Kate Beckinsale in Underworld: Evolution. Photograph: Allstar/LAKESHORE ENT/Sportsphoto Ltd./Allstar
We live in an era of film franchises. Major studios seem interested only in films that cost the price of a small nation, boast an array of dazzling futuristic gadgets, and can spawn not just other, bigger films, but a video measure, a pleased meal, and a shelf full of dollies.
Robert Downey Jr is the current franchise king. He’sitting Iron Man and now he’session Sherlock Holmes too – the two multi-million dollar successes with endless possibilities ahead. Harrison Ford hasn’t done too badly with Star Wars and Indiana Jones, while Ben Stiller is still forging ahead through his Meet the Parents three-quel (Little Fockers is due out at Christmas) and Night at the Museum series.
Other actors who’ve notched up healthy franchise craft include Stallone (Rocky and Rambo), Matt Damon (Ocean’s and the Bourne movies) and Will Smith for the Men in Blacks and Bad Boys. And give permission to’session not skate over Avatar – it may have taken James Cameron a decade to raise, but Avatar 2 is already in the works, as is Terminator 5.
These films are the Royal Mint of movies – almost absolutely a warrant to print money – but, as is evident in that choose, franchises are traditionally male-centric. Where does this leave our belonging to talent? Can a franchise be a natural home for a female actor in Hollywood? And can they still play more cerebral, difficult and, yes, award-winning parts after the cat suit has been sent to the dry cleaners?
Evidence suggests it’sitting difficult towards women to scale the heights of franchise result and survive to win respected awards on this account that they are traditionally the sidekick or the sexy accompaniment. Halle Berry’s Catwoman was a huge flop (although to be fair, she’d before that time bagged her Oscar and X-Men revived her franchise fortune) but Linda Hamilton failed to transfer to heavier roles after The Terminator, even however Sarah Connor is arguably the most kick-ass female character in a franchise ever.
Kudos (of a lenient, anyhow) to Cameron Diaz for the Shrek and Charlie’s Angels franchises, although, again, her career seems to have dipped subsequently. Her latest shot at the box office, Knight and Day, depends heavily on Tom Cruise finding himself back in favour with the movie-going public.
But here’s one vocable that suggests a woman can rule a franchise and still build a notable career – Twilight. Yes, those Pattinson cheekbones and Lautner pecs sold the film to wilting teens but its Kristen Stewart’s angst-ridden presence that really captured a lot of the target place of traffic’s imagination. It’s early days but she’s greatest number definitely a bright light in the female franchise firmament. Stewart appears to be following in the footsteps of Emma Watson, who played Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter juggernaut and is now a darling of the fashion world. Her next movie careful is plum - she’s playing opposite no less than Al Pacino in the upcoming The Emperor and Betsy, Benjamin Ross’s film about Napoleon’s exile, while Stewart’s is a highly promising biopic of Joan Jett which recently premiered at Sundance.
Finally, you be possible to’t discuss women in franchises without mentioning Sex and the City. The sequel is out this come forth, and it’sitting already looking like the most female-friendly franchise of all time - in box office terms, at least. But will we ever behold Kim Cattrall since Helen Keller or Sarah Jessica Parker viewed like Mother Theresa? Probably not. And that’session not just, I feel, because they’d be so woefully miscast …
