How Many of Your Favourite Films Pass "the Bechdel Test"?

[Davroth]

I think you can't really fault script writers for not being capable to write compelling female characters (after all, you can't write about something you don't know).

I don't get this opinion. There's nothing to know. If you're a person, you know how another person acts, regardless of gender.

So you are saying there is no difference between men and women? Because feminists tend to get kinda angry when you write female characters like male characters. :/

I don't know what your talking about. If my definition of "feminist" is right, they should be happy that a female character be written like a male character. Because male characters get to be individuals.

You dodged my point completely. Ah.. well done?

Seriously, though, no. It's not as easy to write a female character as a male. If you disagree with that, it only shows that you have no idea about writing.

And the old "males get to be individuals" is such a broad statement that you just know it's nothing more then a ridiculous generalization. Male characters, as a whole, tend to follow just as many archetypes as female characters do. Which gender has the "better" archetypes, that's debatable, but your statement as it stands is just plain wrong, sorry. :/

 

[xplosive59]

Falling Down: No
2001 A Space Odyssey: No
The End Of Evangelion: Yes
Moon: No
Source Code: No
Pulp Fiction: Not sure, Don't think so though
Drive: No
Battle Royale: Yes
Brazil: :/ To an extent, but mostly no.
The Big Lebowski: No
Ed Wood: Yes
A Clockwork Orange: No

My taste fails the test :/

 

[uneek]

I think you can't really fault script writers for not being capable to write compelling female characters (after all, you can't write about something you don't know).

I don't get this opinion. There's nothing to know. If you're a person, you know how another person acts, regardless of gender.

So you are saying there is no difference between men and women? Because feminists tend to get kinda angry when you write female characters like male characters. :/

I don't know what your talking about. If my definition of "feminist" is right, they should be happy that a female character be written like a male character. Because male characters get to be individuals.

You dodged my point completely. Ah.. well done?

Seriously, though, no. It's not as easy to write a female character as a male. If you disagree with that, it only shows that you have no idea about writing.

And the old "males get to be individuals" is such a broad statement that you just know it's nothing more then a ridiculous generalization. Male characters, as a whole, tend to follow just as many archetypes as female characters do. Which gender has the "better" archetypes, that's debatable, but your statement as it stands is just plain wrong, sorry. :/

You mean that I didn't answer your first question? I wouldn't call that "dodging your point completely" but if you must know: Yes. I do in fact believe there is no difference between men and women, at least, in the area your referring to(you know, the important ones).

No, I don't know that much about writing. But, can I understand why gender comes into an issue?

What I mean by "individuals" is that having an archetype does not mean you can't have an interesting personality.
Example: if I wanted a character who's say(and I'm not describing anyone in particular, just someone I came up with myself)young, spunky, has lot's of energy, is very naive but quick to learn, is there a gender I'm obligated to put this person in?

That's what I'm asking. Personally, I'd make that person any gender and they'd be the exact same character. But since I apparently know nothing about writing, I must be wrong.

 

[floppylobster]

It probably happened... but damned if I can remember that scene! HA HA, just kidding of course. The script I once wrote had two named female characters, unfortunately one was dead before the other appeared so they never got to talk to each other. But in my defense I wanted to write about what a knew about, and I found it hard to find a realistic sounding female voice in my head to write.

 

[Davroth]

I think you can't really fault script writers for not being capable to write compelling female characters (after all, you can't write about something you don't know).

I don't get this opinion. There's nothing to know. If you're a person, you know how another person acts, regardless of gender.

So you are saying there is no difference between men and women? Because feminists tend to get kinda angry when you write female characters like male characters. :/

I don't know what your talking about. If my definition of "feminist" is right, they should be happy that a female character be written like a male character. Because male characters get to be individuals.

You dodged my point completely. Ah.. well done?

Seriously, though, no. It's not as easy to write a female character as a male. If you disagree with that, it only shows that you have no idea about writing.

And the old "males get to be individuals" is such a broad statement that you just know it's nothing more then a ridiculous generalization. Male characters, as a whole, tend to follow just as many archetypes as female characters do. Which gender has the "better" archetypes, that's debatable, but your statement as it stands is just plain wrong, sorry. :/

You mean that I didn't answer your first question? I wouldn't call that "dodging your point completely" but if you must know: Yes. I do in fact believe there is no difference between men and women, at least, in the area your referring to(you know, the important ones).

No, I don't know that much about writing. But, can I understand why gender comes into an issue?

What I mean by "individuals" is that having an archetype does not mean you can't have an interesting personality.
Example: if I wanted a character who's say(and I'm not describing anyone in particular, just someone I came up with myself)young, spunky, has lot's of energy, is very naive but quick to learn, is there a gender I'm obligated to put this person in?

That's what I'm asking. Personally, I'd make that person any gender and they'd be the exact same character. But since I apparently know nothing about writing, I must be wrong.

You are. Gender always factors in. You can't just swap genders and end up with "good" female characters. It's not that easy. If you are continue to claim that there is no difference in how males and females act, I really don't know what to say to you.

 

[keiskay]

considering my taste in movies is cult films or general trashy fun horrors i dont think many will pass.

hobo with a shotgun: no
evil dead: unsure there are women that talk together but they also include their boys in the conversation.
evil dead 2: pass
army of darkness: no
night of the living dead: no, the women interact but with the men at the same time.
dawn of the dead: new one yes, old one no. (old is superior still)
the avengers: no
braindead/ dead alive: no
bad taste: no
night of the creeps: in the loosest standard of the bechdel test it passes but i wanna say no.
cannibal holocaust: no
the civil war on drugs: all male cast so no
shaun of the dead: kind of not really sure though gotta rewatch and confirm.
from paris with love: no
gameboys: no
cheap: yes

 

[chadachada123]

Darkness Falls: No
Dark Knight: No
Inception: No
Avengers: No
American Psycho: No (but thank God)
Garden State: Pretty much no
28 Days Later: Yes!
28 Weeks Later: Yes!
Shawshank Redemption: No, but that makes sense
Matrix: No
How to Train Your Dragon: No, but that's acceptable

So yeah, most movies that I like are a no. Then again, most of the movies that I like barely have characters to begin with. I've probably left out a ton of my favorite movies, too, but that's alright.

What a stupid test.

Yes, films aimed at men are going to be about a man, probably, unless we're talking porno. But hey, I guess we should start shoehorning women into movies like Das Boot, American Phsycho or Amadeus, even though it would make all 3 worse.

But if only maybe 10% of films pass this test, then that implies that only about 10% of films are made with any kind of realistic female character. You don't see that as a problem?

To be fair, many of the movies that I like don't have realistic male characters either. Just saying. Let alone the fact that most movies that I like have very few characters to start with.

Edit: As an addendum, I think this test needs to only be applied to movies that have more than 4 primary characters, otherwise it's completely useless. If your movie only has a guy and a girl, for example, or has little dialogue, or has a female main character but little else (for example: the Hunger Games barely passes, but it's hardly a movie that is bad on representation). And then you've got Twilight, which passes (probably?) but is one of the worst movies for stereotyping women there is these days.

 

[CaptainKarma]

Falling Down: No
2001 A Space Odyssey: No
The End Of Evangelion: Yes
Moon: No
Source Code: No
Pulp Fiction: Not sure, Don't think so though
Drive: No
Battle Royale: Yes
Brazil: :/ To an extent, but mostly no.
The Big Lebowski: No
Ed Wood: Yes
A Clockwork Orange: No

My taste fails the test :/

Don't worry about it, it's not really meant to be applied to individual films. Look at Avatar, it has three developed female characters (Natyri, Michelle Rodriguez, Sigourney Weaver) who are all shown as just as capable as the men, but it fails the test. Does that James Cameron hates women? Or that its a misogynistic film? Hell no.

Its all about the general trends. Another example: Memento. About a man driven into emotional despair by the death of his wife. Perfectly good story. Or The Prestige, two men driven into emotional despair (and hatred) by the death of one mans wife. Cool story, totally great. The Dark Knight: man driven into emotional despair (and murder!) by the death of his fiance. A pattern starts to emerge. Inception. Man driven into emotional despair (and existential uncertainty) by his wife's suicide. Okay now it gets silly. Each film is fine, and tells a good story. But when you put it together, and realise that of the 6 married women in Chris Nolan's filmography, 1 lives (Barbara Gordan) and the rest are stuffed into refrigerators to serve the plot and the male characters development, THAT'S when it becomes an issue.

 

[uneek]

I think you can't really fault script writers for not being capable to write compelling female characters (after all, you can't write about something you don't know).

I don't get this opinion. There's nothing to know. If you're a person, you know how another person acts, regardless of gender.

So you are saying there is no difference between men and women? Because feminists tend to get kinda angry when you write female characters like male characters. :/

I don't know what your talking about. If my definition of "feminist" is right, they should be happy that a female character be written like a male character. Because male characters get to be individuals.

You dodged my point completely. Ah.. well done?

Seriously, though, no. It's not as easy to write a female character as a male. If you disagree with that, it only shows that you have no idea about writing.

And the old "males get to be individuals" is such a broad statement that you just know it's nothing more then a ridiculous generalization. Male characters, as a whole, tend to follow just as many archetypes as female characters do. Which gender has the "better" archetypes, that's debatable, but your statement as it stands is just plain wrong, sorry. :/

You mean that I didn't answer your first question? I wouldn't call that "dodging your point completely" but if you must know: Yes. I do in fact believe there is no difference between men and women, at least, in the area your referring to(you know, the important ones).

No, I don't know that much about writing. But, can I understand why gender comes into an issue?

What I mean by "individuals" is that having an archetype does not mean you can't have an interesting personality.
Example: if I wanted a character who's say(and I'm not describing anyone in particular, just someone I came up with myself)young, spunky, has lot's of energy, is very naive but quick to learn, is there a gender I'm obligated to put this person in?

That's what I'm asking. Personally, I'd make that person any gender and they'd be the exact same character. But since I apparently know nothing about writing, I must be wrong.

You are. Gender always factors in. You can't just swap genders and end up with "good" female characters. It's not that easy. If you are continue to claim that there is no difference in how males and females act, I really don't know what to say to you.

Okay, how about this: You know that personality example I used above. You tell me what gender that character should be and tell me why.

 

[Eric Morales]

You mean that I didn't answer your first question? I wouldn't call that "dodging your point completely" but if you must know: Yes. I do in fact believe there is no difference between men and women, at least, in the area your referring to(you know, the important ones).

No, I don't know that much about writing. But, can I understand why gender comes into an issue?

What I mean by "individuals" is that having an archetype does not mean you can't have an interesting personality.
Example: if I wanted a character who's say(and I'm not describing anyone in particular, just someone I came up with myself)young, spunky, has lot's of energy, is very naive but quick to learn, is there a gender I'm obligated to put this person in?

That's what I'm asking. Personally, I'd make that person any gender and they'd be the exact same character. But since I apparently know nothing about writing, I must be wrong.

For many characters, their gender doesn't matter. A good character is a good character. However, there are some traits that are unique to women and if you don't explore them, you hamstring the number of different stories you can tell.

 

[-Drifter-]

I was tempted to let myself get worked up over some the more ignorant/hyperbolic responses, but really, I'm just glad that most people here do actually understand the test.

But anyway, I suppose I should contribute as opposed to simply making observations, so...

-The Secret of NIMH: Pass
-American Psycho: Fail
-Unforgiven: Pass (I think.)
-The Hunchback of Notre Dame: Fail
-No Country for Old Men: Fail

Only the top three are really favourites (the other two are just a couple of movies I really like,) but that's all I could come up with off the top of my head. So, two(?) out of five pass.

 

[Davroth]

You mean that I didn't answer your first question? I wouldn't call that "dodging your point completely" but if you must know: Yes. I do in fact believe there is no difference between men and women, at least, in the area your referring to(you know, the important ones).

No, I don't know that much about writing. But, can I understand why gender comes into an issue?

What I mean by "individuals" is that having an archetype does not mean you can't have an interesting personality.
Example: if I wanted a character who's say(and I'm not describing anyone in particular, just someone I came up with myself)young, spunky, has lot's of energy, is very naive but quick to learn, is there a gender I'm obligated to put this person in?

That's what I'm asking. Personally, I'd make that person any gender and they'd be the exact same character. But since I apparently know nothing about writing, I must be wrong.

For many characters, their gender doesn't matter. A good character is a good character. However, there are some traits that are unique to women and if you don't explore them, you hamstring the number of different stories you can tell.

If you take a well written, male character and only change the gender and nothing else you don't end up with a well written, female character. You end up with a guy that just happens to have female genitalia.

 

[Fenra]

I'm never any good at putting together top lists of stuff so decided to go through my DVD collection and pick 5 of my favorites at random, they are in no particular order

Jurassic Park
How to train your dragon
Pirates of the carribean: Curse of the black pearl
Silent Hill (dont judge me I liked it!!!)
Brokeback Mountain

Well going by that, oddly enough only Silent Hill matches, with the Rose and Cybil there and interacting a fair amount, certainly not about men... heh of all the movies in that list to correspond to those rules and to be of that genre, I dunno I just find that kinda funny, the rest...

Well Jurassic Park has 2 female characters who interact and have names but it happens off screen, ellie and lex never talk on camera to any significant extent if I remember right

How to train your dragon only has the 1 named female character if I remember correctly

Pirates... well yeah that doesnt pass...

and as for Brokeback Mountain... that should need no elaboration haha

An interesting test that did make me realise how women are lesser represented in most of my favorite films but I'm not entierly sure of its usefulness, I mean Ellie from Jurassic Park is hardly the damsel in distress, misrepresented stereotype, same could be said about most of the female characters in my movie collection, not just the ones up there. Seems a very broad, too broad and vague, test when it comes to this sort of thing

 

[Mysterious Druid]

Moon: Nope, half the cast is the same guy.
Hot Fuzz: Nope.
The Social Network: Nah.

Huh. All my favourite movies are about two-man-teams. Well, how about that.

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

ok let's see

Requiem For A Dream - Pass
Pulp Fiction - I think it fails...
Fight Club - yeah that fails
Grave of the Fireflies - I think this passes but barely...
Scott Pilgrim vs The World - Yeah...I think this passes

 

[Marter]

Scorpion King 3 passes!

Just thought I'd chime in with that, because I know you were all wondering. =D

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

Scott Pilgrim: I don't think so...though there are a lot of girls, they mostly talk about Scott.

I said pass but only because I'm pretty certain Ramona and Scott's sister have a conversation that isn't entirely about Scott, Ramona and Roxy don't really talk about Scott and also Julie has a ton of interaction with Ramona, Scott's sister and Envy Adams about just random crap

...still, it's pretty shallow interaction

 

[Eric Morales]

If you take a well written, male character and only change the gender and nothing else you don't end up with a well written, female character. You end up with a guy that just happens to have female genitalia.

That's precisely my point, there are lots of stories you can't tell without well realized female characters. That's why we should be concerned if films are consistently failing the Bechdal test. It means there is a serious lack of films that are exploring the female experience.

I would argue that not only does not every movie HAVE to pass the Bechdel test, not every movie should. For example, a movie could have a tight focus around a male main character. To venture into the world of games, take Silent Hill 2, that doesn't pass the Bechdel test, but it doesn't matter because human characters only matter inasmuch as they relate to James. My point is that a movie isn't bad because it fails the Bechdel test, just that its a problem if every movie is failing the Bechdel test.

 

[malestrithe]

Hot Shots: Part Deux: Yes.
Lake House: Yes
Drop Dead Gorgeous: Yes
Kiki's Delivery Service: Yes
Johnny Guitar: Yes
Dead Like Me: Life After Death: Yes
Little Mermaid: Yes.
Recoil: No
Wings of Honneamise: No
Rurouni Kenshin: Reflection: Yes
976-EVIL 2: Yes
G.I. Joe: the Movie Probably not. There was a conversation between Scarlett and Lt Falcon's date, but not sure if it was meaningful.

 

[mrdude2010]

"Test" implies there would be some sort of merit in passing or something missing in failure, so who gives a shit?