Wednesday, September 3, 2014

I'm American, and I Only Tolerate Hot, Skinny Chicks on My TV Screen

Hey Steph,

So a few years ago I discovered British television. At the time, I did mind-numbing work, in which my boss himself told me I better be listening or watching something while I worked because it was that boring. Needless to say, I was watching a lot of tv. I got tired of how skanky American television can be, so I tried out some Brit shows that my friends had highly recommended. Besides finding them to be much cleaner than American television (I've since learned that British television is either much cleaner or much, much more raunchy than American television.), I was surprised by the female faces I saw on the screen.

There were normal-looking women on the screen. So, all of them were cute, but some of them were a bit odd looking, some of them were chubby, some of them were black, and some of them were older than 40. It was lovely and refreshing. And depressing because it really shouldn't be that refreshing or noticeable to see these women on the screen in lead roles.

We just don't see this diversity in America. Take these two tv trailers below. The first one is for the show Broadchurch, a BBC crime show. The second is for Gracepoint, the American spin-off of Broadchurch with the same male lead but set in America.



So besides being the exact same storyline with the exact same dead boy named Danny, you may have noticed a big difference in a certain female police detective. Yeah, they replaced the matronly, short British detective for a tall, thin, younger-looking American one. Since pretty much everything about this remake is the same, including the looks of almost every character, it is extremely noticeable this major shift in the looks of the female protagonist. Honestly, I don't think Olivia Colman (our British detective) would ever be cast as the lead of a tv show in America.

As you look around the BBC universe, you'll find an assortment of leading ladies. Let's just look at the companions on Dr. Who. (Remember, I'm not saying these women are unattractive. They just aren't the type of women found in most American television shows and movies.)





Martha Jones, Donna Noble, and River Song (All from Wikipedia)

Now these lovely ladies above don't fit the typical profile of a lead female character on American television. Catherine Tate and Alex Kingston (who play Donna Noble and River Song, respectively) were over 40 when they starred on Dr. Who. Now, fortunately, all three of these women have actually played parts on American tv shows before or since being on Dr. Who; however, none of them played as prominent characters as they do on Dr. Who.

I worry what this means for us viewers. I'm sad that these women being leads on tv was so noticeable to me. When I see these women on British television, it is immediately obvious to me that these women were not cast purely to be eye candy. They were cast because they offered a complex character to follow and relate to. I worry that if we only see one sliver of all women on tv that we will stop seeing the diversity, complexity, and strength of women characters. I believe we tell stories to connect with and understand each other better, but if our stories only show one type of women, will we stop noticing her actions by only seeing her physical looks. Will we start thinking that to be a woman means to be beautiful and thin and young? I don't know. I plan to age in my life, and it'd be nice to still have stories be told about women my age.

Just some thoughts.

Cheers,

Amanda

2 comments:

  1. I watched the trailers and didn't really notice the British female lead to be especially homely. I thought the American female lead looked pretty old and not very pretty. Maybe she subscribes to typical "standards" of beauty because she is blonde and doesn't have a double chin, but I don't think she is eye candy by any means. She is also 6 years older than the British lead. Also this is coming from someone who likes to watch good-looking people on TV, male or female, and so I'm pretty judgmental about it--weird, especially considering I would never be eye candy on TV. So you might not want to hear what I have to say since I'm pretty surface when it comes to a character and his or her appearance--opposite of you, I suppose :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like attractive characters. But, I mostly like awesome characters. I dunno, people don't have to be beautiful to be attractive (Shout-out to anyone who thought Cyrano, Snape, and/or Samwise were incredibly sexy.) My major beef is that a reliance on hot-bodied women has also led to seriously crappy character development for the entire female gender on screen.

    It's like every screenwriter ever was like "Is this character competent? That's too much work. I'll let Wardrobe make her likeable." Cleavage has made for some truly awful heroines (Hello Star Trek) And that's a shame. Because women are actually fascinating and likeable regardless of the hawtness thereof. The hot ones can also be intriguing. Just not in LA, apparently.

    To be fair, they do "pan up the bum" on weak male characters too. But female characters come almost exclusively in the "vaguely-defined personality, bikini-body" model. Which is silliness.

    TL;DR Hot is not always sexy. Sexy is not always hot.

    ReplyDelete