Screenwriting : Strong female lead by Mike Heff

Joseph Campbell discussed the feminine side of the hero’s journey when he proposed the theory, as did many of his contemporaries. This form of narrative structure is not meant to parallel an orgasm as much as explain storytelling through the lens if our base psychological mechanisms. Sex is a part of this, but not the whole. Inanna Queen of Heaven, by Diane Wolkstein, offers a strong example of a woman undertaking the hero’s journey by retelling a cycle of myths from Mesopotamian mythology.

Not being female I am giving an observation. I would say that the “Strong female characters” are badly written if they feel like that.

Good writing is rare. Perhaps in the rush to address the lack of female roles more crap with females characters is getting circulated.

Just a theory.

I gotta admit, this gave me something to think about for quite some time. When it comes to a strong female lead, I'm not sure but maybe she was thinking of Sarah Connor from "Terminator 2: Judgement Day" when she really wants us to consider writing more characters like Sarah Connor from the first Terminator film. I don't know, maybe posting the article would help?

Personally, when it comes to writing any female character I think writers need to take into consideration the differences between how the genders see a situation. I try to avoid situations in a story I'm writing where the female lead has to prove themselves against a man just for the sake of a woman proving themselves against a man. It would be nice to see more unique female characters in film, but maybe we could help that change by writing better characters too. =)

Ok.

It doesn't matter as long as there is strength in lead protagonist and an antagonist perhaps even giving way to facade of lead.

Strength in story can be be the lead I suppose.

This doesn't change screenwriting but prioritization and without that basic element no narrative changes that.

Narrative in my opinion is prioritizing elements that are usually character.

NO COIN

May indeed work.

Over the years, the phrase "strong female characters" (or strong female protagonists/leads) has become a term of derision. It is rather patronizing too, no, and often misused. It has become a trope and some weird, empty tokenism. "This female character is different, she's better, she's special, she's strong!" Okay? So... all other female characters or women and girls are what, weak? We have to be strong in some contrived way in order to be valued or be worthy? What we truly need are strongly written characters, not strong female characters. As an audience member, I cannot stand strong female characters. Yeah, you read that correctly, and I'm not the only one. When I hear or read or see that phrase on paper or on screen, I'm done. Out. Stop reading. Stop watching. Enough already. Female characters are put into yet another box, another label. So for starters, I kindly suggest dropping the phrase altogether and consider bringing more fully-developed, authentic individual female characters to life. Characters with their own unique view and agency. Women are intersectional, there's so much to draw upon! So many stories and characters yet to create. Acknowledge the different perspectives and complexity of each one. The thing is if you can create a three-dimensional character of one gender then you certainly can do so for the other, or for any gender identity. As far as the Hero's/Heroine's Journey(s), if you utilize that/those narrative(s), either one or both, if they can be a tool to help you create authentic stories and characters that resonate, then more power to you. Happy writing, Mike, and best to you! ;)

Some times the lead character can reinvent or bring life to the character and narrative. How projects cast leads that are totally different. Whether it is aging the character or playing a role that you are much younger. Being able to play a wide variety of roles and races opens lots of doors for actors.

In my travels (through books), I've heard it explained in a way that seems to me to avoid the buzz words (good and bad) of female protagonist, etc. There is a MASCULINE JOURNEY and a FEMININE JOURNEY, which is divorced from the gender of the protagonist.

The Masculine Journey is about a character who has the power to change the world (the film's "world") and the journey is to learn to use that power wisely. It's generally an individual, solitary journey (putting aside mentors, sidekicks and so on) - and despite the advice of others, it's his/her decision to make.

The Feminine Journey is about a character that learns he/she has the power to change the world; and, with allies to protect and accommodate (in a positive sense), does that. It's a story where wisdom is a given, where the protagonist tries to include everyone in the saving of the world. It's a story of community, of relationship, where the effect of decisions are acknowledged by the protagonist.

This is a simplification (no story is wholly one or the other), but it makes a lot of sense to me - I use this philosophy in my storytelling. And, again, it's completely separate from the gender of the protagonist.

This is how I tell my stories: what's the theme (question to be answered by the end of the story); what's the journey (individual or community) and who's the best character to tell it (male/female is but one aspect of this question, along with job/skills, POV, etc.)

Because of this, luckily, I never struggle with the touchy issue of "strong female character."

I hope. :)

The playing level is rigged from the beginning- from concept of the idea to Folks in charge.

Lulu Wang said it best two weeks ago winning Best Picture at the Spirit Awards.

“There’s been a lot of conversation this year about how to encourage more women to be in film or get more women into the conversation,” Wang told the crowd. “I just have to say that we don’t have to encourage women. There are lots of women making films and who want to make films… What women need is just the job. Just give them the freakin’ job. Give them the money.”

My novel, "Icon of the Defender", features 3 female leads, all strong in their own special ways as they grow and develop naturally. I've tried to avoid stereotypes and cliché tropes.

I do not understand why someone should think certain "words" belong to either a male or female category. REAL strength is strength of mind, whether be male female or an alien from planet Zardos. A strong woman does not mean an unfeminine woman. The classic narrative structure for a character journey is designed for ALL HUMAN BEINGS living in the world. ALL characters should have unique sensibilities ( even if they are evil) no matter the gender. What new narrative structure should we invent for readers who perceive a woman to be subservient? A lobotomy maybe? No need for any dialogue then.

Why should "Strong" be considered to be either male or female. A strong person is an individual with strength of mind. End of.

That's a very thought provoking question.... but couldn't it also be said that we stereotype males with said structure/formula... I guess the onus will always be on the storyteller to give us something that deviates from the norm... what constitutes a strong female lead... depends on the definition of the author, who is writing the rules of the storyworld.

It's interesting. For me, 'strong female lead' was a big part of the films I watched as a kid...and they definitely still are. Martial arts films with heroines at the forefront (Angela Mao, Yukari Oshima, etc.) just made me that much more invested in their stories. BUT...that being said, on the literary side (books), I was also attracted to the tradigienne. Anna Karenina, Tess of the D'Ubervilles, etc. Women who were strong in spite of or even because of the things that happened to them. I think the problem is that 'Strong female lead' has a very narrow definition. It doesn't have to be action, it doesn't have to be tragic, it doesn't have to mean being 'strong' all the time, it doesn't mean the character doesn't cry or feel pain...Not always, but sometimes people miss the whole emotional development thing when it comes to developing SFLs.

Hi Mike,

I think you're referring to Brit Marling's opinion piece that appeared in the NY Times last weekend.

I could understand her views. She expressed the type of roles, characters, and story lines/story logic that she would rather see, and be a part of.

I could also understand how it could be particularly frustrating for any specific writer/actor/filmmaker to feel like there is a limitation of content and opportunities that they would like to see or be a part of.

I monitor media forms in several ways and for several reasons, and have seen a significant amount of change and progress over the last decade, and imagine an even more significant amount of change and progress over the the next decade. I have included a link to See Jane's 2019 Report on How Media Representation Affects Girls and Young Women, and a link to Brit Marling's opinion piece, for those who are interested. And writers and everyone else on Stage32 should follow SeeJane.org on a regular basis - at least in my opinion.

Best fortunes in your creative endeavors, Mike and All!

https://seejane.org/wp-content/uploads/2019-rewrite-her-story-plan-inter...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/opinion/sunday/brit-marling-women-mov...

@Larissa I totally agree. What is the definition of strength? I think the NYC newspaper writer is wrong to put ALL females into one “category”. What she feels is acceptable for herself may not be acceptable for others. I do not understand why gender should dictate any particular path a character in a film takes. Why should a character be more than, or less than, in any particular scene just cos their sex? It is daft to self limit possibilities in life’s journey.