Quantcast
subscriber help

artisanal film reviews | by maryann johanson

women are not a ‘niche audience’

Unbelievable. IMDB’s Studio Briefing splashes this headline today: “Can Niche Audience Make ‘Sex And The City’ A Hit?”

Niche audience. Women are a “niche audience.” More than half the population: “niche.”

Excuse me for not sounding very ladylike, but What. The. Fuck.
Studio Briefing quotes, with a sort of smug nod of approval, the Los Angeles Times as saying “It’s easier to find $2-a-gallon gas than a straight man eager to see the movie.” So what if straight men don’t want to see the movie? Are straight men the only audience that matters? Why should straight men matter if a movie is deliberately aimed at people who aren’t straight men, as apparently SATC is perceived as being? I mean, that reveals a deep and sort of psychotic kind of self-deception on the part of, you know, all of Hollywood, a kind of circular logic that can only be called a circle jerk: Movies must appeal to straight men because straight men are the only ones who go to the movies because the only movies that get released that matter, in a business sense, are movies that appeal to straight men.

Straight men are far less than half the population, but Hollywood must cater to them all the damn time? Why are “men who like comic book movies” never a “niche”? Or “men who like movies about shit blowing up” never a “niche”?

(The flip side of this, too, is that my choice to see a movie like Iron Man — twice! — is ignored. I didn’t tag along with a boyfriend or husband because he wanted to see it and I cared only about pleasing him even though I would be bored out of my mind by a movie like Iron Man. [I know women do this, even if they deserve a smack for doing so. Tell him to go with his friends, honey, and you go do whatever you want to do.] I went because it’s a kick-ass movie, and because I enjoy fantasizing about all the things I’d like to do to please Robert Downey Jr., which don’t involve sitting in a movie theater. Yet this fact — a woman over 35 voluntarily chosing to see Iron Man, or other movies like it — is not considered an accurate reflection of “what a woman wants to see at the movies.” But that’s a whole other rant.)

I say these things not to disparage straight men, who are among some of the most wonderful people I know, or movies about comic book superheroes or shit getting blown up, which, as everyone who reads this site regularly knows, are among my favorite kinds of movies. And I say these things not as a fan of Sex and the City, which I am most decidedly not. The life the women characters of that show lead is not recognizable to me, not even as a single woman who works in publishing/media living in New York. (I don’t own a single pair of Manolos, and cannot even conceive of buying one: Jesus, that’s rent money, not shoe money, particularly for a freelance writer, like Carrie Bradshaw is supposed to be. And I’m not looking for a rich man to take care of me, either. Maybe because I haven’t spent $50,000 on shoes.)

But I hope to high heaven that Sex and the City, the movie, is a freakin’ blockbuster, if only to show those idiot Hollywood executives that what women like and want matters too.

(Technorati tags: )



Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/flick/public_html/wptest/wp-content/themes/FlickFilosopher/loop-single.php on line 106
posted in:
movie buzz
explore:
  • Patti Heyes

    I’m supposedly a part of that supposed “niche” audience, and I have no desire to see the Sex and the City movie.

    I’m the one who had to convince my husband, the one-time comic book fan, to come along to see Iron Man. (Fortunately, he wound up liking it as much as I did.)

    I am so with you on this. For forty years I’ve put up with being told I can’t be part of the “target audience” for science fiction and fantasy movies and television because I’m not a guy in whatever age group they’re “courting” at the time!

    Thank you!

  • joy

    As someone who has spent the last several years explaining to anyone outside of the city that my single gal life is *nothing* like that of Carrie and the girls, I THANK YOU.

    (Even though I’m totally going to see the movie, though probably not enjoy it as much as Iron Man.)

  • t6

    I’m sort of a straight man. I guess.
    (Except I’m not white…and when they say “straight men” they really mean “straight white men.)
    (And I’ve had sex with other men. It was okay. Not great. But I didn’t die.)
    (Oh, and I’m transexual…so I spent quite a few years being perceived of as sort of female.)

    But anyway, on the surface I’m sort of the demographic they are talking about. And I feel like I should see the Sex in the City Movie. I don’t know if I will, but I feel like I should. Why? Because it is this huge cultural phenomenon and I’ve never even watched one episode. And I sort of feel like, if I care about being clued into the culture that I live in…maybe I should see the movie. And it can’t be worse than Two and a Half Men…which I haaaate…but I sat through one episode of that.

  • Shadowen

    I was about to point out that it is a niche movie: it’s aimed at people who like Sex in the City, which doesn’t consist of every woman. But, as you note in your article, comic book movies are never “niche” movies (even though they are; I can imagine people who, as a matter of principle, have never knowingly seen a movie based on a comic book property).

    And, given the popularity of the source material, not unlike the biggest superhero movies…it’s a movie for a huge niche.

  • Nathan

    i think it was just poorly worded and failed to clearly distinguish between “avid” female fans of the show and females in general, which is part of the point it was trying to make: younger women not being as interested as “their elders.” they could have also said something about it being geared toward city-dwelling, upper middle-class, non-traditional values types, which seems like a niche to me.

    or maybe it has universal themes, i wouldn’t know.

    i’ll be surprised if it makes $16m opening weekend. they should force people to watch this at Guantanamo instead of waterboarding them. *

    *(the above statements are not an endorsement of traditional values or Guantanamo)

  • MaryAnn

    As someone who has spent the last several years explaining to anyone outside of the city that my single gal life is *nothing* like that of Carrie and the girls, I THANK YOU.

    Yeah, that’s another thing about *SATC,* which I’m not sure is entirely the fault of the show itself or of the mass general stupidity of people, who took this as some sort of documentary. Maybe there are women like the charactes of *SATC,* but I don’t know any of them.

    (Oh, and I’m transexual…so I spent quite a few years being perceived of as sort of female.)

    T6, I think you are probably in a very tiny niche of your own. :-> Which must mean you don’t find very much that speaks to you in mainstream entertainment at all. :-(

    i think it was just poorly worded and failed to clearly distinguish between “avid” female fans of the show and females in general

    I agree that that’s true of the show and hence the movie, but I don’t get the sense of that from the linked article. Instead, I get the sense that is always the general sense when it comes to mainstream media talking about women: we’re all alike. And that pisses me off.

  • t6

    There’s Boys Don’t Cry. But um…that’s a real downer…and I’d like to see media images of transfolk where we aren’t raped and/or murdered…or in some other ways tragic.

    But, sadly, lots of people can say that. And then, when someone does point out that there aren’t diverse images of women/gay people/trans people/people of color/etc and certainly not to the same degree as straight white men…somebody always pops up and cries about how hard it is to be a straight white man.

    Then I cry on the inside.

  • Barb Gorczyca

    Women are a “niche audience.”

    Well I am a woman but these type of films mean nothing to me. Never watched the show when it was on cable and don’t plan on seeing it either in the movies or when it shows up on tv again in a couple of months. Give me a Marvel Comics movie (Iron Man, Batman, etc.), a good action/adventure movie or fantasy movie anytime.

  • Katie

    SING IT SISTER!

    As someone who willingly and gleefully sees “boy” movies on opening night I constantly resent being ignored as a movie goer. Or worse, expected to fall all over myself to see the next ridiculous, borderline insulting (if not downright insulting) “chickflick”/romcom.

    But this movie, it’s either going to be HUGE or totally bomb (by industry standards).

  • paul

    Have we considered that a romantic movie might actually be harder to write than an action film, even if obviously cheaper to make? For an action film, all Bruce, Arnold, and/or a superhero needs is a new villian with a new super crime in mind and the rest writes itself. But to come up with new variations on girl meets boy, they fall in love, etc. requires new variations on characterization that usually only shows up in works starring John Cusack or written by Josh Whedon, or dead white women like my beloved Jane Austen.

  • There is nothing that infuriates me more than then fact that there is no reverse word for misogynist. So many times it seems like feminist is nothing more than another word for manhater.Yeah I’m sorry for being born and just waking up to hating women. Or the so called feminist who like to to pretend their is no advantage to being a women. Yes you may be disregarded(and thats bullshit) in terms of your opinions, but you will never be punched in the face. Men are always physically responsible for there opinions. Socially speaking you can get away with murder.As far as the woman in movies thing goes, I dont’t know. Maybe it is just a much harder role to play. Female action hero is far more complex and interesting than male action hero. Maybe their just aren’t enough actresses with the guts to pull it off. And maybe their is plenty of male action heros
    who can mail it in. Maybe it’s because women are more willing to see “guy” movies than guys are willing to see “chick flicks”.

  • amanohyo

    John Smith, the word you’re looking for is misandrist. Hatred of men is called misandry, and there’s a reason that the word is not as widely known as the word misogynist.

    “Socially speaking,” men get away with murder too. I don’t know what utopia you live in, but I live in America, the most wealthy and powerful country in the world. And here in my country women get punched in the face quite often, usually by men they know, and it usually doesn’t stop with a single punch.

    When you ask men what their biggest fear is about women, their most common response is that a woman will “laugh at them.” Women’s greatest fear about men is being raped and killed.

    It’s great that you think female action heroes are complex and interesting, but the very fact that men are able to “phone in” a violent performance in a movie and still be successful should tell you a lot about gender norms on our planet (still 100% patriarchal last time I checked).

  • “Yes you may be disregarded(and thats bullshit) in terms of your opinions, but you will never be punched in the face.”

    a bitterly ironic, if not deliberately blind, statement when one considers that almost all of the domestic violence that occurs in this country is against women. women are punched, kicked, pushed down stairs, stabbed or shot.

    violence against women is endemic in movies, tv, music and videos — and is never thought of as enough to rate a movie R or NC17, although a woman’s perfectly normal bare breast (as per Janet Jackson) is grounds for a complete overhaul of television standards.

    no man is likely to be the victim of an “honor” killing.

    “feminist” is *not* a word for “manhater”, it’s a word for demanding respect for women and their lives. needed because most cultures and societies do not provide such respect.

    perhaps John Smith needs to get out into the real world… read a few newspapers, read a few *books* about women’s lives in this country — which should be the most equitable, fair and just country in the world — and our white, male dominated society, still wants to deny women the right to do what they want with their bodies or their minds.

    and the rest of the world is worse.

  • MaryAnn

    So many times it seems like feminist is nothing more than another word for manhater.

    Wait? What on earth could be perceived as “manhating” in my post?

  • Alan

    Katie – “As someone who willingly and gleefully sees “boy” movies on opening night I constantly resent being ignored as a movie goer”

    I’m a little puzzled here. They *are* making movies for you. They are making exactly the kind of movies that you line up on opening night to see. They probably think that they are making movies for 16 year old boys and, as such, you aren’t interested, but as long as they are hitting your sweet spot, who cares? If movie studios were trying to target women like you they’d probably make exactly the same sort of movie that they already are making now (just like I, a straight, single male, am not being ignored in the romantic comedy department. I like a good romcom and the fact that most of them are aimed at, and watched, by women, doesn’t mean that I feel slighted by the studios).

  • MaryAnn

    as long as they are hitting your sweet spot, who cares?

    There’s a big difference between someone who hits your sweet spot accidentally, just as a matter of course while he fumbles around clumsily, and someone who does it with intent, and with full knowledge of what he’s doing, and how to do it right.

    The girls know what I’m talking about.

  • Katie

    Yeah! What MaryAnn said!

    The bottom line is they don’t care if I see that movie. They’re happy if I do but I’m not someone TPTB consider a movie goer as far as their golden demographic of white males 18-35 are concerned. It’s a bonus if they get me off but it’s not considered necessary.

    Also, Paul, not to belabor the point that people before me have made very well, but come back to me when women aren’t making $0.76 to the dollar. Feminism has nothing to do with hate and just FYI, men are feminist as well as women.

  • paul

    Katie, are you sure you’re talking to me? I was talking about the artistic differences between making action vs. romantic movies.

    Commercially, I would add, it is easier to make sequels to action movies, for all the successful hero needs is another villian. Thus you have Lethal Weapon 1-4, Die Hard 1-4, etc, or the same villian in a different context, such as Alien 1-4.

    But what if a romantic lead tried to have sequels. They find Mr. or Ms. Right again, and again, and again? Pretty soon we’re wondering if someone needs therapy.

  • MaryAnn

    Paul, if you want to say that “commercially” it’s easier to do anything, moviewise, then you’re buying into the whole mindset I am railing against. You’re making a lot of assumptions about what could make for a successful movie if the industry took a wider perspective, and also that men and women do not like the same kinds of movies, or that there isn’t some crossover there.

    AND you’re assuming that the only kind of movie women must like, and that would bring more of them out to the movies, and that would be easy to make, are sequels to romantic comedies… oh, and you’re assuming that romantic movies have to be about the search for Mr or Ms Right, and that there aren’t other kinds of romantic stories that might be told.

  • paul

    Well, yes, I guess I am assuming romantic movies are about finding that special someone. That pretty much defines the genre, doesn’t it?

    And sequels are made because the first movies are so profitable, aren’t they? But the ending of an action movie lends itself better to a sequel than a romantic movie.

    At the end of Titantic, you get a panover of pictures about what a wonderful life Rose had because she met Jack and he died for her. Now, Titantic II would be difficult to put on the ship, unless there was another couple undergoing a tradegy on the ship, so lets assume we follow Rose into the future. The new man would be compared by fans, probably unfavorably, to Jack. Some might say Rose betrayed his memory. If Titantic II wasn’t better than Titantic, I suspect fans would feel even more let down than usual, and if it was better, than Rose loves the new guy better than the man who died for her? That’s a lot of emotional balls in the air to juggle.

    Or if the original movie had a happy ending, then you have to explain why the couple in the first romantic movie broke up. That would change the perception of the first movie in ways action movies don’t have to worry about.

    And in my own defense, I am not, nor did I say, more romantic movies shouldn’t be made, rather that they are harder to write.

  • MaryAnn

    Well, yes, I guess I am assuming romantic movies are about finding that special someone. That pretty much defines the genre, doesn’t it?

    If it does, it’s only because of the limited imagination of Hollywood. What about what happens after you find that special someone? We could have whole series of movies about couples who, let’s say, do other exciting things while being romantic together. You know: *The Thin Man* meets *The Jewel of the Nile.*

    lets assume we follow Rose into the future. Some might say Rose betrayed his memory

    Oh, let’s have a few more movies about the exciting life Rose led after she met Jack! If it were done right, it would be a wonderful tribute to Jack, and no one would begrudge Rose her happy life. The whole point of her meeting him is that she was inspired by him.

    These are merely the quickest, most obvious ideas off the top of my idea. There’s no lack of potential stories that could appeal to more women (and maybe more men, too!). The only lack of imagination is on the business end.

  • Katie

    Paul my apologies if I made a mistake. I was responding quickly at work.

    I’m not knocking the skill it takes to make a romcon. To do well it takes an extreme amount of skill. It’s incredibly difficult to make a romcon unique and funny and well written/acted. The big difference is that when you’re watching a crappy action movie you at least have the visual stimulation of watching shit blow up in spectacular fashion and you can easily check out of the over all story. In a romcom it’s just two actors struggling through bad dialogue trying to convince me that if I just wear this or buy that or do something stupid I’ll score the supposed love of my life. It’s much more difficult to check out of a bad romcom than a bad action movie.

    As for sequels, I’d actually love for someone to make a movie that starts a week after the whole ‘happily ever after’ romcom ending. Ya know, when the reality of a relationship kicks in. I’d find that (if done well) very interesting.

  • Ryan

    The OP here pretty much guaranteed that every comment following would be either a disagreement by a guy…or an agreement from a woman…and lo and behold! So it has been.

    And the sad part is that these movies are being classified by gender. I like a RomCom if it is well made, well written, and has good acting…and ditto for an action movie. I think most people care a whole lot more about the quality of the movie than whether it is hypothetically made for ‘guys’ or ‘girls’

    Also, female leads who starred in ‘action’ movies: Angelina Jolie(Tomb Raider, Mr and Mrs. Smith), Rachel Weisz (The Mummy), Cameron Diaz Drew Barrymore and Lucy Liu (Charlie’s Angels), Sigourney Weaver(Alien), Bridget Fonda(Point of No Return), Geena Davis(Long Kiss Goodnight, Cutthroat Island), Jennifer Garner(Elektra), Milla Jovovich(Resident Evil and sequels, 5th Element), Radha Mitchell(Pitch Black), Kate Beckinsdale(Underworld), and Keira Knightly(Domino, PotC)…to name just a few.

    That list includes only women where they carried the title roll, but in movies with dual leads I think you could make that list far larger. For example, Jamie Lee Curtis was in True Lies…which may have been a Schwarzenegger vehicle, but I would argue she also had a large roll in it. Anne Hathaway also looks likely to be added to the list when ‘Get Smart’ releases.

  • amanohyo

    The OP has a name; it’s at the top of the page. And I’m a guy who agrees with her on this point. There’s no way in hell if a Sopranos movie came out, IMDB would write an article about “a niche audience.” Not even for Speed Racer, which actually is a niche movie.

    I haven’t seen The Mummy in a while, but I don’t remember Rachel Weisz doing much in the way of action. In several of the more recent movies you mentioned (The Mummy, 5th Element, Pitch Black, PotC, True Lies), the female star is in position of relative powerlessness and/or the male star is the obvious center of attention.

    We all care about the quality of movies first too, but aren’t you just a little bit bored of the male perspective on things? Doesn’t it bug you to see movie after movie with a bunch of varied guys interacting, working towards goals that have nothing to do with women or marriage, getting plenty of screen time and character development, and a lone woman character under the age of 30 who is expected to represent 51% of the world’s population?

    Didn’t you find it at all odd that at the end of PotC, Elizabeth, who had been fairly adventurous, happily settled down to become a single mother while Will went off to galavant around the world for ten years? Again, there’s nothing wrong with stuff like that in a single movie, but it happens over and over and over again. Women are a huge market, and they get screwed over because big-budget, well-marketed, high-quality movies are consistently made with the late-teen/twenty-something male in mind.

    Women are not a niche audience. They’ve got money; they’re willing to go to a movie several times with their friends, and then buy the DVD (or Bluray disc) if producers would just fashion more products with a realistic, modern female perspective in mind. In any sane society, the SatC movie would be the most non-niche movie ever. I mean, relationships, sex, shopping, careers, city life? What were Friends and Seinfeld about? What is life about? This isn’t a movie based on some cult television show. I don’t even own a television and I’ve heard of SatC. IMDB’s article truly deserves a WTF.

  • Ryan

    Oh, sorry, I thought OP meant original post, not original poster, my friend corrected me.

    Um, anyway, as to your other points. If you think Milla Jovovich’s character in the 5th element was in a position of helplessness, you clearly didn’t really watch the movie. In Pitch Black (An extremely underrated movie because of the way it was marketed) Vin Diesel’s character is the villain/anti-hero and Mitchell’s character is the Captain who sacrifices herself to get through to him and atone for her earlier mistake. Weisz was more action oriented in the Mummy 2 than the original Mummy, I grant you.

    Anyway, I hate this whole argument. I don’t want people to produce movies with ‘the modern female OR male perspective in mind.’ Creative people should have ideas for plots, and then make their movies, and the good ones will be watched and succeed.

    The fact that right now Hollywood does produce a lot of movies by focus group is where a lot of junk like torture porn and sub-standard action fare comes from. The answer is not to expand that focus group to include trying to figure out what women want to see…but to stop creating movies by focus group altogether.

    Also, Seinfeld was a show about nothing…just so you know =)

    (And Friends sucked. God, talk about cliche)

  • Ryan

    Oh, also, from reading the article it’s fairly clear that the ‘niche’ being referred to was women between 30-50 not ALL women. Probably why it noted that younger women were beginning to be drawn in.

    The article is still sort of stupid, but I don’t think it or anybody would call 51% of our population a ‘niche’

  • MaryAnn

    Except that *is* what Hollywood does.

    The big difference is that when you’re watching a crappy action movie you at least have the visual stimulation of watching shit blow up in spectacular fashion and you can easily check out of the over all story. In a romcom it’s just two actors struggling through bad dialogue trying to convince me that if I just wear this or buy that or do something stupid I’ll score the supposed love of my life. It’s much more difficult to check out of a bad romcom than a bad action movie.

    But it could easily be said that “at least with a crappy romantic comedy you have the visual stimulation of watching pretty people wearing nice clothes and wandering around their spectacular apartments.” Now, *I* don’t feel that way — I don’t want to watch a movie that’s only about nice clothes *or* stuff blowing up real good — but there’s an argument to be made that there *is* an audience for bad rom-coms. Hell, the success of *Baby Mama* proves that there’s an audience for terrible movies about things lots of women worry about (like having babies).

    And that’s the really insidious thing about how (stereotypically) male-oriented Hollywood’s output is: women don’t even get as many shitty movies as men do.

  • Ryan

    I don’t know…they DID re-make Pride and Prejudice about 16 times =)

  • paul

    Like I said, Jane Austen, one of the few writers who seemed to understand both men and women. Classic writers like her will still be in reprint long after the last DaVinca Code is recycled.

    At the end of PotC, I saw Liz staying in the world as King (Queen?) of the Pirates while poor Will must have the worst job in all of fantasy land: collecting the souls of those who died from storms, pirate attacks, accidents, and war.

    Since we’re on the subject of films about women, when I watched The Devil Wears Prada, I came out thinking that if the genders of every character had been switched (and maybe the magazine) not a whole lot would have to be changed. You’d still have the work conflicts, the newbee vs the veteran conflict, the relationship difficulty, etc.

  • Like I said, Jane Austen, one of the few writers who seemed to understand both men and women. Classic writers like her will still be in reprint long after the last DaVinca Code is recycled.
    –Paul

    No, she’s one of the few such writers that Hollywood considers to be commercially viable.

    The sad part is just a few decades ago, Hollywood had no trouble casting female stars as the lead in a movie. The roles weren’t always as flattering as they could be, but they weren’t as rare as they are today.

    But then back then movies–save for obvious exceptions like The Three Stooges–were generally aimed at adults. Today the general audience seems to be teenagers.

    And I love a good action flick as much as any straight male but I don’t necessarily want to see them all the time.

  • M. Sweeney

    I agree one hundred percent. The motion picture industry is way behind the curve when it comes to market analysis. Remember — a lot of market data is generated by studios and producers, the same folks who claim to be unsure about the role of new media in film distribution, and hence are unwilling to fork over additional residuals to writers and actors. But I digress.

    They clearly don’t know — or don’t want to know — who’s really out there, who has disposable income, etc. They also are uncomfortable with the increasing trend toward narrowcasting. Women are a huge market quadrant, and within that quadrant are, yes, niches.

    To understand the size of the female quadrant, one only had to stand for a half-hour outside the Royal Theatre in West Los Angeles during the run of La Vie en Rose. You would see how midled some North American producers and film pundits are. Women — and the men who marry and date them — were lined up two by two, around two city blocks, as if boarding Noah’s Ark. The last time I had been in a packed theatre like that was in 1977 on the opening day of Star Wars. Which, incidentally, tested well with women despite studio nervousness about the word Wars in the title.

    I am 56, female, smart, and very, very tired of Hollywood’s tendency to consult adolescent men before greenlighting a production — a relatively recent phenomenon, I might add. And the very phenomenon that has given us such cinematic triumphs as Joe Dirt.

    Women are not a niche market. We’re a huge market (just consult your cable tv schedule). But ad agencies have not figured out how to market to them because they are caught in the Freudian conundrum, namely, what do women want? Well, ask women. By the way, my brother, a heterosexual man, loved The Devil Wears Prada. A modern film marketer might have been surprised by why he went to TDWP — and dragged his wife along. He has been in love with Meryl Streep for decades and wanted to see her in her mid-life incarnation. The upshot? He’s more in love than ever.

  • amanohyo

    How many times can imdb write the same story without mentioning Titanic or Gone with the Wind (or even MBFG Wedding)? You’d think they’d at least mention one of those even if it was only to note the relative lack of action and special effects in SatC.

    At least the blurb comes to the correct conclusion. Yes imdb, you’re right, it is possible for women aged 20 to 55 alone (around 75 million people) to make a movie a hit. What a wondrous age we live in!

  • pedro

    am straight man.

    won’t be caught dead at a screening of SATC.

    mom and sis like it though.

    but i do agree with what you say about women over 35 going to see iron man because they want to.

  • It would be in woman’s best interest to go see SATC if they want more of there own niche movies to be produced.
    I think its great if women wanna see man movies like Iron “man”, Spider”Man”, and Hell”boy”. The thing is the chances of finding girls that wanna see a movie with lots of kicking ass is about the same as finding a guy like me or just the average guy wanting to see a Jane Austin movie or something Shakespeare did. Which isn’t likely unless hit my head on a rock and recover with amnesia , and was retooled by a misandric woman.

  • pedro

    some of what shakespeare did was good.

    did you know hamlet was a sex perv?

    that’s right. it all depends on who your teacher is…

  • Hdj

    I just always hated how people think hes the building blocks of what a romance is, you know? Theres other concepts of being romantic but I guess anything non Shakespeare it most be unorthodox. Like if your not handing out flowers, or Singing a song, or writing poems , then your not abiding by the laws of Shakespeare’s rules of romanticism. and I always hated that. He’s been the text book usage of how to make Romcom’s for century’s.
    I meen how can his work holds up today standards is beyond me, like what would he have to say about all these transgender people, or gays or those creeps in the polygamist ranches , wheres the romanticism there? How do you translate Shakespeare’s work in to those situations? you cant. We need new concepts for todays craziness , and maybe then your get guys seeing Romcom’s

Pin It on Pinterest