With the rise of remake films with all female casts being on an upward trajectory, what are some of the pros and cons for doing this? Does this have an effect on how the viewer rates and discusses the movie? If so, how, why? If not, why not?
I love this question! I don't know the answer. But, here is an an example of how ( I believe) it has been a change for the worst: the recent re-make of the Ghostbusters film. Compared to the 1980's all male ( main character) cast, the women actors seemed overly directed and controlled. They are funny women. They are intelligent and they have have gobs of talent, yet, it seemed they were not allowed to fully flesh out their characters, interact and riff off of each other, nor flex their comedic muscles as freely and fully as their male counterparts ( Murry, Akroid, etc.) did in the original. – Joslyn Robinson6 years ago
This is a good question, especially with the controversy around recent franchises like Star Wars and Ghostbusters. It seems like a double edged sword. On the one hand, having more female representation is better than nothing. On the other hand it could be viewed as being superficial, just a name change at best, or blatantly sexist at worst. Most of the "stick to the text" fundamentalism seems pretty stupid to me, given that there have been far more egregious changes to text (like Spiderman's powers in the Raimi movies, or the revisionist ending to Jurassic Park) without the controversy. In general, it seems better to have more female characters, but it would be better if there were just more roles for women in general from the start. – tedytak6 years ago