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

[MetalMagpie]

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

The reason the test is interesting is that - if it can be shown that a high proportion of films in a particular category fail the test - it suggests that film-makers might not view women as worth including in films in situations that do not relate to men. The theory goes that men only "engage" with scenes/stories that in some way involve men.

In a scene where a woman talks to a man or in a scene where two women talk about a man, there is always a man involved that the (presumed male-dominated) audience will be interested in. If two women talk to each other about something other than a man, then there isn't a male point-of-interest for the audience.

The test does not touch on how women are represented. Just whether or not the above theory is true (or thought to be true by film-makers).

 

[MetalMagpie]

And what's a Hodor?

A character in Game of Thrones (book and TV series). He has Pokemon Syndrome (meaning the only word he's capable of saying is his name).

 

[OtherSideofSky]

Ren Gui Qing: Yes.

My other favorite films are mostly silent, feature very minimalist dialog, or follow a male point of view character. The Bechdel Test has some serious holes in it when it comes to things like that because it was designed with Hollywood blockbusters in mind.

For the sake of adding something else: I liked the Tsui Hark Di Renjie movie a lot, and I'm pretty sure that passes.

In after absurd claims about what the Bechdel Test actually tests for, because it fell victim to Poe's Law as soon as it was created. Honestly, I've seen people saying that it test for everything from a female perspective to realistic female characters; it's ridiculous. Also in after people thinking the test says anything meaningful about an individual film, rather than merely producing useful aggregate data.

 

[Torrasque]

V for Vendetta: Yes on a technicality. Not really a long conversation, but they did talk to each other about something not regarding a man!
Ghost in the Shell: No because Motoko is arguably not a female, and The Puppetmaster is definitely not a female.
The Big Lebowski: Nope.
Princess Mononoke: Yes, Morrow and San are both female, and they have numerous discussions, some of which don't concern Ashitaka.
Emperor's New Groove: I think so, but I'm not 100% sure. I think Eezma talks to Pacha's wife about things that are not related to Koosko or Pacha, but I'd have to watch it again to be sure.

Thats all I can think of atm. I have more favorites, but it is too early in the morning to think about it.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

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

The reason the test is interesting is that - if it can be shown that a high proportion of films in a particular category fail the test - it suggests that film-makers might not view women as worth including in films in situations that do not relate to men. The theory goes that men only "engage" with scenes/stories that in some way involve men.

In a scene where a woman talks to a man or in a scene where two women talk about a man, there is always a man involved that the (presumed male-dominated) audience will be interested in. If two women talk to each other about something other than a man, then there isn't a male point-of-interest for the audience.

The test does not touch on how women are represented. Just whether or not the above theory is true (or thought to be true by film-makers).

No. No, it does not do that. That is not how the scientific method works. Observing a phenomenon is all very well, but it provides absolutely no basis for leaping to that kind of conclusion about the thought process behind it. To my knowledge, no one has gathered, or attempted to gather, the sort of data it would be possible to base that conclusion on.

Why do so many people insist on making the Bechdel Test out to be so much more than it actually is? All it does is ruin the credibility of a perfectly good analytical tool.

 

[MetalMagpie]

New thought: We're coming up with a lot of failing films because (understandably, considering the website we're on) we're all fans of action, scifi, etc. Those are genres traditionally aimed at men, so are less likely to have a huge female presence.

What I'm wondering is, how many romantic comedies (and other female-preferred genres) fail the Reverse Bechdel Test?

I.e. The film must contain:
1) two named male characters
2) that talk to each other
3) about something other than a woman (or women).

The trouble is, I can't think of many rom-coms! (Don't really watch them.)

To get us started:
Wimbledon - Pass
Parent Trap - Fail (I'm fairly sure...)

 

[Hjalmar Fryklund]

New thought: We're coming up with a lot of failing films because (understandably, considering the website we're on) we're all fans of action, scifi, etc. Those are genres traditionally aimed at men, so are less likely to have a huge female presence.

What I'm wondering is, how many romantic comedies (and other female-preferred genres) fail the Reverse Bechdel Test?

I.e. The film must contain:
1) two named male characters
2) that talk to each other
3) about something other than a woman (or women).

The trouble is, I can't think of many rom-coms! (Don't really watch them.)

To get us started:
Wimbledon - Pass
Parent Trap - Fail (I'm fairly sure...)

"Reverse Bechdel Test" is too long a phrase to be easily memorized. Let's call it the "Magpie Test" instead (Two syllables in front of "test" seems to be the upper limit).

 

[MetalMagpie]

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

The reason the test is interesting is that - if it can be shown that a high proportion of films in a particular category fail the test - it suggests that film-makers might not view women as worth including in films in situations that do not relate to men. The theory goes that men only "engage" with scenes/stories that in some way involve men.

In a scene where a woman talks to a man or in a scene where two women talk about a man, there is always a man involved that the (presumed male-dominated) audience will be interested in. If two women talk to each other about something other than a man, then there isn't a male point-of-interest for the audience.

The test does not touch on how women are represented. Just whether or not the above theory is true (or thought to be true by film-makers).

No. No, it does not do that. That is not how the scientific method works. Observing a phenomenon is all very well, but it provides absolutely no basis for leaping to that kind of conclusion about the thought process behind it. To my knowledge, no one has gathered, or attempted to gather, the sort of data it would be possible to base that conclusion on.

Why do so many people insist on making the Bechdel Test out to be so much more than it actually is? All it does is ruin the credibility of a perfectly good analytical tool.

I think you're taking my reply a little too seriously. This isn't even remotely about science! To my knowledge no one has gathered any data, and there would be little point in doing so. (How would the selection of films be made? What would the minimum length of a "conversation" be? Would such a broad scope have any meaning?)

The way it's interesting is as a thought experiment. Does the idea make sense that men engage more with scenes/stories involving men? Is this something that film-makers are likely to be consciously/subconsciously taking into account?

The explanation I gave (regarding whether or not there is a male point-of-interest in a scene) is exactly the way the idea was explained to me (many years back now...) and it's the way I personally think it's interesting to think about.

 

[itsthesheppy]

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.

I love threads like these, because dudes show up and start doth protesting too much all over the place. The world is sexist in favor of men, gents. Get used to the idea.

Anyway!

LOTR films - nope

Terminator 2 - Yes? I think Sarah Connor and the scientist's wife talk about the terminoator? Or the apocalypse? This ones hazy.

The Avengers - Nope

Gettysburg - there's only one woman and she has one line and no name and she talks to a dude, so nope.

Tombstone - YES! Wyatt's wife and Virgil's wife talk about headache medicine

Aliens - Yes. Ripley and vasquez talk about the aliens. Also ripley and the little girl. In fact Ripley rarely talks about the menfolk, mostly because they're food.

Equilibrium - Nope.

Hanna - yup

Troll Hunter - nope

Watchmen - Yup... I think so, anyway. Actually, maybe they talk about the Comedian the whole time...?

 

[ToastiestZombie]

Hot Fuzz, nope.
Uhh... Inglorious Basterds, nope!
Kill Bill, passed.
Monty Python and the Holy Grail, nope!

Can't really think more of them though...
I don't really care anyway, I'm not gonna suddenly stop watching the films I love because they fail this test.

 

[Frybird]

I recently saw Iron Sky, wich certainly passes the Test but still felt incredibly sexist to me (they are playing with/making fun of sexism at one point, but further in the movie starts to get really uncomfortable without any kind of acknowledging wink...so yeah).

I think the Test is an somewhat amusing thought experiment, but it doesn't really measure anything.

 

[BulbaRaith]

Stand By Me - Fail
This Is Spinal Tap - Fail (I think)
Breakfast At Tiffany's - Fail
Full Metal Jacket - Fail

Although there's good reasons for why they fail, but that tends to miss the wood for the trees.

The real point about the Bechdel test is not about movies but about society as a whole.

The main argument for why most movies fail the Bechdel test is that they were written/directed/produced by men. Men feel they cannot tell compelling stories with central female characters, so there is generally an excuse for focussing on the male characters and female characters are relegated to supporting roles for the male character where they fulfil a specific need he has, or act as damsels in distress that need rescuing. When the vast majority of films portray women in this way it reinforces the message that women exist to support men or be saved by men and cannot have a meaningful existence without men. For people who believe in equality this is not a good thing.

The only real way to fix this would be to have an equal number of women in positions of power where there are roughly an equal number of female writers/directors/producers are males. The challenge is how would you get to that stage?

Any positive enforcement of women has already been shown (even in this thread where no motive was given other than asking a simple question about which films people like pass, what most would count as the bare minimum, a test of participation for female characters in a film) to get a massive negative response from the male (dominant) population. As I said this isn't only a problem in films, this is a deep flaw in society.

What proportion of positions of political power are filled by women? What proportion of positions of power in major corporations and companies are filled by women? What proportion of elite scientific positions are filled by women?

Our society is dominated by a male viewpoint which is very difficult to change. This tends to lead to men viewing only other men as suitable for filling some positions, a lack of women in power then leads young women growing up to feel that they cannot achieve such positions and so the cycle of patriarchal dominance continues unless specific action is taken to encourage an increased number of women into positions of power. The Bechdel test then acts as a simple marker off exactly how far away from promoting women to a truly equal status to men, and effectively shows us we have a pretty damn long way to go.

Hmmm, rambled on a bit there.

tl;dr women are marginalised in society. Women then feel they can't advance in society. Women therefore continue to be marginalised in society. Bechdel test simply highlights this marginalisation. Perhaps having some better female characters might advance female participation in society (and maybe even make some better films).

 

[thewanderer41]

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.

If you've listened to MovieBob's big picture shows, he sometimes mentions that most of our greatest film directors and writers and such grew up in an era surrounded by television. Their films basically represent their nostalgia and their dreams of making movies. If we consider this to be a viable reason, that would explain the lack of good female characters since...well, they just weren't popular back then.

Mulan: Yes (she has such a cool grandma)

 

[darkfox85]

i thought what matter was if the movie was GOOD, clearly i've missed yet another memo about 'shit your now supposed to care about'

It's not really something that matters at all when it comes to my enjoyment of a film. Some will pass some won't. It's a moot point.

Of course not sirs. I love those ten films so much, just looking at the list gives me joy. No one said it was about enjoyment at all, and I used the word favourite to prove its irrelevance. It?s not the point. It?s about something else. What're your favourite films?

To me there are many more important things to a character than what genitals he or she happens to be packing.

Yes. But this is about film and representation, and it?s something I find interesting.

 

[Lieju]

Let's see, my favourite movies are:

Jurassic Park (probably not)
My neighbor Totoro (Yes)
Nightmare before Christmas (I don't think so)

I recently saw Iron Sky, wich certainly passes the Test but still felt incredibly sexist to me (they are playing with/making fun of sexism at one point, but further in the movie starts to get really uncomfortable without any kind of acknowledging wink...so yeah).

I think the Test is an somewhat amusing thought experiment, but it doesn't really measure anything.

But then again, it has a female lead, and as far as I recall, the female characters were written more as an actual characters than 'females'.

Funny thing about the Iron Sky BTW, I have read/heard several people refer to the black astronaut guy as the 'main character', when he clearly is not. In fact, he is pretty much playing the part usually reserved for women in movies: he doesn't have much of an arc, and is really there just to be the love interest for the female lead.

The test does reveal how marginalised women are in movies, though. Even if there is a woman, and there usually is, she is just there for the male characters, even when the movie isn't just aimed for men.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

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

The reason the test is interesting is that - if it can be shown that a high proportion of films in a particular category fail the test - it suggests that film-makers might not view women as worth including in films in situations that do not relate to men. The theory goes that men only "engage" with scenes/stories that in some way involve men.

In a scene where a woman talks to a man or in a scene where two women talk about a man, there is always a man involved that the (presumed male-dominated) audience will be interested in. If two women talk to each other about something other than a man, then there isn't a male point-of-interest for the audience.

The test does not touch on how women are represented. Just whether or not the above theory is true (or thought to be true by film-makers).

No. No, it does not do that. That is not how the scientific method works. Observing a phenomenon is all very well, but it provides absolutely no basis for leaping to that kind of conclusion about the thought process behind it. To my knowledge, no one has gathered, or attempted to gather, the sort of data it would be possible to base that conclusion on.

Why do so many people insist on making the Bechdel Test out to be so much more than it actually is? All it does is ruin the credibility of a perfectly good analytical tool.

I think you're taking my reply a little too seriously. This isn't even remotely about science! To my knowledge no one has gathered any data, and there would be little point in doing so. (How would the selection of films be made? What would the minimum length of a "conversation" be? Would such a broad scope have any meaning?)

The way it's interesting is as a thought experiment. Does the idea make sense that men engage more with scenes/stories involving men? Is this something that film-makers are likely to be consciously/subconsciously taking into account?

The explanation I gave (regarding whether or not there is a male point-of-interest in a scene) is exactly the way the idea was explained to me (many years back now...) and it's the way I personally think it's interesting to think about.

This is precisely about science. Social science, but science nonetheless. You presented your "thought experiment" as a hypothesis proven by data from the Bechdel Test. It is not, and that is a problem. Your new phrasing, which poses your hypothesis as a question rather than a fact, serves your stated purpose far better.

As for data, there is at least one website dedicated to cataloging major films based on the Bechdel Test criteria. They've gone through a fair number and their application of the criteria is fairly transparent. The problem, of course, is that there really isn't all that much one can do with the data except speculate on causes.

Personally, while I think your idea might describe part of what goes on, I don't think it could be more than part of the big picture. I suspect that literary traditions, traditional passive/active gender dynamics (which very few writers break away from, even when they're trying) ultimately have more to do with it.

 

[Kikyoo]

Well let's see. Godzilla movies have the hot topic of the world ending monster so rarely does it have anyone talking about men unless you count Godzilla. But the big thing is there is rarely two girls in any given Godzilla movie. Thus most of your Godzilla movies fail this test. However my favorite 2 Godzilla vs Destroyah and Godzilla Final Wars actually pass this test. Tho Final wars just barely does so. but most of the Godzilla movies after Godzilla returns aka Godzilla 1985 have at least one major woman character who ends up interacting with another "some" of the time. Obviously I don't wana be here all day so I figured I'd just recount the ones that did actually pass the test. At least these are the only two I can remember that clearly do pass the test.

 

[Squilookle]

Lets make this interesting, by Pitting four animation houses against each other!, and finding who has the best percentage!

I may need some help here:

In the Red corner: Pixar.
In the Blue corner: Studio Ghibli
In the White corner: Dreamworks (CGI films only)
In the Black corner: Disney (CGI films only)

Pixar:

Toy Story: probably fail.
A Bug's Life: surely a pass?
Toy Story 2: Fail, I think.
Monsters Inc: Fail
Finding Nemo: Fail
The Incredibles: Pass
Cars: Fail
Ratatouille: Fail
WALL-E: Fail and a half.
UP: Fail
Toy Story 3: Pass, I think.
Cars 2:
Brave: Unreleased and already a Pass.

Studio Ghibli:

Nausicaa: Pass
Laputa: Pass
Totoro: Pass
Kiki's Delivery Service: Pass
Grave of the Fireflies: Probably Fail
Only Yesterday:
Porco Rosso: Pass, though offscreen.
Pom Poko:
Mononoke: Pass
Yamadas:
Spirited Away: Pass
Howl's Moving Castle: Pass
Ponyo: Pass

Dreamworks:

Antz: Pass? Queen to her daughter?
Shrek: Fail
Shrek 2:
Shark Tale:
Madagascar:
Over the Hedge: Fail.
Flushed Away: Fail
Shrek the Third:
Bee Movie: Fail
Kung Fu Panda: Pass
Madagascar 2:
Monsters vs Aliens:
How to Train your Dragon: Probably Pass
Shrek Forever After:
Megamind: Fail
Kung Fu Panda 2: Pass
Puss in Boots:
Madagascar 3:

Disney:

Dinosaur: Probably Pass
Lilo and Stitch: Pass
Treasure Planet: Fail
Chicken Little:
Meet the Robinsons:
Bolt: Pass
Tangled:
Wreck it Ralph: Will Probably Pass.