Concerning my previous little exercise with gender statistics, sometimes when people talk in fandom it sounds as if female characters on TV, especially strong female characters, is something brand new. That 15-20 years ago, you'd be lucky to find one girl on a show, and she was usually the secretary or love interest. This has confused me a bit.
(
Read more... )
Comments 11
I don't know if tehre's a point buried in this comment anywhere.
Reply
Also, coming to think of it, Barbara Wright seems pretty awesome from what I've seen, and that's 44 years ago.
Of course, that's UK. I don't know if UK and US differ.
Reply
Some ethnic groups are doing a tad better thou, not much but there is some more variety in the portraying of the members.
Reply
I sometimes get that feeling too, though it depends on what I'm watching - currently I'm working my way through Carnivale and it has wonderful female characters. Even the strippers didn't suffer from plastic surgery syndrome. :-) Then again, that show DID get cancelled after just 24 eps...
I think I'm also affected by having spent my teen years watching Press Gang (where the lead char had canonically horrible dress sense and everyone else lived in the 80s) and My So-Called Life (grunge). Most women on new shows feel overdressed to me, styled up to look pretty even in situations where that doesn't make any sense.
OTOH, there's no denying that some shows I watched in my younger years had rather few female chars - TYR is an example of this, as is 21 Jump Street.
Which Bruce Willis show, btw, Moonlighting?
Reply
It's the main-stream shows, like CSI (yes I am guilty) and GA (caught one ep) that has the major problems in portraying women as anything but women, if you catch my drift. *g* I watched Weed and the females were truer to life in that one too. Just like in Dead Like me - but those shows seem to get canceled very fast. It seems that the popular US-series tend to rely on what's safe, womanly women and manly men. sighs* Now UK-series are more relaxed in the beauty department, and gender-specifics, IMHO.
It's no wonder that the US is the only 'country' that has most diagnosed "youth with gender-issues" - and that exploded in the late 90ies - I wonder why? *g*
Reply
I'm guilty too - I mean, I'm nuts about Heroes, and it's not good from a gender perspective. Which doesn't stop me from loving Angela and to some extent Claire, but it has so many issues I'm scared to even start counting them. Women getting killed off, women needing rescue when their powers should provide them of ways to rescue themselves, women having clothes that are completely inappropriate for the situation. (Why does Claire need her cheerleader uniform to jump off a bridge? Why does Candice wear miniskirts in the workplace?)
And I think UK shows are in a sense a whole different creature. The book "Tvål" has a hilarious comparison between UK and US soaps using Coronation Street and Melrose Place as examples. (With tough-but-fair females on both shows but looking very different.)
Reply
As far as I remember, that character wasn't in the series. I don't think the Peurto Rican dude was either. But they had lots of characters who weren't in the movie. Iirc, the teachers were mostly the same, but out of the students there were only Doris (who seemed to have quite a different personality in the movie), Coco and Leroy. Was Bruno in the movie?
Reply
Of the people in the 1982 opening credits, Lydia was in the film but had a much smaller part, Bruno, Shorofsky and Leroy were in the film, and Coco, Sherwood, Doris and Montgomery were in the film played by different people. Danny was not in the film, and I suspect he's a replacement for Ralph, since they're both comedians - the difference being that Ralph was massively fucked up and Danny isn't. Julie isn't in the film, but as I recall it, she transfers to the school in the pilot episode. So the only character that comes out of nowhere is Danny,
Reply
Reply
And no, Lisa (the one who switched to theater and Hilary (the pregnant one) didn't make it to the show.
Reply
Leave a comment