Angelina Jolie replaces Tom Cruise in spy thriller
By Milly Shaw | 14 August 2008, 16:16
Angelina Jolie has replaced Tom Cruise as the star of new spy film Edwin A Salt.
According to BBC Online, Tom Cruise had a long-standing connection to Edwin A Salt. After his departure, several other male actors expressed interest in the script but the directors decided it was best suited to Jolie.
Supposedly, the only changes that will be made to the film as a result of Jolie stepping to the role will be the gender of the character and the title of the film. If this really is the case then it’s fantastic news for a film industry not exactly famous for gender equality.
Jolie is clearly no stranger to strong characters in action-led films. From Tomb Raider’s Lara Croft to Wanted’s Fox, it’s tempting to think that Jolie’s characters are throwing punches for feminism and showing that women can be just as tough as men.
But look a little closer and the reality is that Jolie’s characters are usually there because male characters need some kind of love interest. Even when she plays the lead, as with Tomb Raider, she’s still really there to be an object of lust, for the audience if not the characters. Guys love a sexy tough girl. Let her fight, but she has to fight in short shorts and tight shirts.
So if the rumours are true and the only change will be flipping Edwin to Edwina, then congratulations to the film-makers for accidentally making a mainstream feminist action flick.
If Jolie does and says everything that Cruise would have, with no new male characters to save her or bed her, then not only will it probably pass the Bechdel test, it would also be a wonderful slap in the face for Warner Bros president of production Jeff “We are no longer doing movies with women in the lead” Robinov. Go Angelina.
Have your say
In order to keep this blog as a feminist and friendly space, comments will be subject to some rules. We do not seek to censor debate: the beauty of the internet is that anyone can set up their own blog or website to express their views.
- This blog is a safe and friendly space for feminists and feminist allies. Debate and critique are welcome where it is constructive and deepens analysis or understanding. Anti-feminist comments will not be approved. We get to decide what's anti-feminist.
- All comments must be approved by one of the bloggers. For this reason, there may be a delay before your comment appears.
- No sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, classist, ablist comments, comments which make personal attacks on any blogger or commenter, or comments that are otherwise deemed offensive by us will be posted.
- Trolls will be banned from commenting. We get to decide who is a troll.
- No anonymous comments - please feel free to use your real name or make one up, though.
- Be nice.
Feeds
Soirore said:
Well having Jollie in the lead does not ensure that the film will pass the Bechdel test as it requires another female character.
Also, this is not the first time this has happened. Jodie Foster's character Kyle Pratt in Flightplan was originally written as male and this time they didn't even change the name. It worked much better as a female character too.
Not that this all isn't nice but don't pretend that it indicates a move away from sexism on the part of Hollywood. Jolie has rarely been in a film that doesn't accentuate her sexiness whatever kind of character she plays. That's her persona; sexy, tough and a bit naughty. We'll see how the film is marketed, how she's costumed and who else is cast and then we'll be able to draw conclusions.
Posted on 14 August 2008 at 4:44 PM
Sabre said:
She wasn't particularly sexed up in A Mighty Heart was she (haven't seen it yet so not sure)? Or Girl, Interrupted. Or Hackers.
To be honest I think she is so sexy that it almost can't avoided! She'd even look awesome wearing a sack.
Posted on 14 August 2008 at 5:15 PM
Redheadinred said:
Ellen Ripley in the 'Alien' series was originally written as a male character.
I'm glad to hear about Jolie replacing Tom Cruise. I can't stand TC anyhow, but it's cool that they've decided to do this.
You know, it never ceases to amaze me how little filmmakers do something which makes their film unique and intriguing, which is to have an unstereotypical female lead. Seems they'd rather play it safe and ignore the publicity and approval that films like 'Terminator' and 'Alien' have enjoyed.
Posted on 14 August 2008 at 5:16 PM
Hazel said:
What might be interesting is to think of a female role that would work if taken by a man.
And I am reminded of Linda Hunt playing a man in The Year of Living Dangerously and winning an Oscar for it.
Posted on 14 August 2008 at 5:57 PM
Renee said:
If they actually follow throw and film the movie as if Tom Cruise were the lead it has the potential of being an excellent movie for women. We will see though, I have a lack of trust in the entertainment industry.
Posted on 14 August 2008 at 6:30 PM
frau sally benz said:
IF (big if here) they keep the movie as it is and just use Jolie, then I'd be pretty darn excited. While it doesn't mean that Hollywood is changing its sexist ways, small victories are still victories. Having a woman play the same exact role that was intended for a man breaks down gender stereotypes. Simple as that.
But, somehow I am not yet convinced that this will happen here. As Sabre said, it's sometimes unavoidable because Jolie is such a sex symbol. We'll see what happens!
Posted on 14 August 2008 at 8:06 PM
Lucie said:
To be fair, it's hard not to be skeptical about how this film will turn out. It's just a case of how much innuendo, lingering camera angles and dialogue changes there will be.
Posted on 14 August 2008 at 11:26 PM
BareNakedLady said:
Soirore: Jolie has rarely been in a film that doesn't accentuate her sexiness whatever kind of character she plays.
-Agreed. But then she does choose to be in the films, so if it's what she wants to do, I for one am not going to complain ;)
And I thought that one of the (very) few good things about Wanted was that the leading guy/girl didn't get together. It made her character much more independent.
Posted on 15 August 2008 at 9:16 AM
Sarah said:
It's an interesting effect when an originally male role is played by a woman, Ripley in Alien of course, and the new Battlestar Galactica comes to mind. I suspect it's because often writers fall into the trap of writing a 'female role' for women, with all the restrictions and cliches that involves, whereas if the role was originally intended to be male, there's much more scope for just writing an interesting human role. It's a shame it has to be that way, of course.
Posted on 15 August 2008 at 9:55 AM
Stephanie said:
I think it's only me that's dissappointed that Angelina is replacing TC. I dislike them both in equal measure and would have much preferred if TC was replaced by someone who got lead roles because...(wait for it)...*drumroll* ..they could actually act.
And not because of how they look. There's a million talented actresses out there who never make it because they're not what Hollywood thinks is pretty enough for the screen...
Posted on 15 August 2008 at 12:38 PM
Jacob said:
What'd be really good is if love interests in the film stay the same genders. I'm guessing it had a hetro script, will angie get a girlfriend... I'd bet that'd be too far for them!
Finding Angelina Jolie hot is just a matter of opinion, but many male actors do pretty good on their sex appeal too and it doesn't seem to dent patriarchy much. I find her confidence attractive to be honest, and I'd rather hope that'd have a good impact on female viewers.
I think male fetishising of powerful women they find attractive is just a way of pretending that they don't exist beyond male terms, are not self-defined. But that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with BEING an attractive, powerful woman.
I stongly second the above suggestion, I would love to see a man in a traditionally female role in a major blockbuster. I think that'd be far more ground breaking, and do a lot more to change male self-perception which essentially is the real cause of sexism towards women.
Posted on 16 August 2008 at 6:46 PM