Movies Passing the Bechdel Test for Sexism Earned More in 2013

[MatsVS]

The Bechdel test is extremely useful to demonstrate the actual quantifiable differences between the genders in films to even the densest of observers. Great to see that modern audiences are finally catching up to what relevant critics have been saying for years.

Except it is a very lazy shorthand, easy to apply, smug, and ignores the multitude of nuance inherent in the debate about gender politics. A test for sexism that allows lesbian porn to pass and a nuanced story about, I don't know, Flora Sandes or John Barry to fail is quite clearly inherently flawed.

It's not a test designed to determine the quality of female characters, but as a useful quantitative rhetorical tool to demonstrate the dimensions of the problems at hand to the wilfully obtuse. It's reductive, that's fine. It's still important.

 

[Al_]

Whilst the Bechdel test is I reckon well meaning, it is worth noting that the Dead or Alive movie passes it, despite basically being a wank fantasy for teenage boys.

 

[JarinArenos]

It's not a test designed to determine the quality of female characters, but as a useful quantitative rhetorical tool to demonstrate the dimensions of the problems at hand to the wilfully obtuse. It's reductive, that's fine. It's still important.

The willfully obtuse willfully misinterpret the test, as seen all over this thread...

 

[Norix596]

We should keep in mind though that the test can "pass" a movie with a pair of female non-entities and "fail" a movie with a complex and developed female character. While more movies passing the Bechtel test is certainly associated with a good thing, any particular movie passing or failing does not necessarily say anything definitive in of itself about the quality of its portrayal of female characters.

 

[Jumplion]

If directors can find ways to make their films include more women, good on them. But they shouldn't feel like they have to conform to this test.

They already don't.

As for the money bit, there seems to be a complete lack of correlation in almost all cases of the Bechdel Test and things like enjoyment, box office, etc. I'd like to see how other years stack up to this one before we declare this test the ultimate guide to printing money.

The test is not a method to "print money", and whether or not someone enjoys a movie that does or does not pass the test is irrelevant.

Complete aside, but one other thing in the article irritated me a lot.
"Perhaps even more shocking is that every single director was male. We repeat: 50 movies, zero female directors. Maybe some more women behind the camera would be a good start, eh?"

Excuse me? They seem to be implying that this fact is somehow sexist. Who is supposed to be at fault here? Are viewers supposed to avoid movies unless they're directed by women? Maybe I'm reading too much into it. It just seems like a very very silly thing to bring up.

I don't think you're reading to much, rather you're reading into something else that I don't think was implied. The reaction shouldn't be "film directors are sexist by nature of them not being women", it should be "there's a huge disproportion of male directors over female directors, and that's a problem". In an industry as widespread, international, and diverse as Hollywood and the movie industry, it's disheartening to see that.

Contrary to what an unsettling amount of people in the comments think, the Bechdel Test is not something that defines a movie's quality or even its contents of sexism and whatnot. It is simply a tool that can be used to see media in a different light. I could name hundreds, if not thousands of movies over the years that have two men talking to each other about something other than a woman, and yet I could not do the same as easily with two women talking about something other than a man. That is strange and saddening, and on a surface level that is all the test says. Looking into what this means, as a result of this simple test, is where we get into the muck of gender and sex and race and diversity in our media.

If people would like this more linked with games, only 4% of games in 2012 (about 600 or so) had female protagonists in them, while about 45% the player could choose and the rest were exclusively male. We don't think twice about a man being in the spotlight in our media, it just is what it is, and as such it creates this "default" in our media that needlessly imposes a "norm" where there isn't a "norm".

 

[BrotherRool]

This is really only interesting when we have several years data. Hopefully it will make some writers more conscious about the fact they're making all the people male but what we actually want to know is if the situation is getting better or worse with time.

(the money thing is actually important, not because it will change executives minds but because it's % of public that's seeing these films)

I always suspect whenever I hear talk of Bechdel-based assessment of media that it says more about the test itself and the people applying it than it actually does about the media. As noted, The Hobbit created a whole new character to try and deal with the issue of the lack of females in the original work, and they still got slammed by the test for not doing it "right".

On top of that, I don't really get how the test is supposed to be applied. If a film has four women in it, and two of them talk to each other about not-a-man and the other two talk about a man, or do so sometimes but not all the time, or...? And then there's rot like assessing A Good Day To Die Hard, a movie with absolutely sod all to do with gender politics and a hell of a lot about the disconnect between generations.

In conclusion, most places that discuss the results of any given Bechdel test do so while acknowledging that it isn't the be-all-and-end-all of assessing media - and this isn't one of them.

The Bechdel Test isn't about assessing media in any kind of qualitive terms. It's just a really good indicator of just how shit our media is now that a large portion of our films can't even pass the feeblest test of decency such as having two female characters talk to each other.

So to answer your question, in your example it passes the Bechdel test. All the Bechdel test requires is that at one point in your film any two female characters talk to each other and it's not about a man. If a car jumps over a bridge and random female bystander says to another female bystander says 'wow did you see that?' it passes the test.


The easy way to tell that the Bechdel test actually is a really important thing for what it says about our culture in general (rather than a specific film), is to look at just how quickly the male version is passed in any film.

Take A Good Day to Die Hard the male version of the test is going to be passed in practically the first scene. And then it will be passed in pretty much every scene after that. The female version doesn't even occur.


All the Bechdel test is saying is that in almost all our films all the important characters are male, almost all the random one scene characters are male, with maybe a token chick and when there are female on screen, they're their to serve a guy. When someone sits down and creates two medics to say to each other 'Wow how did Bruce Willis survive this?' they make them male because most writers are male and don't think to do otherwise.

 

[Stabby Joe]

Films like Gravity and Captain Philips fail while Sex in the City 2 and Taken 2 pass. I know the test isn't to measure sexism per se yet it seems to be by a good number of media outlets so far...

...even when it's creator doesn't agree with its absolute use, take a hint.

 

[Olas]

I just binge watched Orange is the New Black, that show rips the Bechdel Test to shreds and then pisses on it's grave.

Anyway, this seems more like a coincidence than any sign of major trends, it just so happens that most of the big movies this year had a couple scenes with 2 women in them. I wouldn't consider Man of Steel to be particularly female focused.

 

[Louzerman102]

I'm going to pass the Bechdel Test right now:

Amy: Hey, want to go get a bite to eat?
Beth: Sure, is Applebee's open?

Now plug those two lines in your movie and watch the cash roll in.

The real trick is to pass the test in the most sexually charged situation possible.

example: In a scene featuring full frontal nudity two women are sunbathing on the beach....

 

[martyrdrebel27]

The Bechdel Test is a great place to start when writing female characters and stories in general. But, like Wikipedia, it is not where you stop.

It's at best a guideline, yes.

A standard test for sexism in movies, seriously?

Boy, this is beyond stupid...

Except it's not a standard, it's not a test in any formal test, and it...Okay, it impacts movies, so that part's correct.

(Which, by the way, passes the Bechdal Test.)

Blasphemy! The Bechdel Test is some politically correct monstrosity! If a game passes it it can't be fun!

>.>

Is this whats going to happen now, a writer writes an original script and the producers tell him to rewrite it to pass the bechdel test?

Yes, the horrible persecution is planned for next week. We got our assimilation manuals last week.

But are we going to have this for people of colour? Gay and trans people?

They already do. Don't know about the age one.

A film is what it is, its telling a story that the writer wanted to tell and how the directer sees it and if it took into account every little thing the movie would be a mess.

People take into account every little thing in movies already. It's ridiculous to think this test changes that. Especially since there's no requirement to pass it.

If it had an all female cast would it be judged badly for its lack of male characters? No. Wish they would just allow film makers to make the movies they want with out all these hassles.

If a female-exclusive cast occurred, it would be noteworthy simply because it breaks the normally exclusive demonstration. It would also be a single movie in a sea of sausage. But I don't think you get how it works, and your last line makes me think that more so:

How did Pacific Rim fail, they had a female Kaiju.

Because simply having women isn't what the Bechdel Test looks for. The rules are simply 1. Two or more women 2. who have a conversation 3. that's not about a man. I never saw PR, but since people are saying it failed, I'm guessing at least one of these elements is missing.

The test also doesn't measure whether a movie is good, whether or not it's sexist, or whether it is feminist. You can have strongly represented women who never converse with another female, you can have a movie like Twilight that passes. This is about female representation in the medium in question.

And there's GTAV, which doesn't pass the test. Yet GTA made a lot more money than SR4.

GTA passed the Bechdel Test. Sorry. You can actually be a popular game and still pass it. But, the beautiful thing is you can still fail it and the world doesn't end.

Btw, as a point of reference, any girl on girl porn featuring two large breasted bimbo types in schoolgirl outfits passes this test, therefore NOT SEXIST!

prepare to erase search history, free of the guilt of playing into gender politics. Just gotta make sure there's no men in it, that would be sexist.

Yeah, I hope you're taking the piss here about it, otherwise, see above regarding what the Bechdel Test is and isn't.

from the post you quoted, go up a few and see my other post, in which I say the same GTA 5 point, but in detail. I hope that answers your question as to whether or not the latter post was taking more piss than an R Kelly date. Timely. Nice.

 

[gim73]

Now make this list more interesting. Remove children from the equation. Despicable Me 2 has 3 little girls so it meets the weak criteria. Their interaction with the new chick is essentially parent-child bonding. Any parent child bonding or little girl - little girl relationship is- by social standards, asexual and will not have any "talking about the opposite sex".

Now when you look at the list you have movies like Brave, where the main character does talk with her mother, but that really doesn't count. Some witch in the woods doesn't count either. Somebody that does a transaction or wish is more a minor character than anything else.

I'm kind of offended that nobody is fighting the accusation that "The Hobbit" is a sausagefest. We are all just ASSUMING that the dwarves are all male. Like Gimli says, "The reason why nobody ever sees dwarf women is because they look a lot like dwarf men.". Dwarf women have beards. My suspicion is that AT LEAST one of those dwarves is a woman. I suspect the one who brought a slingshot to the quest to fight the dragon...

 

[Entitled]

I think that people see a correlation and causation in something that isn't there. Iron Man 3 was lumped in with the Passes, even though I really didn't see Pepper Potts talking to other women about anything but Tony's Behavior, or being in trouble.

There is a long scene in which Pepper and whatsherface are discussing scientific ethics in a hotel room.

It is still in the "dubious" category, because at one point during that dialogue they reference Wernher von Braun.

Whilst the Bechdel test is I reckon well meaning, it is worth noting that the Dead or Alive movie passes it, despite basically being a wank fantasy for teenage boys.

"Whilst GED tests are I reckon well meaning, it is worth noting that David Cage passed them despite being a shitty video game writer."

There is nothing "despite" about this, you are comparing unrelated things to each other.

The Bechdel test has about as much intent to measure whether or not a movie is someone's wank fantasy, as the GEDs have to try and identify bad game devs.

 

[An Ceannaire]

The message here isn't that films aimed at something besides a scrupulously masculine viewpoint are *good*. This isn't a "social responsibility" chart; it's a SALES chart. The point is that there's money in broadening your audience.

These films didn't make more money because they "broadened their audience", they made money because they were good films that people went to see. Nobody makes a decision to go see a film just because two women in it have a conversation about a topic other than men.

 

[An Ceannaire]

The Bechdel test is extremely useful to demonstrate the actual quantifiable differences between the genders in films to even the densest of observers. Great to see that modern audiences are finally catching up to what relevant critics have been saying for years.

The Bechdel test is pseudo-science that nobody in their right mind would take seriously - this report will have zero influence on the cinema industry, that's a guarantee.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

If directors can find ways to make their films include more women, good on them. But they shouldn't feel like they have to conform to this test.

They already don't.

I'm aware of that. What I'm paranoid about is the increasing attention the test is receiving and the possibility that directors, and by extension their movies, could be negatively influenced by it. As I said, I'm probably worrying about nothing.

[quote/]

As for the money bit, there seems to be a complete lack of correlation in almost all cases of the Bechdel Test and things like enjoyment, box office, etc. I'd like to see how other years stack up to this one before we declare this test the ultimate guide to printing money.

The test is not a method to "print money", and whether or not someone enjoys a movie that does or does not pass the test is irrelevant.
[/quote]
The money is almost literally the entire point of the article. The whole thing is an implication that if films pass the test, they make more money.

In regards to enjoyment, several of the posts in this thread are people saying they enjoyed the movies that passed more than those that didn't.

My point was that the Bechdel Test is nice, but it shouldn't be assumed that correlation = causation between anything including box office revenue.

As I said, more information like how previous years compare to this one would be very helpful.
[quote/]

Complete aside, but one other thing in the article irritated me a lot.
"Perhaps even more shocking is that every single director was male. We repeat: 50 movies, zero female directors. Maybe some more women behind the camera would be a good start, eh?"

Excuse me? They seem to be implying that this fact is somehow sexist. Who is supposed to be at fault here? Are viewers supposed to avoid movies unless they're directed by women? Maybe I'm reading too much into it. It just seems like a very very silly thing to bring up.

I don't think you're reading to much, rather you're reading into something else that I don't think was implied. The reaction shouldn't be "film directors are sexist by nature of them not being women", it should be "there's a huge disproportion of male directors over female directors, and that's a problem". In an industry as widespread, international, and diverse as Hollywood and the movie industry, it's disheartening to see that.
[/quote]
The problem with bringing this up is that there is no solution other than more women going to film school and making quality films. It isn't the duty of an audience to see specific films in an attempt to prop up directors.

The article itself comes off as accusatory.

[quote/]
Contrary to what an unsettling amount of people in the comments think, the Bechdel Test is not something that defines a movie's quality or even its contents of sexism and whatnot. It is simply a tool that can be used to see media in a different light. I could name hundreds, if not thousands of movies over the years that have two men talking to each other about something other than a woman, and yet I could not do the same as easily with two women talking about something other than a man. That is strange and saddening, and on a surface level that is all the test says. Looking into what this means, as a result of this simple test, is where we get into the muck of gender and sex and race and diversity in our media.
[/quote]
You may be on the right track, but as soon as you mention how strange and saddening it is to not be able to name very many films that pass, you fall into the same trap as those commenters you mention.

The Bechdel Test either need to be kept separate as a tool of observation or acknowledged as being part of sexism discussions.

EDIT: I should also mention the title of this article and thread.

"Movies Passing the Bechdel Test for Sexism Earned More in 2013"

Pretty poorly named if, as you say, the Bechdel Test doesn't actually have a direct link to sexism.

 

[Entitled]

Now make this list more interesting. Remove children from the equation. Despicable Me 2 has 3 little girls so it meets the weak criteria. Their interaction with the new chick is essentially parent-child bonding. Any parent child bonding or little girl - little girl relationship is- by social standards, asexual and will not have any "talking about the opposite sex".

The test has nothing to do with sexuality, it's about measuring how much presence the two biological sexes get in movies.

It demonstrates how surprisingly difficult it is for writers to include female characters in the first place, to the point that even in movies full of dialogue, we have to comb through them to find one between ANY two women, and even if there is one, everyone else around them tends to be a males, so their other dialogue options are limited.

These films didn't make more money because they "broadened their audience", they made money because they were good films that people went to see. Nobody makes a decision to go see a film just because two women in it have a conversation about a topic other than men.

While the formal wording of the test doesn't sound appealing, it's intended usage is to provide a measurment for female presence in plots.

It works because it gives a harder number than if we would start subjectively declaring works to have "strong female characters", or "independent women in imporant positions", and a more plot-significance sensitivity than if we would just list characters or count screentime.

Normally, two male characters talking to each other about random stuff without referencing women, is one of the most self-evidently expected elements of a movie.

Just looking at this top 50 list, the most revealing fact is that there are so many of the failing movies don't even have two women meeting each other at all, while ALL female-protagonist stories are in the passing half.

The secret to passing the Bechdel test is to have many female characters.

 

[MatsVS]

The Bechdel test is extremely useful to demonstrate the actual quantifiable differences between the genders in films to even the densest of observers. Great to see that modern audiences are finally catching up to what relevant critics have been saying for years.

The Bechdel test is pseudo-science that nobody in their right mind would take seriously - this report will have zero influence on the cinema industry, that's a guarantee.

No one ever claimed it was scientific. It's an arbitrary set of standards invented to demonstrate the current state of gender roles in films. Stop derailing.

It's not a test designed to determine the quality of female characters, but as a useful quantitative rhetorical tool to demonstrate the dimensions of the problems at hand to the wilfully obtuse. It's reductive, that's fine. It's still important.

The willfully obtuse willfully misinterpret the test, as seen all over this thread...

Heh, fair point.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

After this, to state that "movies that pass the Bechdel test generally have higher revenues", is not a fallacy derived from the correlation, this is what the correlation itself SAYS.

This is absolutely correct, but it would be a fallacy to state that these movies are doing well because they passed the Bechdel test which is what the article seemed to be implying at points. This is what I tried to say with the following statement about how none of the movies would have advertised passing the Bechdel test but evidently I didn't make it clear enough.

As for why, I'd say it's mostly a mixture of the last two you mentioned: the fact mixed-gender plots tend to be more interesting overall and that family movies tend to both sell well and be mixed-gendered. A lot of the more successful movies that passed were family oriented and hit above 100M$(Frozen, Despicable Me 2, Epic) and while a lot of macho action movies both passed and did well they tended towards failure and sub 100M$ (The Lone Ranger, White House Down, etc.)

 

[Hero in a half shell]

The best example is Desolation Of Smaug. The female elf, among a few other things in the movie, was completely unneeded. Everything she did could have been accomplished by Legolas instead.

So you're saying they should have made Legolas fall in love with Kili?

That would have been AMAZING!