The term “chick-flick” is synonymous with films predominantly centered around romance tropes, female friendship and emotional narratives. Infamous examples include Clueless (1995) and Legally Blonde (2001) and are rooted in their lighthearted tone and feel-good storytelling, yet they are frequently dismissed as less impactful to action-packed blockbuster movies that dominate male cinema culture. This stark divide in how we value films raises significant questions about gender biases in cinema. Why is the “chick-flick” label used pejoratively and does it undermine the depth and complexity of female-centred narratives? How do we determine the standalone factor that makes these chick-flicks we all know and love so problematic?
The Gender Divide
The problem doesn’t lie with the fact that movies can be marketed toward specific genders — this will always be a strategy of monetisation. Problems do arise however, when we hold different values and levels of importance to these films.“Chick-flicks” primarily take the form of romantic comedies, and these films take specific artistic choices to appeal to their target audiences. Also, character appearances and styling have formed stereotypes on the staple main characters we see in these films. A recurring trope in many “chick-flicks” — the stylish, glamorous woman whose appearance initially overshadows her intelligence. Take Elle Woods from Legally Blonde, for instance. Although we grow to love her determination in becoming a Harvard law graduate, her talents are overlooked by her signature blonde hair, fashionable wardrobe, and bubbly persona, which ultimately stay firmly in the forefront of our minds.
Her transformation from “ditzy girl” to lawyer challenges stereotypes, yet her glamour and charm remain central to the plot of the movie, and ultimately how audiences remember her. This raises an important question: do we subconsciously perceive femininity as superficial, or do “chick-flicks” control our mindsets? Are “chick-flicks” setting back gender stereotypes by decades, and are we allowing it to happen under the guise of entertainment?
Gender Influence on Film Reception
The way in which audiences receive films can depend on the influence of gender stereotypes and gender bias persists. Female-dominated films, such as Mamma Mia (2008) and The Notebook (2004), are more likely to be labelled as “guilty pleasures”, rather than cinema masterpieces and the emotional range and depth of the movies are often dismissed as melodrama. In contrast, male-centred films, such as The Godfather (1972) and Snatch (2000), are often celebrated for their complexity, despite also being emotionally prevalent films. So, is the “chick-flick” label more about content, or about the perceived gender of the target audience? Unfortunately, a “chick-flick” label promotes an unserious cinematic perception about a film that male-centre counterparts don’t even anticipate.
Rethinking the Label
Perhaps the problem isn’t the existence of “chick-flicks”, but the way the term is used to diminish films that focus on women’s experiences. While rom-coms and dramas may not involve high-speed chases or explosions, their emotional resonance and character depth make them just as compelling. Instead of dismissing “chick-flicks” as lesser films, we should recognise their cultural value, just as we do with male-centric genres.
Ultimately, good storytelling transcends gender. The success of films like Barbie (2023), which played with femininity while appealing to a broad audience, proves that female-centered narratives aren’t just for women. If we move beyond gendered labels, we might just appreciate films for the great stories that they are, no matter who they’re marketed toward.
Illustration by Lydia Kempton @lydiak_arts