Men Talk a lot in Movies
August 17, 2018 11:30 AM Subscribe
Film Dialogue from 2,000 screenplays, Broken Down by Gender and Age. "...we Googled our way to 8,000 screenplays and matched each character’s lines to an actor. From there, we compiled the number of words spoken by male and female characters across roughly 2,000 films, arguably the largest undertaking of script analysis, ever." Besides presenting aggregate stats, the article allows you to drill down into individual movies.
"In 22% of our films, actresses had the most amount of dialogue (i.e., they were the lead). Women are more likely to be in the second place for most amount of dialogue, which occurs in 34% of films. The most abysmal stat is when women occupy at least 2 of the top 3 roles in a film, which occurs in 18% of our films. That same scenario for men occurs in about 82% of films."
"22 of 30 Disney films have a male majority of dialogue. Even films with female leads, such as Mulan, the dialogue swings male. Mushu, her protector dragon, has 50% more words of dialogue than Mulan herself."
"In 22% of our films, actresses had the most amount of dialogue (i.e., they were the lead). Women are more likely to be in the second place for most amount of dialogue, which occurs in 34% of films. The most abysmal stat is when women occupy at least 2 of the top 3 roles in a film, which occurs in 18% of our films. That same scenario for men occurs in about 82% of films."
"22 of 30 Disney films have a male majority of dialogue. Even films with female leads, such as Mulan, the dialogue swings male. Mushu, her protector dragon, has 50% more words of dialogue than Mulan herself."
I'm watching Disenchantment and I'd really like to see the same analysis because it feels like Abbi Jacobson barely has any lines at all despite being the lead and it makes me sad.
posted by Definitely Not Sean Spicer at 11:43 AM on August 17, 2018
posted by Definitely Not Sean Spicer at 11:43 AM on August 17, 2018
The enormous list of movies where 100% (or near-enough) of the dialog is spoken by men is staggering. Not surprising, but staggering nonetheless.
posted by uncleozzy at 12:21 PM on August 17, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by uncleozzy at 12:21 PM on August 17, 2018 [6 favorites]
Great infographics, very clear. Also, glad someone put in the work to comb through the data on both this and the previous story HOLLYWOOD'S GENDER DIVIDE AND ITS EFFECT ON FILMS
posted by dreamling at 12:24 PM on August 17, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by dreamling at 12:24 PM on August 17, 2018 [1 favorite]
Study: [weeping, exit pursued by bear]
Fan: "Critic said our fave isn't good, get her*!"
Critic: "I said it is good, but I'd like it to be better!"
Fan: "Critic said our fave isn't perfect, get her!"
*Admittedly, I'm thinking of Anita Sarkeesian, and video games commentary rather than movies, but "get her" inevitably happens much more often than "get him."
posted by explosion at 12:41 PM on August 17, 2018 [7 favorites]
Fan: "Critic said our fave isn't good, get her*!"
Critic: "I said it is good, but I'd like it to be better!"
Fan: "Critic said our fave isn't perfect, get her!"
*Admittedly, I'm thinking of Anita Sarkeesian, and video games commentary rather than movies, but "get her" inevitably happens much more often than "get him."
posted by explosion at 12:41 PM on August 17, 2018 [7 favorites]
I have seen 4 of the nine films that feature 90% female dialog. I will start this weekend trying to rectify that. However, I'm not very fond of thrillers so I will probably save "The Hand That Rocks the Cradle" for last.
posted by agatha_magatha at 12:43 PM on August 17, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by agatha_magatha at 12:43 PM on August 17, 2018 [1 favorite]
The enormous list of movies where 100% (or near-enough) of the dialog is spoken by men is staggering. Not surprising, but staggering nonetheless.
Especially as you go through the list and start to examine your own perception of those films. I had to think: "Were there really no women at all in The Hurt Locker? How did I not notice that?" It's a great opportunity to think about how you watch and enjoy films, if you're that kind of person/beanplater.
posted by The Bellman at 12:43 PM on August 17, 2018 [8 favorites]
Especially as you go through the list and start to examine your own perception of those films. I had to think: "Were there really no women at all in The Hurt Locker? How did I not notice that?" It's a great opportunity to think about how you watch and enjoy films, if you're that kind of person/beanplater.
posted by The Bellman at 12:43 PM on August 17, 2018 [8 favorites]
Looking at the few titles with 50/50 balance is eye-opening, too. For example, Clueless and Chocolat are centered around girls and women, but men still get half the dialog in both these films.
posted by mbrubeck at 1:36 PM on August 17, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by mbrubeck at 1:36 PM on August 17, 2018 [6 favorites]
This reminds me of when Pacific Rim came out.
People were all about how progressive it is to have Mako Mori as a lead. But, how is it so progressive if she is seen and not heard? She had hardly any dialogue at all. For a female lead this is just accepted by people as normal.
posted by GladysKnight at 2:09 PM on August 17, 2018 [2 favorites]
People were all about how progressive it is to have Mako Mori as a lead. But, how is it so progressive if she is seen and not heard? She had hardly any dialogue at all. For a female lead this is just accepted by people as normal.
posted by GladysKnight at 2:09 PM on August 17, 2018 [2 favorites]
There's quite a few of the "balanced" movies that consist of a female lead getting a lot of dialog, and all or nearly all other dialog being male actors. At least in the sample I looked at, I didn't see a single one that was the reverse. You can't tell me that some of the supporting actors in "Contact" couldn't have been female.
posted by tavella at 4:15 PM on August 17, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by tavella at 4:15 PM on August 17, 2018 [4 favorites]
This is great, and it certainly helps reinforce what should be an obvious fact about male dominance in Hollywood movies, but there does need to be some caution in how people present and use this data as a reference point.
The study by itself is sufficiently limited enough to prevent it being claimed as truly representative of Hollywood history, with Googlable scripts being far from the kind of random sample that would bring a more solid level of social science to the examination. That isn't to say a more thoroughly vetted study would have provided a radically different outcome, likely the opposite, but that their method still remains open to criticism for its approach in terms of what it covers.
The provided caveats in the piece are a help, but aren't entirely adequate as a warning about the limitations, which leaves the study open to objection from certain angles. The selection of pre-eighties films, for example, is particularly fraught with selection bias, where the scripts they could find aren't really representative of the standard Hollywood output as much as they are films that have strong continued followings. This is itself interesting and potentially points to another level of bias/sexism involved in how critics and select audiences value certain kinds of movies, often "auteurist" or involving fandom around actors, while ignoring other works. The values associated with auteurism, fandom, and critical esteem carry their own sets of issues regarding film history.
The study would have been stronger had they separated out the pre-eighties films completely for lacking significant coverage of the eras, but even with that the imbalance in those later years still distorts the study noticeably in terms of raw numbers, if not general direction of the data. There are, for example, a good number of films that have a much higher proportion of the dialogue spoken by women that simply aren't on the list which makes the total number of women led films look shockingly small in a way that will likely be jumped on for being misleading. The trend is absolutely right, but the raw numbers can shift the impact of the study, making it seem less reliable than its general direction indicates. "Women's films" or in the dismissive common term, chick flicks, are under-represented in the list in a noticeable way. That absence will draw some attention to the study as being flawed, even though that lack will be more than balanced out by other male dominated films were the study more comprehensive. The truth of that though isn't proof of it, which is what the study is hoping to accomplish.
They would do well to narrow their parameters a bit, or present the groupings even more selectively as there would be great benefit in defining their subject more thoroughly. Better categorizing of the films would help show the breadth of the issue and give better illumination of the outlines of the history of women in films. Having options to separate out the major and minor releases, films popular in their time from those with lingering "cult" followings, matching the genres in their selections against those of the actual releases to confirm representative status so, say, action films aren't over or under counted in the list compared to family dramas, weeding out more of the outliers, like The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer which is neither a Hollywood film nor one of any notable significance in audience save for a exceedingly narrow fandom, and leaving older eras apart from the main data until more adequate numbers of scripts can be found so there isn't just one Marx Brothers film, Cocoanuts, representing 1929 when one could as easily have had Sunnyside-Up and had a woman led film as marking the year.
Those caveats though, while important, shouldn't take away from the value of the list and its potential further uses. The talk about Mulan, for example, points to some other aspects of sexism that need still to be addressed in how Hollywood uses archetypes. Action leads are often "strong silent types" where the main character may indeed not have the most dialogue because there is a long standing view that toughness is in action not words which feeds ideals of masculinity and emotion. Femininity was often associated with talk and emotion, which had its value as defining "home" or "family" and other values the hero acts upon, but wasn't seen as able to enact change in itself. In action movies where women take the lead role then there is often some carry over of archetype causing a conflict between image and ideal over how the film treats the value of traditional masculinity. These things too need more study as they also impact the roles of women in film. This study helps point to a jumping off place for that, even as it isn't what it was designed to do.
Again, the study is a great start, it just needs to be built on to give a fuller idea and proof of the history of representation in Hollywood. There should be some necessary caution over the reach of its claims, but the utility can be developed further and find more use as a tool in understanding our cultural history so we can improve on it.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:12 PM on August 17, 2018
The study by itself is sufficiently limited enough to prevent it being claimed as truly representative of Hollywood history, with Googlable scripts being far from the kind of random sample that would bring a more solid level of social science to the examination. That isn't to say a more thoroughly vetted study would have provided a radically different outcome, likely the opposite, but that their method still remains open to criticism for its approach in terms of what it covers.
The provided caveats in the piece are a help, but aren't entirely adequate as a warning about the limitations, which leaves the study open to objection from certain angles. The selection of pre-eighties films, for example, is particularly fraught with selection bias, where the scripts they could find aren't really representative of the standard Hollywood output as much as they are films that have strong continued followings. This is itself interesting and potentially points to another level of bias/sexism involved in how critics and select audiences value certain kinds of movies, often "auteurist" or involving fandom around actors, while ignoring other works. The values associated with auteurism, fandom, and critical esteem carry their own sets of issues regarding film history.
The study would have been stronger had they separated out the pre-eighties films completely for lacking significant coverage of the eras, but even with that the imbalance in those later years still distorts the study noticeably in terms of raw numbers, if not general direction of the data. There are, for example, a good number of films that have a much higher proportion of the dialogue spoken by women that simply aren't on the list which makes the total number of women led films look shockingly small in a way that will likely be jumped on for being misleading. The trend is absolutely right, but the raw numbers can shift the impact of the study, making it seem less reliable than its general direction indicates. "Women's films" or in the dismissive common term, chick flicks, are under-represented in the list in a noticeable way. That absence will draw some attention to the study as being flawed, even though that lack will be more than balanced out by other male dominated films were the study more comprehensive. The truth of that though isn't proof of it, which is what the study is hoping to accomplish.
They would do well to narrow their parameters a bit, or present the groupings even more selectively as there would be great benefit in defining their subject more thoroughly. Better categorizing of the films would help show the breadth of the issue and give better illumination of the outlines of the history of women in films. Having options to separate out the major and minor releases, films popular in their time from those with lingering "cult" followings, matching the genres in their selections against those of the actual releases to confirm representative status so, say, action films aren't over or under counted in the list compared to family dramas, weeding out more of the outliers, like The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer which is neither a Hollywood film nor one of any notable significance in audience save for a exceedingly narrow fandom, and leaving older eras apart from the main data until more adequate numbers of scripts can be found so there isn't just one Marx Brothers film, Cocoanuts, representing 1929 when one could as easily have had Sunnyside-Up and had a woman led film as marking the year.
Those caveats though, while important, shouldn't take away from the value of the list and its potential further uses. The talk about Mulan, for example, points to some other aspects of sexism that need still to be addressed in how Hollywood uses archetypes. Action leads are often "strong silent types" where the main character may indeed not have the most dialogue because there is a long standing view that toughness is in action not words which feeds ideals of masculinity and emotion. Femininity was often associated with talk and emotion, which had its value as defining "home" or "family" and other values the hero acts upon, but wasn't seen as able to enact change in itself. In action movies where women take the lead role then there is often some carry over of archetype causing a conflict between image and ideal over how the film treats the value of traditional masculinity. These things too need more study as they also impact the roles of women in film. This study helps point to a jumping off place for that, even as it isn't what it was designed to do.
Again, the study is a great start, it just needs to be built on to give a fuller idea and proof of the history of representation in Hollywood. There should be some necessary caution over the reach of its claims, but the utility can be developed further and find more use as a tool in understanding our cultural history so we can improve on it.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:12 PM on August 17, 2018
I looked up Hannah Arendt before realizing it wouldn't be there because a big take away for me after seeing it was that I'd just spent 2 hrs watching a middle aged woman think, and I don't believe film had given me that before.
posted by chapps at 1:28 AM on August 18, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by chapps at 1:28 AM on August 18, 2018 [2 favorites]
Boy that list of films with 90% or more female dialog is depressing. Two of those films are horror, and one is basically about torturing young women.
posted by jeoc at 6:28 AM on August 18, 2018
posted by jeoc at 6:28 AM on August 18, 2018
« Older Dollar General: not so much as an opportunity as a... | In which Ryuichi Sakamoto crafts a playlist for... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 11:42 AM on August 17, 2018 [6 favorites]