For many years, male lead movies that dominated box offices have been releasing “sequels” using all female casts instead. As feminist movements started to rise and we as a society began to work through the different waves of feminism, it seems as though movie makers tried to come up with a solution that would satisfy these movements. However, I question if their solution really was even a solution at all or rather perpetuated these issues further.
Movies including Ocean’s 8 (an all-female spin-off of Ocean’s 11), Ghostbusters (2016) (an all-female spin-off of the original Ghostbusters from 1984), The Next Karate Kid (a female spin-off of The Karate Kid), and many more have been released. None of which seemed to become more or even equally as popular as the originals. The intent behind the idea of making new movies with all female roles and casts is great, but the execution in these circumstances seems lacking. As these movies all seem to be less thought out and largely lacking original plot lines, it almost delivers a message that this is all the effort women really deserve, which is nothing near that of the male-led originals.
Female dominated movies and movies that show women as smart, tough, and capable, are absolutely necessary in our society, however I question if this is the best way to go about it. Instead of coming up with new and creative stories for these women to lead, they are taking old movies and used plot lines and pulling a gender reversal and calling it a new movie. I would argue that this does not show the time and effort that solid female-led movies deserves but rather throws them on the back burner and produces pre-made material as a way to check off a box. Although these movies can and do often hold entertainment value, they are not nearly as well thought out, creative, or invested in as the originals. In turn, I wonder why we continually create female remake movies that continue to be arguably less memorable than the originals with the male-led roles instead of coming up with new creative plotlines that contain unique female characters that embody how feminism really wants people to see women and create something fresh for people to talk about.
How do you feel about the remakes of old movies with now female dominated roles? Do these movies perpetuate stereotypes in any way, or do you see them as a step forward for feminism?
Hey Josii!
ReplyDeleteI think you nailed it. Movie remakes where the only difference is that women are the leads rather than men seem to be a sorry attempt at inclusion because the idea that women could have been leads is an afterthought. If the original thought was that only men could be in leading roles, it denigrates women even more when they are leads only for the remake. True feminism would cast women and men equally. Sadly, I don't see Hollywood changing their long-standing tradition of casting with patriarchy anytime soon.
Great topic! I am not a huge fan of remakes in general. I view them as a shortcut and only an opportunity to ride the coattails of a previous film’s success. I appreciate and respect something fresh and creative, as it shows effort.
ReplyDeleteI think there have been some great memorable films with females as the lead (think of Linda Hamilton in the Terminator series). I especially appreciate the films that focus on women in history, highlighting their contribution to our society. For example, the streaming mini-series “A Small Light” tells the story of the heroic actions of Miep Gies, who risked her life to help hide Anne Frank’s family from the Nazis during World War II. These films resonate with me and represent feminism positively with the portrayal of strong, intelligent, independent women. This demonstrates the advantages that feminism has brought to our culture and more films like these would be beneficial to create positive role models for women and girls, and the opportunity for men and boys to see women as equals.
In general, I find most modern remakes of older movies to be objectionable, because very often the motivation behind them is purely profit driven. They aren't trying to tell a new version of the story; they're trying to cash in on nostalgia by just copying the original story. For remakes that are female led, they often suffer from this inherent motivation. It's incredibly difficult for these movies to stand outside of the shadows of the originals when they're so reliant on that shadow to even exist, and thus it makes it hard for women to maintain that spotlight and further women's positions in Hollywood and pop culture in general.
ReplyDeleteI also think that these movies suffer from incredibly derivative and poorly written scripts that make the films overall lesser than their originals, which causes many people to ignore the new stuff and rewatch the old stuff. The Ghostbusters movies are a great example of this. Ghostbusters 2016, much like the classic 1984 original, is a comedy, that utilizes improvisational comedy to tell many of the jokes. The key difference is that the original had many written jokes, the jokes are both lowbrow and highbrow, and the improve was usually very quick and didn't overstay it's welcome. Ghostbusters 2016 was over reliant on improv comedy, to the point where most of the film's jokes seem to be improvised, these improv jokes often overstay their welcome ang drag out for too long, and both the written jokes and improv jokes tend to be very low brow, relying on jokes about sex, human bodily functions, and getting slimmed. As such, most people choose the comedy of the original over the comedy of the new version.
Another way to put it, Ghostbusters 2016 isn't a bad movie because it was female led. Ghostbusters 2016 is a bad movie because it was a very unfunny comedy, especially in comparison to the original. It being led by women was unrelated, but the film being bad rippled out and affected the women as well.