Over winter break, I spent time at the movie theater watching anticipated Oscar films like “True Grit,” “The Fighter,” “Black Swan” and “Tangled.” During most of these trips, I was accompanied by one of my friends who likes the cinema just as much as I do (in other words, too much for his wallet’s own good).
While buying tickets for “Black Swan,” he made a joke about losing “man points” for going to see what he considered a “girl movie.” However, when we went to see “The Fighter,” I wasn’t ridiculed for seeing a film that predominately focused on male characters.
Whether the medium is books, movies or television, it seems more socially acceptable for females to watch or read male-oriented entertainment than for men to watch or read the products geared toward females.
If women enjoy “Indiana Jones,” “Star Wars,” “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” or superhero movies, it’s no big deal. In fact, it is applauded. However, if a man wants to watch “Grey’s Anatomy,” “The Bachelor” or “Desperate Housewives,” he suddenly has girly taste.
Joanne Rowling, author of the Harry Potter series, invented the pen name J.K. Rowling to disguise her being a woman because her publisher believed young boys would not read a book by a female.
Because “The Princess and the Frog” did not make as much money as Disney would have liked, the company blamed the poor performance on the word “princess,” believing boys would rather not see films centered around a girl.
So, in an attempt to attract more boys to its newest film “Tangled,” Disney decided to feature the movie’s deuteragionist, the swashbuckling thief Flynn Rider, over Rapunzel, the protagonist.
While part of me is glad that Harry Potter has sold millions of copies and “Tangled” has been a box office success, despite the initial reason readers and viewers were attracted to them, a greater part is offended.
Why does entertainment written by women or centered around a female have to disguise itself so men are willing to view it or can view it without being looked upon as abnormal?
While not all men snub entertainment starring lead female characters or created by women, the general conception of society and the industry is problematic.
When books who focus on females, like “Twilight” and “The Hunger Games,” do well, the industry is surprised they become popular.
After “Twilight” was adapted into a motion picture and opened big at the box office, articles discussed how amazing it was a female-driven movie could turn such a huge profit. While Stephenie Meyer’s series may be groundbreaking or even considered worth watching, it’s still notable as one of the few hits that is centered around a female.
Most box office hits, popular television shows and books have male leads. Peter Parker, Jack Shepard and Harry Potter are staples of past and present entertainment.
And while strong female characters like Mary Jane Watson, Kate Austen and Hermione Granger are adored by fans, they still play second fiddle to the male protagonists.
I don’t believe every film made or book written should be populated by females. Writers have the right to create their characters, male or female, and tell their stories without interference. The problem simply is many see a female character as a strike against the work, no matter how likable she is or how riveting the plot.
Female characters become the scapegoat to not read or watch something or to blame poor performance on the lack of male centricity.
When a movie about a female action heroine fails, like Halle Berry’s “Catwoman,” it’s because it couldn’t attract an audience; women don’t like action movies and men don’t want to watch female-centered movies. But when male-oriented action movies, like “Jonah Hex” fail, suddenly box office failure is blamed on the quality of the film, the competition or lack of star power.
I don’t really know of anyone, male or female, who had or ever will have a burning desire to see either of these movies. It wasn’t because the of the lead character’s gender but simply because neither of the movies had appealing plots or characters.
The general public at times seems to believe men become less masculine if they go to see female-driven movies, and the entertainment world panders to the assumption, for the most part, women only want to watch romance and men only want to watch male movies. And this cycle carries over to television shows and the publishing world.
The double standard of letting women watch and read whatever they want to with few, if any, comments but harassing men for choosing the wrong entertainment is ridiculous.
Admittedly, those who chose not watch something because of the gender of the main character are the ones truly missing out.
Movies, television shows and books should be judged for their content, not the gender they choose to feature, and a person’s masculinity or femininity shouldn’t be based off what entertainment they choose to digest.
Hannah Rogers is the assistant news editor for The Reflector. She can be contacted at [email protected].