Some veteran movie actresses seem to be saying (to paraphrase Norma Desmond), "I am big. It’s the screen that got small." There’s an interesting essay in yesterday’s Los Angeles Timesexamining why so many film actresses (Glenn Close; Holly Hunter, pictured; KyraSedgwick; Parker Posey; Lili Taylor, et al) are committing themselves to long-term TV series contracts.(Duh, better scripts, meatier roles, and sometimes more lucrativepay.) The article hints, however, at what may be a more interesting question: Is theseactresses’ absence from the big screen hurting the box office? (Doesn’t seem like it, during this $4 billion summer of threequels and male-driven action pics, but what about the rest of the year, when Hollywood moans that no one is going to the movies anymore?) How ’bout it, PopWatchers? Would you go to the movies more often if there were more big-screen opportunities for top actresses like these? Will studioswake up and start making movies with strong female roles again, or will they be content to abandon female-centered stories to television?
As top actresses defect, film's loss is TV's gain
Blog Roll
- Best Week Ever
- BuzzSugar
- Coolfer
- Dark Horizons
- Deadline Hollywood Daily
- Digital Music News
- Gold Derby
- Hits Daily Double
- Hollywood Elsewhere
- Hollywood Wiretap
- Huffington Post
- Hypebot
- Idolator
- jaded insider
- Lost Remote
- Movie City News
- Movie List
- MTV News
- Pop Candy
- PopBytes
- Popeater
- reality blurred
- Salon: Arts & Entertainment
- Stereogum
- The Beat
- The Programming Insider
- Thompson on Hollywood
- Tuned In
- TV Barn
- TV Tattle
- TVFanatic.com
- TVNewser
- Velvet Rope
Featured Video
Realite: Reality TV justice!
Worthy winners on ''Runway,'' ''ANTM''; just desserts on ''Top Chef'' and ''SYTYCD''; bonus Kris Allen!
More 
Today's Most Popular
-
-
The Ausiello Files Ask Ausiello: Spoilers on 'Bones,' 'Glee,' 'Chuck,' 'Gossip Girl,' and more! -
-
-
Doc Jensen on 'Lost' 'Lost': Reboot anxiety?
From Our Partners
Special Coverage
'Twilight' Saga: 'New Moon'
It's almost here! Get all the latest news, photos, video, and fan commentary leading up to the big premiere
More
Comments (1-30) of 43 Add your comment
i think the bigger problem is the absense of female writers. it seems to me that so many of these acressess are taking these television parts because they’re actually available. it’s not that we don’t have the pool of actressess to fill female-lead movie rolls, it’s that we don’t have the writers to write female-lead movies. therefore, no one loses with actresses like kyra or holly landing tv shows. at least we get them somehow!
now if only there were more female-driven comedies. ugly betty, old christine, and liz lemon are realy the only ones we have right now. i need more!
It’s not always the actors/actresses I am drawn to, it’s the movie itself, and whether or not it’s worth $10. For example, I am a huge admirer of Meryl Streep, but waited until “The Devil Wears Parad” came out on video.
also, wasn’t there a popwatch post similar to this (female-driven movies, etc.) recently? In regards to “Knocked Up.”??
I have no faith in Hollywood having faith in women…thank god that cable tv (f/x, usa, tnt, name your favorite) is willing to give these great actresses meaty roles and let them shine…And if it means Hollywood loses money cause we’re staying home to watch them – then gee, isn’t that too bad…
I don’t go to movies anymore anyway. They’re too expensive and not worth the money spent. Rather wait until the DVD comes out and watch it sitting on my couch with a beer.
So, no. It doesn’t make any difference to me what these actresses do. I happen to think it’s just as respectable to be leading lady on a hit TV show as it is in a motion picture.
The key word is veteran. I don’t see Natalie Portman or Anne Hathaway having trouble getting parts. Maybe
female “veteran” audiences are more discrimating about the movies they go to. They would rather watch FX or TNT than go to Michael Bays latest exploding blockbuster.
NineDaves is right. It’s all about the writing. TV has good writing for women and movies, which Hollywood insists on gearing almost exclusively toward young men, does not.
You’ve got the female driven comedies already mentioned like “Betty”, “30 Rock” and “Christine”. “Desperate Housewives” is still a pretty big hit, and “Weeds” is female-driven AND is created by a woman, as is “Grey’s Anatomy” (which I personally can’t stand, but millions and millions of people love)
The audience is clearly out there for these woman-centric stories. I don’t know if its hurting the box office, but they’re definitely missing out on a LOT of money they could be making.
I have always been a huge TV fan (and afraid to say it), I would watch 3 episodes of my favorite show over a movie any day. I am now glad to see it’s not embarrassing to say I LOVE TV and getting the recognition it deserves, and with Networks like Showtime, TNT, F/X, HBO etc, TV couldn’t get better and I think all actors should jump ship at least once and try a series!!
You’d better believe I’d go to the movies more often if there were as many roles for Holly Hunter and Glenn Close as there are for Jessica Alba and Jessica Biel. I know the young bombshells look good in a bikini, but if that’s what I wanted to see I’d do a Google search. When I go to the movies, I want to become involved in a story with interesting characters, and the dearth of quality roles for actresses over 40 is making the movie theater a much less desirable place to be.
I’m 35 now, and sad to say, but if I want to watch a woman my age fall in love, beat the system, succeed at all odds, etc., I’m going to have to watch TV. With a few exceptions (thank you Jodie Foster!) 35 year olds in movies are the older sister/neighbor who pop in to dispense advice and quickly leave when the lights go down.
I remember seeing on interview with Patricia Heaton who said alot of actresses, especially those with children, prefer to do TV that way they can have a set schedule, location, etc. and be able to be home each night with their kids. I also buy the fact that there are limited roles for women in movies and the talented actresses want a challenge, which tv can bring.
There are tons of parts for men of all ages, and plenty for “young” women. It seems that the popular opinion is to ASSUME that movies about middle-aged women only appeal to middle-aged women, and that’s not a giant demographic. And I don’t necessarily think that assupmtion is correct, by the way.
Having said that, I don’t go to movies based on their “stars.” Unless Gary Oldman is in it.
I agree. I’ve loved Kiera Swedwich forever, but she always seems ’stuck’ in roles where she can’t shine. I love “The Closer”. I dvr and rewatch it all the time!!! If she headlined a GOOD movie I would go. But I doubt you’d see her in something like “Good Luck Chuck”.
An interesting theory. I would also say, however, that with the possible exception of Glenn Close, none of those people were ever major movie stars, and despite the hype, I can think of plenty of women receiving meaty film roles…plus, aren’t most of the T.V. Shows they do really casting them as male-esque characters? It is not interesting for me, the female viewer, to see women playing characters I have either a) never seen in real life or b) would avoid if I did see them in real life.
Ok, and maybe Holly Hunter. I’d also point out that Glenn Close on TV is old news by now.
I certainly wouldn’t call these actresses’ crossover into television a “defection”. They’re having to do it. Right now, the movie business is geared toward youth and action, and the roles for 40-50 year old females are limited-and that’s not even adding “quality” roles into the equation. And I’m not sure it’s limited to female actresses, either. Alec Baldwin is on “30 Rock”, Gabriel Byrne has a new series on HBO, and Aidan Quinn just joined “Canterbury’s Law” on Fox.
I also think Hollywood’s emphasis on producing movies for a younger audience is now driving the best screenwriters into television.
I think the bigger problem is that 95% of the movies that come out of Hollywood suck major butt. I blame lack of originality all across the board (writers, directors, producers, and studios—primarily the studios). That’s whats hurting the box office.
Thanks NineDaves for the shout out to my fav…Liz Lemon! “I’m not like you lemon, with your work sneakers and your left-handedness!!!”
A friend at work tried to get me to watch “Damages” but as I am a young female attorney, i thought it hit too close to home.
Will they start writing strong female roles again? They never did. The unfortunate truth is that female-star-driven films don’t make nearly as much money as male-star-driven films. Even Julia Roberts at her peak hovered around the 100 million mark for each success, while Will Smith typically hits 175. That doesn’t mean strong female roles can’t exist, but it does mean that it’s much harder for studios to make work, and therefore less worth it to them. So it’s a combination of a lot of things: a lack of female writers, studio execs who need to worry about the box office, and audiences who go see action movies but not chick flicks.
Glenn Close, Holly Hunter, Kyra Sedgwick, Parker Posey, Lili Taylor…I don’t see these women as the top actresses in their field, do any of you, seriously? I mean, Close and Posey are great actresses when they’re on, but the rest of them? Taylor has only been great in a few movies, and Hunter and Sedgwick are just awful. Hunter’s from the “look at me” school of “serious” acting. All show. Sedgwick was so boring in her movies she hardly registered. In fact, she’s more interesting in her tv show. So no, I am not bothered that these actresses have chosen tv. There are plenty of talented females actresses out there to more than make up for the few who’ve defected to tv. The studios just have to give the rest of them the chance.
I think the women are going where the writing is. Glenn Close probably isn’t looking for cash at this point, but wants a good role with a strong, well written character.
Now that leading ladies like Vanessa Williams and Kyra Sedgewick have established that tv is not death, it only makes sense for great actresses to go where the female characters are fleshed out.
As for movies, they’ve gone downhill over the last few years. We have our standouts of course, but overall I don’t feel as if the final products are better than they were even 10 years ago.
Personally, I go to the movies to see something that looks interesting – not because of any specific actor. So if the studios make interesting movies with good storylines, I will go to see them no matter which male or female actor is in them. I am very happy that we have these quality actors on television as it seems that now we are getting more quality than we did previously.
I will see Parker Posey and Holly Hunter in anything, regardless of whether I stay home to watch or not. Period. Good acting is good acting, in TV or movies.
Glenn Close, Parker Posey and Mary Louise Parker could do commercials for a local burger place and I’d watch.
I went to see “Evening” and left the theater depressed that there are so few good roles for women that they had to appear in a film that was so lame.
I think the mediums have a lot to do with it. A guy can walk away from an explosion without looking back and you know who he is. Women are more subtle and their characters take time to shape. Think about it, a male character can be introduced by donning a leather jacket, sunglasses and hopping on a motorcycle while “Bad to the Bone” plays on the soundtrack. When’s the last time you saw a female character introduced that way?
I think it’s also the studios fault because they don’t want to spend a few million dollars on a women picture. A few of the past chick flick hits like “The devil wears prada” cost only a fraction of money to make, but studios would rather spend gazzillions making movies about robots, pirates or spider-web doofuses. So this actresses go to TV where they can get a steady paycheck and job security. So blame the studios and the people that watch their movies.
I love movies, but they are really in such a dire state right now–we are inundated with lame sequels and trite remakes of stuff that was crap to begin with. There are some gems still out there, of course, but even they are mostly written by men and catered to a male actor/audience. No wonder these talented women are going to TV.
What bothers me most is that there COULD be good roles in women, but it seems like screenwriters aren’t even trying. In Knocked Up for instance (which I actually loved), not only does Katherine Heigel get very few funny bits, she also has to wear “cute” outfits the whole time. I’m sorry, but if I thought I was pregnant and ran off to the store to buy a pregancy test, I would NOT be wearing high heels.
I don’t go to the movies anymore, period. There is nothing out there that can not wait a few months for the DVD to drop. Hollywood is only interested in making sequels and remaking bad TV shows and they have no original ideas. Hollywood also only wants 20-somethings who weigh less than their IQ’s. There is not one current “IT” girl that can hold a candle to these actresses.
Seriously can Jessica Biel, Jessica Alba and any of the others open a movie and carry it alone like these ladies…didn’t think so.
And I’d like to add I find it amusing how for some reason television is seen as the bottom of the barrel of entertainment. Meaning, something is wrong with movies if great actresses are on tv shows.