Oh, for pete's sake, she's ranting again

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/07/lionsgates-new-gamble-russell-crowe-teams-up-with-paul-haggis-.html#more

The above blog contains the following description of the theme of a new movie that’s been announced for Russell Crowe and Paul Haggis:

"Would you save the woman you loved if you knew that by doing so, you would turn into a man that a woman could no longer love?"

And in one sentence they sum up my entire problem with Hollywood and it’s depiction of women. I’m going to excuse myself for going off on a feminist rant, because I think this is a blind spot that the big movie studios have that hamstrings them in a fatal way. They say women don’t go to movies. And I can tell you why. Until they fix this problems, most dramatic movies are going to suck. And it all comes down to one little word – “a”.

In that story, the man becomes a person “a” woman couldn’t. Not “this” woman. Not “some” women. Not “most” women. A woman. Because all women react the same way, and from the beginning, we know what her choice will be. She can’t choose love over morality. She can’t choose morality over love. She can’t let love change her view of morality. She is static. Binary. Yes or no. She becomes a lamp. Turn her off. Turn her on. Russell Crowe gets to spend half the movie agonizing over what to do (and really, who agonizes better than the Crowe? I’d be entertained.) And Rachel Weisz or whoever gets to stand there. And this isn’t some crap movie. It’s headed by 2 Oscar winners. And even they don’t notice that they’ve already effed it up.

And this isn't just a "women" thing. You know what happens when you have one main character who is poorly drawn in a story? The whole plot goes off kilter as everyone else tries to maneuver around the dead lump in the middle of the scene. So, here’s Hollywood’s choice if they want to have scripts that aren’t bad from jump street: either you improve the female characters, or you just make movies that have only men. And since you think sex is the only thing that sells, that leaves you with a whole lotta Brokeback action going on. Who’s Hugh Jackman going to be left to kiss on? Daniel Craig? I might be willing to give that a look, but I don’t know about the rest of America.

Okay, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe I’m extrapolating too much off of one word. But given that 75% of all the movies I’ve seen (and probably 99.9% of the big budget movies) have suffered from a fatal case of cookie cutter female characters, I’m betting I’m dead right. And really, there’s not much excuse for the movie industry. Books have wonderful female characters, written by both men and women. When I read Wally Lamb’s She’s Come Undone, I kept looking at the jacket picture to make sure it was really written by a guy. TV has come a long way in the last few years. Is it any surprise that movie actresses like Glenn Close, Mary McCormack, Kyra Sedgwick, Holly Hunter, Jada Pinkett, Toni Collette and Sally Field are now on television? They don’t get to play characters that well rounded on the big screen.

And why would a female consumer leave her nice comfortable home to see a one-note portrayal of women in a movie theater, when she can stay home and see women who are flawed, and therefore human, in their own living room? Where the popcorn is better. It’s all dollars and cents. Your revenues are in the toilet. You've done a really good job of turning off women. The boys are all at home playing Warcraft. And movie-goers of either gender who are just interested in a good story with well drawn charaters are about to give up entirely. Perhaps it’s time to try something different.