Current Events > James Cameron calls 'Wonder Woman' a step backwards for women in Hollywood

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/08/24/james-cameron-calls-wonder-woman-step-backwards-for-women-in-hollywood.html

DC and Warner Bros. hit it big with “Wonder Woman,” arguably the first big hit in its ambitious extended universe based on DC Comics characters. However, for every critical hit, there is always at least one voice of dissent.

Director James Cameron, who is currently working on a slew of “Avatar” sequels and another “Titanic” TV special, wasn’t as impressed as most people with “Wonder Woman.” In his opinion, it was over-hyped and served to do the opposite of forwarding the cause of women in Hollywood.

All of the self-congratulatory back-patting Hollywood’s been doing over Wonder Woman has been so misguided," Cameron said in an interview with The Guardian. "She’s an objectified icon, and it’s just male Hollywood doing the same old thing! I’m not saying I didn’t like the movie but, to me, it’s a step backwards."

The director went on to explain that he believes one of his popular protagonists, Sarah Connor from the “Terminator” franchise, sets a better example for female leading characters in movies.

“Sarah Connor was not a beauty icon. She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit,” he said. “And to me, [the benefit of characters like Sarah] is so obvious. I mean, half the audience is female!”

Despite how Cameron feels about “Wonder Woman,” it was a hit amongst viewers and critics alike, scoring an impressive box office outing of more than $400 million domestically, according to Box Office Mojo. This figure shatters the other installments in the DCEU. Recently, The Hollywood Reporter notes that director Patty Jenkins addressed the same issue of women in Hollywood as well.

"I hope the success of the film will lead to change and lead to other people getting opportunities," Jenkins told reporters. “I hope women become a diverse, easy hire for all sorts of jobs in the future.”

James Cameron meanwhile is also planning a new Terminator movie with Arnold Schwarzenegger.
---

I agree 100%.
---

Virus731 posted...

I agree 80085%.

---

I honestly thought Wonder Woman was like an 8/10, from the reviews I read I thought it was 10/10 Movie of the year. I mean it was the best DC movie by farrrr but really hyped up
---

Gal Gadot is sexy as hell

Darmik posted...

The director went on to explain that he believes one of his popular protagonists, Sarah Connor from the “Terminator” franchise, sets a better example for female leading characters in movies.

He's right
---

Most successful movie by a female director of all time even if you count Matrix Reloaded

First major female-main Superhero movie since the 80s.

First DCEU movie that receives critical acclaim

"this is a step backwards for women in hollywood."

k
---

gal gadot is sexy but she cant act at all
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

Most successful movie by a female director of all time even if you count Matrix Reloaded

success doesn't mean step forward...

ChromaticAngel posted...

First major female-main Superhero movie since the 80s.

because superhero movies only became popular 10 years ago

ChromaticAngel posted...

First DCEU movie that receives critical acclaim

who gives a fuck
fuck off
---

I mean, Terminator 2 is one of the GOAT but James Cameron has kind of completely lost his god damn mind with all this Avatar nonsense.
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

First major female-main Superhero movie since the 80s.

False, Halle Berry Catwoman, remember?
---

“Sarah Connor was not a beauty icon. She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit,” he said. “And to me, [the benefit of characters like Sarah] is so obvious. I mean, half the audience is female!”

Meh, I didn't need James Cameron to tell me that women being good-looking and being respectable are mutually exclusive things in Current Year.
---

iron jojo posted...

Darmik posted...

The director went on to explain that he believes one of his popular protagonists, Sarah Connor from the “Terminator” franchise, sets a better example for female leading characters in movies.

He's right

To be fair you could make a counter-argument that Linda Hamilton didn't headline Terminator. Arnie did. Even if the character was better.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

ChromaticAngel posted...

First major female-main Superhero movie since the 80s.

False, Halle Berry Catwoman, remember?

no she is an ANTI HERO that is a step backwards for women!!!!111

ChromaticAngel posted...

k

HURRRRDURRRRRRRRR
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

ChromaticAngel posted...

First major female-main Superhero movie since the 80s.

False, Halle Berry Catwoman, remember?

Ssshhhhh. We're all trying to forget.
---

I dont get what hes trying to say. Like there can only be one type of leading female in movies? And that the ones in his movies are it?
---

TheoryzC posted...

I dont get what hes trying to say. Like there can only be one type of leading female in movies? And that the ones in his movies are it?

Yup, this is all just a way for him to advertise his new movies by saying they are like real feminist movies or something. It forces all the feminists to go out and see them. It's brilliant strategy, really.
---

Virus731 posted...

no she is an ANTI HERO that is a step backwards for women!!!!111

Halle's Catwoman was a step back for all humanity.
---

Darmik posted...

Sarah Connor was not a beauty icon. She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit

This all describes Wonder Woman except she's executed a lot better. Who the hell thinks of WW as specifically being a "beauty icon"? This guy needs to get his head out of his ass and check his own content first. Terminator is by no means a literary wonderland.
---

TheoryzC posted...

I dont get what hes trying to say. Like there can only be one type of leading female in movies? And that the ones in his movies are it?

no, he's saying that throwing a generic beautiful all-powerful female character with no depth doesn't do shit for progress

she's literally a token
---

Wonder Woman is hot.

The character I mean. Not so much Gal Gadot. Bitch has no curves.
---

Terra-enforcer posted...

This all describes Wonder Woman except she's executed a lot better. Who the hell thinks of WW as specifically being a "beauty icon"? This guy needs to get his head out of his ass and check his own content first. Terminator is by no means a literary wonderland.

well they did choose a model who couldn't act so that's a start

hurrfuckingdurrrr
---

So his big grievance is that Wonder Woman is pretty? Because

She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit,

3/4 of these things apply to her too. Not that different from Sarah Connor.

His primary criticism seems to be about the Wonder Woman character in general. But I think re-interpreting classic characters in a modern way is a good thing.
---

A female character being beautiful and attractive, even sexy, isn't the same as being objectified.

I haven't seen the Wonder Woman movie yet, is there any point in the movie where she is restricted to her body parts? Is she not the headline hero with her own journey and story, rather than being part of a man's? Does she not exhibit her own agency as a character?

In what way is she being reduced to an object?
---

i havent seen wonder woman yet, but it sounds like he's just trying to say he did it better. dude is kind of a dick, so not surprising...
---

Besides Sarah Connor being a strong character, what exactly did she progress for women in Hollywood? Did she get more actresses and female-directors into the spotlight? Was there a sudden huge boon of female-led (and successful) action movies after Terminator 2? I'm not going to argue that she wasn't a great female character, but she didn't progress much if Hollywood kept the "women can't lead a big name movie" mentality for 20 more years. We've yet to see what Wonder Woman will accomplish in its wake so I can't comment on that.

Just another director talking out his ass about a rival studio's film in order to get a bit of publicity. It's no different than Joss Whedon talking shit about the treatment of women in Jurassic World.


Cameron may be a good direction, but that doesn't mean he can't be full of shit sometimes.

Sarah Connor was just a side character basically. Nobody would have given a fuck about that character had Arnold not been so iconic as the Terminator.
---

Terra-enforcer posted...

Darmik posted...

Sarah Connor was not a beauty icon. She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit

This all describes Wonder Woman except she's executed a lot better.

EL OH fucking EL.

Wonder Woman better executed than Sarah Connor?!?!?

Mods? Arrest this individual immediately for felony trolling in the first degree.
---

Are female leads supposed to look like Janet Reno?
---

piUrsEitanizm posted...

Virus731 posted...

I agree 80085%.

ayyyy

Speaking of Sarah Connor, a lot of people took exception to her characterization in the first film since she spent all of her time cowering and being protected by a guy. So James Cameron took it upon himself to write her as a hyper masculine antithesis in the sequel. But instead of her being an empowered character, he wanted her to come across as a broken individual. But, of course, the "strong individual = strong character" crowd loved it.

And decades later, he's able to pat himself on the back and point the finger at other people because the character shows a bit of skin. As opposed to The Terminator where James Cameron's future wife's breasts were in full view of the camera.


But let's not talk about that because it's ancient history and it goes against his holier-than-thou narrative.

^ Shut the hell up.
---

Darmik posted...

“Sarah Connor was not a beauty icon. She was strong, she was troubled, she was a terrible mother, and she earned the respect of the audience through pure grit,” he said. “And to me, [the benefit of characters like Sarah] is so obvious. I mean, half the audience is female!”

So the "better" example is better because she's a terrible person in a gritty movie?

That's not what Wonder Woman is about. And this obsession with what a female protagonist "should" be is bull. In the wider context of pop culture, our heroes should be diverse not just in asthetics, but in ideals and character.

Sarah Connor worked in Terminator. She would have been impossible in Wonder Woman, and in the context of the DCEU to that point, insufferable.

Wonder Woman is hopeful, idealistic, naive, assertive, and pro-active, among. She saves they day while fucking up a few times and isn't always right.

And she is beautiful, because if we're going to talk about female role models, women shouldn't have to be ashamed of being beautiful. "Beauty" isn't something to avoid, and a woman doesn't need to look like they came out of the Fallout universe to be a "real" woman. Sometimes, real women are gorgeous.

James Cameron is being stupid, here.
---

I agree. The movie was good and a good demonstration of how to do a female protagonist right. However the media surrounding it was a clusterfuck and completely outweighs the movie itself. He's still kind of a dick for patting himself on the back though.

Zack_Attackv1 posted...

^ Shut the hell up.

Get a new gimmick.

Virus731 posted...

she's literally a token

this tbh.

his problem is that she's portrayed as a girl power icon meant to open up the possibility of more leading females in hollywood when in reality she's depicted and sexually objectified more than most other superhero females potentially even surpassing the likes of black widow and nobody really thinks of BW as an icon for female progress.

i mean it's a bit telling when the actress herself which is supposedly "hollywood" thin has claimed she couldn't breathe when first slipping into the costume in BvS.

of course, whether or not they're just staying faithful to the comic is another discussion.
---

A better example from Cameron's own filmography would be Ripley from Aliens, a female character that embodied the traits of female motherhood and the guns-blazing male action hero. Instead of having Ripley sacrifice her female qualities, she was able to hold onto them while also displaying typical male traits and embody a progressive female character. The scene where he's holding Newt in one hand while holding a gun in the other is the perfect visual representation of this.

Sarah Conner from T2 is just repeating what Cameron had already done instead of progressing the female character another step. What he's shaming Wonder Woman for is exactly what he did in his very own example.
---

Patty Jenkins' response:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DICzihOXcAAwEWs.jpg

Classy.

So_Hajile posted...

A better example from Cameron's own filmography would be Ripley from Aliens, a female character that embodied the traits of female motherhood and the guns-blazing male action hero. Instead of having Ripley sacrifice her female qualities, she was able to hold onto them while also displaying typical male traits and embody a progressive female character. The scene where he's holding Newt in one hand while holding a gun in the other is the perfect visual representation of this.

Sarah Conner from T2 is just repeating what Cameron had already done instead of progressing the female character another step. What he's shaming Wonder Woman for is exactly what he did in his very own example.

Cameron didn't make Ripley himself (she was already a great character in Alien) which I guess is why he didn't cite her as an example. I agree with you though.
---

Darmik posted...

"She’s an objectified icon, and it’s just male Hollywood doing the same old thing!"

LOL!


CommonStar posted...

Patty Jenkins' response:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DICzihOXcAAwEWs.jpg

Classy.

Seems like Jim Cameron thinks a woman director made a movie that didn't make a strong female character like male directors or something lol
---

Shotgunnova posted...

Virus731 posted...

no she is an ANTI HERO that is a step backwards for women!!!!111

Halle's Catwoman was a step back for all humanity.

I liked it
---

Ripley, Sarah Connor and Adrianne Balboa are my favorite examples of strong female characters in movies. All of them are both strong and feminine in their own ways...well Adraianne not so much in the first film, but w/e.

The thing is, most current superhero films are are just popcorn flicks. The characters are often meant to just look cool and sometimes be some eye candy. This applies to both males and females. Chris Evans is objectified just as much as WW.

Anyway, I don't think that we should analyze movies like Iron Man or WW the same way that we do movies like Rocky and Terminator. They have a different intent of what they're trying to do from the start.
---

Jokeaccountinc posted...

Didn't she start out as a bondage fantasy

yes

also, this is focusing on fucking action movies

there are countless lead actresses in other genres, so the whole "a woman doesn't have to be damaged to be strong" bullshit is bullshit, action movies are about grit

it's like she thinks that it'd be progress to cast amy schumer playing a happy as can be lass fighting aliens
---

Well the WW director's response was aptly put IMO.
---

scar the 1 posted...

Well the WW director's response was aptly put IMO.

It's pretty easy to say "well it doesn't make sense you because you're not a woman"

very dismissive of what he was actually saying
---

At the end of the day, the movie came, it made money, and so Mr. Cameron's words don't really matter anymore.
---