Are women just bored of the rings?

[Krug]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/21/movies/21JAME.html

I CLOCKED my first yawn at 50 minutes, lulled by too many pale-blue mountains, computerized tricks and a plot so intricate all I knew for sure was that Gandalf had called for help. And did I care if help arrived? I did not. The final entry in the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy reveals once more that what the chick flick is to men, this trilogy is to women — or at least to a large secret society of us for whom the series is no more than a geek-fest, a technologically impressive but soulless endurance contest.

...
Like the two earlier installments, it also arrived with unmistakable social pressure to gush over its sheer size and spectacle. In a cultural version of political incorrectness, expressing anything less than ecstatic praise seems unenlightened if not downright boorish.
...
But both demographic and empirical evidence suggests that the trilogy is still primarily a boys' toy. The well-calculated hype and exaggerated praise (the New York Film Critics Circle last week voted "Return" best picture) has obscured what the series really is: an FX extravaganza tailored to an adolescent male's fear of sentiment and love of high-tech wizardry.

This is not a backlash opinion. The male geek factor was present from the first installment, "The Fellowship of the Ring," which New Line Cinema promoted heavily online to reach that audience. Online promotion is still a big part of the marketing strategy, as countless "Rings" Web sites help sustain the true fanatics. The company's own surveys reveal intriguing information. Before "The Fellowship" opened in 2001, New Line polled potential viewers on their awareness of the J. R. R. Tolkien novels on which the films are based. Those most likely to have read the books were "older" (in Hollywood-speak, over 25); 51 percent of them were older men, while only 33 percent were older women. When the first two films opened, exit polls showed women to be less enthusiastic than men; and a more recent survey taken in anticipation of "The Return of the King" said that interest levels "still skew male."

 

[Buttercup]

Well, I certainly loved the movies. I've read the books somewhere around 15 or 16 times. But I also DM, I like Babylon 5, I hang out at internet message boards, and have been called an uber-geek by my geeky friends. So I guess I'm not typical.

Of the 9 people I work with every day, one has no interest in the movies. Two have only mild interest. The rest are enthusiasts. And only one of these people is a man. Of course, I work in a library, so again, we may not be typical.

I'm sure Lord of the Rings does not appeal to women who only read Danielle Steel and Harlequin romances. And frankly, who cares?

Having said that, we did notice while we were waiting in line for RotK that there were 12 males for every female. Honestly, I don't understand that. But I also don't understand the appeal of Danielle Steel. So maybe I really am a geek.

 

[Berandor]

I think it's probably true:
LotR has not many good female characters, Fantasy as a whole is widely regarded as a male's genre (and might turn off women simply because of that). But "tailored to an adolescent's fear of sentiment"? With all the love and trust and Frodo and Sam hugging and gazing at each other? It's almost hokey!

 

[tetsujin28]

All the women I know have been gaga over it. Then again, I'm in a university town, and an English one at that.

 

[Wombat]

Well, the best example I can come up with is my sister.

She has never read the trilogy, but decided to see the first film anyway, because I had enjoyed the books so much.

She is now desperately in lust with Viggo

As she says, "No man wears dirt as well as he does."

But that is not the only reason she has enjoyed the films. She has liked the action, the drama, the scenery (...she is trying to convince her husband that they need to vacation in NZ very soon...), and all the rest.

Her other comment was, "Now I see why you always liked those books so much!"

 

[Piratecat]

My mother-in-law is more fanatical about the movies than I am. Every woman I know thinks they're great. No, I don't think this is a male-only phenomena.

 

[storyguide3]

I attended Trilogy Tuesday, perhaps the most hardcore "geek" way to see the films, and something like half the people in the theatre were women. And I find that any review that feels the need to defend itself from accusations of "backlash", is backlash, just the kind that the author wishes to disguise.

Anyone who actually SAW the movies without a closed mind and could still say "...obscured what the series really is: an FX extravaganza tailored to an adolescent male's fear of sentiment and love of high-tech wizardry. " must have spent too much time in the concession line and the bathroom. Yes, Frodo and Sam's friendship is catering to adolescent male fears of sentiment. Bollocks.

 

[ASH]

I loved the movies.. I can say that most of the girls i know like the movies.
I am a border gamer geek, but the girls I hang out with are not.
They are young, single, girls who dont really read, and if they do its not fantasy.. usually romance novels.. !

They like the movies just as much as me, and I think they are the best moives I have ever seen.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I'm sure Lord of the Rings does not appeal to women who only read Danielle Steel and Harlequin romances. And frankly, who cares?

I'm sure it also doesn't apeal to highly intelligent women who don't read fiction at all, perfering popularized science and occasional political analysis, but that wouldn't be as insulting and dismissive, would it?

The movies apeal strongly to geeks, and fairly well to men who are not geeks. They apeal to a much lesser extent, imho, to women who are not geeks. A few scenes with frodo and sam being close platonic friends doesn't compare to the amount of action, action, CGI, bad jokes and more action.

And obviously one part of the review was spot on... "Like the two earlier installments, it also arrived with unmistakable social pressure to gush over its sheer size and spectacle. In a cultural version of political incorrectness, expressing anything less than ecstatic praise seems unenlightened if not downright boorish." - or its seen as an excuse to insult the person's intelligence and value as a consumer...

I'm not particularly interested in seeing the newest movie. I woudn't mind, but I'm more interested in getting last minute holiday stuff done and cleaning up after my solstice party. I know if and when I do go, I'll spend part of the movie enjoying myself, part mildly bored by the epic spectacle, and a good chuck closing my eyes to avoid vertigo from the huge swooping slightly out of focus landscape shots. Man I hate those... Actually the combination of cgi battles and swooping cameras gave me a headache when I watched the first two in the theater.

And I am a geek. Go figure...

Kahuna burger

 

[Tom Cashel]

For a writer who makes comments about political correctness, and its affect on what we are supposed to think (as a culture) about these films, she makes no bones about the fact that it just happens to be extremely politically correct to crack on anything that appeals to 67% percent of men and only 33% of women, and to dismiss anything that requires a little concentration as a "geek-fest," when really it is just too much for the writer's "chick-flick"-rotted mind. She can't tell Sauron from Klingons or Jedi? Well, I can't tell one Julia Roberts or Hugh Grant movie from the next. Oh...wait a minute...yes I can, because I bother to use my brain sometimes.

That article is utter poppycock and folderol, a vomitous mass of words spewed forth from a head whose cranial cavity is most likely a bone-barrel of sloshing fluids.