Will we ever see a female-led film franchise?

Will we ever see a female-led film franchise?

It's all well and good for the ladies to don the Lycra and strut their stuff in a superhero flick. But can they pull off the serious stuff once the series is over?

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 game, a happy meal, and a shelf full of dollies.

Robert Downey Jr is the current franchise king. He's Iron Man and now he's Sherlock Holmes too – both 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 with 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 business 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 let's not skate over Avatar – it may have taken James Cameron a decade to make, but Avatar 2 is already in the works, as is Terminator 5.

These films are the Royal Mint of movies – almost literally a warrant to print money – but, as is evident in that list, franchises are traditionally male-centric. Where does this leave our female 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's difficult for women to scale the heights of franchise success and survive to win respected awards because they are traditionally the sidekick or the sexy appendage. Halle Berry's Catwoman was a huge flop (although to be fair, she'd already bagged her Oscar and X-Men revived her franchise fortune) but Linda Hamilton failed to transfer to heavier roles after The Terminator, even though Sarah Connor is arguably the most kick-ass female character in a franchise ever.

Kudos (of a kind, 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 word 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 market's imagination. It's early days but she's most 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 choice 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 can't discuss women in franchises without mentioning Sex and the City. The sequel is out this spring, and it's already looking like the most female-friendly franchise of all time - in box office terms, at least. But will we ever see Kim Cattrall as Helen Keller or Sarah Jessica Parker as Mother Theresa? Probably not. And that's not just, I feel, because they'd be so woefully miscast ...

Source

The obvious female-led film franchise that this article totally overlooks is Sigourney Weaver in the Alien movies, but apart from that, I have to agree, I can't really think of any others. Uma Thurman in Kill Bill?

Cameron Diaz in Shrek counts as a female film franchise win? WTF? Sure, Charlie's Angels had two movies, but you can't really call two movies a "franchise" I think three is the minimum for a franchise, but then in that case, should Keira Knightley get a mention for Pirates of the Carribean? (They are making a third Kill Bill movie, so then would Uma Thurman properly qualify? I guess it depends if the third movie is any good)

Also, Kristen Stewart for Twilight? Seriously?!?!? And how can you even compare Kristen Stewart to Emma Watson?

This article brings up a good point, but I think it uses the wrong examples to make it's point.

Can a female lead franchise work, and work well? Discuss.

Oh! and Milla Jovovich in the Resident Evil movies.

I was about to mention Resident Evil.

Underworld?

Scream? (okay, they stopped making those a while back)

Hm, a lot of horror there, I guess. But you also have Tomb Raider, which never really took off but they could make another one.

Porn?

-HECK!