Oscar season approaches, which means that once again it’s time for the annual cry of … There-Are-No-Good-Roles-For-Women! Maybe “cry” isn’t the best word. ”Whine” is more suitable — from a self-inflicted wound. Here’s a taste of this year’s first-whine from a Hollywood Reporter story titled: Shallow Pool for Oscar’s Actress Contenders:

How shallow is the pool? Some are talking about performances such as Sandra Bullock’s in the feel-good film “The Blind Side

The lack of depth has led to a slew of awards-season chatter, from the expected downplaying — all categories are cyclical — to blanket explanations about studios making fewer awards movies in general. …

But it also highlights that, for all the strides made by the women behind the camera, the women in front of them can still be subject to the old prejudices. Indeed, the more cynical in town — including at least one actress awards-contender — say that the director and actress trends are hardly a coincidence. Many female directors, they argue, can feel pressure to cast a preponderance of strong male leads to negate the perception that theirs is a female-oriented film.

The article is simply wrong on one very important point. These aren’t “old prejudices,” these are new prejudices.

Back in the bad old studio days when a handful of Republican men ran everything, women ruled. Well, maybe not “ruled,” but they were a steady force at the box office because those Republican men spent millions grooming girls into movie stars and building A-pictures around them. (And for a while, Rita Hayworth did rule Columbia.)

At one time or another, Bette Davis, Katherine Hepburn, Barbara Stanwyck, Olivia De Havilland, Jean Harlow, Mae West, Joan Crawford, Norma Shearer, Janet Gaynor, Mae West, Claudette Colbert, Ginger Rogers, Myrna Loy, Alice Faye, Judy Garland, Ingrid Bergman, Bette Grable, Esther Williams, Marilyn Monroe, Grace Kelly and many, many others worked as regularly and earned nearly as much success (and sometimes more) as their male counterparts in all kinds of films, including big-budget prestige pictures that put many butts in many seats. At one time or another, each was was a stand-alone movie star and many enjoyed long legendary careers.

Did a paternalistic and sometimes sexist system force these women to fight for decent roles in-between casting couch wrestling sessions? Of course, but anyone who wants to argue something’s changed should drop me an email inquiring about a bridge for sale.

But the real story is just how many of those fights were won allowing these immortals to leave behind a wealth of films loaded with strong, dignified, feminine performances that will live for as long as there’s civilization. And what won those sometimes historic battles wasn’t some sense of entitlement over ”fairness.” These women were as tough as they were talented. 

So what changed?

Well, you tell me.

Forty years ago the left started their takeover of the film industry. Now that they own it fully there are more women in executive positions than ever before, and yet most every year you can hear the scrape of a barrel bottom when Oscar nominations are announced.

Sounds to me like some sensitivity training is in order.

But it’s really about the free market. Women don’t draw like they once did and you can trace the reason for that to the roles and the actresses themselves. Somewhere along the line, ”acting like men” became confused with strength, and nudity and sex with romance. Other than a natural charisma and a dab of talent, the secret to stardom is retaining enough sense of mystery to allow audiences to project what they want on you, and nothing breaks that spell quicker than the literal and figurative baring of the ass. 

On the big screen, as in real life, it’s hard to respect someone you’ve just seen tramp around cussing like R. Lee Ermey in “Full Metal Jacket.” For the men in the audience, the illusion is shattered (lust fades, love lasts forever) … for the women, they can no longer relate. Offscreen, no one likes a loudmouth trashing who you are and what you believe in. You can sum the whole problem up in a word … ”class.”

But in the true spirit of socialism, present-day Hollywood’s solution is not an attempt to rebuild the female movie star but to foster equality through the dragging down of the male star.

The death of the movie star is no longer just a “woman’s problem.” Narcissism is an equal-opportunity affliction and without those sexist, paternalistic conservative studio bosses to look out for their shared interests, both male and female stars have worked overtime to deconstruct themselves in the eyes of the public. And so…

…today the chickens and roosters are coming home to roost.

I also found these quotes from Ms. Fox:

“I don’t want to have to go on talk shows and pull out every single S.A.T. word I’ve ever learned, to prove, like, ‘Take me seriously, I am intelligent, I can speak.’ I don’t want to have to do that. I resent having to prove that I’m not a retard.”

And…

“Women are expected to be conformist automatons in L.A. but in Britain you can be more yourself and people will take you on face value.”

Far be it from me to point out that the base audience for “Transformers” is young males in Middle America, the same men that Fox condemns to a robot apocalypse.  I doubt the bi-coastal elites from Beverly Hills to the Upper West Side will be waiting in line for the midnight showing of Michael Bay’s latest opus.  Alienating your core audience is never a good idea.  Perhaps Ms. Fox holds an associate’s degree from the Timothy Geithner School of Business Management.

Fox asserts that she is “not a retard” and that she bucks the system by not being a “conformist.”  Is it bad for me to call foul on both points?

I learned something a long time ago.  Back in my fraternity days at USC (oops, man, did I just give the Huffington Post ammo?… A USC FRAT BOY!!!!!!  No wonder…) I noticed how the guys who constantly bragged about their sexual prowess really didn’t do too well.  The guys who were discrete, never bragged, never felt the need to prove anything, had a steady stream of attractive dates and girlfriends. The braggarts would spend their weekends regaling in tales of three ways and sex with strippers while drinking forty-ouncers and challenging each other to games of “Street Fighter” on the Super NES.

The same goes for intelligence.  When you feel compelled to tell the world how smart you are, how intellectual your positions are, how deep your education runs, the sad truth is that you probably aren’t that bright.

Megan Fox is a panderer.  She trashes Middle America to the British Press.  She wears “Star Wars” T-shirts to make Fan Boys drool, then calls those Fan Boys “retards” to the hipsters in Silver Lake.  She talks up her intelligence and non-conformity…. by making stupid, conformist statements.

Lauren Bacall made this observation about Hollywood: “When I first went into pictures, women absolutely ran the show. Bette Davis practically owned Warner Brothers.”  Bacall doesn’t know many of the stars of today. “They’re all too self-involved, y’know? And they’re so unaware of what goes on anywhere else.”

Hmmmm…is there any way that we can draw a parallel between the rise of “correct” thought in Hollywood as evidenced by self-absorbed automatons like Megan Fox and the observation that Hollywood used to be BETTER for women?  Is it, perhaps, that whiny divas who parrot talking points to look cool, who lack independent thought and rely on their good looks instead of honing their craft, have made Hollywood WORSE for women?  That may be a stretch.  Maybe I need some self-professed smart person to help me make that argument.

Bacall, Bette Davis, Katherine Hepburn, Joan Crawford…these women are legends.  Not just because they are superior, gifted actresses, but because you can feel their presence, their intellect, their “moxie” in every thing they did.

As a reformed frat guy I can tell you…these women had “balls!”

I have a friend.  An actress.  The one pictured above that you might not recognize.  Her resume is similar to Fox’s, before her lucky break in “Transformers.”  This actress is not an automaton.  Her politics are a unique blend of feminism, social liberalism, libertarianism, and hawkish neo-conservatism.  She has a business degree from BYU, although she’s never mentioned it to anyone to further her “smart” credentials.  When she walks into a party she doesn’t instantly turn the conversation into a discourse on her sexual habits a la Ms. Fox, nor does she sit by and let a comment about that “fascist George Bush” go by without a rebuttal.

Yet while Megan Fox was busy being pampered on the set of “Transformers,” this actress worked with me on the direct to video knock-off movie “Transmorphers.”  While Megan Fox sat in her trailer waiting for make-up, this actress did her own make-up, then stood outside in the freezing rain for 12 hours in an old junkyard near Topanga.  While Megan Fox pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars, this actress got paid $50 a day.  No complaints.  No crying.  Just smiles and hard work.

Yes, Megan Fox, women in Hollywood still face issues and obstacles.  But not in the way that you think.  While you are gaming the system, being part of the problem and not the solution, others are advancing the cause despite you.

I know a couple of other actresses like my friend.  They feel alienated, blacklisted, and closed off.  Not because they are as attractive as Megan Fox and people can’t get past their looks.  Not solely because of the male stranglehold on Hollywood.  They feel out of place because they have “balls.”

And the last thing you want to be in the tolerant world of Hollywood is a woman with “balls.”

Megan Fox is clearly lacking a pair.

Julia Roberts and Clive Owen star in the fun, smart DUPLICITY, from writer/director Tony Gilroy

Roberts’ last starring role was in 2003’s Mona Lisa Smile ($63.8M domestic), and since then she has become a full-time Mom. Overall, she has 8 movies on her resume that have reached $100M in the US with her as a lead (I’m not including the Ocean’s Eleven franchise). Her most successful string of movies started in 1997 with My Best Friend’s Wedding ($127.1M cume) and ended with her Oscar winning performance in Erin Brockovich ($125.6M cume). During that span, she starred in 6 movies, generating an average of $115M in domestic box office.

Katherine Heigl is one of the actresses getting all of Roberts' old ingenue roles

But, she has entered the “danger zone” for any actress. All the types of roles that Julia used to turn into $100M blockbusters are going to Katherine Heigl, Kate Hudson, Anne Hathaway, Reese Witherspoon and Elizabeth Banks. What’s a 40+ woman to do?

DUPLICITY writer/director Tony Gilroy

She should be looking for smartly-written, age appropriate movies with some pedigree (co-stars, director, etc.). That is exactly what Duplicity is. Writer/director Tony Gilroy wrote the Jason Bourne movies, and his last film, Michael Clayton, was nominated for 7 Academy Awards. The result is an excellent movie. Clever, smart and charming, and Julia Roberts isn’t trying to pass herself off as an ingénue. The movie was expected to open to about $15M, and that’s exactly what it did, and still, bloggers write things like Julia’s Comeback: Audiences Say Go Back and people question if she’s still a draw.

For comparison sake, here is, to the best of my knowledge, the all-time box office champs for movies starring 40+ actresses above the title.

Glenn Close as Alex Forrest in FATAL ATTRACTION grabbed over $156M

ALL-TIME TOP 15 GROSSING MOVIES WITH A 40+ FEMALE LEAD
1. Fatal Attraction – Glenn Close (40) – $156.6M cume
2. Sex & the City – Sarah Jessica Parker (43) – $152.6M cume
3. Mamma Mia! – Meryl Streep (59) – $144.1M cume
4. 101 Dalmations – Glenn Close (49) – $136.2M cume
5. The Devil Wears Prada – (57) – $124.7M cume
6. Something’s Gotta Give – Diane Keaton (57) – $124.7M cume
7. On Golden Pond – Katherine Hepburn (74) – $119.2M cume
8. Terms of Endearment – Shirley MacLaine (49) – $108.4M cume
9. First Wives Club – Diane Keaton (50), Goldie Hawn (41), Bette Midler (51) – $105.5M cume
10. The Client – Susan Sarandon (48) – $92.1M cume
11. Flightplan – Jody Foster (43) – $89.7M cume
12. Moonstruck – Cher (41) – $80.6M cume
13. The Bridges of Madison County – Meryl Streep (46) – $71.5M cume
14. Bird On Wire – Goldie Hawn (45) – $70.9M cume
15. 102 Dalmations – Glenn Close (53) – $66.9M cume

In other words, it is a longshot for a mature woman to open a film in a big way. Last year, Hollywood gave us Mamma Mia! and Sex & The City, but they were both based on popular source material. The only other movies that starred 40+ actress to generate significant receipts were Australia ($49.5M cume) starring Nicole Kidman (40), Nim’s Island ($48M cume) featuring Jody Foster (46) and Nights in Rodanthe ($41.8M) with a 43-year-old Diane Lane.

Meryl Streep had Universal Studios execs jumping for joy with MAMMA MIA!

Given the nature of the business, is it really fair to say, “Julia Roberts can’t open a movie anymore?” The reality is that it is very rare that any woman north of 40 “opens” a movie, and let’s face it, ABBA opened Mamma Mia! and HBO created the success of Sex & The City.

In fact, I would argue that Duplicity is an excellent choice for the former $20M-per-movie star. You could argue that it is quite similar to Adam’s Rib, the movie that Katherine Hepburn starred in at the age of 41, a romantic comedy featuring she and Spencer Tracy as husband and wife operating, as lawyers on opposite sides of a big case. Duplicity is a very good modern-day parallel, not a classic like Adam’s Rib, but very good.

Kyra Sedgwick has scored big with THE CLOSER on TNT

Increasingly, the best roles for women 40+ are on television. Kyra Sedgwick (The Closer), Glenn Close (Damages), Holly Hunter (Saving Grace), Edie Falco (The Sopranos), Vanessa Williams (Ugly Betty) and Sally Field (Brothers & Sisters) have all found meaningful work on the small screen, but with two young kids, the TV series grind isn’t likely in the cards right now for Roberts right now.

Based on the $14.5M weekend and the fact that Females 25 Plus don’t often rush out to see a movie on opening weekend, I think it’s reasonable to project a $40M-$45M domestic gross – maybe even $50M. Michael Clayton only reached $49M in the US, so is Julia’s drawing power that much inferior to George Clooney?

In my mind, Duplicity is a creative success and, although the jury is out on commercial viability, it is by no means a disaster. Good for Julia Roberts that she has devoted herself to full-time motherhood. I’m glad she chose a project with an IQ, and I hope she continues making smart career choices. Her success will be of service to other actresses in Hollywood – those who are 40+ now, or will be someday.

Steve Mason is on Facebook and now also on Twitter@LAMase.

5pm PST - Stage Door (1937) – Women at a theatrical boarding house try to make their big break happen. Cast: Katharine Hepburn, Ginger Rogers, Adolphe Menjou, Gail Patrick Dir: Gregory LaCava BW-92 mins, TV-G

Because it conflicts with Big Hollywood’s live-blogging of the Academy Awards, under penalty of our disapproval and no small amount of pouting, you’ll have to set the DVR for this classic gem containing more bona fide female stars than you’re likely to see during all nine hours of tomorrow night’s Oscar telecast.

Katherine Hepburn, Lucille Ball, Eve Arden, Ann Miller and Gail Patrick round out one of those dream casts the Golden Age frequently served up, but it’s 25 year-old Ginger Rogers who walks away with the film, stealing it right out from under the rest in one of the best performances of her career.

For good reason, Rogers is best known for the ten glorious musicals she made with Fred Astaire, but here’s a chance to see that the smart, sexy, sassy Rogers would’ve had no problem becoming an immortal all on her own.