Quote:
Originally posted by Allstar
More female leads?
Carmela Soprano/Edie Falco is a stronger female lead than any you have just mentioned. Frances Conroy as Ruth Fisher, Kima Greggs as Sonja Sohn? Gillian Anderson as Dana Scully CARRIED The X-Files. Katee Sackhoff as Starbucks is the blueprint for many future female characters and let's not start with the four women of Desperate Housewives. It's nice having more female leads now but what's the point if none of them are as well written and diverse as the strong roles I mentioned?
Besides @ your other point: Todd VanDerWerff explicitely mentioned the increasing diversity but all of them are just offsprings of shows we already had and so they feel thematically and structurally just repetetive to some degree.
|
No, i get that point but most of those shows were carried by Men, predominantly. I'm referring to shows that have a FEMALE as the lead, as the main breadwinner, as the one who the show internally and externally revolves around. I mentioned those actresses purely bc they were at the top of my head but point being, we don't need a new "revolutionary" show. What we need are "revolutionary" characters that can become beacons of hope for our, and future generations.
Some of the content released in the last 4 years has been brilliant, to tell you the truth. I get that some are offshoots of previous plots (like, what isn't) but i don't think that neccessarily is the driving force now. Scandal is, very often, repetitive, quite far-fetched and very annoying when they speak sodamnfastlikepleasecanigetawordinedgeways but its the performances of the actresses/actors that keep millions tuned in every week.
