She makes a great point, and depictions of women such as those in the movies she cites should be avoided, but I think we should try to maintain a balance in our portrayal of female protagonists. “Hunger’s” success is partially based on the wide appeal of its teenage hero, Katniss Everdeen, who makes it through the movie without a single scene of sexual objectification (despite opportunities to work this into the story). Katniss is a believable, reluctant hero. She succeeds where other female heroes have failed because she isn’t a FFT ... Precisely. Katniss is a fully formed, multilayered Protagonist, not reduced to an object or the object of romantic or sexual desire." Does this preclude believable female protagonists from ever having a romantic/lover side, for fear it will automatically result in them being condemned as FFTs? Isn't this denying how reality itself actually works when it comes to male/female relationships? I'm not saying the bizarre fever dream known as Sucker Punch is a correct approach, but something more along the lines of Point of No Return with Bridget Fonda (I know, a remake of Le Femme Nikita): She kicks ass but she still allows room for a sexual relationship with a man in which he asks her out, buys dinner for her, etc. The relationship eventually breaks down (from what I remember) because of her secret life, but I think it struck a balance. My wife is a highly intelligent, strong woman. However, she still likes to hear "You look beautiful" from time to time, and she's been known to like the occasional piece of jewelry--and shoes, for the love of God, don't forget the shoes--as well. Non-News flash: Women are complex. All I'm saying is avoid swinging the pendulum so far to one side just to make some kind of sexual political point about FFTs that you wind up sacrificing authenticity in your stories. I think it was Robert McKee who wrote in Story that when an audience gathers to watch a movie, its collective IQ jumps by 25 points—they'll detect anything inauthentic and check out of your story.

I don't think studios aim to keep women down by creating FFT characters and franchises. I think studios view their audiences as dolts and make product accordingly. They think we're all stupid, knuckle dragging, heathens. That's why we even have the concept of a FFT. Just go back and watch all the strong female leads in old movies when the people were no divided into a million little special interest groups and activists. Barbara Stanwyck in MEET JOHN DOE comes to mind. THIS is a strong female role. What happened Hollywood? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFNdy1rbeaw

An interesting perspective for a protagonist who, gasp, didn't do much to overcome many of the situations the story placed her in. The whole bees nest in the same tree had me groaning a bit, but following that with the emcee's telling "the audience" those aren't normalbees was especially so. Then there was the other tribute who saved Katniss from sure death, killing her attacker with no apparent motivation other than "just because". Seemed both were a little deus ex machina-ish. And what was up with the dogs at the end? Huh? Somebody said they were detailed more in the book, but the whole bit felt forced - as did the "uprising" forcing the change of rules. As for the movie being a wake-up call against the FTT... I don't know about anyone else, but Sigourney Weaver never turned me on in Aliens. Am I missing something? Same with Jodi Foster in Silence of the Lambs. Though it's not an action film, it certainly lends itself to a multi-layered characterization devoid of sexuality.

Wake up call? Didn't James Cameron already do that with Aliens and Terminator 2? The female action star isn't something new. The fact is that most action stars, male or female, are horribly thin characters. That's why most action movies suck. If you have a complex, identifiable character in your action movie, chances are they're going to seem human and vulnerable, meaning in all the action they might actually get hurt. You care if they live or die. That's what make action exciting. There must be danger! All the great action movies have these vulnerable characters. All the lousy action movies have impersonal, indestructible robots for protagonists.

I read this a few months back, by Theresa Couchman via John August's site. "[It] would’ve been nice if a studio that’s known for creative and original storytelling had decided to do something more interesting with their first female protagonist (in SIXTEEN YEARS) than make her…a princess. Who’s cool because she’s good at “boy” stuff. How fresh and exciting! Ugh." (http://johnaugust.com/2011/wishing-pixar-were-braver) I'm all about balance, (full disclosure: I wrote an Action/RomCom with a fashionista sniper protagonist), but let's be honest, female leads are a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. Someone, somewhere is going to shout, "FTT!" while others bemoan, "Masculine Pursuits Ideal Syndrome!" So, per CJ's brilliant point, "Women are complex," for the screenwriter, shouldn't that be the fun part? ;)

In a strange piece of synchronicity, I've been thinking a lot about female action protagonists a lot over the last few days (and bending the ears of my long-suffering fellow writers on the subject!) I've been coming to the conclusion that, as Bryan says, a lot of action movie protagonists are thinly written characters. Mallory in Haywire isn't a particularly rounded female character - but she's no less rounded than any of the men in the movie. But I've also also to the conclusion that as long as so many action movies only have one female character, they'll keep getting away with using "she's a woman" as a characterisation. If there's more than one woman in your movie, you have to give them actual *characters* to differentiate them from each other, instead of relying on their gender to differentiate them from the male characters. So, more female characters = better written female characters. Quantity = quality!

(hit "post comment" slightly too early, must just add...) The Hunger Games has five, possibly six significant female characters. All well differentiated from one another. Thus appearing to prove my point.

What about a Barbarella/Rose Sayer mashup. Kick arse with snark to boot. Although perhaps ditch the skimpy chain mail outfit http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6550847/female-armor-sucks

While I sympathize with the argument, the facts don't support her case. To start with, most movies with actresses as the main lead do poorly at the box office. The only exceptions to these are films based on teen-lit properties (Twilight, Hunger Games), and the occasional romantic comedy/drama. http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2012&p=.htm So far this year, out of the top 30 movies, female leads hold the #1, #8, #9, #21 and #24 spots Last year: #4, #21, #24 and #38. I should also point out that the last Resident Evil movie made more money worldwide than Bridesmaids. And along with the Underworld series (and was there ever a more fetishized heroine than Selene?) is a true franchise featuring strong, kick-ass female leads.

We have a similar idea for a movie:) I've been writing an action black comedy (basically 9 to 5/Sex & the City meets Three Days of the Condor by way of Nikita), where I'm exploring via sub-text how sexism, ageism and other prejudices vary according to gender (It's partly an allegory for how Hollywood treats actresses, particularly when they reach 40 or older, vs the way Hollywood treats male stars) While it's action-packed and sexy, I'm also trying to make it truly intelligent and plausible, with strong female characters. However, as a man, I keep questioning myself if I'm projecting my fantasies onto my female characters. I think I have myself under control, but I'm wondering if you had that issue, and how did you deal with it?

Exactly this. It's par for the genre. Groan. When was the last time we had a male action star with receding hair line, beer gut and carpal tunnel? Tom Cruise and Ryan Reynolds must have been double-booked that day. And what exactly makes Katniss a fully-formed, complex protagonist? Being saved by three deus-ex machinimas? Being the only attractive female from a district of supposedly starving coal-miners? Being the only attractive female in the games? Or perhaps it was her having that mega-hunk of a crush waiting for her back at home while she was being pursued by the quirky and charming cutie from the games? Dear me, what a complex dilemma for such a down-to-earth, representative female; having no less than two hunks vying for your affection! What a wake-up call for female protagonists! And good thing she wasn't sexified -- what with her flaming cocktail dresses and Tomb Raider-like leather getup while frolicked about firing arrow with sniper-like accuracy. Good thing indeed.

"I keep questioning myself if I’m projecting my fantasies onto my female characters." It's a constant back and forth, isn't it? I finally realized that if I set up an aspect of the character early on, then I could intelligently/plausibly pay off with a bit of fantasy later. Example: Page 1 sets up that Protag loves all things Paris, (Protag's goal) especially her lingerie collection meticulously stored in her Salvation Army Thrift Store armoire. Page 2 reveals she's a sniper with the FBI-HRT unit on her way to work. So when on page 8, she sneaks in a shopping session before her unit's practice drill at a high-end mall, it's perfectly plausible to have Protag in a Victoria's Secret dressing room in a pretty Paramour Pink bra, trying to make a purchase decision while her Rambo Boss shouts at her over the walkie-talkie clipped to her gun duffle bag. Is she half-naked? Yes. But is the intent to make her an object? No, it's part of who she is, she loves lingerie (established) and during her walkie-talkie convo with Boss, she's clearly no push-over. I do the same with the male lead, he has his eye candy moments, but I've previously set up the scenarios, so when I pay them off, they are plausible and don't yank us out of the moment to groan, "Obligatory hard body scene!" One more thing, SEX and VIOLENCE are the bread and butter of screenplays, or so I've read from the Greats. S&V can be ALL CAPS or watered down as needed. I'm a big fan of fantasy, and I tend to think most movie goers are. ;)

Caroline Heldman also has a Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/carolineheldman

Let's all go read Strong Female Characters at Hark, A Vagrant and then continue this discussion.

Josh, that's great. While I'm glad there's been some good give and take about the specific issue of female characters, the reason I followed up the OP with two about characters as 'profound individuals' is to drive home the point about how we should strive to dig deeper into ALL our characters.

[...] the fighting f- toy (??????????? ????????????, ?????????, ?????????2),  the sexy sidekick (??????????? ???????? ??????? ?????), the sexy [...]