I may be
trying to cover more than I should here….
A few
weeks ago in the Huffington Post, an article was posted up with the headline;
One Photo Shows Why We Needed An All-Female ‘Ghostbusters’ Reboot and there was
photo of Kristen Wiig talking with a group of young girls dressed as
Ghostbusters.
We all
know by now that the Ghostbusters reboot has received a huge tidal wave of
internet troll abuse not to mention the heinous attacks on Twitter on the
amazing Leslie Jones, but the filmmakers and the cast had the last laugh. The
film has been well received and no childhoods were ruined in the process as
some idiotic people claimed. The photo proves that. These girls in the photo
and all the young girls who watch the film will hopefully be inspired that they
can be whoever they want to be.
Young
girls aren't just given the same old role models to look up to, they have a
choice, they won't get told that they like 'boy films', as they are just films,
no gender separation needed.
I was
brought up, along many others on films like Ghostbusters, Star Wars, Back to
the Future, heck even Lord of the Rings, which is (collectively) one of my
favourite films BUT even in my twenties, given the chance to see female lead
characters on screen is something I didn’t think would happen, not the way
things were going. I thought the dream of great female characters was going to
continue to be a niche thing, no matter what Cate Blanchett said when she won
her Oscar. It’s my go to speech when I want to make a point of how important
that speech actually was, people DO want to see films about women/starring
women.
While
watching films like The Hunger Games, Mad Max: Fury Road and Star Wars: The
Force Awakens, I didn’t think twice that all the leads were female. I just
thought what great characters and how much I enjoyed the films. Of course I was
over joyed about Rey being the Jedi over other male characters, but apart from
that, gender did not cross my mind. This is why I was surprised at the back
lash from people complaining, actually complaining that the leads were female!
It’s absurd and several different kinds of wrong that people saw fit to
complain about this.
Mad Max:
Fury Road and Star Wars getting the main brunt of these complaints, it seems
that people couldn’t bear to see women in great roles where they weren’t just the
side characters and more than a few lines to say. The battering down on female
roles is a prime reason why we need MORE female roles that aren’t conscious,
they just feel natural. Then more young girls, like the one in the photograph,
can see their heroes or heroines on the big screen.
Strong
Female Characters
What
defines a strong female character? To me, a strong female character is someone
is front and centre. She is determined in her goal and isn’t swayed or
controlled by a man. She isn’t just in an action film, she could be in a comedy
or thriller or anything she chooses. She isn’t an ‘ice queen’ and she isn’t
‘quirky’ and she is not always ‘romantically inclined’. She is described by
more than her appearance and her age is not relevant. She has a personality and
is not a one dimensional character. She doesn’t necessarily have to be the
hero, she could be the villain. She is more than her job, more than the people
that surround her. She has an actual name. She is a strong female character.
Reading
the above back (not out loud) I think I’m asking a bit too much. But hopefully
I’m clear in what I mean. A ‘strong female character’ is NOT only, someone in
an action film who can beat up an entire warehouse of people without breaking a
sweat. This description of a female character has been used too long to hide
the fact that she may be strong but she’s the only female around. I think I’m
also guilty in using this description in the wrong way, but I will stop from
now on and only use this when its right.
‘She-boots’
The
misconception that about ‘she-boots’ is that they are not a progression as
women should be given new stories and their own franchises and so on. Honestly,
I think the fact that potential film reboots have been given their own gender
specific nickname is the bad thing here. Why aren’t they just called reboots?
Why does there have to be name calling? Why is there a need to point out that
the leads are female?
So called
‘she-boots’ aren’t the long-time solution to the gender inequality in Hollywood
but they are a start. The news that there was an Ocean’s Eleven-esque heist
film with an all-female cast going into production sent another uproar through
the ranks. I had always thought that the Ocean’s Eleven was a film where it
really didn’t matter if the cast was male or female and now that a similar film
was underway, I couldn’t believe it. But when further news was released that
Cate Blanchett and Sandra Bullock (excellent cast so far) was cast and one was
Danny Ocean’s sister, I was less enthusiastic. However, never to turn down what
otherwise looks to be (with more actresses cast) an excellent film.
Over on Hitchcock’s World, he’s written a post
about a number of possible re-boots with all female casts. For me this
illustrated that re-boots are not the ultimate answer, even though I loved his
idea for Die Hard, I would watch that film. I think what is needed, is more
stories, films that feature women in the lead roles and more importantly, new
material. What with actresses banding together to start production companies
and more women directing and writing, hopefully we will be other the ‘she-boot’
hysteria and moans from the negatives out there.
And one
last thought….
In A
World…
SPOILERS!
Actress
and writer Lake Bell’s debut feature, In A World… tackled the world voice over
artists, in particular the famous worlds used in countless trailers, ‘In a
world…’. This industry is dominated by men. The main part of the film is
competition to be the voice over artist to immortalize those three little words
in a new big blockbuster franchise which happens to feature a cast of women.
Bell’s character is competing against her father, who is well renowned in the
business and belittles her whenever he gets the chance. He doesn’t see her as
competition at all. Ultimately she is picked, but she is told she was not the
best person for the job, but was chosen for the greater meaning of having a
woman in that role. The funny thing about this is the executive who delivers
this truth is played by Geena Davis, who is known for championing women.
I found this a mixed message, unsure whether to
take it as the industry is like this, blunt. Or it could be taken that, the
only way for things to change is for people in a position of power to change
things themselves. Somehow, this might not be the best approach to the industry
run by men. Everyone wants to feel that they deserve the opportunities that
they are given and aren’t given a place because, a token is needed or diversity
numbers must be met. However I still believe equal opportunity should be given.