BASIC REPRESENTATION SCORE: 0
[no significant representation of girls/women]
FEMALE AGENCY/POWER/AUTHORITY SCORE: -20
THE MALE GAZE SCORE: -5
GENDER/SEXUALITY SCORE: -8
WILDCARD SCORE: 0
Is there anything either positive or negative in the film’s representation of women not already accounted for here? (points will vary)
TOTAL SCORE: -33
IS THE FILM’S DIRECTOR FEMALE? No (does not impact scoring)
IS THE FILM’S SCREENWRITER FEMALE? No (does not impact scoring)
BOTTOM LINE: This series has marked a low point for women’s representation on film in recent years, and this third outing is no exception. Perhaps the only surprising and slightly progressive thing is that Liam Neeson’s lady-avenging badass doesn’t freak out over incontrovertible evidence of his daughter’s existence as a sexual being.
NOTE: This is not a “review” of Taken 3! It is simply an examination of how well or how poorly it represents women. (A movie that represents women well can still be a terrible film; a movie that represents women poorly can still be a great film.) Read my review of Taken 3.
See the full rating criteria. (Criteria that do not apply to this film have been deleted in this rating for maximum readability.)