JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: WRITING COLUMNS ABOUT NOTHING – GREAT EXAMPLE BY AN EXPERT – IDIOCY OF WRITING ANYTHING ABOUT A MOVIE DESIGNED TO GIVE “THE HOTS” TO 12-YEAR OLDS – FEMINISM AND NATURE OF HOLLYWOOD   Leave a comment

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY HADLEY FREEMAN IN THE GUARDIAN

My interview with James Cameron prompted outrage – but is Wonder Woman worth the fuss?

Count on Hadley Freeman to do a review (or is it supposed to be an interview?) which isn’t a review (or an interview) around the topic of a movie most might know likely isn’t worth walking across the street to see at a free showing.

This silly production with its skimpily-clad “actress” is intended to give the “hots” to 12-year old boys. It has no other purpose, no matter what anyone reads into it.

Ms. Freeman’s purpose is yet one more repeat of the well-worn, almost threadbare, theme that there aren’t enough women leads in films.

I reluctantly point out that Hollywood is not about social causes nor is it some kind of democratic institution.

It is about money, big money, and nothing else.

Believe me, if more women leading in films were understood to increase revenues and profits, Hollywood would be churning them out around the clock without any prodding.

Actually, there was a time it did just that. In the 1940s, we had a long list of truly major female stars – Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, Katherine Hepburn, Lizabeth Scott, Vivien Leigh, Lauren Bacall, plus many others.

Why was that?

With a major war and economic turmoil and women filling in every kind of work possible from driving steam engines to working the assembly lines, there obviously was a big public appetite for female heroes.

It should be remembered, too, that production values and costs then were tiny compared to those today, so that each film was less of a risk for a studio.

But into the 1950s, many of the featured women begin to be more about being pin-ups or cutesy types – from Marylin Monroe to Doris Day.

The economics of making major films reflect the economics of society. It cannot be otherwise, unless you speak of smaller “indy” films, but I don’t see writers on this topic, like Ms. Freeman, even mentioning, or showing any awareness of, such films.

No, they seem to expect that the Hollywood money machine should suddenly serve a cause. Now, how realistic is that?

Posted September 6, 2017 by JOHN CHUCKMAN in Uncategorized

LEAVE A COMMENT

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: