« Weekend Estimates by Klady - May 4 | Main | No Excuses »
May 04, 2008
Hot Button - Message, Misogyny Or Misunderstanding?
It seems like we all need a reminder of some of the basic rules of Hollywood… again. I will proceed down that track at another time, but the thought hitting my brain pan today is this one…
Hollywood is neither monolithic nor terribly interested in the content of what they sell.
The brilliant – and that is a straight forward compliment – Manohla Dargis makes this miscalculation extravagantly in her “Where are the women at?” piece in the Summer Preview at The New York Times this weekend.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with pointing out that there is, as there has been for year after year, a dearth of movies with female leads in the summer season. Never mind the ironic truth that this summer has more women in lead roles than has been the norm, as Hollywood chases – 2 summers later – the The Devil Wears Prada dollars that they didn’t believe were there in nine figures until it happened.
But the urge of Manohla, as it is for most critics, I find, is to ascribe some sort of intent on the part of "The Industry." This, I disagree with… no matter how vacuous, silly, vain, arrogant, misogynistic, and foolish execs can be.
"Hollywood" is driven, before anything, by trends. It is one of the troubles of Hollywood, as there is this 18 month to 3 year lag in bringing studio films to market and trend chasing can be absolutely deadly. But still, they do it over and over and over again.
(Note: The return of The Hot Button is coming... sorry for the delay.)
Posted by poland at May 4, 2008 12:28 PM
Comments
Date on the column says April 1, 2008. That may fool some people who don't realize it's actually the right link.
As I commented yesterday, Dargis' screed is totally misguided. It makes a surface judgement and makes no attempt at all to analyze "problem," if it is a problem in the first place. As I also said yesterday, women don't seem to obect to their seeming absence, since they show up in droves to these summer movies. Whether they do so out of resignation or because they like these movies is another column. Hopefully, one that has some actual reporting. And that's leaving aside the question of whether they are dragged by their boyfriends/husbands, though judging by movie grosses, more girlfriends are dragged to summer flicks than boyfriends are to chick flicks. In other words, it's not just guys driving up Iron Man's gross.
Posted by: Blackcloud ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 4, 2008 01:26 PM
Sure, but what gets glossed over is that wouldn't movies be better off if they touched, in general, on things that were actually relevant to peoples' lives a little bit more often? Just because something is a passive circumstance instead of a nefarious conspiracy doesn't make it any less noticing and calling attention to.
Posted by: jeffmcm at May 4, 2008 04:18 PM
"Why is Angelina Jolie the only recognizable name in Wanted?"
Morgan Freeman isn't recognizable?
Posted by: Cadavra at May 4, 2008 04:36 PM
Took a look earlier-did she even view all the pictures she is dissing?
Posted by: doug r at May 4, 2008 06:37 PM
When did Charlize Theron earn a nine figure payday?!
Posted by: Andrew at May 4, 2008 07:50 PM
Hollywood is neither monolithic nor terribly interested in the content of what they sell.
Especially true for summer. Hollywood is most surprised when a hit emerges out of nowhere -- then they milk it for all they can. Examples are too numerous to name here.
The same premise can be used to justify the name-checking and Oscar-whoring on anything that isn't presold. Why does the trailer for "Mamma Mia" have to include the line "Academy Award Winner Meryl Streep"? The studios don't cut their own trailers but such a line tells an outsider that Hollywood is creatively bankrupt.
Posted by: Chucky in Jersey at May 5, 2008 03:09 PM
No it doesn't, such a line tells someone who doesn't know anything else about the movie that a popular star is in the movie and that it may be a quality product.
Posted by: jeffmcm at May 5, 2008 03:18 PM
When did any Hollywood star earn a nine-figure payday? I know some of them might get 9 figures eventually, but do any of them get a hundred mill up front, i.e., on payday?
Posted by: Blackcloud at May 5, 2008 03:50 PM
To jeffmcm, Oscar-whoring = "quality product".
I have two words for you: Georgia Rule.
Posted by: Chucky in Jersey at May 6, 2008 01:12 PM
GEORGIA RULE RULED MY DICK.
LOHAN? MORE LIKE OWN-HAN.
Posted by: LexG at May 6, 2008 01:21 PM
Chucky, there's something wrong in your brain. If Georgia Rule is a bad movie (don't know, didn't see it) then it was bad before the marketing staff ever chose their campaign for it, and it would have looked bad with or without name-checking. And I don't think they 'Oscar-whored' it because it was released in the Spring with, I'm pretty sure, very little awards campaigning.
Please stop being stupid.
Posted by: jeffmcm at May 6, 2008 02:05 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)