I think with Lost in Translation it wasn't so much the lack of sex as it was the ambiguity of if the two got together or not. Eyes Wide Shut is a good example of how even famous directors, actors and big budgets are not immune to the sex sells bit though.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

quote:

---

Originally posted by nicole

hey guys,
my name is nicole and im a new member. i was wondering if you could answer me this question to help me with my A2 exam. the question is...Are actresses objectified in the film industry to sell movies? please give examples if you agree or disagree.

---

I watched the documentary "Searching for Debra Winger" recently (directed by Rosanna Arquette), and Rosanna and many other aging former babe movie stars in the documentary concluded that hollywood basically wants actresses in films who are perceived by viewers as "****able" (to quote Rosanna from the documentary). Thus the metoric rise to fame of beautiful and talented actresses, but then the lack of roles for them as they enter their 40s.

Linux, the choice of a GNU generation.
http://subzerolinux.org

I think there is a lot of truth to that, but I also think one of the big problems (one that is slowly being reformed) is the lack of female writers in Hollywood writing decent roles for the actress. If the bulk of the parts are for girlfriend or wife or whatever the "****kability" factor is a lot higher on the list of requirements.

That still leaves the belief in that requirement for casting and producers to get over. Sometimes they'll cast hotties for totally inappropriate roles (such as Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist in "World is not Enough" and Elisabeth Shue as the worlds greatest expert on Fusion in "The Saint" (or Kaneu in a similar role in "Chain Reaction" for that matter).

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

If you are in this business to make money, you need to make films people will pay to see. The simple fact is people - both men and women - prefer to watch people who are attractive. If that's "objectifying" then both men and women are objectified.

Linda Hunt, Kathy Bates or Meryl Streep would have made a better nuclear scientist than Richards. But in a James Bond film the audience doesn't want realism. Both men and women want Bond to end up with the attractive, young woman and not just have a professional, working relationship with the "Bond Girl". He already has the professional, working relationship with with an excellent actress - Judi Dench. I don't think that makes women "objectified" in movies.

And any woman writer, producer, director or studio head knows that so I don't really buy the argument that a woman in those roles might not objectify actresses.

Sherry Lansing ran Fox for 12 years and Paramount for another 12. She had the final say on every movie made at those studios for 24 years. During those 24 years I don't think actresses were less "objectified" at Fox or Paramount than at any other studio.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

Actors generally not just actresses are objectified (if by objectified we are using the term to mean viewed mainly as a pretty object).

I think its getting much more equal, if that is the word. Daniel Craig's swimming trucks shot in the recent bond movie is a case in point.

I think you would be hard pressed to say that Brad Pitt et al would have the careers they would if they weren't female lust objects. Men are just more simple than women to turn on - ie young, sexy, attractive whereas women have the whole power, money, fame thing that means older, less attractive men can get away with being lust objects.

Doesn't mean they're not being objectified by the viewer in a similar way - and i am sure the film makers are just as aware of this as they are with the actresses.

** If its worth making, it's worth making properly. damn it!**

"And any woman writer, producer, director or studio head knows that so I don't really buy the argument that a woman in those roles might not objectify actresses."

The fact that the beautiful people will still get the roles does not change the arguement I was making about the quality of the roles. The more quality roles the less of them are chosen for their hotness. Not saying the beautiful people will go away but you can only squeeze so much into a poster or add.

This whole line is starting to remind me of a scene in LAST ACTION HERO where they went into a video store (in the movie within a movie) and the clerks and customers were totally hot women.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA