Warner Bros. Officially No Longer Making Movies With Female Leads

[AZBlue]

Um....maybe they should just offer females quality roles??? Or, as the article suggests, marketing the movies with female leads??
Huh..now that's a thought!


Warner Bros. Officially No Longer Making Movies With Female Leads
Posted by Melissa McEwan at 12:00 PM on October 9, 2007.
This post, written by Melissa McEwan, originally appeared on Shakesville

Warner Bros president of production Jeff Robinov has made a new decree that "We are no longer doing movies with women in the lead". This Neanderthal thinking comes after both Jodie Foster's The Brave One (even though she's had big recent hits with Flightplan and Panic Room) and Nicole Kidman's The Invasion (as if three different directors didn't have something to do with the awfulness of the gross receipts) under-performed at the box office recently. ... Of course, Warner Bros has always been male-centric in its movies. But now the official policy as expressly articulated by Robinov is that a male has to be the lead of every pic made. I'm told he doesn't even want to see a script with a woman in the primary position (which now is apparently missionary at WB).

(snip)

Of course, it's not just action films that WB is unwilling to make with female leads, but all films. Every genre is to be female lead-free--because, evidently, teh bitchez is Hollywood poison!

I know it's a crazy suggestion, but maybe WB could just try making movies with female leads that people actually want to see before giving up on teh womminz altogether. And, while you're at it, perhaps you could try something original. This precludes endless derivations of Steel Magnolias in which eclectic groups of sassy women are bound by their patronage of the same salon, a book/foodie/quilting club, or magical pants. It also precludes remakes and/or thinly veiled modernizations of Jane Austen's stories, especially Sense & Sensibility, Pride & Prejudice, and Emma. It yet further precludes various bastard children of The Odd Couple and Cagney & Lacey. All of these things have been done, and often done well.

More at http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/64803/

[maxsolomon]

1. soon they'll no longer be making movies with humans in the lead

pixar characters show up on time & don't go to rehab.

no, no, no...

[RandomKoolzip]

2. Fuck, I've been boycotting Hollywood since 1998 or so.

Hollywood produces nothing but shit. There hasn't been a good, intelligent movie produced by a major studio for so long I can barely remember the year I did see one.

SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL INDEPENDENT FILMMAKERS! ATTEND LOCAL FILM FESTIVALS! BURN HOLLYWOOD BURN!

To paraphrase Gerald Cosloy, I'm not one of those people who's gonna tell you that there are NO good major studio movies out there to see. In fact, the minute one comes out, i'll be the first to watch it....

[Botany]

3. Good thinking!

But what about "The African Queen, Ann of a Thousand Days, and Elizabeth?"

[jojo54]

7. Great pic Botany.

One hell of an actress and all around human being!

[book_worm]

4. Actually WB hasn't always been "male-centric" in its movies:

At least not in the past. Bette Davis was WB top star of the late 30's thru the 40s and the studio built many films around her including "Jezebel", "Dark Victory", "The Letter", "Now, Voyager" and "A Stolen Life." After Joan Crawford left MGM after 18 years of stardom she went to WB who put her in such big films as "Mildred Pierce", "Humoresque" and "Flamingo Road."

But the truth is that the studio system was much better to actresses than the independent era has been.

[Connie_Corleone]

10. Yeah. They had some great female roles back then.

I love watching those movies on Turner Classic Movies.

[Zookeeper]

13. That's what I was thinking...

This film-geek grew up watching those movies on TV every day after school.

[LSdemocrat]

5. It might help if they offered women the same quality of movie that they offer men

If the movie is good, people will go.

[Reader Rabbit]

6. Yeah, 'cause poor box office performance couldn't possibly have to do...

...with crappy directing or generic plots. It's gotta be the fault of the dames.

:crazy:

[AZBlue]

8. But EVERY movie with a male lead does so well at the Box Office!

:sarcasm:

[Connie_Corleone]

9. It's either the movie sucks or the marketing of the movie sucks.

The Kill Bill movies did very well with a female lead. Maybe Time Warner needs to take a lesson from that or actually get some better scripts with solid female roles in them.

I agree with the article. Stop with the rated PG group of women talking about boring things while making an American quilt. And no more Jane Austen.

[AZBlue]

11. Seriously. How many reamakes of Sense & Sensibility do we really need??

[NashVegas]

46. Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

Yes, the last we all looked, Uma was indeed femme.

I mostly agree about the Jane Austen; I enjoyed the latest version of P & P, but enough already and please! No more movies about Jane Austen or her influence.

[Mike03]

12. Bizarre Story

How seriously do we take this? You mean to tell me that if a good screenplay with Julia Roberts or Sandra Bullock already attached landed on the Development head's desk, he would turn that deal down?

[onenote]

14. and I should believe this story why?

Warner Bros. has several films with female leads in production and in development. The following article suggests that McEwan's column, which uses quotation marks rather loosely, has more holes in it than swiss cheese.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117973754.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

[Mike03]

15. Yeah, sounds like BS to me N/T

[Beaverhausen]

23. You shouldn't believe it. Disclaimer- I work at Warner Bros.

this is total bullshit. Someone posted it yesterday from a blog.

For the record, Warner Bros. studio executives are for the most part very liberal.

[AZBlue]

25. Well of course they aren't going to admit it.

They will backpeddle like crazy. Only by publicizing such a stupid idea will they have to counteract it.

[onenote]

28. and the fact that all of the evidence suggests that its untrue doesn't matter to you at all

interesting.

[AZBlue]

36. What evidence?

[onenote]

39. oh, the various movies featuring women leads that are still being developed

and pursued?

[AZBlue]

56. See post 34

[AspenRose]

16. This is a joke, right?

:wow:

[Occulus]

17. There's a novel Mercedes Lackey wrote

called "Vows and Honor" that features not only one but two strong female leads characters. One is a sorceress; the other, a highly-trained martial artist/priestess. The story would make for a good film, I would think.

Wizard's First Rule, by Terry Goodkind, is apparently being made into a miniseries. Although I'd have liked to have seen it made as a feature film, it's a very long and detailed story, and the details are very important as the story progresses. That aside, it has a very strong female lead character as well.

Warner Bros. needs to fire the president of production and hire someone willing to give something new a try.

[Mythsaje]

19. Rumor has it that Starz has contracted to make a movie based

on the Valdemar series.

[Occulus]

63. I'd like to see something based in that world

not necessarily a Valdemar book- something more along the lines of the one I mentioned.

Although the Last Herald-Mage series would make for a pretty good film/set....

[NewJeffCT]

27. Interesting book to choose for a miniseries

I liked Wizard's First Rule from Goodkind, though I found his books to be somewhat derivative of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. I think I stopped reading Jordan's series after 9 books and Goodkind's after 5 or so...

[Occulus]

73. WFR was very good

Temple of the Winds was good for different reasons. Talk about an adult solution to a problem...

If you want to finish the series, I'd suggest you just skip "The Pillars of Creation". It sets up some events for the following book, "Naked Empire", but "POC" could be renamed "Pile of Crap", for all the good it did for the series. Richard and Kahlan and the rest only appear late in the entire book, and the thing's a doorstop in the first place.

Goodkind got "back to his roots" with the ending trilogy of "Chainfire" and "Phantom"... here's hoping the last book, "Confessor", will be a good ending to the series.

Personally, I think there are a lot of modern fantasy novels that could become excellent films. Studios would be hard-pressed, though, to make "The Last Herals-Mage" into a film or films because the main character's homosexuality plays a prominent role in the events that make him so important in the first place, and "mainstream" Hollywood hasn't exactly done a stellar job including that topic into its films in recent years... well, not that I'm aware of, anyway, with the one solid exception I know you're thinking about right now. ;)

Fantasy novels tend to take audiences in directions they're not used to going in. We don't have real magic in our world, but we do have very high technology, so that's where film audiences feel the most comfortable. Hopefully, the Harry Potter films have primed a generation of moviegoers to be more willing to appreciate such films.

[Totally Committed]

18. One of my favorite movies of all time, and its female lead....

"Breakfast at Tiffany's" with Audrey Hepburn:




Another of my favorites with its two female leads....

"Thelma and Louise" with Susan Sarandon and Geena Davis:




Yeah, pictures with women at the lead never work... :sarcasm:


TC

[JDPriestly]

20. Maybe if they made movies about women -- rather than women playing men,

the movies would attract female moviegoers. I'm not drawn to movies with titles that make it sound like women are playing warriors, say like "The Brave One" or "The Invasion." Pride & Prejudice is more my speed.

[KamaAina]

21. Th-th-th-that's all, folks!

No more Warner Bros. for me -- and I'm male!

[Javaman]

22. Sure blame the actors when the writing sucks. nt

[Touchdown]

24. I smell bulls#!t.

This would be all over the daily papers' arts & entertainment sections, as well as in the Hollywood press. Having it from some obscure place most people never heard of (Shakesville) makes me wonder if it's true. AOLTW may be a huge monster, but bad press from mysoginy isn't good for any business.

[AZBlue]

26. It is all over the place.

Just google it. They're now in the damage-control phase.

[Beaverhausen]

29. well, I have a list of the films in production here at WB

and I say you are wrong. What is your obession with this?

[AZBlue]

34. Hardly obsessed, but thanks Dr.

As for films in production - do you know the timeline for a film? It takes 3-5 years, from start to finish, for almost any film. Films in production have been in production for 1-3 years already.

[Beaverhausen]

38. You don't know how far out my list goes

drop it already. Posting stories based on gossip from blogs is for the freepers.

[AZBlue]

57. Wow - is this Barry Meyer?

You must be if you have a super secret list that no one else has. Because of course any list that the general public and even most of your employees would have falls into the category I described above (in production for years in advance). Hi Barry!

Although, even though you're Barry Meyer, you still don't have the right to say what can and can't be discussed here on DU. Sorry, Barry.

[Beaverhausen]

62. You're funny.

and that's Mr. Meyer to you.

[AZBlue]

69. Can we compromise and say "Mr. M"?

:D

[Mike03]

43. I'd be curious, if you know

which actress currently commands the largest salary. I haven't seen figures in a long time, but it used to be Julia Roberts.

[Beaverhausen]

44. I believe it's Nicole Kidman although honestly she hasn't had a hit in a while

I think Reese Witherspoon is getting up there.

[Mike03]

50. Interesting, Thanks! N/T

[Touchdown]

32. I just Googled it...9 links...all opinion blogs. Story still stinks.

Not one from a major entertainment journalism source. No Entertainment Weekly, No Rolling Stone, No Variety, No NYT, No LAT, No Post. Nothing from legitimate Hollywood news sources.

Still smell it.

Google criteria...Warner Bros.+Female Leads

AfterEllen (2 hits)
And We Shall March
Newsique
Congoo
DebraDaumier
Sin City- Box Set from Boxxet ...WARNER HOME VIDEO
Daisy Fuentes...Spock.com... Warner Bros., Luke Goss and other people matching 'bros' ...
Livermore Bang Bros. Female masturbation machineuso...foundationcinema warner torri di quartesolotesta fluida...

There's your 9, and I think 3 of them have nothing to do with this story of yours.

[AZBlue]

35. Um....the quote came from LA Weekly.

Funny thing too...you must have a different google than I do. I get pages of links.

Believe the story, don't believe the story, I really don't care. But at least be factual in your posts.

[Touchdown]

37. Where? I saw no reference to LA Weekly in the OP.

I saw no link to LA Weekly. I'm being factual here. I see no links to LA Weekly.

So link to it.

[onenote]

42. all of the stories come from the same source: Nikki Finke

who claims that 3 unnamed Warner producers told her. Of course, she gives no indication whether these three producers all claim to have heard Robinov first hand (was there some big producer meeting at Warner Bros?) or whether they are saying that they heard from someone who heard from someone who heard from someone.......

Basically, there is nothing to back up this story at all.

[Beaverhausen]

45. Sounds more like sour grapes from those producers

when Robinov told them WB wouldn't do their films.

[Lorien]

52. Eh, I used to work in the film industry, and this sounds like typical thinking

for major studios and Warners in particular.

Warners is notorious for idiotic moves like this one. Just look at the way they promo any of their films; the trailers and ad spots rarely represent the film accurately in the least. They'll sink millions into promoting some piece of schlock that they sunk too much into to begin with (like Wil Smith's "Wild, wild West") and neglect to do any promotion for a real gem (Like Brad Bird's "Iron Giant"). those are just a couple of old examples. They've gotten even worse over time. Watch their DVDs too; they are poorly designed and packaged, the menus are awful and the extras are lousy if they exist at all.

The studio I once worked for was Disney. We had a few good Feature Animation hits like "the Little Mermaid" and "The Lion King". We were 30 votes short of winning an Oscar for Best Picture with "Beauty and the Beast", so the mouse lost it's mind and started crafting films that they thought oscar voters would vote for, not films that families would enjoy. We ended up with crap like 'The Hunchback of Notre Dame' and "Pocahontas"; movies that made no sense as animated pictures instead of appealing Fairy Tales and talking animal pics. When Pixar started raking in the money Disney decided that they were doing so well because it was CG, not because the stories were simply better. You could animate "Finding Nemo" in a Southpark style and it still would do better than "Treasure Planet"-but the suits never got it. The story is everything. Gimmicks, leads, special effects...everything is secondary to the story and how it's told. Hell, the last great animated movie was about a rat who dreams of working in a five star French restaurant. Who would have thunk it?

[AZBlue]

58. Unfortunately, today's film industry makes Archie Bunker look like a feminist

Also unfortunately, the quality of today's film choices has plummeted. Either studios are solely after the Oscar, as you so eloquently pointed out above, or solely after 15 year old males. You'd think in the first instance consumers might win some, but rarely do they.

And the studio heads wonder why box office attendance has fallen? Pfffet!

[Mike03]

59. Used to work in the film industry also, but

I don't think it sounds typical at all.

The bottom line was always the dollar.

Females not only see movies, but they often determine which films men who accompany them will see.

Lastly, female superstars are not paid commensurate with male stars to begin with, so the films they appear in are almost always not as expensive (although there are obvious exceptions).

[Lorien]

70. The bottom line is always the dollar, and sadly the "logic" they

employ to acquire as many BO dollars as possible is flawed to state it mildly. The idiotic sweeping statement that there will be "no more movies with female leads" sounds all too familiar to me. Hundreds of my former co-workers are struggling now because "there will be no more movies made using traditional animation". Traditional animation is still cheaper than a quality CG film, but a long line of titles like "Home on the Range" drove the decision to stop making them-bad scripts, the medium had nothing to do with it. Yes, we women often decide which film will be seen on Friday night, but we're still not the coveted 16-45 year old male demographic. If product A makes 12% more on average than product B, then a studio will make nothing but Product As all year round.

[Mike03]

71. You definitely sound like you know what

you are talking about.

I hope you stay in touch. It would be sort of nice to have a network of people who are in, or care passionately about, the cinema industry.

It's really nice to know some DUers are filmmakers or involved in film production. I've really missed talking about these issues.

[jpgray]

66. Wild Wild West. The horror.

:scared: That movie was awful. Superlatively awful. Great point.

[piedmont]

30. I officially no longer watch Warner Brothers movies. *IF* this is true. nt

[Rhythm and Blue]

31. How utterly, utterly insane. nt

[negativenihil]

33. YAWN

this reeks of bullshit. plain and simple.

but by all means - don't let this get in the way of a good ol' fashioned knee-jerk reaction. :eye roll:

[varkam]

40. If some more reputable sources break the story...

then I'll bite.

[KurtNYC]

41. The mean average for the number of movies an american sees in theaters: 0

Zero. Meaning the average American has stopped going to the theater. The key demo for movies is males 14 to 24 who see on average 6 movies per year in a theater.

Here are the top grossing films this year:
336,530,303 Spider-Man 3 (2007)
320,706,665 Shrek the Third (2007)
313,588,051 Transformers (2007)
309,302,628 Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
289,855,714 Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
220,239,735 The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)
203,040,254 Ratatouille (2007)
181,673,339 The Simpsons Movie (2007)


Look how many of those are sequel! It isn't a creative business -- Hollywood tries to repeat success and creativity or diversity be damned. There is a market for indy and diverse films but it is far smaller and more DVD/Netflicks and on demand driven.

[onenote]

48. mean average for accuracy of the above statement: zero

In fact, the average number of movies seen in theaters increased from four to five last year.

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=25990&pg=1

[KurtNYC]

51. Median average = Zero

ya got me. Median average is zero meaning than less than half of americans go to a theater in a given year.

[onenote]

53. nope. still getting it wrong == only 1/3 don't go the movies in a given year

WHile I don't have the numbers for 2006 (when the average number of movies attended in the theater was 5), in 2005 (when the average number of movies attended was only four), only 33 percent of Americans said that they never went to the movies in the theater. Forty-two percent said that they saw between one and four and 24 percent saw five or more. Moreover, the general trend has been that more,not fewer, Americans see movies in the theater. In 1988, 45 percent said that they never went out to the movies. Its levelled off at around 1/3 since then (with a one-time dip down to 28 percent in 2002).

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=20521

[KurtNYC]

55. That is what people REPORT doing

so it is based on memory, expected answer, options presented by Gallup, etc.

Studios measure movie going habits in a more concrete way (credit card data, physical headcounts) and their data says that more than half of americans don't go to a movie in a theater in any given year.

[onenote]

72. link?

[Initech]

49. I've been to the theater exactly three times this year.

First was Grindhouse (which was a truly kick ass theater-going experience), second was the Simpsons Movie. Cant even remember what the third was.

[Initech]

47. Oh how I fucking loathe this profit-obsessed world we live in.

How about this - maybe if WB would stop hawking these bullshit remakes, sequels, and TV Show movies (I even saw a preview for something called "The Comebacks" - a movie that's nothing more than a fucking clip show), and they would hire decent directors and buy scripts of movies people would WANT to see, then maybe we could get some movies with female leads in them again. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[taught_me_patience]

54. This is insanely wrong - Disclaimer I work for WB

A joke of an article. I know for a fact that WB is producing movies with female leads.

In fact, I'd say WB is at the forefront of making culturally sensitive movies. No other studio would even dare attempt a project like "Letters from Iwo-Jima".

[Mike03]

60. Questions for people still in the Industry

When I was in Los Angeles and paying attention to all this, the highest female actor salary was around $20 mill plus perks, and the highest male actor salary was something like $30 mill plus, maybe higher, possibly as high as $40 mill in rare exceptions. Granted, that was in the roaring Nineties.

Are those still the figures? I would be fascinated to know how much the budget situation has changed regarding the salary of leads in major motion pictures.

[Beaverhausen]

61. There are all different types of deals

Some get a big payout up front, some get a percentage of the gross profits which can add up to large dollars if a film does really well. Some films pay out for years and years.

[Mike03]

65. Well, it's nice to have a conversation with someone

who knows about this. It's been a long time since I've spoken with someone in the film industry.

Of course you are right, many actors take points/percentages.

Does Warner Bros. sort of share a lot with Columbia? I'm trying to remember where Warner headquarters was--Toluca Lake/Burbank? Across from The Smokehouse?

Sorry, this convo is making me irrationally nostalgic for Los Angeles.

[Beaverhausen]

67. Yes, the main studio lot is in Burbank.

There had been Columbia offices here at one time, but now they are in Culver City - and part of Sony I think.

There are numerous Warner lots and offices all around LA, but the original is right here.

I love working here on the lot. There is a ton of activity these days.

And if you are a Stephanie Miller fan, the studio where she does her radio show is part of our lot, too.

[Mike03]

68. Nice to meet you

I have seen your posts before and always found them informative, but I truly had no idea you were in the film industry.

It's nice to know you are around DU. Good luck with your work.

[jpgray]

64. I wonder how they singled out protagonist gender as the cause of failure