At least once a week, I read yet another article bemoaning the dearth of movies about female characters and attributing this phenomenon to sexism. I find such articles puzzling because:
1. People who make a couple’s entertainment choices are overwhelmingly women. Couples where this is not the case tend not to watch Hollywood movies.
2. Women are overwhelmingly heterosexual.
I don’t know why everybody finds it so shocking that heterosexual women prefer to spend 3 hours staring at cute guys. This is Hollywood, so there can never be any acting to speak of. The plots will be weak, the characters will be plastic and cartoonish. Is it any surprise that the viewers choose at least to stare at what peaks their sensuality?
I’m a raging feminist but I’d never seek out a movie with a female protagonist. Why would I? To watch a plastic cyborg with zero relevance to my life for 3 hours? That would be a weird way to spend time. And this is precisely the reason why novels have been so dedicated to female characters since the XVIIITH century: they have an overwhelmingly female audience. People want to stare at what they find attractive and hear about themselves.
Clarissa's Blog 
Having a female protagonist isn’t mutually exclusive with having “cute guys” in the films, including a handsome leading man. (See pretty much every romantic comedy ever made.) Even a movie like Hunger Games, with a female protagonist and with a lot going on besides romance, has some young actors in strong supporting roles who are considered cute.
And aren’t heterosexual women watching television too? Orange Is the New Black, for instance, is a spectacularly successful show, all about women in the prison system. TV in general has seen a greater variety of shows with women as protagonists or significant supporting roles, especially female characters of the sort that don’t often appear in mainstream Hollywood movies as meaningful main characters (e.g. middle-aged or African American).
Hollywood in general has been struggling to compete with different kinds of media and get people to actually go to a movie theater. Their standard formula seems to be to rehash old plots and rely on huge special effects vehicles (like action or superhero movies that are part of a series).
They could probably stand to make even more movies with prominent female characters and still profit, given that movies with female protagonists have done really well at the box office, including comedies like Bridesmaids and animated films like Frozen – there’s a demand for such films. Interestingly, Hollywood does look to popular novels (with often a largely female following) for inspiration, as it guarantees them an existing audience who’ll be interested; of course, being Hollywood, they have a tendency to mess up the books they adapt.
“The plots will be weak, the characters will be plastic and cartoonish.”
The thing is, many people who go to these movies don’t take such a harsh view of them (at least, not of all of them), and some of them do find the female characters relatable. Also, heterosexual women do like looking at women too – not necessarily sexually, but for other reasons. Historically, there were periods like the Depression and World War II where Hollywood more regularly had movies with strong female characters to appeal to women in the audience who were working and struggling. (They also had handsome leading men.)
As for criticisms of sexism, I didn’t read the article you linked to, but generally these criticisms go beyond whether or not there’s a female protagonist to looking at the portrayal of women. You could have a movie with a female protagonist that’s still a sexist movie.
LikeLike
Television offers time and space to develop a character. To do that in a movie, you need good actors. And good actors are absent from Hollywood. The only purpose of Hollywood movies is to show a number of pretty,catchy pictures. There is never anything else.
LikeLike
I don’t know why everybody finds it so shocking that heterosexual women prefer to spend 3 hours staring at cute guys. This is Hollywood, so there can never be any acting to speak of. The plots will be weak, the characters will be plastic and cartoonish. Is it any surprise that the viewers choose at least to stare at what peaks their sensuality?
Except there’s far less fan service shots then you’d expect of these films starring cute guys and there are actors who just should not have any kind of a Hollywood career if the basis for women going to movies is to stare at cute guys, even taking into account that most actors are better looking than the average guy walking down the street. Woody Allen should have never had a career in front of a camera because he looked like an old man in his 30s. Jack Nicholson’s career should have jumped off a cliff after 40. Yet unbelievably, he was the lead in a rom com at sixty with a woman who was 35. 35 year old women do not fantasize about 60 year old men. And he wasn’t even a good looking, preternaturally well kept man. Nicholas Cage should have lost his career once he lost his hair. Sylvester Stallone should not be able to helm an action film at his age and looks, I don’t care how much he exercises.
There are better people on television which has more fan service. True Blood people watched because the actors were hot, (the plots were inane). Any Shonda Rhimes show has more fan service for women than most Hollywood movies (the plots are inane). When I think of movies catering to women by having good looking guys, I don’t think of Hollywood. I’ve never watched a Hollywood film where I’ve thought, “This is genius costuming because it makes the lead male more appealing.” I see this in Hindi cinema all the time (inane plots).
LikeLike
“Jack Nicholson’s career should have jumped off a cliff after 40. Yet unbelievably, he was the lead in a rom com at sixty with a woman who was 35. 35 year old women do not fantasize about 60 year old men.”
– The ones with daddy issues do. 🙂 And there are, sadly, many of them.
“Nicholas Cage should have lost his career once he lost his hair.”
– Compared to everybody else in Hollywood, he is actually not a horrible actor.
LikeLike
I have my fair share of dad issues. And I have a friend who is prematurely gray (it adds about 10 years to his perceived age) who is younger than me that gets much younger girlfriends (who tend to have daddy issues) or much older girlfriends. But he is not in bad shape and his underlings like him. Jack Nicholson is decrepit looking and plays an asshole.
LikeLike
“Jack Nicholson is decrepit looking and plays an asshole.”
– You don’t have to convince me! The moment I hear that Nicholson is in a movie, I know I will not be seeing that movie. I have no idea why people are so crazy about him.
LikeLike
I think he is horrible. One of the worst along with Keanu Reeves.
LikeLike
Yep, there are lots of women who gleefully await the next George Clooney film. He is better looking than his dad, who was a TV weatherman in Cincinnati OH.
A large proportion of the in-theater audience consists of teenage boys.
When I want to watch a movie, I generally go for non-Hollywood “art” movies.
LikeLike