The subtle sexism behind bad female action films

Production president Jeff Robinov has informed Variety that Warner Brothers isn't run by a bunch of misogynists after all. To the contrary, they are committed to making movies—action films in particular—with women in the lead. Now that's nice and I'm glad to hear it (assuming we can take his word for it), but it really only addresses part of the problem.

Here's an idea, Jeff: How about making good female action movies while you're at it? Yes, that means giving a little more attention to writing, directing, and production. But it also means using sound principles when casting instead of a bunch of outdated, sexist notions.

A certain type of actor is generally required for action roles; e.g., moviegoers—male and female both—must find her convincing as a formidable character for it to go over. Indeed, as shocking as it is to some Hollywood insiders, occasionally a role might call for a woman with muscles. (Gasp!) The idea that you can plunk any actress into an action role and have it work is absurd. It takes more than a pretty face and red-carpet cred, and getting a "good" actress isn't always enough either. (Meryl Streep is a great actress; however, I have no interest in seeing her play Wonder Woman.)

Yet time and again we see the studios forcing ill-suited actresses—often with no more training than a few weeks spent in a cushy Hollywood gym—into action roles while genuinely athletic actresses struggle to find work.

That's not only sexist, it's bad moviemaking.