Clearly, a female-protagonist film is aimed at a female audience. But equally important in the case of Netflix's Enola Holmes is the notion that the sisters of famous male figures often are overlooked and the female audience needs to know more about those "hidden stories".
Thus, the producers of Enola Holmes (and likely Netflix as well), decided to ensure their message was clear - with a cleverly executed marketing scheme to both grab attention and to echo the sentiments. READ ON ABOUT THE "SISTER STATUES": https://www.forbes.com/sites/tufayelahmed/2020/09/23/netflix-celebrates-enola-holmes-release-with-statues-of-sisters-overshadowed-by-famous-brothers/?sh=200ee2ab16ef
What do you think? Gimmicky or Genius?
1 person likes this
Karen "Kay" Ross This is an important issue and I would love to do some serious industry dialog on it. (It's good to see Neflix doing something I don't hate for a change.) I take issue with the idea that female protagonist films are clearly aimed at female audiences. Let me qualify that. I write ONLY female protagonists and none of it is aimed at a female audience per se, nor have I ever had any male say they are not engaged because the star is female. I think that the industry and filmmakers actually do make films with female protagonists on the assumption that they will attract more female audiences. But that attitude itself is part of the real issue around female empowerment and symbol - they are going to portray the female in a way they assume women are attracted to. This seeming universally accepted attitude masquerades in media as a marketing concept, but in my view it is just a palatable way to express and perpetuate the deep-seated misogyny of the film industry, which is really an expression of the deep-seated misogyny in society currently and across literally the millennia. In caps for emphasis, not to yell: THERE IS NO REASON A FEMALE CANNOT INSPIRE A MALE, IN FILM OR IN REAL LIFE, PERIOD, AND THEY DO. And I am going to say that there is no reliable study (or any study at all) showing the opposite to be true. I regard all marketing concepts to the contrary as misogynist crapola. This is a very complex subject, and one fraught with underlying and often learned biases, most often among men but across cultures, which by design reduce the power of the feminine. You do hit one nail on the head here: women's stories are simply not told. That's because societies and historians marginalize women, intentionally. I have a very dear young woman in my life who just turned 13. I wrote a book just for her - "39 important women" - highlighting the lives of 3 women for every year of her life, whom I thought she should know about. She's African-American, so I focused on African-American and Black females (75% of them). Now... I did copious research (~300 hours) and experienced the absolute truth behind the statement "women's lives are not told." It was a serious challenge. I can find literally thousands of detailed profiles of men, historical and current. When looking for women's stories, that drops down to dozens, even (or especially) considering historical resources, and we get few personal details, if any. They have been at times very, very powerful people whose whims hold the power of life and death over millions, but they end up with small mention or intentionally derogatory mention or no mention at all. I can find out what Julius Caesar ate for dinner on several occasions, and what his mood was. I cannot find any such detail for Cleopatra... or Theodora (Empress of the Eastern Roman Empire), who you should recognize are near equal in importance. I am going to stop here...
...and case in point... after two days, I am the only comment on this post, about female leads...
I see what you're saying, Shadow. I know you know this, but when it comes to hedging one's bets, a production company is going to only account for the audience it can reliably claim will watch. Yes, boys/men can also enjoy stories with a female protagonist, but right now, statistically, it is unreliable to say that they will. However, just as you said, I'd love for there to be studies done with recent releases like Enola Holmes, Stranger Things, and other YA female-driven stories to see how much of the audience is still male. Current studies I think could help turn the tide on gender expectations. We should drop the Geena Davis Institute a note! LOL!
Also, most of my projects are done from a female point of view who had mostly male mentors, so am actively writing female characters who do likewise. I'm with ya on this one!
Karen "Kay" Ross You see, that's the thing: "reliably claim will watch" is garbage - they don't know, especially today in the new environment. It's just outdated industry cultural bias which frankly they repeat like parrots. Corporate animals are afraid to be associated with a failure, and the attitude is at the base of such debacles like Cats.... Corporate producers back a "proven" property - or a remake or a sequel - instead of an original property. Because if it fails (as many do), they can say "who would have guessed such a sure thing could fail?" and they can't be blamed (Cats... how could that possibly be a box office failure?). If it succeeds they are golden. But if the "new" property fails, they are associated with the failure because it was untried. That's the attitude but note it has nothing to do with what the audience actually would or would not watch, if it is done well. As Orson Welles says: get the audience at the start and they will follow you anywhere. Literally, any well done story will find an audience.