accurate.

I won’t argue with anyone that tastes are varied but I believe it’s ludicrous to stand up and say that there aren’t enough movies for female viewers. I’m sorry but I must have missed the class where little girls were taught to love fashion, and only fashion, while men learned about sports. I realize we may be wired differently but it is unfair to think that just because we have breasts and different hormones, we cannot enjoy a good summer blockbuster, regardless of how male-centric it is. Just because the marketing campaign is targeting the 18-34 year old male does not necessarily mean that women are not going to see a film. Ignoring my past experiences with summer films for a moment, the screening of Iron Man that I attended last month was equally divided between men and women and to me, most of those women looked like they were having fun. I did not see teary eyes or sour faces suggesting they were dragged, instead, most of the women seemed to be genuinely interested in the film. My experiences with my local film group are even more telling – the majority of the group is female and most of the turnout for events seems to be female centric, regardless of the film. Are my group and my experiences an anomaly? Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe.

To make matters worse, it is not bad enough that the marketing geniuses and decision makers forget about the female demographic but now I have to read about the lack of women roles in movies and how the summer is male dominated. Yes, I see the point, I think we are fairly well aware of the situation but I do not agree that the lack of those female roles directly affect the number of women going to the movies. Female led films do not necessarily equate to women going to the movies. They are two separate issues and though they may have some small bearing on each other, one does not dictate the other.

Is the argument that women are not being catered to, valid? If one were to look at the number of films led by women in comparison to those led by men, one would assume that no, women are not getting the same amount of attention. Further, if we consider, as Dargis does, that people like to see characters they can relate to on the big screen, then yes, perhaps females are under represented. My response to that argument is that it seems exclusionary; almost as if saying that if you are not African American you will not get enjoyment from a Tyler Perry film, if you are a man you will not take anything from Sex and the City: The Movie and if you are not a man you will totally miss the point of The Incredible Hulk. Actually, my take on that argument is that you will not see those films – period. In reality, nothing is quite that black and white but by taking the argument to its most extreme, the core message seems to be just that. What really pickles me is that this argument doesn’t appear to hold any water. How many men can relate to a guy with anger issues that turns gigantic and green when his temper kicks in? I would say women and men are on the same playing field in regards to relating to a character like this one and essentially, to nearly all comic book heroes.

To be quite frank I’ve had enough with the argument that women are not being catered to. When studios decide to release films like Sex and the City: The Movie to appease the roaring vaginal crowds, I want to run the other way, hide in a closet and never come out again. More than that, I want to clock a producer and studio upside the head for assuming that because I’m a woman, I want to see a film full of product placement, bitchy women and dirty talk. I’m no prude but the film did push a few buttons. Do the bigwigs not understand that this is not making a difference? We don’t want to see movies simply targeted at women. We want to see good movies. Period.

First of all you (general, not you personally) ignore me (the woman) and then you offer me up this mindless tripe which comes across as some sort of afterthought to shut me up? Yes, please do use your already built in fanbase to add to your boxoffice, but please, do not belittle me by assuming it is the film that every woman has been waiting for since puberty. I am tired of having to defend myself to individuals who are up and arms that I, as a woman and a fan of film, did not run out to see the movie; never mind the fact that I had no interest in seeing it and only gave in so that I would not speak blindly about it when I mentioned it here - and I am positive that I am not alone. Though the film brought in good opening weekend numbers they were not “everyone and their mother went to see this” numbers. They were not Titanic numbers. And the argument that perhaps my tastes are not those of the average female film viewer does not fly with me. I love my share of female centric films – like my recent encounter with Then She Found Me, last year’s The Jane Austen Book Club and goodness, do not get me started on the number of times, this year alone, I have seen Joe Wright’s Pride & Prejudice. Not to mention the enjoyment I take from teen girl romances like A Cinderella Story and Chasing Liberty. I am just as needful, yes I sometimes feel the need to watch a romance, of sweetly romantic, even saccharin, stories but to assume that as a female, that is all I want to watch, angers me.

To be fair, I do not believe either Thompson or Dargis are suggesting that the issue is black & white as they both bring up cases in which films feature female leads who can cause some serious damage, Ripley in Alien and Angelina Jolie in the upcoming Wanted film but among the long list of male superheroes, it does look like women, and female crowds, are at a slight disadvantage. So what do we do about it? Do we stop going to the movies and sit out the summer and wait it out until the next romantic comedy? I’m not planning to. The simple truth is that women are, as Brad Brevet suggested in a recent editorial, overlooked and I would argue that one of the reasons for that is that men and women are not playing on an equal playing field. Reality is that sexism is very real and alive but in Hollywood, money talks louder than nearly everything else. If films with female leads were more successful, Elektra and The Invasion come immediately to mind, perhaps we would see more summer tentpole productions with women at the helm but I think it is unfair we pin it simply on the fact that women don’t want to see these movies when the truth is that no one wanted to see these movies. Does Hollywood expect women to settle for these poor offerings? It seems to me that if I, as a woman, want to see an action film, I have to choose from what is offered, even if I don’t particularly like the choices. That, right there is a problem – I want to have the choice of seeing a woman kicking ass, but the reality is that for whatever reason the studio cares to shell out, that film isn’t out there for me to see and that, in and of itself, is an altogether different problem.

Looking back at classic Hollywood, I can’t help but think that the fans of film in the early part of the century were better served than we are today. True, there weren’t the same number of films to choose from but the back catalog of great films with female leads/co-stars is astounding. On second look, those films attracted both male and female audiences. So what’s changed? The marketing and demographics have changed. The average movie goer is no longer the 30 something couple but the 13-18 year old group mob with no responsibility and a pocketful of disposable income. The changing demographic has also changed the type of films we are presented to the point where there is an over saturation of comic book and action properties on the big screen but this problem does not simply affect women but filmphiles in general.

As a woman and a lover of film, I do not simply want to see movies with female leads. I want to see movies with characters, male or female, that I can relate to, situations I can react to and stories that move me in some way but above all, I want a good film. What I don’t want is for someone to prop up a company that will focus on creating films that will simply pander to a female audience for the sake of making a few dollars and spouting comments like “We’re fulfilling a need for women’s films”. I just want to see a good film, regardless of who stars in it and who makes it. That is not too much to ask… is it?