NO MORE WB FILMS WITH FEMALE LEADS?

[MattBrady]

Fans who’ve been watching the rise and fall and rise and fall of the possible, potential, probable, not likely, maybe happening, probably not, but then again maybe Wonder Woman movie at Warner Bros. may have new reason to despair.

According to LA Weekly’s Nikki Finke, Warners isn’t interested in making films with female leads. Her source? Warner Bros president of production Jeff Robinov who Finke quotes (through three sources) as saying: "We are no longer doing movies with women in the lead." Finke said that Robinov's sentiment/statement was confirmed by three producers.

Finke takes the broader (no pun intended) view of the alleged new “direction” for Warners, even going so far as to getting a response from Gloria Allred, comic fans will clearly see the writing on the wall for the beleaguered Wonder Woman movie that the studio had been trying to get off the ground for years now, most notably, with Joss Whedon at the helm (he signed on in March of 2005), until he left the project in February of this year. At last report, Producer Joel Silver was “struggling” with the Wonder Woman movie, and the studio had purchased another script for a possible Wonder Woman movie around the time Whedon left.

Most recently, of course, Jessica Biel’s name was bantered about as a possible Wonder Woman in the upcoming Justice League of America film, which was/is, reportedly, to be the launching pad for several solo hero film franchises, including Wonder Woman.

As Finke points out, Waren Bros. films with female leads have underperformed in the market of late, but that, Finke said, is something that has many factors, and is not solely due to the female leads.

[black-adder]

What studio made good luck chuck?

[Peasily]

Sexist idiots. Just give the WW film to Timm, McDuffie, and their DCAU cohorts and say have at it. I don't see why Timm couldn't branch out and direct live action.

[MattBrady]

Originally Posted by black-adder

What studio made good luck chuck?

romantic comedies are not the same as films with female leads, marketing decisions notwithstanding.

MattB

[black-adder]

Originally Posted by MattBrady

romantic comedies are not the same as films with female leads, marketing decisions notwithstanding.

MattB

but if its a romantic comedy with a female lead doesnt that count for something?

[MattBrady]

Originally Posted by black-adder

but if its a romantic comedy with a female lead doesnt that count for something?

not in films, but I doubt it. If anything, I'd probably lean towards the idea of that film being a romantic comedy, then a {shudder} Dane Cook vehicle (as his character is the title character) and then a Jessica Alba flick - from all the previews I've seen, it's his story and follows him, not the other way around. Yeah, she's hot and has a following, but there's no way she's carrying that movie on her own, which is what the original article is talking about, and what a Wonder Woman movie would be doing as well.

MattB

[Kingbobb]

If this is true, it's the stupidest statement a studio suit has ever made. Has he checked what % of the American population is women? Somewhat more than half, if things haven't changed much. This kind of statement is all that the wives and girlfriends of America need to tell their significant others they aren't going to see any more Warner's movies . We'll see how long this last when their ticket revenues drop by a significant %.

Granted, this won't stop me from seeing the Dark Knight. But I can really see my wife swearing off most other WB creations until they recant...and that means making a female-lead film.

[black-adder]

Originally Posted by MattBrady

not in films, but I doubt it. If anything, I'd probably lean towards the idea of that film being a romantic comedy, then a {shudder} Dane Cook vehicle (as his character is the title character) and then a Jessica Alba flick - from all the previews I've seen, it's his story and follows him, not the other way around. Yeah, she's hot and has a following, but there's no way she's carrying that movie on her own, which is what the original article is talking about, and what a Wonder Woman movie would be doing as well.

MattB

But all the trailers focused on her losing her pants.
i barely know Dane Cook from adam.

[melperfect]

I can't believe that quote actually passed Robinov's lips!!!
Way to be progressive WB!

[skaly]

Originally Posted by MattBrady

Warner Bros president of production Jeff Robinov who Finke quotes (through three sources) as saying: "We are no longer doing movies with women in the lead."

...

As Finke points out, Waren Bros. films with female leads have underperformed in the market of late, but that, Finke said, is something that has many factors, and is not solely due to the female leads.

Quoted for

Seriously, I have no idea how people can come to such conclusions. I'm just... baffled. Robinov is trying to make a connection (between female leads and profit) that is tenuous at best, especially since he admits that there are other factors.

This is the worst way to make creative decisions.

[OG_vg_warrio]

I'm curious as to how far back they've been looking at this. Offhand, I can think of Catwoman, Cinderella story, The reaping, In the land of women, Panic Room, and Nancy Drew. Statisticly speaking, there may be truth to this but otherwise this was a very stupid thing to say.

[MattBrady]

Originally Posted by black-adder

But all the trailers focused on her losing her pants.
i barely know Dane Cook from adam.

a pratfall does not a lead make.

MattB

[pop monkey]

Originally Posted by melperfect

I can't believe that quote actually passed Robinov's lips!!!
Way to be progressive WB!

The actual "quote" probably didn't. The article states that the quote passed through "three sources", so the chances of it being an actual quote are slim. The idea, however, is still ridiculous. Blame might be laid, in one or two instances, on a particular female lead not delivering a worthwhile performance with the script she was given, but you can't turn around and say, "okay, no more female-led movies". That's retarded!

This can't all be blamed on the difficulties launching WONDER WOMAN, though. What other recent WB female-driven movies have underperformed enough to warrant this sort of response?

[LazarusMan]

Originally Posted by MattBrady

not in films, but I doubt it. If anything, I'd probably lean towards the idea of that film being a romantic comedy, then a {shudder} Dane Cook vehicle (as his character is the title character) and then a Jessica Alba flick - from all the previews I've seen, it's his story and follows him, not the other way around. Yeah, she's hot and has a following, but there's no way she's carrying that movie on her own, which is what the original article is talking about, and what a Wonder Woman movie would be doing as well.

MattB

I love the fact that I'm not the only one that shudders when that idiot's name is mentioned. His name is like mentioning the worst things about human existence and then someone scraping a chalkboard with their fingernails.

I think, especially looking at the comic genre of films, look at the ones with the female leads. Catwoman was ridiculous and just utterly amazing in its crappiness, Elektra the same. Warners made a decision, they WILL not stand by it, especially if it involves making money and lots of it.

The name of the game in Hollywood is how much money can we make, and thinking on the horrible performances of a lot of movies leads one to make a rash decision. I'm not saying it's a good one, but it's like saying you believe that Captain America is staying dead. It will be overturned. Someone will change this.

I bet, in less than 6 months, someone at Warner Bros. will have "the best idea ever" and it will star a female lead and revolve around her character, and then the head of Warners will look like a champion for women's rights because he was never completely 100% for the idea of doing away with female lead movies anyway. It's all part of the machine, people.

[Beheader]

Originally Posted by OG_vg_warrio

I'm curious as to how far back they've been looking at this. Offhand, I can think of Catwoman, Cinderella story, The reaping, In the land of women, Panic Room, and Nancy Drew. Statisticly speaking, there may be truth to this but otherwise this was a very stupid thing to say.

Panic Room did very well. It's the reason why Jodie Foster is on a tough girl role kick as of late.

But you can see why WB would be hesistant to make a female superhero movie, considering there hasn't been a successful one made yet.

Although news like this isn't going to sit well with the stars in Hollywood.

[tunabeard]

Originally Posted by pop monkey

The actual "quote" probably didn't. The article states that the quote passed through "three sources", so the chances of it being an actual quote are slim.

It would have been really interested if Ms. Allred's response comments were posted along with this piece.

And if his comments were actually made then I would hope the other major studios would take notice and greenlight some Grade A projects with a female lead and show Warner Bros. just how truly stupid it was to make such a comment. I would hope that any female actresses under contract with Warner Bros.(or any other studio) would take offense to the statement as well.

[J.C. Bakken]

Originally Posted by Kingbobb

If this is true, it's the stupidest statement a studio suit has ever made. Has he checked what % of the American population is women? Somewhat more than half, if things haven't changed much. This kind of statement is all that the wives and girlfriends of America need to tell their significant others they aren't going to see any more Warner's movies . We'll see how long this last when their ticket revenues drop by a significant %.

Granted, this won't stop me from seeing the Dark Knight. But I can really see my wife swearing off most other WB creations until they recant...and that means making a female-lead film.

How many woman is it in the US? Don't know, and the studio's don't care, if they arn't going to the movies, or buying the DVD's. The movie studios will make movies that they think will sell to the target audience, and market research and all that crap will most likely tell them something, possibly not all the truth, but this time, they probarbly got the answers telling them that woman in leading roles don't sell as good as men.

[Pack]

Originally Posted by pop monkey

The actual "quote" probably didn't. The article states that the quote passed through "three sources", so the chances of it being an actual quote are slim. The idea, however, is still ridiculous. Blame might be laid, in one or two instances, on a particular female lead not delivering a worthwhile performance with the script she was given, but you can't turn around and say, "okay, no more female-led movies". That's retarded!

This can't all be blamed on the difficulties launching WONDER WOMAN, though. What other recent WB female-driven movies have underperformed enough to warrant this sort of response?

No the actual quote didn't pass through three sources it was confirmed by three sources.
I'm a reporter. You can't get more solid backing than confirmation from two separate sources other than primary sources.

[Flicker]

Boy, Waren Bros. just keeps making bad decisions lately.

[waterdragon]

I guess they don't want any females in their films with that kind of statement, because any actress or woman not even the slightest bit offended by that would really make the world all the more crazier.

So Nancy Drew only made 25+ million, big deal. It was an all ages fun type of movie. Did you expect every moviegoer to see it? I bet it didn't even cost 10+ million to make.

[black-adder]

I wonder if miss Allred plans to sue for discrimination.

[protonik]

Originally Posted by Peasily

Sexist idiots. Just give the WW film to Timm, McDuffie, and their DCAU cohorts and say have at it. I don't see why Timm couldn't branch out and direct live action.

It isn't sexist when it is based on financial returns etc. If movies with female leads are not performing it doesn't make sense to continue to produce them. It is sure fun to try but if it doesn't work then you have to look at the bottom line.

[black-adder]

Originally Posted by MattBrady

a pratfall does not a lead make.

MattB

OK i concede you might have a point there.
she may not be the "lead actor" but i imagine that Jessica Alba has just as many fans (if not more) than Dane Cook.
they used her image to heavily promote Fantastic Four and Sin City.

[G Dog]

Originally Posted by black-adder

I wonder if miss Allred plans to sue for discrimination.

Except this isn't a simple act of discrimintation. This is based on numbers. This is based on them looking at the box office takes of movies with female leads.

This would be like Fox deciding that they're not making enough money on superhero movie so they're going to stop making them, then someone saying "Stan Lee should sue!"

[Robb Welch]

The comment was not sexist. I think people need to keep in mind the history with female leads in the past 8 years, the push, the sucess and the failures. Also keep in mind hollywood looks at demographs in audiences. Turns out not as many people are as interested in female leads in action movies as once was thought. So they are changing the way they do things.


Hey how well did resident evil 3 do, anyway?