If the noughties were the decade of the superhero then...

[Silvermoth]

Could the '10s be the decade of the superheroine? In the past few months we've had confirmation of an Alias and Wonder Woman television show as well as a potential Black Widow movie. As soon as the Avengers franchise gathers steam there will probably be some great heroines there too.

What do you think? If it's not superheroines that define the next decade, what will define it?

 

[obin_gam]

I want to say remakes but that has been consistant in the Double-ohs aswell. I also want to say 3D but ai hope it will die and burn in hell soon so as to not pestilencing (if thats even a word :P) the Tens.

I dont think superheroines and such movies and series will be that noticable. Sadly.

This was a hard question...

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Superheroines have never been very sucessful in movies for the same reason as they have never been very sucessful in comics; the primary audience is male, and they want to see male heroes.

 

[Pink Ranger]

It has more to do with the superheroine movies being of poor quality. Catwoman, Elektra, Aeon Flux, Resident Evil, etc.; regardless of "target audience" and whatnot, those movies were just objectively bad.

It's not so much the male target audience at fault, but writers who can't write female characters outside of personal revenge plots.

 

[BillPardy]

It has more to do with the superheroine movies being of poor quality. Catwoman, Elektra, Aeon Flux, Resident Evil, etc.; regardless of "target audience" and whatnot, those movies were just objectively bad.

It's not so much the male target audience at fault, but writers who can't write female characters outside of personal revenge plots.

Exactly the problem. As soon as writers learn to write female action heroes, then we'll see good superheroine movies.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

It has more to do with the superheroine movies being of poor quality. Catwoman, Elektra, Aeon Flux, Resident Evil, etc.; regardless of "target audience" and whatnot, those movies were just objectively bad.

It's not so much the male target audience at fault, but writers who can't write female characters outside of personal revenge plots.

Whilst I agree that they have been generally below-standard, quality is a matter of opinion. There are plenty of superhero movies and action movies with male leads that are as bad as the films you mentioned, that have suceeded at the cinema. Just because a film makes money does not mean it is a good film, and vice versa.

The point is that Supergirl, Catwoman, Elektra, Aeon Flux et all have all flopped, and movies about female superheroes will always flop because the target audience is not intrested. The same reason Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics never sell anyway near the top of the comics charts.

 

[Catman]

movies about female superheroes will always flop

I can solve that problem. Nudity.

 

[DieSmiling]

It'll never happen on a large scale. I could see a Wonder Woman movie being successful, but you'll never see a ton of different female driven superhero movies. Female driven action movies just don't draw.

 

[Silvermoth]

It'll never happen on a large scale. I could see a Wonder Woman movie being successful, but you'll never see a ton of different female driven superhero movies. Female driven action movies just don't draw.

Thats a bit of a generalisation. There have been tons of film franchises that have action and a huge female following...Twilight, True Blood, Harry Potter, Doctor Who, The Hunger Games, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Xena: Warrior Princess even Tomb Raider has alot of female fans.

There are tons of women who like action. They just need to make a quality film first that interests them. They're not gonna turn up for "****ty naughty co-eds fight zombies in their underwear" or something.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Whilst I agree that they have been generally below-standard, quality is a matter of opinion. There are plenty of superhero movies and action movies with male leads that are as bad as the films you mentioned, that have suceeded at the cinema. Just because a film makes money does not mean it is a good film, and vice versa.

The point is that Supergirl, Catwoman, Elektra, Aeon Flux et all have all flopped, and movies about female superheroes will always flop because the target audience is not intrested. The same reason Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics never sell anyway near the top of the comics charts.

I know opinion is personal, and I do respect your opinion, and taste in sh movies.
But, I would struggle to name any male superhero films that were successful at the BO, that were as stark raving boring as those female sh films you just listed. That is, male superhero films that are the first chapters in a franchise, and are not semi-successful sequels, that got a bit of BO success due to having better movies beforehand(like Batman and Robin).

Even the poorest male dominated sh films that have had BO success with their first films, have had *something* going on in them to hold your interest, like the 1st Fantastic Four film.
I've seen all of those female films you listed, and they all suffered from having nothing much happening in them, ie you could not even get into them as mindless action films.

edit: and i have not seen it, but 'The Spirit' , from all reports, seems to fit the same boring criteria as the female sh movies listed, and that did terribly at the BO, so perhaps it is nothing to do with gender whatsoever.

 

[redmarvel]

Whilst I agree that they have been generally below-standard, quality is a matter of opinion. There are plenty of superhero movies and action movies with male leads that are as bad as the films you mentioned, that have suceeded at the cinema. Just because a film makes money does not mean it is a good film, and vice versa.

The point is that Supergirl, Catwoman, Elektra, Aeon Flux et all have all flopped, and movies about female superheroes will always flop because the target audience is not intrested. The same reason Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics never sell anyway near the top of the comics charts.

They flopped because the movies were not well made. Give the gals a decent script and they'd do a better job. It's like detective shows with leading ladies (V.I.Warshawski) they seem to be designed to flop.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

They flopped because the movies were not well made. Give the gals a decent script and they'd do a better job. It's like detective shows with leading ladies (V.I.Warshawski) they seem to be designed to flop.

Unfortunetly quality is subjective, everyone has different ideas on it, and anyway, no-one knows how good a movie is before they go to the cinema.]#

Whether these superheroine movies are good or bad, people don't go to see them. That's the point. They don't go to see them because action movies mainly appeal to 18-24 males, and they'd rather see a man kicking ass. It's really that simple.

 

[Red Mask]

Could the '10s be the decade of the superheroine? In the past few months we've had confirmation of an Alias and Wonder Woman television show as well as a potential Black Widow movie. As soon as the Avengers franchise gathers steam there will probably be some great heroines there too.

What do you think? If it's not superheroines that define the next decade, what will define it?

It would be great if more superheroine films came out but a trend like that can't be predicted.

I do think a Black Widow movie can do well because it's still a super spy heroine. As for other superheroines...time will tell.

 

[Chris Wallace]

It's premature to even talk about this now. We are nowhere near having superheroines prevalant on film. Remember that SOME attempts were made to do this in the '00s.

 

[p4poetic]

Superheroines have never been very sucessful in movies for the same reason as they have never been very sucessful in comics; the primary audience is male, and they want to see male heroes.

Charlie's Angels, Tomb Raider, Kill Bill...

Funny how once the mid 2000s came around with Elektra and Catwoman flopping, all of a sudden female superheroes can't sell. I distinctly remember in the early 2000s they said 'Girl Power' was all the rage.

 

[Red Mask]

Don't forget the PowerPuff Girls!

Yeah - they count!

 

[Catman]

I distinctly remember in the early 2000s they said 'Girl Power' was all the rage.

It was to some degree. Xena: Warrior Princess and Buffy the Vampire Slayer paved the way.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Charlie's Angels, Tomb Raider, Kill Bill...

Funny how once the mid 2000s came around with Elektra and Catwoman flopping, all of a sudden female superheroes can't sell. I distinctly remember in the early 2000s they said 'Girl Power' was all the rage.

I hated the Charlie's Angels movies more than the feeling I got after the novocaine wore off behind my wisdom teeth getting pulled. Tomb Raider was another huge letdown. But we have yet to see a successful-or even good-movie based on a comic book superheroine. Even the women on teams (Storm, for example) get shafted in favor of the male counterparts.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Charlie's Angels, Tomb Raider, Kill Bill...

Funny how once the mid 2000s came around with Elektra and Catwoman flopping, all of a sudden female superheroes can't sell. I distinctly remember in the early 2000s they said 'Girl Power' was all the rage.

The first Tomb Raider movie was sold on the sex appeal of Angelina Jolie and Lara Croft. I agree it is a proper serious action movie starring a woman, and it did lead to a sequel. But it was sucessful simply because Tomb Raider was a cultural phenomenon at the time. Angelina Jolie wore a padded bra for goodness' sake, if that doesn't tell you enough about the intended audience, nothing will.

Charlie's Angels is a camp girly comedy, and appeals to men, not due to action, but on the basis of showing attractive women in slimpy clothes. It's lowest common denominator stuff. I don't think there are any girls out there who would see the three Angels as legitimate heroes or role models, or any guys who take them seriously.

Kill Bill is a Tarantino movie and sold on the basis of that.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

It was to some degree. Xena: Warrior Princess and Buffy the Vampire Slayer paved the way.

But Xena was popular for the novelty, the fact that it was so camp, the inferred lesbian vibes, and the whole 'women in skimpy clothes' thing.

Buffy was popular because it was genuinely well made, but the huge female audience was more intrested in the characters and the soap opera elements than the action.

The point is this; men would rather see guys kicking ass than women. When you do have a woman kicking ass, she is usually presented as an amusing novelty, and almost invariably objectified; the fact that she is tough just makes her sexier, and she will usually wear skimpy clothing. This way, the male audience does not have to take her seriously. Buffy the Vampire Slayer- the name is supposed to sound silly, because the idea of a cheerleader killing vampires IS silly.

Female audiences enjoy strong female characters who can take charge, and some women enjoy action, absolutely. But the core audience of action movies always has been, and always will be, predominatly young males. And they would rather see males kicking ass.

If you want to get even more basic; yes, women CAN fight. But men are made for fighting. A man (initially) is a woman with his senses dulled for fighting.

 

[Red Mask]

I hated the Charlie's Angels movies more than the feeling I got after the novocaine wore off behind my wisdom teeth getting pulled. Tomb Raider was another huge letdown. But we have yet to see a successful-or even good-movie based on a comic book superheroine. Even the women on teams (Storm, for example) get shafted in favor of the male counterparts.

And yet, the X-Men movies have featured more comicbook superheroines than any other movie. X-Men 2 was the first film to feature two women piloting jets and one airforce jet.

Charlie's Angels was silly. But I'm hoping the new TV series will be better.

 

[Red Mask]

But Xena was popular for the novelty, the fact that it was so camp, the inferred lesbian vibes, and the whole 'women in skimpy clothes' thing.

Buffy was popular because it was genuinely well made, but the huge female audience was more intrested in the characters and the soap opera elements than the action.

The point is this; men would rather see guys kicking ass than women. When you do have a woman kicking ass, she is usually presented as an amusing novelty, and almost invariably objectified; the fact that she is tough just makes her sexier, and she will usually wear skimpy clothing. This way, the male audience does not have to take her seriously. Buffy the Vampire Slayer- the name is supposed to sound silly, because the idea of a cheerleader killing vampires IS silly.

Female audiences enjoy strong female characters who can take charge, and some women enjoy action, absolutely. But the core audience of action movies always has been, and always will be, predominatly young males. And they would rather see males kicking ass.

Those males must be the ones watching those straight-to-video action films and action movie flops. I don't envy them.

 

[p4poetic]

So all the aforementioned successful movies with female superhero leads were only successful because of the skimpy clothing appeal...yet other movies that came after with the same skimpy clothed females flopped...for what reason? That makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Silvermoth]

I'm always suprised when people say "Buffy or Charlie's Angels were silly in their nature and therefore don't count as successful action movies starring women". I mean, do you really think Bruce Willis could take out an entire building full of terrorists by himself? Action movies are inherently silly.

 

[Red Mask]

I keep forgetting to add Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon in my list. They weren't superheroines, but they sure kicked butt.