MovieChat Forums > Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017) Discussion > Too many female leaders?

Too many female leaders?

posted 7 years ago by maximmm (3373)
23 replies | jump to latest

One thing that I thought was odd.

So, we have Rey - she's the new kickass lead who will save the world from certain doom - fair enough. I've seen plenty of female leads in films and some of them are awesome.

Then we have the leader of the Rebellion - Princess Leia who is currently the general in lead.
I'm thinking... ok... she was Luke's sister and all, fine.

Then she gets taken out and we are introduced to the person next in the chain of command - Vice Admiral - and guess what - she too is a woman.

On one hand, I'm glad that this series isn't going the HBO route and turning every 4th character gay, but as is the case with HBO and its kin, the agenda here is way too obvious and clearly overdone.

I'm thinking they should mix things up a bit more - add a dude rebellion leader to the mix. Hell, if they want to be a bit less obvious, add a gay or lesbian as well - I mean, they already have 40 main characters here, another 10 won't make it any more convoluted than it already is - but it would water down the 'only females should be in the lead' concept.

The future of the world is one where men, women are equals and where no gender subjugates another - but if you make it the complete opposite of what it was in the 1920's, it's still going to be a rather dark world.

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 7 years ago

No doubt if the entire film had been populated by strong male leaders, like in 99% of everything in the history of film, you would have made a thread whining about that, too. Right?

[–] maximmm (3373) 7 years ago

Good question.

It's more like, if the empire was full of women and the good guys were all led by dudes and all women side-kicks were depicted as trigger happy or cowardly females, I'd support the notion that there's a very strong anti-female vibe in this film.

In the original film 'new hope', it was all dudes vs dudes, and the only female character was depicted as being weak and always in the need of being saved by the manly dudes. That's sort of how things used to play out in films in those days (equality was not a thing in films as of yet) - though to be fair, there was only one main female character and she did develop into a strong female figure by the end of the trilogy.

Anyways, like I said - I fully support equality - but shoving the 1920's paradigm into our faces with the roles reversed is anything but equality.

It's like you make an anti-slavery film where slave masters are depicted as being slaves with a dumb cattle-like mentality and slaves are depicted as being wise and nurturing slave masters, and then you state that this is the best anti-slavery film. Your are still making a pro-slavery film, just with the roles of slave masters and slaves being reversed.

[–] RussellNash (2087) 7 years ago

Best answer on this subject so far! Kudos, maximmm! 👍👏

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 7 years ago

"Anyways, like I said - I fully support equality - but shoving the 1920's paradigm into our faces with the roles reversed is anything but equality. "

Apparently the only thing that would satisfy your type would be a completely calculated balance of genders and behavior. That's not how art works, that isn't how nature works, that isn't how anything works. Asymmetries are perfectly compatible with a commitment to equality. And I don't think anyone who truly understood or "supported" equality would have made the thread you did. I'm not buying it for a second.

[–] Master_Lo (309) 7 years ago

Oh, and the latest Battlefront installment had female lead in campaign mode or story mode, or whatever you call it. As I understand it is somehow tied to TFA movie.