Screenwriting : Female Protagonists by Tony McFadden

Boo-yah. The female protagonist in my current script doesn't match any of these 15 archetypes. Which either means the script is stunningly original or completely unsaleable. Or maybe both!

I'll go for the latter Kerry. I have a lead female in a action/supernatural novel and she is probably closest to The rape victim, but I'm not sure she is exactly that. She definitely a victim turned aggressor.

"...male writers can't write an interesting scene between two women that isn't conversation about a man." Trolling?

Thinking that passing the Bechdel Test means we write great female characters is sadly very foolish. Same goes for avoiding these archetypes. Danny clearly states in his article that his point isn't that we should be avoiding them, just that they we should be trying to understand potential pitfalls that surround them. It's also, as the article clearly demonstrates, nothing to do with the gender of the writer. We can insert scenes satisfying Bechdel, we can remove superficial descriptions of female characters, and we can proactively avoid misogyny, but the reality is the honesty and dimensions of female characters are nuanced and come from a far deeper understanding.

The Bechdel Test is a meaningless judge of movie quality. "Gravity" fails. The "Sex and the City" movie passes. Should we have strong female characters? Absolutely. In fact, all of our characters should be strong. That's just good writing.

I think Alle was joking with her misandropic statement. She's way too smart for that. I would, however love to see a character who doesn't, in some way, have remnants of those 15 or so character traits. Of all the people any of us have met in real life, how many don't have some form of these traits embedded within them. The nature of movies is that it condenses life into a couple of hours, so every nuance is accentuated. This is why screenwriting is an art unto itself, and those who master it make those two hours seem as if they were real life. So basically, in order to show characters how we'd like them to be we have to cheat life and pick those scenes which show only the qualities we prefer. This is one reason I'm also a novelist. My characters are not confined in that way.

As a 35 year old female screenwriter I can't wait to see more and better female roles. The last two romantic comedies I saw, I felt insulted- Chef was like watching a horny teenage boy's fantasy ( Scarlett Johansson practically having an orgasm watching Jon Favreau making pasta!) and The Other Woman, where a wife and her husband's mistress get drunk and braid each other's hair (both women in their 40's) I know they are comedies, but let's make intelligent comedies!

@Alle - you lost me on roles for women when you started talking about doggy style sex.....and by the way all men aren't like that. Don't get me started on how every commerical selling to a female has a man as a complete idiot if it wasn't for their wife. I try to write good characters no matter what sex. To me, each of them needs to shine.

You're correct, Alle, "misandropic" isn't a real word at all. It's "misanthropic". And it wasn't coined recently. Plato wrote about it. A misanthrope is someone who hates people in general, regardless of gender. It's not the opposite of a misogynist (a person who hates girls or women).

Haha, you guys! (And I use guys as neutral gender.) As is often the case in English, I was turning a noun (misandry, which means man hating) into an adjective. Sorry if my wayward ways of a prose fiction writer was confusing. And I was using it in jest. I don't think you're a misandrist, Alle. :-) However, I'm a bit saddened by the apparent fact that of all the scripts and books you've read, you've come away with the belief that only women can write about women. Most of my readers (of novels) are women, and most of my protagonists are women, and most of my reviewers are women, and I've been nominated for a half dozen reviewer awards from women (and won some) because they like how my women characters are portrayed. I wonder if you believe women can't write male characters.

Ah, okay, Stuart. That would make a person a misandrist. (also, not a new word - around since the mid 1800's)

This is the best post I've seen on Stage 32. Important, balanced, well-written, and about a subject worth contemplating (most of the posts sound like bickering child siblings to me). I really admire the writer who posted this and I agree with nearly every word you wrote. With one exception. Unlike you, I don't go to movies to see people I would love to hang around with in real life. I go to see dramatic conflict. Sometimes the most interesting time I spend is listening to a movie character,I wouldn't want to meet in real life. Regardless of gender or genre, I like movie characters who change me, not characters just like me. For god sakes, I'm a writer. People like me are boring. Give me some chianti with Hannibal Lecter and I'm there. Spend money wrecklessly with The Wolf of Wall Street, I'm in. Watch Don Draper hide his identity and screw around, yes! Take an elavator ride with Lorne Malvo, sure. Just don't ask me to hang around with a group of likable characters from my side of the tracks, OK? I'd rather die.

I'm glad you all enjoyed my article. I am going to stay out of the misogyny conversation however, because...well, because I am.

I think for any good character, be it male or female, needs to solve their own problems. Anytime someone has to rescue the main character from the antagonist it weakens the story. We aren't bickering it's a discussion. Once it moves off topic and get personal, then it's bickering in my opinion. I come here to learn from others that wish to teach, talk with people that have a common interest in screenwriting and movies in general. I have a thick skin developed in the Marines.

I'm going to close off my comments on this by saying that I don't think either gender can write the other as well as their own. That doesn't excuse us from writing poor characters, or stereotypical characters. It also doesn't give us license to demean the abilities of others, just based on gender. I'm glad there was a good discussion on character development here. Sorry it devolved at times to something less.

Hey all, I thought those of you on this thread might be interested in a documentary called MISS REPRESENTATION. I've posted about this film before on Stage 32. I found it incredibly helpful in my quest to write great female characters. This film exposes how mainstream media contributes to the under-representation of women in positions of power and their influence in America. It challenges media's often disparaging and extremely limiting portrayal of women and girls. It starts with a personal story from the narrator and then talks about the media's affect on teenage girls and how they self-objectify -- PLEASE HANG IN THERE -- it then goes heavily into social media, news media, advertising, TV, Hollywood, movies, screenwriting, history, social issues and politics. It has staggering statistics. MISS REPRESENTATION is currently available to stream on Netflix. Here is the trailer: http://therepresentationproject.org/films/miss-representation/ This same group is also producing another film called THE MASK YOU LIVE IN. This documentary addresses how as a society, we are failing our boys and men. Here is the trailer: http://therepresentationproject.org/films/the-mask-you-live-in/

Thank for sharing, Beth. This thread has caused me some consternation (only in the following case) because I'm writing a script based on a story by a woman, using her personal accounts, her personality, and her concept. It contains a lot of the dreaded 15. It's a romcom, and traditionally romcoms treat men and women with somewhat equal disdain in the stereotyping department. Now that I've been thinking how to make this politically correct, almost every scene that was once funny, falls flat. If I follow that path, the story is no longer hers, or a very diluted image of her original idea. One particular character problem is that she's extremely clumsy, but not at all ditsy. I'm not sure that portraying a person as having such characteristics is necessarily demeaning. Chevy Chase did it to great effect. Rosanna Dana was a ditsy sage. I'm open to suggestions.

Still hoping to check out Miss Representation but waiting for it to pop-up on a streaming service in the UK. When it comes to writing cross gender, I feel it boils down to a couple of things. Firstly, if we are the type of writer who reflects our internalised views or external world. Some of us, to use a term David Simon coined, lean toward life stealing, we write in an observational capacity, holding up a mirror to the world. Some of us project our internalised voice, we open ourselves up to the world. As a result the former is going to be subject to the company we keep and the latter subject to who we are. So I don't believe that men write better men or women write better women, I think a lot stems from where you muse lies. Secondly, in terms of character depth and dimension, we have to consider the target audience. James Cameron movies tend to feature female protagonists, however they aren't very deep or feminine. But it doesn't matter in terms of the Aliens or Terminator audiences. Women are portrayed in misogynistic fashion in franchises such as The Fast & Furious, yet the movies attract a huge female audience who enjoy that projection of male and female roles. It's also important to note it repels plenty of progressive men too.

Women are never off topic...lol. I try in my writing to represent both genders in a fair light. I can write believable male characters more naturally than female and I suspect women can write more believable female characters. I try much harder to portray female characters accurately. I also get a critic from both genders to make sure I wasn’t totally of base with my writing.

I find that hard to believe Denise. Gravity has a female lead, The Heat had two of them. You just keep writing stories that inspire you and pitch to companies that have produced movies with a woman in a leading role.

Keep writing, Denise, times are changing. Cool script concept in your loglines section by the way. I live in an area built on the grounds of an old WW2 service airport where female pilots would fly the planes in and out.

Hey Stuart, you're welcome! With your story, I suggest if your character is clumsy then write her that way. Clumsy people are hilarious and endearing. Yes, don't do ditsy, big difference. If your comedy hits stereotypes then perhaps delve into them but then surprise us. Do something different! Something never seen before. And, CJ, I think the key to writing great female characters is to make them fully developed, well-rounded people. Make them flawed, imperfect, strong, caring, weak and smart (street smart, commonsense smart, or academic). Have a moment of weakness. Have a moment of incredible strength. I loved Ripley in Alien and Aliens (not the other Alien films). I thought she was all the above. In Aliens, she had emotional problems. She was unstable. She was loving and caring. She was strong. She had moments of weakness, She was scared. She acted when no one else would. She was motherly and protected the child and everyone else. She never gave up. Ripley is one of the best female characters I've ever seen in an action/horror film. Personally, I think we should not consider the target audience. We should demand more of them. We should stop dumbing things down. The only way to change perceptions is to change what is represented. When writing a stereotype see how you can twist it, change it, add to it, show the flip side of it, surprise audiences. Look at how successful FROZEN was, simply because the protagonist chose her love of her sister over the love of a man.

Denise, you are doing everything right. You are writing from the heart. Whoever gave that bit of information doesn't know what they're talking about. Hollywood is dying for well-written scripts with female leads, especially after Gravity. Yes, right now, most of them, in film and TV, are "women in a man's world" concept. Hollywood has to find it's sea legs, so to speak. You just need to write the best script you can, then pitch it all to hell and then some. Try going after the actors you envision in the rolls. No easy task, but it's another avenue.

Beth, thanks for your encouraging advice. Your advice to CJ is also spot on. Incidentally, I worked on Aliens. I sculpted Segourney Weaver for the scene where she fight the Queen Alien at the end. I have a handful of Polaroid of her I had James Cameron shoot for me.

Let's not go implying people write stereotypes.

Beth, thanks for the link. I'll be watching that with the eye of a screenwriter and the father of a young daughter. Stuart: you are the coolest person I know. This is not sarcasm. I'm geeking out to be on the same thread as you. :)

You write stereotypes, CJ? Never! :) You always have great posts, by the way. Very thoughtful and perceptive. :)

Stuart, you're very welcome. I hope it helped you somewhat. :) Wow, what a great experience you had! How wonderful an opportunity to have worked on such an iconic film. When I saw ALIENS in the theater, the audience cheered, clapped, some even stood up, when Ripley comes out in that power work loader and says to the queen alien, "Get away from her, you bitch!" I've never had a movie audience experience like that before, not much since either. Everyone was thoroughly entertained and fully invested in Ripley. :)

Thanks for the kind words, Beth. Nearly got my manties in a twist there.

Too funny, CJ. ;) Nah, c'mon. I'm usually in complete agreement with you. Just this one time I swayed -- slightly. ;) Again, you are very sharp. Certainly have taught me a thing or two. We've both been on Stage 32 for some time now. Pure respect for you man. Wish you the best!

Wow, Kerry! No one's geek out for me before. I'm flattered and honored (I guess). Okay, free popcorn for you at the screening for my next film! If you don't mind me saying so, you have a n uncanny resemblance to Fred McMurrey. I wish you the best in your endeavors.

Beth, your advice help put me back on track. I derailed there for a minute. It's too easy sometimes to get caught up in the swing and sway of political tribute. At some point we just have to be true to our own heart and that of our characters. As for Aliens, you weren't alone in your audience experience. I was at the cast and crew screening and sat next to the main cast. I can tell you that we all were freaked out during the whole show. No one had seen any dailies. We didn't know what to expect. When it was over, no one made a sound. I looked at James and he was a little in shock because there was no reaction. Then all of a sudden, the applause broke out. You hardly ever see a response like that from a crew. Jim had prepared this huge buffet feast, but everyone's stomach was so twisted into knots, hardly anyone could eat.

I had heard that story in an interview some where Stuart. Ripley really broke the mold for female leads. She showed us it could be done and a female could be an iconic film hero.

I'm a woman who writes action adventure fantasy and most of my hero's are female. I think the only thing getting in the way of a more even division of rolls is the pre conserved notion of how men and women are supposed to act and what they are expected to want out of life.

So Stuart says, "Yeah, they call it The Last Supper now, but to us it was just Passover dinner. Jesus is like, pass the horseradish, and I go, oy, I FORGOT the horseradish! And Jesus is like, what am I supposed to put on my gefilte fish?" Sorry, thread hijack. So I'll add: thinking more about this, I realize that when I write female protagonists I don't really think, "this is a female". I just write from a side of myself, like I do for every character (I'm male, for the record). But is this the RIGHT or WRONG way to write a character of a genre not your own?

I wrote a blog post on this for Stage 32 back in late Jan. I kinda don't want to say too much in this thread incase it gets published anytime soon. But yeah, Kerry, for the most part, I think that's the right attitude to go with.

Hey Kerry, yeah, whatever works for you, right?! I'd say you have the right method. I try to focus on the psychology of the character first, not so much the gender. That really helps me steer away from preconceived notions about the sexes. Oddly, I think I write men better than women. I've actually made a couple of my male readers cry. Go figure!

Okay Stuart, now I'm totally geeking out too.

Beth, your case one of the reasons why I don't support the women writer better women argument. The flip side implies women don't write men well. Given that female writers find breaking in hard enough, the last thing needed is the assumption you struggle to write male roles.

Wow, thanks CJ! Just to explain myself a little... I've always loved men -- AND NO, I don't mean as boyfriends! I'm talking platonically here. Most of my best friends have been men. My buddies. Growing up, I was a tom boy, a jock. I played most sports. Anyway, I've always related better with men than women. Generally speaking, men are straight forward. Blunt. Most have a great sense of humor. I think those of us lucky enough to be surrounded by a wide variety of people really have a better grasp of how men and women are actually more alike. Just get past the surface stuff and the ridiculous way genders are projected in the media, especially women.

Well here's a fist-bump just for you, Beth. I am so the yin to your yang. I grew up very close to my sister, when we were kids we shared toys, and when we were teenagers we shared our thoughts. I've been fortunate enough to befriend and work with some really remarkable women. I tend to only be motivated to write female protagonists and I'm sure that's a result of my experiences.

Off topic of the Beth/CJ snugglefest (not mocking, just jealous)... I worry about how my current script will be received as written by a man. The last feature film I wrote/directed involved a neurotic, psychologically damaged male protagonist. This on involves a neurotic, psycholocally damaged FEMALE protagonist. I worry about charges of misogyny. I tend to write effed up heroes. But it's much less fraught for a man to write an effed up man than an effed up woman.

Kerry, if you worry then you care, and that's what matters in my opinion. The danger is blissful ignorance.

Geekee checking in. haha! You guys are great. Mostly what I'm seeing here is that just about everyone is right in their approach this hot topic, because we all have different backgrounds and relate to the opposite sex differently. For men who grew up dealing mostly with men, and women who grew up dealing mostly with women, their view of the world is going to be a lot different than people like Beth, CJ, and me. I totally agree that character has to come from the psychology of the character, but that psychology is vastly different from the male / female POV. As they say where I live, same same but different. I grew up with women and girls all around me. Not only did I have two sisters, but my mother ran a ballet school out of our house, so I was surrounded everyday by female energy. I was the only boy. I danced with the New York City Ballet when I was ten. The only boy. When I graduated high school, my first job was as a hairdresser. There were two boys and fifty girls. As Beth says about men, I'm way more comfortable around women, than I am men. My female characters are imbued with what I know about women, having been around them all my life. It's easy for me to let the characters take over and leave Stuart out of the equation all together. I'm sure, if I was to write a realistic war scenario, I'd have to do a boatload of research and interview dozens of real soldiers to get that realist feeling of their thoughts and actions. I would suggest that those men who don't feel comfortable writing female characters to spend more time around women without the interference of other guys. Just get to know them, be buds, hang out, blend in, pal around. It's not about interviewing or picking their brains, it's about observation and listening. I promise you, it will be more rewarding than you can imagine.

Kerry, since I was around since the first Passover dinner, I can safely tell you that as long as your female character is motivated by realistic and believable psychological traits that are germane to the story, no one will question why you used a woman rather than a man. Okay, three people will. There's always three people who question everything.

Yeah, CJ, I have an older brother (5 years older) who tested in the genius range -- sorry to say, I'm more from the swallow end of the family gene pool -- but, anyway, in high school he competed in creative writing and speech. He'd finish his writing and sit me down on the couch and do his speech for me and then ask my opinion. Mine! He'd take my thoughts to heart. Took me very seriously. Made adjustments according to what I had to say. That was an amazing little experience that shaped who I am now. My brother made me feel that I could hold my own no matter whom I'm dealing with. So, you fathers out there, really listen to your daughter's opinions. Their thoughts. It's invaluable!

Hey Kerry, I totally agree with CJ -- snugglefest aside. Write your neurotic female character as authentically as you can. Be truthful. Give her real reasons for her behavior, perhaps they are medical. I don't know what your story is about, but please please let it be much more than behaving badly because of a man, or a love thing. Give her sane moments too. :)

Yes, write her so she feels multilayered. So theres a pathology to her. Know what her triggers are that will set her off or bring out the diff sides of her personality.

Thanks, guys. I've worked longer on this screenplay than any other in my life (mainly because I'm writing so slowly because I have a kid now). So I've spent years with her and know her inside and out. She's plenty real... She's just difficult is all. :) And her problems have nothing to do with a man.

Does anybody else study the Jung personality types? That's quite a good way to try and see past gender, or at least pick a personality type that lends itself to a certain mindset. I'm obsessed with the ISTP female, the type that lends itself most to being a tomboy. Also the polar opposite of my own personality type.

Sounds like a great script, Kerry. Best of luck with it!

I'm familiar with the Jung personality types, but I haven't really studied them. However, I've always had an interest in behavioral studies and psychopathology. Crime and forensic pathology too.

Kerry: Don't worry about speed, political correctness, or gender psychology. We all find different people interesting for different reasons, so we shouldn't write characters one way or another, regardless of their gender. Just make the character interesting to you and put her in a great story. If a woman is obsessed with the pool boy, she can still be an interesting character. If a woman's sister died of mennigitis just before her Christmas , she can still be boring. The character's backstory isn't the answer to everything. Some characters like Lorne Malvo (Fargo) are interesting and we have no idea what happened in his past. People don't need a reason/rationale to be interesting. Some characters hold our interest because they're in a dramatic situation. Again, this has nothing to do with their personality or psychology.

Great comment, Lee. Yes, I loved FARGO (the TV series). Lorne Melvo (Billy Bob Thorton) was a fantastic character. We didn't know his back story, but man, as an audience, we really wanted to. I thought he did have a rational to his pathology. He clearly was a sociopath.

Thank you so much for posting this article. I'm happy to say my screenplay passes the Bechel Test.

Perfectly stated, Lee! When we meet someone in real life, we don't know their backstory. We see how they present themselves through actions and dialogue, even what they wear. We form opinions about them from that. Your characters should be interesting long before we know their backstory, or as you point out, never knowing their backstory.

Great article, and my scripts pass the Bechdel test. Also working on this -- "Another way to get more female leads on the big screen is by writing more novels with female leads." But I think the key to writing compelling female or male characters is to write the truth, which is always complicated. The most interesting protagonists are the ones who struggle to be better, braver, or to love when it's not easy, for whatever reason. And for me, the most fascinating antagonists are those who use their darker characteristics to get what they want, while fighting or ignoring their own humanity, but letting us get a glimpse of it every now and then, e.g., Al Swarengen -- one of the most well-written villians of all time.

And they said Pirate movies don't work until Pirates of the Caribbean made a fortune. The trade news is full of articles about female-driven movies making money and winning awards, including Hunger Games, Gravity, Twilight, Fault in Our Stars, Black Swan, Million Dollar Baby, Thelma and Louise, Erin Brockovich, Bridesmaids, and countless others. If, in fact, the number of releases with female leads equaled the number with men, women would dominate at the box office. The smart money may be adapting comic books, but talent is moving to television.

Writing a period piece with a female lead is double the trouble. I've done it more than once because there are so many fascinating women in our history to write about -- women people don't know about because history books focus mainly on male heroes. Good to write with a specific actress in mind, particularly for a period piece, but also tough if she's not interested for whatever reason. And I agree -- talent, especially female, is moving to television.

Denise. Take a look at the this year's box office leader, Shaileen Woodley, who generally plays female lead roles. Lee Davis. http://www.thewrap.com/5-surprising-box-office-stories-of-2014-so-far/

Denise I think your right, but the only way that will change is if we as writers continue to write good parts for female characters. I remember two different interviews, one with Glenn Close and the other with Meryl Streep. Both said when asked what made them choose that role they replied "The character, not many good roles are written for women." So I say whether it's the lead or not we as writers need to write good roles for women. On another point you brought up, why do we HAVE to have a love interest in every movie. If the movie has both genders why do they always hook up? Never understood that.

Denise. I never said Hollywood is giving female-driven films an even break. I said that IF the number of female and male lead role films was equal, the female lead films would generate more box office. More women are interested in movies than men just as more women read novels than men. Since women are not silly enough to boycott movies with male leads, these movies do better at the box office. But, Hollywood is no longer interested in making films for adults regardless if they're men or women. The most lucrative films today are targeted at children who spend opening weekends with separated parents. Guilty parents looking for easy ways to entertain kids every other weekend are now the highest ROI (return on investment) audience for filmmakers. This comic book mentality allows studios to make lots of money without dealing with the risks and costs involved in making films for more mature audiences. Hollywood is not against female-leads, they are against any film that has less profit potential. Recent box office results suggest the most lucrative market segment is adolescent boys. Remember how Willie Sutton answered the question why he robbed banks, "That's where the money is." Hollywood is not robbing banks, but they are robbing moviegoers of choice and they're laughing on their way to the bank.

I dont see how Hollywood is robbing anyone. People are choosing to pay for tickets, spend their money on movies that get horrible reviews, and that they know will probably suck. You can't blame hollywood for supplying what people are demanding. More female-protag movies are being made now because people are finally asking for them. The difference is, every time one bombs, it sets back the movement another 3-6 months. So they have to be really careful because no one wants to do that.

Danny. I said robbing moviegoers of choice. If you talk to mature filmmakers (Soderbergh, Spielberg, Lucas,) mature actors (Bullock, Streep, Clooney) or mature audiences, there is a widespread feeling that the industry isn't serving their needs. Why should they? The comic book/franchise adaptations are doing great. But, the movie business is losing large audience segments by overconcentrating on the youngest audience segment. The good news is that as more talent seeks other outlets (Netflix, Cable TV, etc. ), producers and studio execs will reshift the pendulum.

Hollywood is not supplying what people are demanding. That's why so many of us are turning to online streaming, foreign programming and other media outlets. How can Hollywood keep ignoring women -- 51% of the American population?

Those movies are all out there, not enough people are buying tickets to them. The audience decides what movies Hollywood makes.

The people decide who to send to Congress. Doesn't mean they're doing a good job in Washington!

Actually, no, it's the male dominated executive heads of big studios that decide what films Hollywood makes. Remember, women only comprise about 17% of executive producers in Hollywood. In 2009: Women were 113 million of the moviegoers and bought 55% of the tickets. Men are 104 million of the moviegoers and 45% of the tickets. Women made up 9 million more filmgoers than men. Just think of how much MORE money a studio could make if they could just hit that core audience even better. :)

Beth. I don't think they're ignoring women. I think they supress films about (and/or made by women) saying those films don't do well at the box office. Level the playing field and you'll see more than 51% of the box office going to see movies that target women.

Funnily enough I agree with all 3 of you... Beth, William and Lee. :-)

Good point, Beth. We certainly need more women in executive suites, but we also need more women to show up at the box office. Hollywood hates to leave money on the table, so if women start supporting certain types of films in larger numbers, those kinds of films will get more green lights.

Lee, they are ignoring women. Suppressing. Limiting. Restricting. Use whichever word you choose. They all apply. :)

Beth. I think it's more insidious than "ignoring". I think they're anti-women. When's the last time you saw a smart effective woman in a Hollywood film? Not a killer, prostitute, alchololic/drug-addict, rape victim, nun, or bombshell?

Also, Lee, did you see the box office numbers I listed for 2009? NINE MILLION more women than men bought movie tickets. HUNGER GAMES/CATCHING FIRE, with a female protagonist, brought in 161.1 million in its debut. Its audience comprised of 59% women and 41% men. So please don't put this on women. You said, "If women start supporting certain types of films in large numbers, those kinds of films will get more green lights." WHAT?! What "kinds" of film are you referring to? I take offense to that. By the numbers given, women support most films. In order for a larger variety of films to be made and for more films to feature female protagonists they must be supported by everyone -- men and women.

Polarising the audience and material isn't going to help. As Beth says, we need respectable female roles (from extra to lead) that have generic appeal.

Beth. I agree with you, Women are the larger audience. I'm the guy who brought up the fact that Shaileen Woodley has the best box office record this year (male or female). And I keep saying, if they level the playing field, women will generate larger profits than men, not to mention, we'd probably get to see less expensive, more interesting movies. Even some suitable for adults!

No, CJ, the fault is not in the roles, it's in the producers.

Well, I guess, we can agree to disagree. I feel it is the lack of roles available for women and also the male dominated film industry that is at fault. At least we all are hopeful for the same thing -- better roles for women and a better variety of film for everyone. How we get there will be interesting to see.

Lee, and anyone else -- I don't know if you saw my first post on this thread -- but please view the documentary MISS REPRESENTATION on Netflix. :) Here's the trailer: http://therepresentationproject.org/films/miss-representation/ I think you will find it very interesting. This great discussion about women in film and in the film industry becomes even more complex when you look at the overall representation of women, not just in movies, but in politics, in news media, in advertising and in leadership positions. Not only are major studios predominately owned and operated by men but so are the majority of news media and broadcast companies. MISS REPRESENTATION has staggering facts and statistics. It will further open your eyes to society's bizarre view and portrayal of women.

Like Sylvia, I agree with all of you (in theme) (because every single story I write has either a woman lead or strong supporting role, no matter how minor), but you all are leaving out who is at the top of the food chain in Hollywood, and it isn't the producers. It's the Cinema Exhibitors. By their very unscientific process of of weeding out films that don't respond well monetarily in the first few days by ticket sales AND popcorn sales, they collectively kill a film's chances of going anywhere, thus swaying the folks who finance movies (read bankers) to make copies of the ones that do last more than a few days. This is how it's been done for at least the last fifty years. The newly minted comic book franchises are run off of ancillary sales (food, toys, theme part tie-ins, etc) more than ticket sales. Making or not making films in Hollywood isn't a conspiracy, but more like a blind collective mind (that happens to be mostly, if not entirely dominated by male exhibitors (movie house owners)) and bankers. That said, pitting male against female as a basis of intelligent choice is dangerous and wrong. Both sides are made up of individuals who have good and no so good tastes. An example from both sides would be the Expendables series for the men, and Fifty Shades for the women. There truly is no accounting for taste. Now, of course, there are well-made films in those genres, but these aren't them, yet they make (or will make) a shitload of buckaroos. Monetarily, if producers were smart, they would hit up the Regency Romance genre that in books, far outsell any other genre and the audience is probably entirely women. As Lee pointed out (though not saying so precisely), it's the other venues (cable, Indy, Web, etc) that will be the only recourse to the collective Hollywood mind.

Stuart. Thanks for your comments. I had forgotten that the money guys are pushing pop-corn & tie-ins as well as the films that go POP! POP! It's a tough act to follow, but with the power of streaming, the cinema exhibitors may soon be running popcorn stands in Jurassic-style theme parks. Meanwhile movies that tell compelling stories will survive and flourish like the mammals that inherited the world after the dinosaurs.

Beth. Thanks for the URL. I will make a point of watching MISS REPRESENTATION. In turn, I'd like to point you to an blog that often covers the odds against women filmmakers. http://feminema.wordpress.com/

Hey Stuart, thanks for helping to clear up some of the movie money chain -- it being even more men at the top. ;) Actually, I am not pitting male against female. No way. I'm pointing out that in an industry that is so male dominated not only does it create a skewed view and affect the portrayal of women in film, but it also affects industry job opportunities for women and thus their influence on film. It's frustrating that after some of the great films of late with strong female protagonists and films written and directed by women, the number of women working as directors, writers and cinematographers has actually gone down. :( Nonetheless, I do know there are tenacious, amazing PEOPLE in the film industry who are working hard to change those dynamics. I hope those in power do open their blind collective minds and see the benefits of tapping into their more open minded and hopeful audiences!

Thanks Lee, I'll check out that blog. :)

Lee, for all your good intentions pitching women vs men weakens the argument. Saying female orientated films are better or women should go watch 'their' films creates an us vs them mentality. It overcompensates the true issue and creates a wall of resistance. And suggesting some sort of conscious male manipulation at the top is offsetting where the issues lie. Feminism is about one thing, equality. Sexism is everywhere, it stems from men and women of all ages and all types. Even those of us that try to be progressive fall foul of it. I certainly fall foul of it. Just because a women writes, produces, or directs a script doesn't mean it isn't misogynistic. Women produce and support some remarkably misogynistic content. The less militant and more detail focused the progressive argument is, the better the response it will generate.

Well said, CJ. Yes, it is mind blowing how some women portray or poorly treat other women in media -- especially news media. When we have news anchors who would rather point out how ragged Hilary Clinton looks verses what political or social issue Mrs. Clinton is addressing, we've got major problems. I am so offended when a female news anchor asks a talented woman artist or political leader a ridiculous, disrespectful question like "So, did you get a boob job?" If we cannot respect women in leadership positions then how can we take any woman seriously? General Motors recently appointed a woman CEO and during the announcement the men on the panel referred to her as a "car gal" instead of CEO. This brings me back to male dominated industries. A strange dynamic happens -- and you can see it more obviously in American news media -- but women, generally speaking, will project themselves, dress themselves, value themselves, and judge other women, according to how men value and view them. Fox News is a great example. They have average-looking, male anchors who are roughly 15-20 years older than their female counter parts and dress in conservative suits. The female anchors are young, look like models, wear revealing clothes, wear tons of makeup and mirror the male anchors' often sexist opinions. When any industry is dominated by one sex -- especially those industries that have social influence -- whoever is piloting that ship has powerful influence. Likewise, female dominated social media like "networks for women" such as OWN or Lifetime swing the pendulum so far the other way in response that personally I do not connect with it at all. I generally find their programming to be overly sweet, preachy, and self-involved (the exception being "Miss Representation"). We need balance to rise above all this. We need women and men from different backgrounds and cultures to come together and share ideas. Just think of all the brilliant people and influences we are denying our society -- and the film industry. :)

I'm with you all the way, Beth. And your facts are, in fact, facts. Most of the cultures of the world promote men in one fashion or another,over women. The movie biz from our standpoint, that being the creatives, is motivated by "artistic" creativity. But the sad truth is that it is really motivated 100% by money, because that is what gets a movie made and into theaters. On the most part these people, male and female, are not creatives in our sense, but creative money-makers. The Lao woman director I'm going to go help on her second film made her first film for $5000, and shot it entirely in her house. Her husband wrote the script to be a contained story. I couldn't believe how exceptionally good it was, all at a cost less than stocking a craft services table. She was one of ten international filmmakers to be invited to Cannes this past March. I think (totally my opinion, but based on years working within the system) that filmmaker need to stop thinking in terms of Hollywood and go Indy (and all that embodies). We need to not only crowdfund our movies, but crowdfund the theaters to show them in. Only then will we break the grip Hollywood (and other like mega film industries) have on filmmakers. I'm not saying that anyone should tear down Hollywood, because it's a great and wonderful institution, but the rest of us need our place in the sun. It shouldn't always be about winning, but about playing the game, together, to advance a like cause. I say no more.

Wow, Stuart, well said. I couldn't agree more. Indy is the way to go. We may not be able to move mountains, yet, but foothills, absolutely. :)

I couldn't agree more with both of you. I think women should be given the same opportunities as men. I hope more women move up into those roles currently dominated by men. It would change the landscape of the movie process in a good way. Movies have always been a collaborative art form and I believe their worldview only benefits us. I hope the men or women that turn my stories into movies will do the material justice. As a writer, I try to make great characters regardless of gender.