This article discusses the issue of race in movies. Specifically, it analyzes how white and black characters are portrayed differently in the movie, Be Cool, written by Peter Stienfield and directed by F. Gary Gray. Be Cool is a comedy sequel of the movie Get Shorty. The movie stars four white actors: John Travolta, Uma Thurman, Danny DeVito, Vince Vaughn, and three black, or non-white actors: The Rock, Christina Milian, and Cedric the Entertainer.

Chili Palmer (John Travolta), with his ever so poised attitude and strong build, is the star of this movie. Chili decides to leave the movie industry to pursue the music business. In the first ten minutes of the movie, Chili's friend is killed by the Russian Mafia. Chili heads to his friend's wife, Edie Athens (Uma Thurman), to offer his services in assisting her run the record label. Throughout the movie, Chili and Edie eventually become romantically involved. The romance has to wait however. Their time is occupied by the young pop star that will be the savior of the record label, Linda Moon (Christina Milian), dealing with her pretentious manager, the manager's gay, aspiring actor bodyguard, Russian mobsters and an Ivy League gangster music producer and his entourage.

“Hollywood has arguably done more to integrate Blacks into productions than any other mass medium. Yet exclusion of minority actors from certain roles and actions persists”. This movie is a confirmation of this fact.

This movie depicts three of the four white characters as poised and in control of their immediate situations. For example, Chili Palmer is the essence of a well rounded man. He speaks confidently, is not afraid of the opposition, and in the end, he gets the girl. Chili is in control of every situation he encounters. As Robert Entman and Andrew Rojecki argue, “Black-white conversations almost all involve hierarchical relationships with the white in charge of critical decisions and the direction of the plot”. This movie is a true depiction of this fact in most every scene.

Edie Athens loses her husband in the first ten minutes of the movie and with Chili's help, immediately regains her footing in the music industry without shedding a tear. She is depicted as a stereotypical all-American white woman. She is blond, sexy, warm, and non-confrontational, and a lovable woman. Edie and Chili, the two leading white characters, become romantically involved.

Raji (Vince Vaughn) is a white man playing a character that, as the other characters proclaim, “Thinks he is black.” Raji's character is an obvious attempt by the writer to create humor in the movie. Raji's character, however, is a reminder of the depictions in the movie Ethnic Notions by Marlon Riggs, where white people adorned exaggerated costumes and language in order to portray black people. In Raji's effort to be black, he speaks in slang, barely completing a coherent sentence without using profanity. His attire consists of suits, hats, and he dresses, as Chili Palmer says, “Like a Pimp.” He has no respect for women, particularly his client, Linda Moon, and is out to get what he wants by any means necessary.

All of the black characters in this movie are in supporting roles. Sinclair "Sin" Russell (Cedric the Entertainer) is a black rapper with an entourage of gangsters. The fact that Sin has an Ivy League education is certainly not the stereotypical black man; however, his positive traits seem to be overshadowed by the fact that he is a gang banger. Several scenes almost make a mockery of the fact that he is an intelligent black man.

In one scene the Russian Mafia uses racial epithets towards Sin. The head member of the Russian says, “Be Cool, N****r!” to Sin. As Joe R. Feagin noted in The Continuing Significance of Race: Anti-Black Discrimination in Public Places, “The most common black responses to racial hostility . . . are withdrawal or a verbal reply” . Sin chose the verbal reply,

”How is it that you can disrespect a man's ethnicity when you know we (black people) have influenced nearly every facet of white America; from our music, to our style of dress, not to mention, your basic imitation of our sense of cool . . .walk, talk, dress, mannerisms. We enrich your very existence, all the while contributing to the gross national product through our achievements in corporate America. It's these conceits that comfort me when I'm faced with the ignorant cowardly, bitter and bigoted who have no talent, no guts; people like you who desecrate things you don't understand, when the truth is you should say, thank you man and go on about your way . . . “.

During this verbal retort, the camera zooms in on Sin's face, possibly an effort to get the audience to absorb the words. Although a valiant effort on the part of the producers to get this message across, “Creating a color-blind society on a foundation saturated with racism requires something more than simply proclaiming that the age of brotherhood has arrived”. After shooting the Russian, Sin comments, “Racial Epithets, why does it always have to come down to that? Makes me sad for my daughter.”

Dabu, Sin's right-hand man, is another attempt by the writer to add humor to the movie. Dabu has a strong desire to kill someone; however, when he holds a gun, often times it discharges without any intent of his own. He tends to display cross-cultural attributes, from drinking tea with a pinky finger in the air to wearing a bullet proof vest with his pants barely above his thighs. In one scene Sin and his group of friends are outside of a club talking to Chili Palmer after going to get Mongolian Barbecue. Dabu is so smitten by the character, Linda Moon (Cristina Milian), that he is completely focused on her while eating his food and begins slurping as if in a sexual manner. In that scene, Dabu displays the stereotypical sex-crazed black man.

In addition to Dabu, Sin's entourage is a group of black men portraying the stereotypical gun-toting gang bangers who threaten people in order to get what they want. Their wardrobe consists of bandanas, pants worn well below the waist in order to show their boxers, plenty of jewelry on their necks and wrists, and their mouths full of slang.

In the beginning of the movie Linda Moon is an aspiring singer who has grown to hate the music business because of her experiences with her current manager, Raji. Linda Moon comes across not as a black or a white character, but more of a neutral role. Although a minority, she plays a role that may have been portrayed by a white female as well, without much change to the dialogue, wardrobe or scenes.

The Rock is a gay bodyguard who is searching for his big break in the movie industry. His appearance alone tends to be threatening until he shows his only significant feature, the raised eyebrow. Although “The Rock” and “Gay” in one sentence alone seem to be an oxymoron, he portrays the stereotypical black gay man with ease.

White and black characters are treated similar in respect to the names they are given. Chili, Sin, Raji, Dabu, are all slang names and all of which you would associate with black characters.

Some of the roles and situations in this movie, when seen by the typical white American, are likely to reinforce anti-Black stereotypes. The black characters, outside of the black police officer, are essentially framed as lazy, careless and cold gang bangers. This is the common view of all black men that the media portrays to the typical white American.

In one scene, Sin's entourage drives up to his house in three black hummers with expensive rims, with the music playing extremely loud. Annoyed, Sin dismisses this behavior by saying, “. . .must you live up to the stereotypes?” Sin's white neighbor shakes her head and hurries into her house shortly after the cars arrive. Inside of one of the cars is a kidnapped program director who the audience assumes is in charge of the music that is played on radio stations. Sin proceeds to threaten the man into playing his records. As this occurs, Sin's daughter walks out on the porch. While the men, under the order of Sin, greets Sin's daughter, the camera moves to the back of the men to show low waisted pants, boxers showing, all have weapons stuck in the back of their pants.

Entman and Rojecki argued that “White racial thinking now spans a spectrum that runs from racial comity and understanding to ambivalence, then to animosity, and finally to outright racism”. “The bulk of whites exhibit ambivalence that may be tipped toward comity or hostility depending on the interaction of political climate, personal experience, and mediated communications”. “At one end of the spectrum are white people who believe it is not possible to generalize about African American individuals any more than about whites. At the other end of the spectrum are full blown racists who believe blacks and whites are fundamentally different”.

How would seeing the movie, Be Cool, likely affect the sentiments and schemas of a typical, racially ambivalent White American? The characters and scenes in this movie are heavily stereotypical of black people. This movie may bring a since of confirmation of what a typical white American might think about black people, based on what they have seen in the media. For many white Americans, the media is the only way many white Americans see black people so their schemas are influenced by these images. According to Travis L. Dixon, Cristina L. Azocar, and Michael Casas, “African Americans are typically relegated to a depiction as perpetrators while being underrepresented as officers and victims on local television news”.

One may argue that the character Raji is a negative depiction of a white man and may influence whites to believe that it isn't just blacks. However, “Whites already know that members of their group come in all moral and intellectual shapes and sizes.”. So a character like Raji is not likely to have a real affect on their current thinking about their own group.

Given that the stereotypical black man is heavily portrayed in the movie, Be Cool, a typical white American seeing this movie could either remain as ambivalent or be moved from ambivalence to animosity. “Racial animosity occupies an important step short of racism. Although those exhibiting animosity often get labeled as racist, they do not see their stereotyped anti-black generalizations as adding up to a natural racial order that places whites on top and legitimizes discrimination“.

Although the movie industry has made great strides in reaching comity between white and black roles, the efforts are still lacking. Society still tends to instinctively provide white actors with highly coveted roles and black actors in highly stereotypical or supporting roles.

As we all know, without director, movies would never be made. What a lot of people keep forgetting is that without writers, movies couldn't get made either. I still find it hard to believe that writers aren't getting enough recognition.

Movie bosses buy the scripts. They buy the scripts pretty cheap too. I remember that writer Shane Black, who wrote movies like the lethal weapon series, sold his scripts for the last Boy Scout for 1.75 million dollar back in 1990. That movie made over 150 million dollars at the box office. When it comes to famous directors, they can make as much as 10-20 million per picture not including box office percentages.

When I see a director win an academy award for best picture, I assume that the writer will win best screen play no? It doesn't seem to be like that. I don't understand how a director who made a movie out of a screenplay can get more honours than the writer himself.

One question that deserves an answer is does directing a story deserve more credit than writing one? When I write a story I can already see images of what is happening as I write. I am pretty sure that it is the same way for other writers too. Directors on the other hand, already have the story in hand. They just need to shoot it. Often this happens without the director consulting with the writer to see how he envisioned the story. When no consulting is done, when the movies comes out you usually hear the writer saying that this wasn't his vision or certain scenes he didn't like and so on.

In closing, writers deserve our respect as much as directors or actors. Utopia will come when I will see a writer being on the same pedestal as others in the movie business.

Moreover, some men continue to try and bring down female action heroes. One of these men is Don Feder, who wrote in his article “Wimps Whiners Weenies: Men in Movies Today,” that in female action heroes' movies women are “fearless and indomitable” which means men show no contrast to them. As a result, male characters end up playing the fool and being helpless. Feder believes that this is not what the public wants, even when these movies feature famous directors or actors, and therefore they do not do well in the box office. Notwithstanding, if we take a look at the box office earnings of “Tomb Raider, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” and “Charlie's Angels,” for example, we can see that they passed the mark of 100 million dollars. These numbers prove patently that Feder was wrong in his assertion.

Then we have the statement from Elliot Lederman, Universal's Senior Director of Licensing, in 1999; he affirmed that despite the popularity that the television show “Xena the Warrior Princess” was obtaining back then, we should not expect “a rash of female Rambos anytime soon”. What is more, he added that “there hasn't been a successful female action hero since Wonder Woman. Other studios have tried to create them, but Xena is the first successful one and it's going to be tough to follow the trend.” As we have been able to experience or witness, this statement is highly inaccurate, because we could very well say that after Xena there has been a rash of female Rambos indeed, and it was not so tough to follow the trend. Nowadays there are numerous, and many successful, female action heroes and they just keep coming. However, not all of them are accepted by the public, but it is only the minority that goes through that process or problem.

Christina Larson has a theory as to why some female action heroes underwent this lack of acceptance. She states in her article “Seven Mistakes Superheroines Make: Why The Latest Action-Babe Flicks Flopped” that she believes that Hollywood overreached when dealing with this type of women since studios did not stop to think or analyze why exactly audiences loved female action heroes. What they did instead was to come up with a formula that they thought was the one that had brought about success to previous female action hero's movies: they placed beautiful women with well-shaped bodies wearing tight costumes and then they made them fight in them. Apparently, they thought that that was all it took to make a female action hero movie successful. They based movies on the protagonist's good looks and sex appeal, but, actually, that formula was virtually wrong, which was a fact proven by the low box office income that movies like these obtained. What Hollywood should have realized, adds Larson, is that the movies that feature female action heroes that did well in the box office, did not only show a pretty woman with a nice body and revealing clothes, but they also showed them as strong, witty and successful. She makes an excellent comparison between a female action hero who was accepted by the public and one who was not:

Lara Croft may have originated as pure male fantasy - but on the big screen, she became erudite, well-traveled, a working photojournalist, and went home at night to a house worthy of Architectural Digest. On the other hand, Elektra [...] might turn heads in her tight-laced scarlet bustier. But her personal magnetism doesn't measure up: she's a gloomy assassin who suffers from nightmares, insomnia, and OCD. Plus she hates her job but can't - or won't - figure out what to do with her life.

As we can see from this quote, Lara (“Tomb Raider”) is a successful, happy woman who has got her life under control, while Elektra is a woman who is not happy and has definitely no control over her life, she does not even knows what she wants. Lara emanates a positive feeling whereas Elektra does the opposite, and no one likes negative feelings especially coming from an action hero, so it is no wonder the audience rejected the latter.

Ben Hur must rate very highly in anyone's ranking when it comes to a real epic tale, wrapped up with all that splendour and spectacle. It is no mean feat to turn out a movie like this and even those who aren't attracted to the story content of Ben Hur, can't deny the sheer artistry that went into the making of it.

It's the seventh year of Augustus Caesar's reign and in the Jews from Judea are making their way to their home cities for the census. A bright star in the Eastern sky announces the birth of Jesus Christ. A few years later a Roman Commander, Messala, who grew up in Judea, takes control of the area. His boyhood friend Ben Hur is there to meet him.

Ben Hur refuses to name Jewish patriots and is sent away on a slave galley and his mother is imprisoned. Ben Hur's search for revenge and to find his mother and sister are mixed in with biblical stories like the Sermon on The Mount and The Crucifixion.

The most memorable scenes are the chariot race where Ben Hur is pitted against Messala and the violent sea battle in the galleys.

The stars of this movie as Charlton Heston as Ben Hur, Jack Hawkins, Stephen Boyd, Haya Harareet and Hugh Griffith. The director of Ben Hur was William Wyler and the composer of the fabulous soundtrack is Miklos Rozsa.

Ben Hur is the one movie everyone thinks of when they talk about a Biblical epic. It is certainly over done and much too long but it has earned itself a place in Hollywood history. The movie is 50 years old but it is still intensely watchable and somehow captivating with its hundreds of different sets and huge number of extras. It cost a small fortune to produce but its magnificence as a Hollywood production still holds good today.

Ben Hur Title Music 1959

Ben Hur On The Galley Ship

With the huge technological boom, not only have film budgets for indy features plummeted, but the distribution possibilities have sky rocketed. With DV and HD format cameras costing under five thousand dollars, no film developing fees and the internet, making a film can be as cheap as fifteen thousand dollars.

Once you've spent thousands of hours planning, shooting and editing your baby, you don't want it to sit on a shelf. Here are my five picks for distribution.

1. The Internet is a vast resource. O.K. so what, you know that, right? Wrong. Make a trailer, make a website for your film or production company. Put your trailer up in high definition on your website and on YouTube.com. Make a myspace and a facebook for your film. Make friends. Use StumbledUpon (if you aren't familiar with this google it) and get others to stumble your trailer. This is free advertising and the best kind because it it international and sets great name recognition when you start doing the festival circuit. Which leads me to number 2.
2. Film Festivals are inexpensive to enter. If you want your film distributed, it will be through a film festival. If you can get thousands of friends on the internet who enjoyed your trailer or even streaming your feature length film, maybe one hundred will come to the premier at a local film festival. A distributor sees a packed theater of roaring fans, you have a much better chance at distribution. Distributors don't look for their favorite movie, they look for what will sell.
3. Most festivals cost but fifty dollars to enter. Take a stab. Try The Big Damn Film Festival. Midwest Independent Film Festival and Muddy Water Film Festival. These are smaller but nowhere near as hard to get a film into as Sundance or Cannes. If nothing else, you meet people and make future connections.
4. Software Developers might seem like a crazy facet to explore. BUT many times companies like Apple, Adobe, and Macromedia are looking for people who have made films using their software. If you film has visual heavy parts, great editing or compositing, try looking out for film contest that these developers put on. I once entered a short film into a Macromedia Flash contest and was runner up. Your whole film might not get picked up, but you can score some cash and pull in some royalty checks from their use of the video.
5. Online Forums are a great resource. You can put clips up, trailers and production stills. This is a great way to generate buzz and make connections. You'll learn from other indy film makers what they are doing with their films. Build up your friends on there, they will help you. A great one I recommend is dvxuser.com
6. Netflix/Amazon/BitTorrent/iTunes are all easy ways to get your film out there. You can submit it to Apple, find a nice agent and get them to help with Amazon and Netflix. Put your film up for download on BitTorrent. If all else fails stream your film 100% free on your website. What do you have to loose? If the film is good people will want to see your next. I'd take one hundred thousand people seeing my movie for free instead of five thousand people buying a dvd. Because when the dvd does get released, you tell the people who've seen it and hopefully they tell their friends. That's great publicity.

Hopefully these tips will help you have the next big indy film, useful pointers on all aspects of pre production to post production to come. Stay Tuned

According to some reports, “Gone with the Wind” movie earned the distinction of being the highest earner film in World Entertainment history if the currency will be accumulated to the present time. The movie, top billed by British Actress Vivien Leigh and Hollywood matinee idol Clark Gable was released in 1935 and won the Best Picture Oscar award in 1936. The movie with a highest profit gained was “Blair Witch Project”, the 2000 released horror flick which earned almost $200 million with the production cost of only $20 million plus.

In Hollywood, two best buddies attracted gossipers whether who is the richest man among them, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, both geniuses in their respective field, they earned huge bucks from their big projects released. Lucas, creator of Star Wars series while Spielberg, creator of Hollywood bankable movies, including Jurassic Park series, War of the Worlds, Schindler's list, The Jaws among others. However the two brilliant film makers remain good friends through out the years and help each other rose to fame. Ironically, they are the people responsible of making Indiana Jones character came into life. Indiana Jones is a concept created by George Lucas and directed by Steven Spielberg, and remains the only movie franchise in history created and crafted by the best names in the entertainment business as it stars Hollywood legends Harrison Ford and former James Bond star Sean Connery.

A film, in itself, is a multi-sensory splendor of thought, action and emotion. It is the culmination of days', months', and even years' worth of passion and perfection. It seeks to communicate its purpose; it revels in its manifested mystique. One can only look at a scene in a movie to understand how much effort everyone involved has took in the realization of the entirety, and therefore come to relish it.

The subject of a film is often the main focus of the cinemagoer's discernment. Universal topics such as love, self-discovery, family relations, war and peace -- commingle with the setting and the genre, together with an alternate perspective -- to take the audience to a quest which is both enriching and satisfying. And the world having as many tongues as there are cities, one cannot overlook the fact that culture plays a key role in cultivating the "talking pictures".

International cinema is a fascinating journey that does not require a dozen passports and a fistful of currency, but only a keen sense of details and an appreciation of all things new and varied. You don't have to travel far and wide to find out the liberal American lifestyle, the romanticized French cityscape, the subdued elegance of the Chinese, the religious devotion of the Hispanics, and so on. That is the beauty of cinema -- the world comes to you. It speaks, and makes you see an exquisite spectrum from a prism of eyes.

We Filipinos have so much to be proud of about our culture. It is a rich tapestry of age-old beliefs and traditions, fostered idealism, and adherence to the contemporary. We have a culture that is definitely unique and vibrant, throbbing from the pulse of every countryman. Who can match our famed hospitality and generosity? Or the way we possess that characteristic "utang na loob" or value of indebtedness whenever a friend lends us a hand? And especially the collective behavior of constantly assuming a positive outlook in life in spite of insurmountable hardship? There is just so much that the whole world can learn about us.

We are a people who regard filial obligations and loyalty to our comrades in high esteem. We bear the brunt of labor in order to support our loved ones -- this is particularly evident with the mass of remittances coming into the country from Filipinos contracted for work abroad. We do not hesitate to help strangers in distress, even if we've got our own share of it. Tasks are better accomplished through a cooperative endeavor like Bayanihan, which in turn encourages camaraderie and brings out the best in everyone. There are many other traits Filipinos have that are worthy of emulation, but what I definitely find most admirable is that unquenchable zest for life!

There is always a downside to every story. The Philippines is still classified as a third-world country, and poverty is still the top issue to be dealt with. Crimes still abound, there is an ongoing threat of terrorism; and while the economy may be doing fine, its performance is not enough to respond to continual unemployment and the fear of foreigners who consider investing in the nation. There seems to be bad news in the headlines just about every day.

Various films from preceding eras have taken an excellent introspection into the Filipino way of life, and there are amazing gems that have been produced in recent years -- a number have even been recognized in international film festivals -- but most, if not all, have been overshadowed by the country's big movie studios that churn out seemingly uninspired films that follow mostly in the way of Hollywood's hollow blockbusters and comedies, and the popular Asian horror genre. These studios appeal to the audiences with their movies featuring bankable celebrities and catchy plots, but usually leave out the quality and substance that makes a film truly worth buying a ticket for.

I applaud the hard work of our independent studios and filmmakers who, even with limited resources, manage to deliver films that cater to both the aesthete and the intellect. They are visionaries in the sense that they are able to see through mundane human conditions and turn them into a riveting portrait of the idiosyncrasies of man. There is also a rising trend in the form of digital film production and also the Internet's multimedia capabilities, where up-and-coming directors can experiment and be the next Brocka or Bernal, two of the many gifted directors that were successful in bringing the Filipino psyche to higher grounds.

It's somewhat appalling that it takes the global film scene to acknowledge the excellence of quality Filipino movies, for a majority of our own race to realize what immense talent we possess. If we can only gain more support for our “indie” filmmakers, have greater awareness of our innate creativity, and have a deeper appreciation of our culture, then we can promote and nurture that talent. Through the result of these efforts we can show what fine Pinoy cinema is all about -- not just to international film spectators and award-giving bodies -- but most importantly to ourselves, and emerge with honor and pride at the greatness, more than ever, of the Filipino spirit.

The two recognizable American actors, Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett, provide the only part of the film that most people would understand because they're the only ones who speak English. The other characters are a promiscuous deaf Japanese girl who wants some sexual attention in her life so she can feel accepted, some boys from Morocco who shoot Cate Blanchett's character, and some nice Mexican folk who take care of Brad and Cate's kids for a while. All four groups get about 5 minutes of story per scene and by the end they are all shown connected.

I would give this movie at the most a charitable 1 out of 5. If you like non-traditional kinds of movies you will like this movie. If you prefer movies that require you to piece it together like an 8000 piece jigsaw puzzle, you will like this movie. If you speak all of the following languages: English, Spanish, Japanese, and Arabic, you will somewhat understand this movie. My suggestion however is to look elsewhere even if you wish to watch movies that are non-traditional.

If you have to watch this movie, mute it.

image source

With a spine-tingling plot that equals The Ring, the Pang brothers spin a terrifying web about a girl named Mun (Angelica Lee) who has an eye operation and suddenly acquires a third eye and the unwanted ability to see dead people. Sounds familiar? But with the Pang Brother's excellent story telling skills and wonderful shots, the movie has been a huge success in Thailand and other parts of Asia.

Take Two: Gothika screenwriter Sebastian Gutierrez has been tapped to do the US version of The Eye.

The Grudge

image source

Audiences thought they'd seen all the Asian horror movies, then came Ju-On, or as it more popularly known, The Grudge. Takashi Shimizu wrote and directed this chilling story about a vengeful spirit who inhabits a house. Anyone who enters the house is tracked down by the cursed of the Ju-On.
Take Two: Shimizu still remains at the helm of the American version, still set in Japan and which has TV's vampire slayer Sarah Michelle Gellar in the lead role.

Infernal Affairs

image source

One of the biggest movies in Asia is a cop story about the never-ending war between the police and the triads of Hong Kong. There's a cop who infiltrates Hong Kong triad; and a triad spy who pretends to be a cop and has moved up the ranks. It's a cat-and-mouse game as both undercover agents try to find out each other's identities. Its one of those movies every serious film buff ought to watch.

Take Two: This award-winning film has caught the attention of many Hollywood players when it came out in 2002. Big names like Brad Pitt (who's one of the producers) and director Martin Scorsese are just some of the people behind the US-version, called The Departed. Matt Damon and Leo Di Caprio are rumored to be taking on the lead roles.

Hollywood Panders to Gender Stereotype

While Hollywood pandered to the gender stereotypes of the time, it made it virtually impossible for women to occupy roles that did not challenge society's norms and beliefs. Society believed males to be masters of science and mathematics, society branded them providers and protectors, while women were branded images of domestic and supporting help to a man's dominance as head of the household.

Consequently, a male-dependent woman in need of rescue from impending doom was engendered on screen. Men were saviors to women from outer space monsters, men were sky captains and knowledgeable scientists, while many films at the time limited the roles of women in science fiction to helpless beings clad in scanty metal bikinis or torn, rugged garb to satiate the male appetite for sex goddesses on screen.

Women suffered through these roles early as 1931 with the launch of Frankenstein (possibly earlier) to The Forbidden Planet of 1956 and were excluded from occupying roles that extended the range and possibilities of the female existence.

The Feminist Movement and a Change in Depiction

It was not until the second wave feminist movement of the 1960's and the subsequent rise of feminist science fiction that women really challenged these stereotypes. Films such as The Bionic Woman (1976), The Stepford Wives (1975) and Born in Flames (1983) questioned and challenged old stereotypes of a feeble woman. Writers became influenced by the ideas of equal opportunity for men and women in society and this idea paved the way for a far more intelligent depiction of women in science fiction films without challenging society's norms to its core.

By late 20th century, however, women's role in science fiction cinema had drastically changed for the better. The feminist movement had ended, women established themselves as world leaders, scientists, providers, protectors and moved forward in establishing a more serious female presence in the world and on the silver screen.

To this end, women in science fiction films are now portrayed as scientists, warriors and even villains! Science fiction films such as Terminator III, The Cave, I, Robot, Serenity, the Alien franchise and The Matrix franchise, show a diverse possibility of female roles; a far cry from the first images of female gender presented on screen.