Why do actresses generate more interest than actors at awards?

Home // Forums // Movies // Why do actresses generate more interest than actors at awards?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 43 total)
Created
3 years ago
Last Reply
3 years ago
42
replies
1288
views
25
users
5
4
3
  • Daniel Montgomery
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 14th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162479

    Discussing hated Oscar wins in another thread, it seemed like women tend to get more backlash than men when they win Oscars, but then Joe Burns pointed out that women generate a lot more excitement in general when it comes to awards. I wonder why that is.

    Of course, an even better question might be, since us awards obsessives go crazy about female actors at the Oscars, why are the majority of Oscar movies stories about men. Just look at some of this year’s Best Picture frontrunners: “Boyhood,” “Unbroken,” “Foxcatcher,” “The Imitation Game,” “Birdman,” etc. are all stories about men. While some of the top female-led films like “Wild,” “Still Alice,” and “Big Eyes,” are seen primarily as performance showcases and not as great films in their own right. What’s up with that?

    No right or wrong answers here, just wanted to know what people thought about might be the reasons behind some of these gender differences.

    Reply
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162481

    Lol Daniel.

    It started with this: …and this:

    and also this:   and this:  and this:   and institutionalized misogyny came into being.

    As for your “better” question, it comes down to this:  Usually if you follow the money trail, you almost always get to the root of things.

     

    Am I crazy for answering this way? Lol. Maybe.

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    seabel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 21st, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162482

    I do think it has something to relate with “being a woman”. For example, since awards are televised, fashion plays a big part in terms of someone’s success. We just had a hell of a season with glamour queens Cate Blanchett and Lupita Nyong’o. You can’t play fashion with a man because they always wear the tuxedo (Unless you count the “South Park” guys).

    So, when performances and art get relegated to a second place, and the first place is taken by fashion and stuff like that, women get more interest. Personally, who wasn’t expecting Cate and Lupita to appear on the red carpet this year?

    And I don’t think it’s misogyny, it’s (sadly) reality. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    BrokenFan
    Member
    Joined:
    Nov 16th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162483

    Getting right down to the bone, the majority of the men who care about any of this award stuff at all are gay, and they tend to pick ponies and have diva-competitions, kinda like sports teams, which I guess derives from the subconscious misogynistic views about women: seeing them as objects and things to be pitted against one another. Also goes into the projection of their more feminine side (not saying that gay = effeminate at all) through these actresses to the point where some identitfies with their movie/real life persona. I mean go visit awardswatch.com, like….the cesspool of what I just described but with like talking monkeys. I’m not saying that ALL gay men are subconsciouly misogynistic or that ALL men who like to predict awards (as thrilling as it may be) are gay, but most tend to be and gay men are just competitive about the divas. That’s why there’s either an enormous backlash or praise when an actress becomes the center of attention, hardly anything in between. 

    Also I think majority of the ‘men’s stories’ presented are just too unidentifiable with the audience that predict awards, or at least the Oscars, where as films like Still Alice, Wild, and Big Eyes have women centers that goes through a phase of hardship and survival that often most identify with its core audience (women and gay men) and I don’t necessarily agree that just because there’s a central praised performance, people tend to think it to be an overall weak film. Especially in the Oscar game because a lot of factors goes into suceeding or failing. It also speaks to the LACK of women’s roles in general. I mean all the hot shot Oscar directors rarely do films with a lone female lead, so most are often delegated to smaller films like Wild, and Still Alice, which are smaller films with the only way to market it is the central performance of its stars. 

    In conclusion, it’s a business and there’s misogyny. ERRRvrywhere. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    KyleBailey
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162484

    I think women year after year give more impressive performances than men. Though in years like last or this year where you can name more men for contention, a female performance seems to shine above them all. I personally loved the 2011 race. Viola Davis, Meryl Streep, Rooney Mara, Glenn Close, Michelle Williams, Tilda Swinton, and so many others that were in that year’s race were really strong. Even in the Supporting Actress that year with all the ladies of The Help, Bridesmaids, Janet McTeer, Bernice Bejo, Shalienne Woodly, and so on. That was a year where there were way more worthy Female performance for awards then the men. But look at last year. Even though 6 or 7 people were really in the bubble of nominations, they were some pretty great performances. Usually you will get a weak link in a Best Actor race or Supporting but most of the time those races have no weak links. I hope that made sense I kind of slap a bunch of thoughts and never know how to word it 

    ReplyCopy URL
    nkb325
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 6th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162485

    I always feel like its kind of that woman who get awards attention generally give the more “actory” performances if that makes sense. A lot of the time I feel the really baity female performances have a lot of crying, a lot of screaming, a lot of throwing things around the room, lengthy monologues through tears, whereas men are rewarded for charisma, reservation, eeking out a single solitary tear in the face of adversity, blah blah. The women that get awards attention give “bigger” performances than the men that do, and I think the bigger a performance the more emotional investment it causes. I mean look at female winners of recent years like Lupita Nyongo, Cate Blanchett, Natalie Portman, Anne Hathaway, Melissa Leo, Monique, etc. These women all screamed and cried and took over the screen. Then look at some male winners like Jean Dujardin, Christopher Plummer, Christoph Waltz, Daniel Day Lewis (Lincoln). These were performances rewarded for charisma, quiet dignity, and all that crap. I am not saying at all that any of these performances are better than any others, I just feel like it always seems that we expect bigger performances from women, and I think the bigger the performance the more people care about it. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    montana82
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 14th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162486

    Women are more interesting.  They shine and light up the screen more than the men do.  My opinion of course.

    ReplyCopy URL
    KyleBailey
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162487

    Women are more interesting.  They shine and light up the screen more than the men do.  My opinion of course.

    Totally agree  

    ReplyCopy URL
    FilmGuy619
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 13th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162488

    I think that the women suffer more of a backlash because they are more overexposed than the men are. Take for example, Natalie Portman. During her campaign trail for Black Swan, my aunt once said that it was all “Natalie Portman this, Natalie Portman that”. Just like with  Jennifer Lawrence. It was all “Jennifer Lawrence this, Jennifer Lawrence that”, “23 reasons why we love Jennifer Lawrence”, and all that. That kind of campaigning rubs people the wrong way, as well as how they act like they want the awards more than the men do, in terms of their speeches. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    manakamana
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 28th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162489
    1. The demographics of gay men who idolize strong female figures was already mentioned here before, but it’s part of a long lineage of entertainment and queer history. 
    2.  In the act of performance itself, it seems more often than not that female performers are given responsibility for much more internally expressive work than most men you see onscreen for whatever reason (has a lot to do with some complicated social justice ramblings if you ask me to expand).  
    3. There’s already so few mainstream options to choose from between women every year, it seems like even more of an injustice when someone one sees as more deserving is overlooked — especially from a group like the Academy whose average voter is an 60-something hetero white male, which seems to be often reflected in some of the outcomes (compare the average Actor nominee/winner to the average Actress nominee/winner). 
    ReplyCopy URL
    Riley
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162490

    I do not get it.  Men tend to get the better roles, so we see tend to see the better performances from them.

    ReplyCopy URL
    CAROL-CHANNING
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 30th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162491

    Cuz we gey.

    And those be our queens up there!! 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Nessie
    Member
    Joined:
    Oct 28th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162492

    I’m a woman, but I’m not more attracted to the performances of actresses than actors. If anything, I’m more critical possibly because so many performances by “great” actresses strike me as artificial, fake and phony (Meryl Streep being the Queen of Phony in my book… don’t like Cate Blanchett either! Grandes Dames don’t do it for me. I find them tedious).

    However, my favourite all-time actors are actresses: Gena Rowlands, Maggie Smith and Tilda Swinton. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    CAROL-CHANNING
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 30th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162493

    I’m a woman, but I’m not more attracted to the performances of actresses than actors. If anything, I’m more critical possibly because so many performances by “great” actresses strike me as artificial, fake and phony (Meryl Streep being the Queen of Phony in my book… don’t like Cate Blanchett either! Grandes Dames don’t do it for me. I find them tedious).

    That’s funny because, as a guy, I feel the exact same way with a lot of “great” male actors.  I feel like I can spot their bag of tricks from a mile away and sometimes find them tedious and predictable.  That’s not to say that I don’t like or am not occasionally amused or entertained by them, but it takes a lot more effort on their part to really surprise or dazzle me. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Sasha
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 24th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162494

    pook answered it in the best possible way.

    Women just have it harder in life. Just look at the recent nude selfies scandal. It was only pictures of women, no men at all. When in reality it’s the guys who take dick picks all the time. Where are nude selfies of James Franco, Leo DiCaprio or one of the Hemsworths? They sure take them but no one hacks them. Why? Because hackers are straight dudes and also they know it’s the women who’ll get them attention. Most of the time it sucks to be a woman. 

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 43 total)
Reply To: Why do actresses generate more interest than actors at awards?

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Similar Topics
nitowendy - Aug 22, 2017
Movies
nitowendy - Aug 22, 2017
Movies