The Patriot lost its shot at being a chick flick because it kept missing opportunities for Mel to remove his shirt (e.g. each time his shirt got severely blood-splattered).
Or ANYTHING with Julia Roberts. (The move she made with Morgan Freeman and the other with Mel excepted.)
As per the AMC Movie Theater adds:
Guy: “Yeah, but does it have boobies in it?”
Yes, Titus and Hamlet were real girly-girl movies. Not to mention Othello.
If the flick has Chris O’Donnell it’s usually on the chick side. Don’t let Vertical Limitfool you. He’s been trying to get back into any kind of movie ever since Ben Affleck made him obsolete.
While Chick Flick is a useful category, I do think it is limited. For one thing, it doesn’t distinguish a fairly good Chick Flick like Sleepless in Seattle from a very bad one like Message in a Bottle. There are a lot of gradations within the Chick Flick genre.
Apologists for Chick Flicks often insinuate that these films are actually of a higher quality than the mindless crap usually dished out by Hollywood. In fact, this is rarely true. In most cases, it’s just a different kind of mindless crap.
Chick Flicks are also sometimes naively characterized as those which are about genuine human emotion. But, there are many films such as Taxi Driver or Smoke which deliver compelling portraits of human emotions, but which would not be called Chick Flicks. Furthermore, the emotions expressed in Chick Flicks are often not all that genuine.
Some may blithely dismiss any Tear-Jerker as a Chick Flick, but this is by no means definitive, because there have been a number of male-oriented tear-jerkers made – The Cowboys, The Deer Hunter, Shane, Taps, Saving Private Ryan.
I’ve even known some people to take a feminist stance on Chick Flicks – that they are films in which women have voices, are empowered, etc. But this would actually be a short list of films. Most of what are called Chick Flicks are minted in pure patriarchy. Some, like Sleepless in Seattle, merely capitalize on female stereotypes. Others, like My Best Friend’s Wedding, divide women into Scheming Bitches and Supliant Princesses. And nothing says a woman’s place is her home quite like a domestic drama from the Lifetime Network, where you can catch films with titles like Murderer in my Bed, Her Father’s Past or Don’t Call that Woman “Mommy”.
I’m not sure this answers your question. What was it again?
I seem to recall that the first movie that I saw had ‘chick flick’ attached to it as a description was ‘Fried Green Tomatoes’. That year also had ‘Thelma and Louise’ I think. In fact, it may have been a good solid year of ‘chick flicks’.
I think the definition of a “chick flick” depends on the individual.
To me a chick flick is a movie that I will only watch because it will probably get me laid. “Female Perversions” is an example of a movie that my viewing earned me the post-cinematic sex. Horrible, horrible movie.
On the other hand I thoroughly enjoy movies that have no guns/titties/robots and lots of genuine emotion just as long as I can relate to some part of the movie.
One accurate description of the difference between guy movies and chick flicks that I heard recently:
“Women enjoy stories about one person dying slowly. Men enjoy stories about lots of people dying quickly.”
William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet from Baz Luhrmann a few years back was a tough one to categorize here. I mean, a fairly high body count. Plus, have a few more guns in it? (I loved these - close up on a nickel-plated handgun engraved ‘Sword 9mm’. Classic.)
By way of defining what is not a ‘chick flick,’ my ex used to categorically denigrate any movie where the poster or video box showed someone holding a gun. I eventually ‘got’ her with Matrix. “Ha! You liked it, and they’re ALL holding guns!”