# Resolved(?) - Chick Flicks vs. Guy Flicks **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [December 9, 2002, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519 "2002-12-09T14:58:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/1 "2002-12-09T14:58:55Z")
So I was talking with WordWoman last night, debating whether the remake of the Thomas Crown Affair was a Chick Flick - me: Yes; her: No. I came up with the following definitions: Both Chick Flicks and Guy Flicks are films that simplify characters and plots - there are Good Guys and Bad Guys and the plot revolves around Achieving a Goal. But with a Guy Flick, the goal is about achieving some_thing_, whereas with a Chick Flick, the goal is about winning some_one_. This is an obvious over-simplification - in Guy Flicks, the hero gets a lover or final victory over childhood pain as icing on the cake quite often; and in Chick Flicks, the hero often achieves material success as well as falling in love, making peace with friends or parents, etc…but you get the idea. With that in mind, I argue that the TCA remake is a Chick Flick because the most important thing at the end of the film is Rene Russo deciding whether she can trust TCrown (Brosnan) and find emotional fulfillment through that trust, NOT whether the painting is returned (which is more of a tricky bit of filming than a real resolution). What do you think - both about the Guy Flick = something vs. Chick Flick = someone definitions and about whether the TCA remake is a chick flick? Two caveats: 1. I did a search on the SDMB for this and couldn’t find anything - yet I could’ve sworn I contributed to a dicussion on this - perhaps it was during the Great Void… 2. No offense intended by the phrases Guy Flick or Chick Flick - just trying to use easy-to-understand phrases. I happen to be a big fan of well-done versions of either genre… ---
**Author:** ![UrbanChic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9dc877/32.png) [@UrbanChic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UrbanChic)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/2 "2002-12-09T15:23:21Z")
I didn’t view _Thomas Crown Affair_ as a chick flick. For me, at least, a movie has to either be **a)** a romantic comedy or **b)** something along the lines of _White Oleander_, _The First Wives’ Club_ or _Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya WhateverTheHellItWasCalled_ to be defined as a chick flick. Interesting thread topic, though. ---
**Author:** ![lauramarlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a5b964/32.png) [@lauramarlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lauramarlane)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/3 "2002-12-09T15:28:33Z")
This is an interesting debate–I thought the remake made it lean more to the chick flicky end of the scale. For my SO and I, the definition of a guy flick usually includes “stuff explodes”. I like and watch all kinds of movies but I still think that anything with Vin Deisel or Steven Segall is worth his having to sit through at least two Hugh Grants. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/4 "2002-12-09T15:53:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JuanitaTech \* > \*\*I didn’t view _Thomas Crown Affair_ as a chick flick. > > For me, at least, a movie has to either be **a)** a romantic comedy…\*\* I can see where you’re going, **JTech** , but here’s my thinking - for one whole sub-category of Chick Flicks, if you can insert the word “Romantic” in front of another movie genre, it is most likely a Chick Flick. So to me, the remake of the TCA is a Chick Flick because it is a Romantic Action movie, as opposed to say, a Bond Movie, which is just an Action Movie that happens to have Bond Girls and gadgets. Since “Romantic” is on the front, it means that the goal of the hero is to achieve emotional fulfillment - i.e., to achieve some_one_, like I was stating in my OP. > [@](#): > > \*\*or **b)** something along the lines of _White Oleander_, _The First Wives’ Club_ or _Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya WhateverTheHellItWasCalled_ to be defined as a chick flick. \*\* Oh, yeah, these are the another sub-category of Chick Flick, but still revolve around the lead character achieving emotional fulfillment and not achieving some external goal, like in a Guy Flick. > [@](#): > > \*\*Interesting thread topic, though. \*\* Cool - glad you like it. What do you think of this set of observations? ---
**Author:** ![Gorgon\_Heap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f475e1/32.png) [@Gorgon\_Heap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorgon_Heap)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/5 "2002-12-09T16:38:26Z")
I have never really thought about it quite like this, but I approve of your proposed defining characteristics. Unfortunately, I can’t comment on the film in question because I only saw the first half-hour. May I add another pair for consideration? “Family Film” vs. “Kiddie Film.” A Family Film will have happy feelings as well as “bad stuff” and enough of a range of humor for both children to enjoy and adults to find amusing. A Kiddie Film is an agonizing exercise for any adult to try to sit though. “Rugrats” etc. come to mind. What I find interesting is how animated cartoons and films are striving to fit into the Family Film area now - goofy enough for the kids, but with a lot of jokes only adults will understand (I think Powerpuff Girls fits nicely into this.) Sorry for the hyjack. As for the OP, I think another movie that works with your ideas is _[Ghost_. Think about it: Dude gets killed and spends the rest of the movie trying to kill his killers. Your some_thing._ However, it kinda boils down to a ChickFlick, because he also wants to say his last goodbye-smoochy-smoochy with his girl. What an interesting OP, **Wordman**. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/6 "2002-12-09T16:44:19Z")
It sounds like the ChickFlick gene is domimant to the GuyFlick gene. That is, the introduction of Chick Flick elements into what would otherwise be a Guy Flick automatically renders the film a Chick Flick. Is it even possible for this to work in reverse? Would enough explosions and car wrecks and a goal of achieving some_thing_make _Steel Magnolias_ a Guy Flick? ---
**Author:** ![UrbanChic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9dc877/32.png) [@UrbanChic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UrbanChic)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/7 "2002-12-09T16:50:39Z")
Wordman, can you provide another example of a romantic action movie, please? It’s a sub genre I’ve never really thought of. Would _Out of Sight_ with Lopez and Clooney be one? ---
**Author:** ![lauramarlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a5b964/32.png) [@lauramarlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lauramarlane)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/8 "2002-12-09T16:54:20Z")
**Dewey Cheatem Undhow** , it seems that Thelma and Louise would be a chick flick with guy flick elements–stuff explodes, and they have the ultimate car wreck. What about that Geena Davis movie–the one with Samuel L. Jackson that I can’t remember the title of at the moment? Chick flick, or guy flick? ---
**Author:** ![Monstre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Monstre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monstre)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/9 "2002-12-09T16:56:42Z")
> [@](#): > > Is it even possible for this to work in reverse? Would enough explosions and car wrecks and a goal of achieving somethingmake Steel Magnolias a Guy Flick? Probably – as long as enough of the lead chick characters were in the midst of said explosions and car wrecks. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![UrbanChic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9dc877/32.png) [@UrbanChic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UrbanChic)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/10 "2002-12-09T17:06:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lauramarlane \* > \*\*What about that Geena Davis movie–the one with Samuel L. Jackson that I can’t remember the title of at the moment? Chick flick, or guy flick? \*\* _The Long Kiss Goodnight_. Good example. I’d say it had elements of both. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/11 "2002-12-09T17:19:02Z")
Wow - lots of interesting comments and observations. **Gorgon Heap** - couldn’t agree with you more about the Family vs. Kid distinction. The original Bugs Bunny cartoons and the Toy Story movies qualify, to me, as Family, vs., say, Thomas and the Magic Railroad or Barney, which are full-on kid… (please jab hot needles in my eyes for seeing those…) **Dewey** - I think your observation about dominance is really interesting. I would hypothesize that a films’ ultimate Chick-ness or Guy-ness depends on what is required for final resolution - I think **lauramarlane** ’s observation about Thelma and Louise is spot on - a Chick Flick with Stuff Blowing Up - but ultimately about emotional fulfillment (in this case, not compromising and staying strong). Having said that, look at There’s Something About Mary. Ultimately a Chick Flick (he asserts carefully - it’s a fine line) because of the Romantic nature, but clearly playing out in full-on Guy Flick territory due to the vulgarity. It clearly straddled the fence, leading to broad appeal, but it was it’s ultimate Chick Flick-ness that enabled the guys to get their girls to go see it, right? I also think about Alien and Aliens - definite Guy Flicks with no strong romantic sub-plot for Ripley. But what about True Lies - could that, **JTech** , be another Romantic Action Flick? (with comedy thrown in, too). I agree with you that Out of Sight is a kind of Romantic Suspense movie (not really action, per se, but suspenseful). Oh - and other romantic thrillers? Hitchcock, Hitchcock, Hitchcock!!! North by Northwest, To Catch a Thief, Rear Window, Notorious - the list goes on… I saw that Geena Davis movie - I think it was just bad. 🙂 Your thoughts? ---
**Author:** ![UrbanChic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9dc877/32.png) [@UrbanChic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UrbanChic)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/12 "2002-12-09T17:26:24Z")
_True Lies_ was, in my opinion, an action comedy. With Tom Arnold. _Tom Arnold_. Not a chick flick. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/13 "2002-12-09T17:33:23Z")
So how does _Lord of the Rings_ fit in? Despite the lack of explosions, we do have flaming CGI monsters and rapid-fire elves, which is probably enough to qualify it as a Guy Flick. Meanwhile, the primary objective is material in nature (destroy a thing) rather than personal, which also matches your definition. Then again, though, there’s definitely a romantic subplot (as opposed to a one-night-stand subplot, like in a Bond flick), and from what I understand from reading this board, the male leads were all eye candy to some extent. Then again, neither the plot nor characters were particularly simplified, so maybe it doesn’t qualify as either. Another example might be _Braveheart_. Plenty of action, but an eye-candy lead, and both the primary (Freedom!) and secondary (love) motivations are personal in nature. It seems to meet all of the criteria for a Chick Flick, but somehow, it just doesn’t _seem_ like one. ---
**Author:** ![UrbanChic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9dc877/32.png) [@UrbanChic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UrbanChic)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/14 "2002-12-09T17:42:22Z")
There are some movies that transcend guy vs. chick flicks. _Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Rings_ (am I the only person who didn’t like that movie, by the way? I suspect that I am.) is one of them. _Seven_ and _Silence of the Lambs_, although not in the same genre as LotR: FotR, are two other examples. ---
**Author:** ![DaddyTimesTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f07891/32.png) [@DaddyTimesTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaddyTimesTwo)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/15 "2002-12-09T17:59:33Z")
I never thought about _The Thomas Crown Affair_ as anything but a Guy Flick, but the OP raises some good points. I was going to say that one good argument for it being a GF is Rene Russo is topless in more than one scene, and I think Boobs are de regueur for a GF. But, I believe Brosnan shows some skin as well, and independently of Rene Russo. So it’s kind of one step up, one back on that. One thing I will say is that the remake was worthless (except for the aforementioned Rene Russo Breasts). Basically, I have nothing definitive to say. Which is also de rigueur for a post from me. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/16 "2002-12-09T18:04:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JuanitaTech \* > \*\*There are some movies that transcend guy vs. chick flicks. _Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Rings_ (am I the only person who didn’t like that movie, by the way? I suspect that I am.) is one of them. _Seven_ and _Silence of the Lambs_, although not in the same genre as LotR: FotR, are two other examples. \*\* I agree with **JuanitaTech** here; as I stated in the OP, a Guy Flick or a Chick Flick is built around a typically simplistic plot. Some movies have too rich of a plot or characterizations to withstand being reduced to mere Guy Flick or Chick Flick pigeon-holing. Having said that - I could see the argument that LOTR is a Guy Flick because of its action and its ultimate goal of destroying the one ring and bringing peace to the land bit. But it is so rich a story that it is tougher to categorize. (and it reminds me of a related clice - there are X plots out there. The fewest I have ever heard is "There are only two plots out there - Our Hero Embarks on a Journey or A Stranger Came to Town)… As for True Lies - I was thinking perhaps Chick Flick-y because of Arnold hooking back up with JLC and his family, but am happy to acknowledge that the blow 'em up stuff is more prominent. ---
**Author:** ![Albert\_Rose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de053/32.png) [@Albert\_Rose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Albert_Rose)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/17 "2002-12-09T18:05:01Z")
You’re just limiting this to _American_ movies, right? I’ve seen plenty of movies, some of them “foreign” (I’m in the U.S.), that fit neither category. I see a lot of movies/films that fit _both_ categories. **Attack of the Clones** seems to do that. And **Out of Sight**. And the “Spaghetti Westerns” with Clint Eastwood, and **Bridge on the River Kwai** and so on and so forth. I like the categories as a broad indicator of a movie’s audience/intent. It’s pretty easy to classify a bunch of movies as one or the other (or both). ---
**Author:** ![Badtz\_Maru](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e36b37/32.png) [@Badtz\_Maru](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Badtz_Maru)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/18 "2002-12-09T18:18:17Z")
I like a lot of chick flicks, but I tend towards the ones where the lead is pursuing something instead of someone - a couple of examples I can think of are ‘Bridget Jones’ Diary’ and ‘A Price Above Rubies’ (which I tried to start a discussion on recently). In both movies there is a female lead, with typical female concerns, but the romantic angle in both movies seems somewhat secondary - BJD isn’t about Bridget finding the perfect man (though she does end up with a guy in the end), it’s about her taking control of her life and becoming successful - men are more of an obstacle than a goal. ‘A Price Above Rubies’ is definitely a chick flick, but the lead spends most of the movie in an unhappy marriage and a demeaning affair. Towards the end you think she’s found the man for her and it’s going to have the typical chick-flick ending but she decides she wants to keep things on the friendship level with him. Purely coincedence that both my examples star Renée Zellweger. ---
**Author:** ![UrbanChic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9dc877/32.png) [@UrbanChic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UrbanChic)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/19 "2002-12-09T18:29:38Z")
WordMan, allow me to be perfectly clear here: if a movie has Tom Arnold anywhere near it, it cannot be a chick flick. He is the anti click flick actor, if you will. I submit that if Tom Arnold’s thumb made a cameo in _Steel Magnolias_, it would have ceased being a chick flick. JuanitaTech, admitting she may be goind slightly overboard on this one… ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519/20 "2002-12-09T18:41:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JuanitaTech \* > \*\*WordMan, allow me to be perfectly clear here: if a movie has Tom Arnold anywhere near it, it cannot be a chick flick. He is the anti click flick actor, if you will. I submit that if Tom Arnold’s thumb made a cameo in _Steel Magnolias_, it would have ceased being a chick flick. > JuanitaTech, admitting she may be goind slightly overboard on this one… \*\* LOL!!! As for your comments, **Badtz** , again, I can see your point. I would argue for Bridget Jones’ Diary (haven’t seen Rubies) that the heroine is seeking emotional fulfillment, the base requirement for any Chick Flick vs. a Guy Flick. The fact that she gains this fulfillment through taking control of her life AND the fact that there is a romantic component to it strongly reinforces the whole chick flick/emotional fulfillment as goal aspect to it. I think we agree about this, I am just trying to demonstrate that Romance is merely one way that a person in a Chick Flick can achieve the requisite emotional fulfillment… And, **AlbertRose** I am not sure what to do with your comment about Attack of the Clones being both. I would argue that Lucas is a Guy Flick director/producer/writer and that is the reason why the Chick Flick aspects of this movie were so bad. As for the overall arc of Star Wars - I would argue that it is about the Rise, Demise and Redemption of Anakin Skywalker aka Darth Vader - that is more about honor than emotional fulfillment. The romance stuff is a sub-text that plays into the whole honor quest. YMMV. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-chick-flicks-vs-guy-flicks/141519.md?page=2)