![]() Such companionship ceases to exist only to be recaptured at the end of the film. In addition, main female characters tend to be defined in contrast with other female characters, mostly to their expense, which drives the narrative towards the creation of unhealthy environment and relationship dynamics as far as female companionship is concerned. As Radner (2010) further argues, “the aspects of these films that unite them revolve around the way in which the heroine herself is defined” (Radner, 2010. In all of them, the action of buying feminine clothes, makeup, or shoes represents a large part of women’s identities. In fact, the films presented before act as evidence of such an argument. Radner (2010) contends that “what sets the girly film apart from other films geared towards a female is its focus on consumer culture.” (Radner, 2010. To begin with, the first productions were not directly labeled chick flicks: instead, they were categorized as "Girly Films". Therefore, the aim of this article is to present how such implications have launched the evolution of the genre since the 1990s and how it has clashed with postfeminist theory. Race and ethnicity are topics which chick flicks do not usually approach in depth: as such, they are already found lacking in that department. However, their implications go beyond plot-related issues which this article will explore, such as sexuality, gender, and male-dominated spaces. ![]() Works such as Mean Girls (2004), The Princess Diaries (2001), Clueless (1995), or Pretty Woman (1990) have become quite iconic to the chick flick genre. In its early developments, chick flicks were understood as white female-targeted films which involved white feminine-related topics and whose main female white characters “are often strong, confident and quick-witted, engaging in verbal battles to achieve their ‘happily ever after’ either with their lead male character or with fellow female characters, or sometimes both.” (Wilkins, 2017.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |