Originally Posted By: ronnierocketAGO
There is no conflict what so ever between "family values" and leading compelling female characters in movies/TV that aren't merely designated props/playthings for men. For all of Hollywood's preaching, by default they usually fall back to the same patriarchal traditionalism that town supposedly decries. Not that I necessarily mind such traditionalism, but when they do it out of creative bankruptcy or worse cowardice, they deserve to be criticized with feet to the fires.

I'm reminded of ALIENS, Big classic action blockbuster with Sigourney Weaver the star and character that everybody liked and rooted for. She earned that rare Oscar acting nomination given for an action film. But that was what, 1986? Hollywood can do much more frequently than that.

Of course there is unfortunately still an undercurrent of sexism within Hollywood. I'm reminded of when Kathryn Bigelow was the front-runner to win the Best Director Oscar for HURT LOCKER, Salon magazine ran a piece criticizing and dismissing her talents because she never made "women movies," or whatever that means because women should only direct movies about women, like how men always make movies about men and other such wonderfully stupid observations that somebody was paid to write and somebody else published.

~I use quotations on "family values" because it's a questionable moniker used by particular peoples in recent decades waging their own cultural war using the mechanics of government against other particular peoples are actually very much pro-nuclear family and pro-marriage, a very welcome alternative to forsaking the institution of marriage or even celebrating divorce, a fact lost when some people miss the forest for the trees.


Compelling leading female characters is fine. Since you mentioned it, Aliens is one of my all time favorite movies. But in addition to being such a great writer and director, it worked because of how Cameron went about it. Ripley wasn't trying to be "GI Jane." She wasn't a soldier trying to be "one of the guys." She was just put in a position and did what she had to do. More than anything, it was really more about her taking on the mother role and protecting Newt among all the chaos.

The problem comes when movie makers, for whatever reason, but often to make some political or social statement, try to have their female characters act outside of their gender roles. And then present it as something that's a good thing. Something to be cheered.

And for the record, I liked the Hurt Locker, but I don't think it deserved both "Best Movie" and "Best Director."


Mods should mind their own business and leave poster's profile signatures alone.