Well, sure – which is why it’s not a test of filmmaking quality as such. Any half-awake author may shoehorn in a Bechdel-compliant scene in their screenplay, but ya gotta be at least a decent writer to make it seem like it fits.
At the very least it must be in production, surely.
So “women and children first” ain’t cool anymore?
The appeal to theoretical biology doesn’t always work, either. Hyenas are straight up matriarchal and fight and die against other clans. Lionesses do most of the hunting. Lots of species where the females hunt with the males, which is a dangerous affair. They don’t get protected, even if them dying might be a theoretical waste.
Lionesses hunt because, among lions, hunting is not a particularly risky activity. Fighting off hyenas, however, is, and that’s a job that’s reserved for the males. In all species, it’s the males that get the riskier end of the division of labor. And even if our society has changed to the point where this isn’t really relevant for us any more (no human job is really all that risky any more), our biology hasn’t had a chance to catch up with that fact yet, and so males are still hardwired to favor the riskier jobs.
Back to the subject of the thread, though, the other aspect you have to consider is just how incredibly few movies fail a reverse Bechdel test. Even in movies that are primarily about and appealing to women, the male characters will usually still be developed. You’ll almost always find a couple of men having a conversation about something other than women. It’s that disparity that really drives the issue home, not either number by itself.
For Pete’s sake, Chronos. marshmallow just gave you a specific example of a species—hyenas—where the females dominate risky activity like clan fights and hunting. (In fact, female hyenas are typically physically larger and more aggressive than male ones.) How can you move right from reading that to parrotting the inaccurate generalization that “in all species, it’s the males that get the riskier end of the division of labor”?
In some other counterexamples, feral horse clans are “matriarchal” with their comparatively few stallions being neither the dominant nor most aggressive individuals in their herds. Male bees don’t participate in the “risky” activities such as nectar/pollen gathering. Wolf pack hunts are led by the breeding pair, not by males in particular. And I don’t know how you would argue that males among solitary species such as leopards, bears or pumas have “riskier” labor than females, since adult individuals all live separately and do their own hunting. (Not to mention that female bears will frequently attack and drive off larger males trying to eat their cubs.)
And of course, all of this overlooks the exclusively female risks of bearing offspring. Speaking of “labor”. :dubious:
Got a cite for that? I know about male hormones causing greater levels of aggression, but I’m not sure that implies that men are actually “hardwired” to prefer riskier activities. It’s not easy to disentangle cultural from biological influences when it comes to things like what sort of job someone prefers.
According to wiki, “Males in most hyena species are larger than females,[19] though the spotted hyena is exceptional, as it is the female of the species that outweighs and dominates the male.” Hyena - Wikipedia
That’s all I found: it’s a trivial clarification admittedly.
Is this still a thread about the Bechdel test?
A concise, informative and amusing video explaining everything that is good and bad about the test:
http://moviebob.blogspot.se/2014/01/big-picture-blecch-dull-tests.html
In short, as has already been said here: it says nothing about individual movies but rather the movie industry as a whole and as such using it as a critique of individual movies is not only pointless but demonstrably counterproductive.
Nope, it’s about men. The Bechdel Test conversation marketed poorly with the focus groups, so it’s gone.
I will remember to thank you in my Oscar speech. That is a brilliant idea for a movie.
Let’s steer the discussion back to movies. Thank you.
Read my post #18.
I disagree with this assertion. I think males in female-centric films are often poorly drawn.
My apologies, I missed your previous mention of the movie.
Relative to the women in female-centric films, or to the men in male-centric films, maybe. But that’s to be expected: The characters a film centers on will of course be more developed. Comparing apples to apples, though, the men in female-centric movies will tend to be better developed than the women in male-centric movies.
Yes. For one thing, the male characters in female-centric movies, or the relationships they have with the female characters, are more likely to be what the movie is fundamentally about.
But many kinds of male-centric movies that focus on action or adventure, for example, have no fundamental need for women per se in the plot, and so the filmmakers don’t bother with (or are actively discouraged from) making any of the main characters female. (Even Alfonso Cuaron got some flack for having a female astronaut main character in Gravity, for example.)
There is also the issue that action-adventure movies may (a) be adapted from other media (comics, books and the like) which already have established roles for the leads, who in many cases are male; or (b) are set in historic periods in which having a woman as the action lead (or even present at all in some cases) would be unrealistic.
Hyphens are Merriam-Webster’s middle name.
Yes, but they still usually get some development unrelated to that relationship. We’re likely, for instance, to see the male love interest at work, interacting with his co-workers (i.e., talking with other men about something other than women). If a woman is in a movie primarily as a love interest, though, we’re less likely to see her interacting with co-workers.
Oh… well done, sir. Really, very well done. 
I can’t really think of any movies where two women talk about a man. Maybe I’m watching the wrong movies, but even chick flicks don’t have them. Even in film writing classes I took 15 years ago, the whole idea was “show, don’t tell.” In “Legally Blonde,” for example, the main character talks about the boy she is chasing maybe once in the entire movie. In most scenes, she is doing things to try and get him back, not talking about him. Probably the most stereotypical female dialogue I hear is women refusing sex or saying how little they want sex. In movies where they talk openly about their needs (The Sweetest Thing, 2002), I actually find it refreshing and liberating.
Now Sex and the City, on the other hand, is all about talking about men, and nobody says it is stereotypical.