“I'd recognise that arse anywhere, you piece of shit” (Seamus ‘o’ Grady)[1]. Are women in Hollywood films represented purely as sex objects to entertain and pleasure men? With particular reference to ‘Charlie’s Angels-Full Throttle’ (2003).

Representation of women has changed over recent years due to feminism, which rose during the 1970’s where women fought for their rights to equality. However, women are still seen subordinate to men, which has resulted in a patriarchal society. Women were being negatively-represented in films such as Alex Forrest in ‘Fatal Attraction’ (Director: Adrian Lyne, 1987), where women were represented as ‘femme fatales’[2]. However, in contemporary society this representation of women is developing within the media, due to women achieving more active than passive roles, which active roles were typically associated with men. This is evident that both the media and society is developing as women have more dominant and active roles. However, this does not stop the fact that women are still seen as tools for pleasure and are shown still in a stereotypical manner in contemporary films such as ‘Charlie’s Angels-Full Throttle’ ( Director: McG, 2003).

The stereotypes that exist in contemporary films are used in subtle ways where those who are media literate will be able to pick these out though the obvious stereotypes are easily noticeable such as the ‘bimbo’. This stereotype is shown in ‘Charlie’s angels-Full throttle’ on Diaz who is represented as a ‘bimbo’[3] and used as a distraction for the men. This representation is used in the very first scene where the Angels show a display of ass-kicking female empowerment[4] using their strength and initiative to save a kidnapped man, a complete role reversal for the representation of women where they were once the ‘damsel in distress’ who were portrayed as vulnerable and weak. Although women are in a more empowering and active roles, they are still subordinate to men as they are mainly seen as the objects of the gaze. This means that are being seen as tools of pleasure and not for their acting ability undermining women’s ability to succeed.
Men are constantly stereotyped as the active, providing and tough individual who drives the narrative forward, whereas the passive, home orientated and emotional[5] people tend to be the women who is constantly being controlled by the man and is there to make the hero look good providing ‘scopophillic pleasures’ to the audience. This is challenged by contemporary films for example the angels in Charlie’s Angels-full throttle or Patience Phillips (Halle Berry) in Catwoman (Dir: Pitof, 2004). This stereotype is progressing in the media as awareness of women’s ability is becoming more shown in contemporary film such as ‘Kill Bill volume 1 and 2’ (Quentin Tarantino, 2003/2004).

Kill Bill volume 2 (Quentin Tarantino, 2004) is a contemporary action film where the protagonist role is challenged. The antagonist role was once associated with the male gender, however Uma Thurman plays Beatrix Kiddo, a dominant, active and tough women. This is evidence of women’s ability to be just as equal to men as a result challenging a patriarchal society. Representations of women are gradually changing due to the positive role women are being given the chance to be in as a result this film was highly successful making a total of $66,207,920[6] as well as promoting women’s authority, however this film is evidence that the society we live in views women for ‘erotic pleasure’ as she is wearing a yellow, tight suit as a result creating a ‘male gaze’ amongst men. The yellow outfit she is always seen to be wearing can connote happiness. This could represent goodness as oppose to evil creating identification with the audience.

A historical film that represented women with the power they deserved was Alien (Dir: Ridley Scott, 1979), a film produced in the United Kingdom, featured the first female protagonist, Sigourney Weaver who played the active hero and remained the only survivor, was a huge success in the 70’s, the decade for feminists making $1,983,690[7] and has played a major part in the progression of positive representation against women in the media. This film was successful due to the fact that women were finally emerging from their stereotypical roles and not because she was getting objectified or viewed for pleasure as a result this film challenges Laura Mulvey’s theory and proves that not all women are objectified in order to make a film successful. On the other hand, Ripley may have been played by a female but this role was never intended to be played by a female[8] as a result it would have been another male action hero film.

Haskell (1973) points out that directors in 1962 were guilty of having misogynistic views upon women[9]. This would lead to the negative-representation of women and oppressing them. So feminism may have played a major part in the progression to minimise objectification however, but women are still getting viewed for the wrong reasons such as pleasure and degrading them. An example is Basic Instinct (Dir: Paul Verhoeven, 1992), where the spectators are provided with ‘scopophillic’ and ‘voyeuristic’ pleasures throughout and at this time we are introduced with the ‘female gaze’. We also see a misogynist view from Gus Moran (George Dzundza) who constantly calls Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone) degrading words such as “pussy” and ‘Bitch’,[10] this proves that he does not respect her but uses vile words when mentioning Tramell as a result reinforces a patriarchal society.

The mid-nineteenth century focused on the first wave feminism[11] which was important for women as this was the century in which women decided to change their presence in society for equality[12] and this resulted in the three waves of feminism. At that time, the society was patriarchal in every area, this undermined women. To an extent, the society can be labelled as patriarchal and have a higher authority than women. This is evident in films such as Coyote ugly (Dir: David McNally, 2000). Violet (Piper Sanford) the protagonist and other females are totally controlled by the ‘ogling’ men when she lands a job as a ‘coyote’ bar dancer/sex kitten and waitress[13] at a club. She is seen pouring liquid over herself providing ‘erotic pleasure’ and being the subject of the ‘male gaze’ as theorised by Laura Mulvey[14]. This could also be an example of post-feminism as the females aware of what they are doing and enjoying it so in a way it can be reversed due to the fact they have the will to decide what they want. It could also be interpreted as the females having the competence, capability and the potential to tease the men, this as a sign of dominance from the females rather than males.

To provide entertainment and pleasure for the audience the, films are mediated to attract the attention and by doing this results in the ‘male gaze or even in some cases the ‘female gaze’. Mulvey identified that the ‘male gaze’ resulted in the male viewer to drool over the erotic exhibition of women’s bodies on the screen.[15] Greer (1999) said that women are under much more pressure to impress with their make-up and high heels.[16] This proves that women are passive and are conforming to the ideologies that they are confronted by to impress the opposite sex as a consequent the hypodermic needle model is reinforced.[17] This is reinforced by Charlie’s Angels-full throttle (Dir: McG, 2003), as they are represented as three attractive angels who ‘kiss ass’[18] having the active role but being objectified at the same time.

Charlie’s Angels-full throttle, Kill Bill, Coyote ugly, Catwoman all attract different audiences. The genre of the film decided the audience and as a result we are shown an active audience. ‘Uses and gratifications theory’ could be applied to these films as they all provide the audience will escapist entertainment. This can be seen in Charlie’s angels-full throttle, which stars beautiful and glamorous women who can also ‘kick asses and perform the role of the action hero. [19] This theory assumes an active audience where individuals chooses the text it consumes and have dissimilar reasons for consuming the films. The primary audiences are teenagers who appeal to an action/adventure genre. The secondary audience would be feminists and fans of the actors/actresses.

Gaye Tuchman (1978) states that that females are represented far less than males on TV. Tuchman also stated that when females have roles, they are mostly shown as being negative roles[20]; he called this ‘symbolic annihilation’. This can be challenged to a certain extent as protagonist woman are becoming more common in contemporary films as a result however they are still being shown in negative roles such as the ‘objects’. The human characteristics are being taken away from them leaving them as the tools of desire to entertain and pleasure.
‘Phallic’ objects are widely used in films such as Kill Bill, Catwoman, Lara croft: Tomb raider, coyote ugly and Charlie’s Angels-full throttle. These are either ‘phallic’ or ‘fetish’ objects that create the ‘male gaze’ resulting in women being represented as object of desire. An example is in ‘Charlie’s Angels-Full Throttle’ where they are seen in a club called the treasure chest. The angels in the film fight crime without the use of guns seen as a ‘phallic’ object however; they use ‘phallic’ objects to manipulate the men in this scene. They are seen seducing the men by dancing alongside a pole in ‘skimpy’ outfits and jiggling breasts, wiggling bums[21] causing the ‘male gaze’. This means that they use ‘phallic’ objects for ‘eye candy’[22] for the men but not to help them fight crime as a result it means that they are shown as sex objects.

Action films have slow motion to create enigmas within the film; a code theorised by Barthes. An example is when the angels’ fall off a building after being shot. This is an alternative to keeping the audience engaged and entertained besides the ‘eye candy’ (women). However, in Charlie’s Angels-full throttle, these interlink with each other. The desirable object being Diaz running along a beach in a bikini suit played in slow motion. She is being portrayed as the “to-be-looked-at-ness”[23] object meaning that they are being shown as a figure to be gazed upon.
Mulvey argues that women are viewed in two ways from the spectator: voyeuristically and fetishistic. This leads to the Freudian theory in terms of males feeling ‘castration anxiety’[24]. In Charlie’s angels the substitute is the pole in which they dance alongside. This provides ‘erotic’ pleasure as the heterosexual spectators are given a buzz to satisfy their urges. Kaplan and Kaja Silverman (1980) argued that “the gaze could be adopted by both male and female subjects: the male is not always controlling the subject and nor is the female always passive object”[25]. This challenges stereotypes against women and patriarchy.

An example is Basic instinct (1992), where the spectator is provided with the ‘female gaze’ of a naked Nick Curran (Michael Douglas), this in contrast administers ‘erotic’ pleasure for the female audience. This film is also a prime example for patriarchy as it challenges the passive female who is Tramell (Sharon Stone).

Ridley Scott, the director of Alien directed a film called Thelma and Louise (1990). In this film as well as Alien features female protagonists. In this film the two women could be categorised in two groups. The ‘whore’ and the ‘Madonna’[26]. The two females had freedom and lived independently. Louise was portrayed as the ‘Madonna’ as she was the housewife, a role given to her by her husband as a result reinforcing patriarchy. Thelma is represented as the ‘whore’ who is carefree that she almost got raped and gets no respect from the males[27] “Bitch! I shoulda gone ahead and fucked her!” (Harlan)[28]. Feminists could argue that due to this, women belong in the home as they can’t look after themselves without the male figure.

An alien (Dir: James Cameron, 1986) features Ripley once again in the stereotypical roles of a mother. This is also seen in contemporary films such as Kill Bill 2 who woke up form a coma to find her baby had gone. Even though these women are in active masculine roles rather than the passive roles, they are being represented in a stereotypical manner. This means that women are presented stronger as they can bring up a child had also fight evil and protect them.

Emanuel Levy (1990) conducted a study and concluded that physical looks and youth were far more important for the female stars. This as a result puts pressure on females to look pretty to attract a male audience. This means that women need to conform to what males want reinforcing a patriarchal society. However, female groups such as destiny child are advertising female empowerment hoping it may progress the existing representation of women not as sex objects but as empowering, strong and independent women crushing misogynist views that are present in society.

Women are judged according to their looks however men are judged according to their acting skills. Sharon Smith (1972) declared “The role of woman in a film almost always revolves around her physical attraction and the mating games she plays with the male characters”[29]. This means that women have to try harder to gain attention from the audience and a way in which they can be ale to achieve this is by using their physical attraction to appeal to the audience making harder for woman to succeed than men.

Destiny’s Child promoted ‘girl power’ by releasing a song that was a soundtrack to Charlie’s angels called ‘independent women’. This was helping women gain the correct position in society. Pink also had a synergy by releasing a song called ‘feel good thing’. The representation of pink could promote ‘girl power’ as she is a woman who can speak her mind and as tough as a male promoting equality which could be the first signs of progression. On the other hand, David Gauntlett argued that female role models such as destiny’s child are glamorous[30] as well as successful, this providing voyeuristic pleasure whatever role women are in. It means for women, males are entertained by them due their body features rather than their ability to act.

Gauntlett (2002) later argued that “movie producers have realised that kick-ass heroines do better business. Her also realised that audiences would laugh at images of pretty housewife and reacted by showing women how to be sexy at work[31]. This could be interpreted as women need to look sexy as well as kick ass or audiences would laugh at images of housewife roles. This concludes that society had moved on in terms of the representing women in stereotypical roles as this is no longer accepted in society as correct however thy do need to look good in appearance.

The angels are associated with their simpering, body-grinding bikini-clad tits n' ass. The girls are shown as empowered but repeatedly using their looks to distract and outwit the pathetic men on parade in the film[32]. This as a result means that they can use their looks to distract men, which is used as a tool to help them. As a result woman are represented in more intelligent roles than men as they use their intuitive to fool the men and gain control power over them for their benefit whereas men are shown with a weapon such as a gun to guild them. This could mean that women are getting themselves objectified in order of achieving what they wanted.
Charlie in ‘Charlie’s Angels-full throttle’ could be represented a Marxist he is dominant and rules[33] the angels; they are under his power. This could be seen as a concept of hegemony[34]. This is because the angels are ‘Charlie’s’ angels who are controlled by a mysterious male voice as a result they can be seen as passive reinforcing Mulvey’s theory on active/male and passive/female.

At 40, Demi Moore plays a ‘fallen angel’[35] in an antagonist role following propps theory on character roles. This can be linked with Claude Levi Strauss theory on binary opposition[36]s as they clash. The hero versus villain can be labelled upon the angels and Madison Lee (Moore). This binary opposition is used in the film for the identification by audiences. Moore is shown to be wearing black, which can be connoted an evil whereas Diaz alongside Moore is wearing white which can be connoted as purity and heavenly associated with angels, which represents what they are.

‘Charlie’s angels –full throttle’ has a non-linear narrative as there are flashbacks of the angels before they worked for Charlie, living the nostalgic memories of the past of the angels, this helps the audience identify with the characters and not feel alienated. Parts of the film follow Todorov’s narrative structure. Most of the films end with a resolution such as Alien getting defeated or in Kill Bill where Bill finally dies however some films do not follow this. An example is Basic instinct where Tramell doesn’t die.

To justify the reason why women are presented as passive objects could be due to the lack of female directors. As there are only a few female directors, the audience are shown the film form a male point of view. This means that what ever the director wants to see gets shown as a result women are shown in tight clothing, revealing and with ‘phallic’ objects. Naomie Harris quoted “film is such as male-dominated industry”[37]. This results in women being negatively represented and reinforcing a patriarchal society.

Overall, women are increasingly seen in films in a male associated role of action hero or protagonist however, even though they are in these roles they are represented as sex objects with the use of ‘phallic’ or ‘fetish’ objects with the main aim to attract heterosexual males in gaining pleasure and entertainment. On the other hand, not only the males are given these pleasures as now there is also a ‘female gaze’. An example of this is in the recent James Bond film, ‘casino royale’ where Bond (Daniel Craig) is dripping wet coming out of the water a complete role reversal that was once seen with Halle Berry. This concludes that not only women are objectified though the majority are women so a patriarchal society is still present.

Word count 3,051

[1] Charlie’s Angels –Full Throttle (2003)
[2] http://www.peom.co.uk/femmefatale.html
[3] http://www.moviehabit.com/reviews/cha_f703.shtml
[4] http://www.movieviews.org/reviews/may-july2003.shtml
[5] A2 Media studies: the essential introduction pg. 227
[6] http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1808504212/info
[7] http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1800020133/details
[8] Lacey, Nick ‘Image and representation’ pg.218
[9] Nelmes, Jill (1996) ‘An introduction to film studies-third edition’ pg. 248
[10] http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Basic_Instinct_(film)
[11] Bennett, Peter (2006) ‘A2 Media Studies: essential introduction’ pg. 229
[12] Bennett, Jacquie (2005) ‘Media Studies AS & A2’ pg. 108
[13] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0200550/plotsummary
[14] Mulvey, Laura (1975) ‘Visual pleasures and narrative cinema’
[15] Bennett, Peter (2006) ‘A2 Media Studies: the essential introduction’
[16] Gauntlet, David (2002) ‘Media, Gender and identity’ pg. 78
[17] Bennett, Jacquie (2005) ‘Media Studies: AS & A2’ pg. 86
[18] Gauntlet, David (2002) ‘Media, gender and identity’ pg 66-67
[19] Gilligan, Sarah (2003) ‘Teaching women and film’ pg. 25
[20] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_annihilation
[21] http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/review.asp?DVDID=9572
[22] http://www.bullz-eye.com/mguide/reviews_2003/charlies_angels_full_throttle.htm
[23] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Mulvey
[24] http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/gaze/gaze09.html
[25] http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/gaze/gaze09.html
[26] http://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/id/824016/index.html
[27] Rayner, Philip (2004) ‘Media studies : the essential resource’
[28] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103074/quotes
[29] Gaunlett, David ‘Media, gender and identity’ pg. 48
[30] Bennett, Jacquie (2005) ‘Media Studies: AS & A2’ pg. 109
[31] Bennett, Peter ‘A2 media studies: a essential introduction’
[32] http://www.dailyinfo.co.uk/reviews/feature/504/Charlies+Angels+Full+Throttle/
[33] Bennett, Jacquie (2005) ‘Media Studies: AS & A2’ pg. 111
[34] Gauntlet, David ‘Media, gender and identity’ pg. 69
[35] http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/preview/1808403424
[36] Bennett, Jacquie (2005) ‘Media Studies: AS & A2’ pg. 92, 93
[37] http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/03855141912_06368000.html