I think it's a double standard. Do I think Kaye Beckinsale could beat up Colin Farrell in a fight? Hell no, but I also don't think Harrison Ford could survive falling from a cliff by using just a float boat or that Jessica Biel could fall in love with Adam Sandler if he was a nobody or that Steven Seagal could take down a whole war machine while barely being able to move.

It's action, it's fantasy, it's not supposed to be a David Attenborough documentary, but some male critics suddenly decide they're biologists and are adamant about realism. Like an action movie is true to real life. It's ridiculous.

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

7loUge t1_jebvk1m wrote on March 30, 2023 at 9:49 PM

#2,502,446

Sharon Stone beating up Arnold was completely believable to me.

Man_of_Average t1_jech9em wrote on March 31, 2023 at 12:23 AM

#2,507,756

... You're using Steven Seagal as an example people do believe?

mechaiineramen t1_jeci13r wrote on March 31, 2023 at 12:29 AM

#2,507,962

People DO accept female action stars. It just depends on the movie. Kate Beckinsale did her Underworld shit just fine. Michel Yeoh did a ton of movies in Hong Kong. Uma did it in Kill Bill. Angie did it in Tomb Raider. It's all about the TONE.

Nobody thinks the Indy films are serious. Nobody thinks the female action star movies are serious either. So if you go and make a dead serious movie where a guy falls out if a plane and survives using a boat or a girl kicks a massive dudes ass, yeah, nobody is gonna buy it.

Smug_Dimmadome t1_jecros2 wrote on March 31, 2023 at 1:42 AM

#2,510,679

Replying to Man_of_Average (#2,507,756)

Yeah I can't take OP seriously after reading that lol

[deleted] t1_jedbzxv wrote on March 31, 2023 at 4:39 AM

#2,516,301

Men don't say this.

A small percentage of idiots do.

Posting this multiple times won't change this.