Men, do you watch "chick flicks"?

[rinka]

I can get into a movie because it's visually interesting, but mostly dialogue is what gets me. Whether it's in Million dollars hotel, Pride or prejudice or Mr and Mrs Smith (which I'm aware I should detest ). I can enjoy dialogue in a movie because it's witty, beautiful, realistic or bizarre.

And yes, I watch chick flicks. And dramas. And some action movies I appreciate, though car chases make me sleepy. Never saw a zombie movie and it's unlikely I will. Comedies with Jim Carey or Ben Stiller or the likes I do my best to avoid.

Btw The Devil wears Prada - not good. Accidently saw it on tv a while back. Kept waiting for some twist or comedy or emotion or point, well that was a complete waste of time. I've seen many crappy movies, but that one was actually so pointless it really pissed me off that I hadn't turned off the tv and gone and cleaned the bathroom or something.

 

[ShyGuy68]

I'll admit that I watch some chick flicks, and that I'm the happy owner of Sex and the city on DVD (both the movie and the tv serie). I'm also going to watch the second one when it's coming out here in Denmark in a little less than a months time!

 

[midwestyankee]

Friday night: When Harry Met Sally, for about the third time since its release. We laughed at lots of inappropriate places because it's just damned silly in some places. Otherwise, it was enjoyable for the wit and precision of the dialog.

Last night: the original Unfaithfully Yours with Rex Harrison, Linda Darnell, and Rudy Vallee (1939, I believe). It's actually a combo chick flick and thriller with a helluva lot of comedy thrown in (ya gotta love Preston Sturges - writer/director - if you you like comedy). Gawd almighty did Rex have a great voice!

 

[Pineapple2]

The thing is, chick flicks are a specific genre. Any movie in this genre is geared towards a specific audience. The same audience that Cosmo is geared towards, or Vogue. You get what I mean?

Dick flicks, on the other hand, are geared toward the audience of Ask Men.

Women, (and since the makers of Cosmo want women to buy their magazines, they are women,) see certain products in Cosmo. They like them, and buy them, or maybe can't afford them, but still admire them. They read advice in these magazines. They read about a couple where the boyfriend was cheating, how to lose weight, and how to find the perfect boyfriend.

Then, they go to a chick flick. In the chick flick, the main character's boyfriend is cheating on her, so she dumps him and gets all depressed. Her friends tell her to lose weight, and she finds a new boyfriend, all the while wearing the perfect jeans.

Men, on the other hand, get the same programming from the magazine Ask Men, go to see a dick flick. The same thing happens.

Interest has little to do with it. This is what's dished out by the film industry, to these two demographics. Each year, three dick flicks and three chick flicks are made. They are strategized, recycled, and regurgitated. Each year, they are rationed out to the two demographics.

They are not supposed to be good, they are not supposed to be emotionally stimulating. They are supposed to sell, and they are supposed to be seamless and glossy, so that the consumers think that that the movie is well made. This is a professional product.

Now, imagine, little Jo Ann, is walking through the mall with her friends. The friends she gets to hang out with, only because she followed the latest advice on how to be popular. They get bored, and they have some money, so they decide to go to the movies. There's three playing. One is a dick flick, the other a chick flick, and the next Finding Nemo. What are they gonna see? Why?

The answer: Jo and her friends will see the chick flick, or the romantic comedy. Why? Not because they like a good narrative, but because it's the logical choice. They are teenage girls. The movie is marketed to teenage girls. They aren't going to go see the dick flick, where a random car gets hit, and five guys run around throwing their pubic hair around and drinking beer. There's no incentive, it's boring. They're not going to go see the one about the animated fish, either. At least, in the romantic comedy, there's some chance of making out. That's no incentive for the chick flick either, since the sex scene is probably really bland and boring too. But hey, whatcha gonna do?

So they go see the movie, all hoping for some chance that this one will turn out better than the last. They've been watching these things for a long time now, and there have actually been about two movies in the last fourteen years that they've liked. Although, not all of them could agree which two, and they all had fun discussing it.

As the movie progresses, they hang out, and even though it's boring, and not particularly good, they're hanging out. Eventually, they all get sucked into the movie, some dramatic scene or the other, and the hour passes quickly. The popcorn gets eaten, the lights are turned up.

As they leave the theater, they see some guys coming out of the other screening room. They laugh at them, not understanding why they would want to pay ten dollars just to see something get blown up. It's because guys are more visual than girls, Jo Ann decides. That's what it said in my magazine. And look what friends the magazine has got me. It must be right.

When they get home, they talk about how the main character really should've followed Cosmo's advice on dating, and how her lipstick was so not her shade, according to the color chart of lipsticks and face shapes.

Interest has little to do with it. Or choice, or preference. Dick flicks and chick flicks are both boring. They are generic movies. They're not even like other genres, that are based around ideas, plots, or literary devices. No, they are based on the type of person that's going to buy them.

But people don't come in types. They're all human. They're all different in some ways, and in some ways they're all the same. But, in order to literally be a demographic, the people need to be turned, molded, and shaped into a type. How to do that? Well, it's not the easiest thing, is it? At least, not intentionally.

So instead of creating the perfect audience, you lose the idea of producing for your audience. You create an artificial audience. Your own personal manikin that you can try movies on. What will my manikin think if the actress does this in this scene?

This manikin is a very ingrained cultural stereotype. Everybody knows about it, even, especially, the audience. The manikin is the actress in the movie. The manikin is the girl everyone wants to be. The manikin is the girl everybody is glad they're smarter than. The manikin is the girl who really hates dick flicks, to the point of having to resort to chick flicks. The manikin is who you're supposed to be, in the public narrative consciousness.

And the manikin is the intended consumer.

What I wanted to say was, this has nothing to do with the differences between the sexes. This has to do with the differences between the demographics.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

Yes, I understand this. I think perhaps I have not made my point well enough. I am not suggesting that the only movies men want to watch are action movies and the only movies women want to watch are romantic comedies/chick flicks. That's absurd. I think both sexes enjoy a variety of films.

Last night L and I watched The Blind Side, and we both enjoyed it.

However, I do believe the audience for "chick flicks" is primarily female. That does not mean men don't or won't watch them, only that far more women watch them than men. And I believe there has to be a reason for this.

Yeah, there is a reason why they're called "chick flicks."

The ones that have the most crossover among genders seem to have something extra to offer guys. I'm not entirely sure I'd call The Blind Side a chick flick, but if it is, then it had a lot of football. Grosse Point Blank had a lot of brutal killings to go along with the John Cusack/Minnie Driver froth. The ones that I like seem to feature guys talking about how "chick stuff" is simply bizarre. When Harry Met Sally has a lot of this. Sleepless in Seattle has this scene mocking chick flicks.

 

[2likis2luv]

I happen to love chick flicks. Some of my favorites "Bridges of Madison County", "How Harry Met Sally", "Wuthering Heights", "Two Women", etc.

I also think "Pearl Harbor" and "Hannah and her Sisters" are amazing at exploring the inner workings of the relationship between us and them.

 

[Netzach]

The thing is, chick flicks are a specific genre. Any movie in this genre is geared towards a specific audience. The same audience that Cosmo is geared towards, or Vogue. You get what I mean?

Dick flicks, on the other hand, are geared toward the audience of Ask Men.

Women, (and since the makers of Cosmo want women to buy their magazines, they are women,) see certain products in Cosmo. They like them, and buy them, or maybe can't afford them, but still admire them. They read advice in these magazines. They read about a couple where the boyfriend was cheating, how to lose weight, and how to find the perfect boyfriend.

Then, they go to a chick flick. In the chick flick, the main character's boyfriend is cheating on her, so she dumps him and gets all depressed. Her friends tell her to lose weight, and she finds a new boyfriend, all the while wearing the perfect jeans.

Men, on the other hand, get the same programming from the magazine Ask Men, go to see a dick flick. The same thing happens.

Interest has little to do with it. This is what's dished out by the film industry, to these two demographics. Each year, three dick flicks and three chick flicks are made. They are strategized, recycled, and regurgitated. Each year, they are rationed out to the two demographics.

They are not supposed to be good, they are not supposed to be emotionally stimulating. They are supposed to sell, and they are supposed to be seamless and glossy, so that the consumers think that that the movie is well made. This is a professional product.

Now, imagine, little Jo Ann, is walking through the mall with her friends. The friends she gets to hang out with, only because she followed the latest advice on how to be popular. They get bored, and they have some money, so they decide to go to the movies. There's three playing. One is a dick flick, the other a chick flick, and the next Finding Nemo. What are they gonna see? Why?

The answer: Jo and her friends will see the chick flick, or the romantic comedy. Why? Not because they like a good narrative, but because it's the logical choice. They are teenage girls. The movie is marketed to teenage girls. They aren't going to go see the dick flick, where a random car gets hit, and five guys run around throwing their pubic hair around and drinking beer. There's no incentive, it's boring. They're not going to go see the one about the animated fish, either. At least, in the romantic comedy, there's some chance of making out. That's no incentive for the chick flick either, since the sex scene is probably really bland and boring too. But hey, whatcha gonna do?

So they go see the movie, all hoping for some chance that this one will turn out better than the last. They've been watching these things for a long time now, and there have actually been about two movies in the last fourteen years that they've liked. Although, not all of them could agree which two, and they all had fun discussing it.

As the movie progresses, they hang out, and even though it's boring, and not particularly good, they're hanging out. Eventually, they all get sucked into the movie, some dramatic scene or the other, and the hour passes quickly. The popcorn gets eaten, the lights are turned up.

As they leave the theater, they see some guys coming out of the other screening room. They laugh at them, not understanding why they would want to pay ten dollars just to see something get blown up. It's because guys are more visual than girls, Jo Ann decides. That's what it said in my magazine. And look what friends the magazine has got me. It must be right.

When they get home, they talk about how the main character really should've followed Cosmo's advice on dating, and how her lipstick was so not her shade, according to the color chart of lipsticks and face shapes.

Interest has little to do with it. Or choice, or preference. Dick flicks and chick flicks are both boring. They are generic movies. They're not even like other genres, that are based around ideas, plots, or literary devices. No, they are based on the type of person that's going to buy them.

But people don't come in types. They're all human. They're all different in some ways, and in some ways they're all the same. But, in order to literally be a demographic, the people need to be turned, molded, and shaped into a type. How to do that? Well, it's not the easiest thing, is it? At least, not intentionally.

So instead of creating the perfect audience, you lose the idea of producing for your audience. You create an artificial audience. Your own personal manikin that you can try movies on. What will my manikin think if the actress does this in this scene?

This manikin is a very ingrained cultural stereotype. Everybody knows about it, even, especially, the audience. The manikin is the actress in the movie. The manikin is the girl everyone wants to be. The manikin is the girl everybody is glad they're smarter than. The manikin is the girl who really hates dick flicks, to the point of having to resort to chick flicks. The manikin is who you're supposed to be, in the public narrative consciousness.

And the manikin is the intended consumer.

What I wanted to say was, this has nothing to do with the differences between the sexes. This has to do with the differences between the demographics.

Your dick flick sounds a lot like Harold and Kumar - a film that most of my friends and I, female and male, totally loved - precisely because it took a risk on a NON generic iteration of a totally generic kind of stoner comedy, putting immigrant, racial, and identity stuff into it in a really smart way while still being about a kind of dumbassed awesome American aspiration (Kumar's speech extolling White Castle at the end)

I wonder whither the film industry and if it's going to go the way of the music industry - completely up its own ass in one regard and completely indie and fragmented and internet/artist driven in another.

 

[Pineapple2]

I don't know, haven't seen it. Sounds fun, though.

 

[Netzach]

It is. Pubic hair sight gags and all.

 

[Keroin]

The thing is, chick flicks are a specific genre...

<snipped for brevity>

What I wanted to say was, this has nothing to do with the differences between the sexes. This has to do with the differences between the demographics.

Mmm, as someone "in the know" I won't disagree that movies are essentially "products" and marketed as such. However, I don't think demographics alone can account for why women and men (not all women and men and not all the time - put down the rocks, angry mob) often choose different types of movies.

Many of my girlfriends can't handle watching violence. Plain and simple. It wouldn't matter how good the script/acting/cinematography was, they just couldn't enjoy a movie with overt violence. (Recalls bad memory of taking a girlfriend to Gladiator)

Gracie not wanting to watch Aliens - an excellent movie - is a good example of this, in my opinion. No one has programmed her to not want to watch that movie, she just doesn't want to see that level of violence and gore.

Conversely, the majority of my male friends have no problem watching violent films. And many of these men are kind, intelligent and non-violent in RL. They just like action.

Gender may not account for all of our entertainment choices but I don't think we can write it off as non-applicable either.

Yeah, there is a reason why they're called "chick flicks."

The ones that have the most crossover among genders seem to have something extra to offer guys. I'm not entirely sure I'd call The Blind Side a chick flick, but if it is, then it had a lot of football. Grosse Point Blank had a lot of brutal killings to go along with the John Cusack/Minnie Driver froth. The ones that I like seem to feature guys talking about how "chick stuff" is simply bizarre. When Harry Met Sally has a lot of this. Sleepless in Seattle has this scene mocking chick flicks.

Grosse Point Blank...so good! I have to watch that one again.

Yes, there was a lot of football in The Blind Side, which would usually turn me off, but the story was good. A little high on the "cheese" scale but good. Hollywood always has to amp up the drama and pathos. If the story is interesting enough, I can filter it out, though.

 

[YourCaptor]

How about some man flixs.

Gladiator can't be one, cause the end makes you want to cry, and cry is not man.

The Departed is a good one, very entertaining, very funny movie.

I also really liked crank. When it came out I wanted to see it, but my guy friends were all stupid about it. I just knew it would be good, cause when you have no expectations for something, then surpassing those expectations isn't too hard. though the helicopter fall should have been death. 2 was good too.

I'm sorry, I don't speak cuntonese.

 

[Pineapple2]

Many of my girlfriends can't handle watching violence. Plain and simple. It wouldn't matter how good the script/acting/cinematography was, they just couldn't enjoy a movie with overt violence. (Recalls bad memory of taking a girlfriend to Gladiator)

[...]

Conversely, the majority of my male friends have no problem watching violent films. And many of these men are kind, intelligent and non-violent in RL. They just like action.

Gender may not account for all of our entertainment choices but I don't think we can write it off as non-applicable either.

Well, I've had different experiences. A lot of my female friends just love a lot of gore. Can't say that the male friends are squeamish, although there is one that is notably so. Maybe it's a generational thing, with exposure being the changing factor.