online question answered via my facebook friends

i posted the question "I want to find out what you think women's roles in film are.... and if they are just seen as sex symbols now or have gone to take on greater roles in films in more recent years?" on facebook, and got my friends to post their answers and opinions on it.
I got around 15 responses, which all pretty much agreed with each other in saying that even though before in the 19080's where women were seen as sex symbols, even today they still are, even though they seem to have greater roles in film.
People said that women are cast more in actions films today then they were before, in films such as mr and mrs smith or charlies angels, however, they said that they even use their sexuality in their parts, i.e. flirting or dressing sexy to show off their assets.
One of my friends even said that men use thier sexuality too, but it doesnt mean their not good actors, i.e. Johnny Depp and Julia Roberts, who have both been good and leading actors but are also very beautiful and sexy.
In conclusion i think that this research has been valid as it shows me that a group of opinions are really similar and all help to support the research i have done so far. Their answers sum up that progression has been made (ever since women got the vote someone pointed out) however women are still classified as sex objects, no matter how big their role is.

Secondary research from text books

Using the text book Film Studies- Critical Approaches, edited by John Hill and Pamela Church Gibson , I found some really useful information on the roles and power of women within film. Molly Haskell looked like a really good case study, and her opinions strong. Haskell assumes that film 'reflects' social reality, that depictions of women in film mirror how society treats women. She believes that the effects of mainstream media advetise womens body images, giving them sex roles and showing violence against women. "An array of virgins, vamps, victims, suffering mothers, child women, and sex kittens."
'(Haskell) diagnoses violence against, and marginalise of, women in acclaimed 'New Hollywood' films, as reactions to the emergence of feminism and the threat posed by women's autonomy.'
She also comments on the 'womans' picture- or 'weepie' (such as The Notebook, or one of my case studies Bridget Jones)- a production category denigrated by the industry and most critics, which suggests that such films actually did represent the contradictions of womens lives.
Molly Haskells theory is interesting to me and my research. The two parts that i have highlighted in red suggest that she believes that films are a reflection on a womans real life. I had never considered this before. I think i might post a question online and see if, when brought to the attention, other people share this view, as i think its a valid point to consider.

Laura Mulvey is another women from this text book and i was intrigued by some of her arguments. She argued that 'the institution of cinema is charactersied by a sexual imbalance of power' and that women are somewhat defined as "to-be-looked-at-ness". Mulvey wrote an essay that explored the relationship between the image of women on screen and the "musculinization" or the spectator position.
Laura clearly believes that women and men are not equal on screen, and that women are created as sex objects to be looked at and desired on the screen. This agrees and supports a lot of research i have done already for this topic.
Overall these two women have provided me with useful insight and more importantly, their theories are more recent and relevant to Propps', as his were about folk tales whereas these women are refering directly to the roles of women on the screen.

Secondary research on box office statistics

I decided that i wanted to find out what the top 10 films in the box office were in 1985 and then compare them with the top 10 films in 2005 (20 years on) and see if the majority of them had males or females as leads. This would then show me that either the public prefers films that have mainly men/women, that men/women are more successful in the film industry in comparison to the other, or show me that times have changed over the last 20 years in terms of the types of actors cast and how successful they are.

1985:
The top 10 films of the box office in 1985 were (in order of 1- 10): Back to the future, Rambo:First Blood Part two, Rocky IV, The Color Purple, Out of Africa, Cocoon, The Jewel Of the Nile, Witness, The Goonies and Spies Like Us. Out of these, i used the Internet Movie Database (www.IMDB.com) to research the leading roles in each film. I discovered that 9 out of the 10 films were male dominated roles, and that one can be argued as a female role (Out of Africa staring Meryl Streep). Sylvester Stallone was popular, having been the male lead in the 2nd and 3rd most popular film at box office, as well as Michael J. Fox and Michael Douglas staring in lead roles. The genres of this films seem more for males, and not as versitile as some of the genres we know today. A lot of them were to do with gadgets, fighting and detective work, unlike the fun comedy and 'girly' films we know of today.

2005:
The top 10 films of the box office in 2005 were: Star Wars three, The Chronicals of Narnia, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, War of the Worlds, King Kong, Wedding Crashers, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Batman begins, Madagascar and Mr and Mrs Smith. Already, you can see a much more diverse genre here, in comparison to 1985. I would say that 5 films have a male lead role, and that the other 5 of them both have a lead male and a lead female, which could show a slight improvement of women in film now in comparison to 20 years ago. The most obvious example from the title of this film would probably be Mr and Mrs Smith, as Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie star alongside eachother, and the woman gets to do as much shooting as the man does! Also, King Kong was shared between Hollywood stars Jack Black and Naomi Watts, although could be deemed as a sterotypical portrayal of women, much like Star Wars, where even though Natalie Portman stars as one of the main characters, a lot of the fighting is left up to the male characters, i.e. Ewan McGregor. Most of these films seem to come from books/comics (Harry potter, Chronicals of Narnia, Batman and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.)

Overall, I have found out that in 1985, the box office was slightly overtaken by the male actors overulling the females, however, in 2005 it is not that much different, however, females have been cast along side males in slighty more films 20 years on. I think that cinema still think that its the mens job to do all the fighting in films and become the hero, however, even though 2005 was mainly a year for Johnny Depp, Daniel Radcliff, and Tom Cruise, it was still a year for Angelina Jolie alongside Mr and Mrs Smith, and Natalie Portman alongside Ewan McGregor.
These figures prove that male leads are popular with audiences, or make a movie seem better in some way and therefore gain a lot of viewers, and that women have risen up in 20 years to claim some of the fame alongside male actors, making them more well known and successful too, in comparison to 1985, where the genres were not as broad and the female actrises not as well known.
I wil next do some institutional detailed research on the studios that created the top 10 films.

The validity of my research so far . . .

The secondary research that I did on the two articles at the start of my blog (one written by a girl and one by a boy) was no where near as reliable as i would have liked it to have been...as it literally is just their own opinion on the roles of women in films, however, i found it interesting that the boy was agreeing with the girl in terms of that there is a place for women to play bigger roles on screen. I wanted to make this research become more accurate and reliable, so i decided to do a quick verbal servey on 20 women (aged 17-30) and 20 men (aged 17-30) on what their own opinion on the roles of women on the screen is, if they should change, and then see if their opinions were the same as those who wrote the 2 articles. From the women, 17 of them believed that women had gone on to take greater leading roles in films more recently, and when i asked for examples of films i got charles angels, scream, bend it like beckham, and tomb raider. However, the remaining 3 of them said that they feel that women are portrayed as sex symbols more than having leading powerful roles, in films such as American Pie and Van Wilder. This shows me that the article written by the woman is now more reliable, as the women I asked repeated what she had basically said, which is that women are still used sexually to promote films, but that more and more women are taking the lead in a lot of films out there today.The mens response was a lot more varied i think, and didnt support the male article as much as it could have done. Although 14 men agreed that women had taken greater roles over time, they also said that they were still being used as sex symbols. Three of them gave the example of charlies angels, and that even though women play the lead they are still being promoted as sex symbols. The other 6 men (which were between 17 and 22) said that women were just used purly in films as sex symbols, and that men remain the main characters, such as James Bond and Indiana Jones.I believe that i have chosen the right films for my case studies too... As i wanted to close in on the question "the roles of women in films" I decided to chose 4 films from the 80's and 4 films from now (2000's) and explore how the roles would have changed over a period of 20 years. From the 80's i decided to look at Beaches as the main characters are two women...who are not portrayed as sex symbols throughout, An officer and a gentlemen as its about male pilots, and the women in it could be seen stereotypically (factory working) and then the terminator, which is a massive 'action man' role at that time taken up by a male actor, and Alien, which has exactly the same concept as the terminator, but has a lead female role doing all the fighting. I am then going to compare these films to more recent ones. Charlies Angels, as they are three lead women who go on missions and fight, (som might say only men are capable of this role) Brigit jones, which portrays a women in a sterotypical light which is a good/bad thing, and the lead of it is a woman. The 40 year old virgin, as its not a typical role that a male would lead in, as its not to do with war or guns, and Agent Cody Banks, as its like a younger version of james bond, where the lead is a male secret agent.Propps theory is valid to my research, as i want to compare his theory on folk tales and try to adapt it to the films ive chosen and see if it still applies today. I also looked at two other websites which had the same information on propps theory, so i know my research is a bit more reliable now.I will now continue with more research.

Propps theory and my own

Vladimir Propp (1895) analyzed a whole series of Russian folk talks in the 1920s and decided that the same events kept being repeated in each of the stories. Propp also decided that a narrative needed to have:

• the villain, who struggles with the hero.
• the donor, who prepares and/or provides hero with magical agent.
• the helper, who assists, rescues, solves and/or transfigures the hero.
• the Princess, a sought-for person (and/or her father), who exists as a goal and often recognizes and marries hero and/or punishes villain.
• the dispatcher, who sends the hero off.
• the hero, who departs on a search (seeker-hero), reacts to the donor and weds at end.
• the false hero (or antihero or usurper), who claims to be the hero, often seeking and reacting like a real hero (ie by trying to marry the princess).
  

Propp’s theory of narrative seems to be based in a male orientated environment (due to his theory actually reflecting early folk tales) and as such critics often dismiss the theory with regard to film. However, it may still be applied because the function (rather than the gender) of characters is the basis of the theory. E.g. the hero could be a woman; the reward could be a man. Critics argue that Propp’s strict order of characters and events is restrictive. We should rather apply the functions and events randomly as we meet new narratives. E.g. the hero may kill the villain earlier than Propp expects. Changing the traditional format will change the whole way the text is received.
http://www.mediaknowall.com/Propp.html
http://www.adamranson.plus.com/Propp.htm

Some of the case studies I have chosen to study do contain examples of Propps theory, although not all of them in one film. Bridget Jones works with Propps theory, as she is portrayed as rather a conventional princess who is still waiting for her prince to come and rescue her, and she doesn’t really know what to do until he does, whereas Hugh Grant is the false hero and Colin Firth is Bridget’s true love. Her friends help her out during the time she is trying to find love, so they could be considered as the ‘helpers’. A lot of films today seem to contain two of Propps key ingredients; a hero and a villain. There is always a good and a bad person, in any kind of film; horror, sci-fi, drama, action ect. I think that Propps theory is just as strong as it was back then, and perhaps could be argued that it applies even more so nowadays than it did, even though it was intended for folk tales and male characters. Swap the dispatcher for a hospital, the donor for a shop assistant and the helper for a friend and you have a modern day film with the typical characters that exist in this superficial world.

My chosen case studies from 2000's and my own textual analysis of them

How the roles of men and women have changed 20 years later in the 2000’s:

Bridget Jones (2001):

I chose Bridget Jones as another case study film, as it completely and fully represents a modern day woman, who is in a crisis and is looking for love. I believe this film was a major hit as so many women can identify with this character as it’s so stereotypical of women.
I think it’s interesting that at a first glance the character might be deemed as a bit weak and a wreck. However, the fact that it was produced and written by women makes her character undoubtedly a heroin for other women, as well as the fact that Rene has completely taken charge of the lead role. Rene is completely in charge of the screen, as well as the voice over, which relies on her thoughts alone. She shows us women that there is light at the end of the tunnel, and that there is someone out there for everyone (In her case, there are two).

The 40 year old virgin (2005):

This is a deliberate contrast and comparison with Bridget Jones, as it singles out all of the single men out there and stereotypes the nerds and geeks. (Big time!) This film, like Jones, is a story of a man who starts off trying to lose his virginity and then ends up falling in love. Some men who have been in similar situations will sympathize with him and understand the feelings and emotions the situation creates, as does Bridget Jones for women. This proves that a man and a woman can play similar roles and still be as successful as each other in achieving the audiences they want to.

Charlie’s Angels (2000):

This film is a typical modern day example of three lead women as protagonists for a change, much like Ripley from Aliens back in the 1980’s, only with a lot more up-to-date equipment. Men are used in this film only as their ‘helpers’, and killed and beaten by these women. Their aim is to join forces which make ‘girl power’ a key topic here. It shows us that they are just as good as men at handling weapons and solving crimes. Interestingly, one of the villains is a man, and the girls prove stronger by capturing him and overpowering him.

Agent Cody Banks (2003):

This has a similar idea to it much like Charlie’s Angels except the lead character is a boy, who is given secret missions to complete as he is selected as an agent. He has to deal with a lot of the same equipment as the girls in Charlie’s angels, although, their ages differ which somehow reflect on their performances. The girls in Charlie’s Angels are a lot more confident in what they are using and of what their missions are, whereas the boy in Agent Cody Banks is only a teenager and is fascinated by the equipment and has to be taught how to use it. The portrayal is different which makes it an interesting contrast that between both these films, the women seem stronger as the protagonists. This film is much like Storm Breaker, which is also about a young boy as an agent.

My own textual analysis on my case studies from the 80's

The Terminator (1984) is, along with an Officer And A Gentleman, an example of an 80’s film where the lead role is predominately a man. It’s about a man showing off his powers and role as an ‘action’ hero, who is indeed a machine, and sent to track down this woman, who is due to give birth to a son who is a threat against the ‘machines’. This, like an Officer and a Gentleman, has both a man and a woman who are on the screens, although the man is a lead figure in both stories, and get opportunities to show off their skills, whereas the women are just like ‘spare parts’ there to help bring the story along and act as a ‘side kick’ to these men.
Aliens however, has a woman as the lead role, and is a continuation from the 1979 film Alien. This was probably the first major leading woman role, in a sci-fi horror/action, which was a huge contrast to the Terminator, which is based on a similar role of hero and survivor. A woman is able to outlive all of the males and females in each Alien film, and fight for a life, which was one of the first major changes in the roles of women on screen, as usually it would be a male taking the lead.
The film Beaches, is a totally different genre to The Terminator or Alien, and creates such a different type of emotion, due to the different situations dealt with the two leading women. It proves, like Alien, that you don’t need to have a male predominant in films to make it a huge success with its audiences, which is probably now why men and women roles are more or less equal now. It contrasts slightly with an officer and a gentleman, as although there are two women characters in both films, which seem close as friends, we experience the friendship closer in Beaches as they are the lead and focus of the whole story, whereas in an Officer and a Gentleman the two women are overshadowed by an overwhelming male majority.