#Women Make Film

[langernameohnebedeutung]

ngl, I'm beginning to take issue with how in conversations about anti-intellectualism almost automatically, the face of girls and women will be slapped on the problem.

[phantomladyoverparis]

 Le 15 Mai (1969), dir. Claire Denis

[blackroseberry22]

Look at this 🥰

Regina King , Tracee Ellis Ross, and Issa Rae

Need a movie NOW !❤️😭

[wuntrum]

honestly sooo crazy to me that people will make sex-focused movies (especially the nc-17 ones) and yet we don't get to see penis? at all? not even a little bit? need equality in my movie nudity...cmon now...

[foamloam]

Boyfs who like to annoy each other

[firelise]

CHEVALIER (2023) → Costume Design by Oliver Garcia

[dribs-and-drabbles]

Having seen @bengiyo's dream cast for Only Friends, I started thinking about what an alternative female cast might look like. I'm not entirely sold on some of these but here's where I am at the moment...

Mew = Mook Worranit / Top = Milk Pansa

Ray = Film Rachanun / Sand = View Benyapa

Nick = Mild Lapassalan / Boston = Namtan Tipnaree

Atom = Neen Suwanamas / Boeing = Pat Chayanit

And then the inverse of our lesbians:

Cheum = Sing Harit / April = Fluke Pusit

[frmulcahy]

Idk what kind of crack they were putting in 90s period dramas but it’s just Not The Same Anymore

[gaytobymeres]

Benoit Blanc's similarities to other fictional detectives

Specifically Holmes, Poirot and Columbo because I'm most familiar with them and saw many of their characteristics in Blanc.

Impeccable clothes - Poirot

Cigar - Columbo

Post-case slump - Holmes

Eccentric - Holmes, Poirot, Columbo

Detection as a means of helping people, not just for the sake of solving crimes - Holmes (and Poirot and Columbo to a slightly lesser extent)

Fun name – Holmes, Columbo, Poirot

Referred to by surname (almost) all of the time, even by close friends/partners – Columbo, Holmes, Poirot

Kindness to and deep respect for vulnerable women – Holmes, Columbo, Poirot

Said to be the best detective in the world – Holmes, Poirot

Fun American accent – Columbo

Hates rich people who abuse their financial influence – Holmes, Columbo, Poirot

Polite – Columbo (of course Holmes and Poirot can also be very polite but I don't feel like it's a defining characteristic for them the way it is for Columbo)

Rude to mean rich people in a way that is so polite the horrible rich people don’t realise they’re being made fun of/talked to rudely – Holmes, Poirot

Politeness and diplomacy that is often pushed too far and they explode into explicit anger – Holmes, Columbo, Poirot

Drama in resolution – all three to varying degrees, but especially Poirot

Understated and affable – Columbo

Involved in self-contained stories – Columbo, Poirot, Holmes (though a couple of Holmes stories do link closely to previous stories)

Uses the word 'afoot' – Holmes

Gay – Holmes, Poirot (I'll let you decide if this applies to Columbo)

[thesapphocinephile]

Women in suits hold all the power...

[phantomladyoverparis]

Apetaxamin (1980), dir. Frieda Liappa

[dolorygloria]

Claudia Cardinale portraits

[mariocki]

Lalla Ward makes a brief appearance as Lady Augusta, intended bride to an ill-fated aristocrat, in A Ghost Story for Christmas: The Ash Tree (BBC, 1975)

[the-woman-upstairs]

Abigail: come for the ballerina vampire, stay for the vampiric family drama, cheer raucously for everyone getting covered in gallons upon gallons of blood.

[pynkhues]

I recently read an article in which Quentin Tarantino stated that fewer movie stars exist as a result of "Marvel movies in Hollywood." I think Jennifer Aniston made a similar argument before saying that there are no longer any movie stars. I'm not sure what that means. I can think of a lot of movie stars right now, such as Zendaya, Timothee Chalamet, and Zoey Deutch etc. what do you think? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this and Quentin's comments.

QuillBot's

Months ago, when you sent me this ask, anon, I wrote out a really long reply and as soon as I hit post, my laptop crashed and ate the answer, and I was so annoyed at myself for not saving my reply, that I couldn't bring myself to try and re-write an answer. I'm really sorry for that, especially because I think this is such an interesting ask (or well, two asks, because I think the death of the movie star and the impact Marvel's had on the broader concept of a movie star, are kinda two different things).

I've been thinking about it a bit again recently though, particularly as the Oscar race gears up, and Jacob Elordi and Charles Melton''s respective stars are rising in an industry currently desperate to find the new young Hollywood male 'talent', and I've been thinking about it again because honestly?

I agree with Jennifer Aniston, I think the movie star is dead.

We are a long, long way from Golden Age Hollywood where actors like Cary Grant and Marilyn Monroe could captivate a public imagination in a way that translated to big box office effect, after all. Hell, we're even out of New Hollywood, an era dominated by names like Al Pacino, Jack Nicholson, and Jane Fonda, and the Blockbuster era with Tom Cruise, Sylvester Stallone and Harrison Ford.

My original reply went into a lot of the different reasoning as to why this is (like with many things, I don't think there's any one reason for it), in particular how the advent of streaming has changed our relationship with films and TV shows, how the saturation of the market has diluted the staying power of celebrities, how social media and the perceived accessibility of celebrities removes personal mystique which in turn removes intrigue and increases a sense of entitlement, and the fact that so many people having stopped going to the cinema means that the experiential element of seeing a film in a setting larger than life has been diminished.

I think call out culture plays a role too, with any actor on the rise being torn down by tweets they made eight, nine or ten years ago impacting how their star rises, I think the dismantling of the studio system (which is a good thing!) also harmed actors in the long run as studios stopped investing the same resources into making and training stars (they used to be able to sing, dance and act! Now some can barely even act!), and I think, of course, the rise of prestige TV changed the industry substantially (after all, movie stars were movie stars - they traditionally did not, and would not, do TV, which created a clear class structure in terms of screen-based storytelling).

And yeah, I think the language shift from film and TV to content has done irrepairable damage to the artistry of filmmaking and the consideration of a movie star as an actor at the top of their field instead of an actor with the most Insta followers or YouTube subscribers (after all, if everything's content, isn't it the same thing? [no lol]).

Which I guess is kind of where Quentin Tarantino's argument comes in, right? What he's saying is that Marvel's made it so that the IP - the content itself - is the star, not the actor, and I'd say he's probably right with that.

Think of it this way - back in the New Hollywood/Blockbuster era, Harrison Ford was the movie star - he was leading new franchises left-right-and-centre between Star Wars and Indiana Jones, sci fi epics like Blade Runner, leading action thrillers like Patriot Games, The Fugitive and Clear and Present Danger and getting nominated for Oscars for Witness.

He was a movie star in every sense of the word because you could hinge a film - one with a new concept, not just remakes or sequels - on him and be virtually guaranteed a success. He was what sold the tickets, the director just hopefully had to make something good enough people would leave the cinema glad they saw.

Tarantino's argument is the Marvel model - - hell, even the new Star Wars properties, turned the franchise into the star, for better or worse, which means original films can't compete because nobody knows the IP. Back when Harrison Ford was at the top of his game, his name was what helped original films including smaller, standalone works like Witness find an audience, but the studios have changed that. Capitalism has changed that.

Properties with existing audiences and deep pockets for merch were prioritised, only now those franchises are faltering and you've got a generation trained that 'cinematic events' are reserved for blockbusters in established universes, instead of taking a risk on a new film because you know you love an actor who's in it.

Do I think we could go back?

Maybe, but probably not.

I think the place we are now in the history of cinema / TV / 'content' means you can't make a movie star anymore because I think the industry is simply so different that no actor can break through in the same way that even Leonardo DiCaprio could 30 years ago. That industry doesn't exist anymore, actors aren't guaranteed draws (Bones and All proved that for Timothee Chalamet, and Wonka I think could go a similar way), or they have to heavily rely on other industries to become household names which I think dilutes them as a pure 'movie star' (Zendaya's a great example of this - I like her a lot, but how many movies has she even been in? They built her career up in peripheral industries long before they tried to sell her as a movie star, and frankly, I'd question her even as a leading actress yet given she's typically only either been in ensemble casts or clear supporting).

It's a whole new world, and yeah, I think the movie star is dead.