Can They Give the Big Boys a Run for Their Money?

At only 24, Drew Barrymore can be forgiven if she submits to occasional bouts of fear. After all, for the past year, the adoringly sweet actress with the girl-next-door demeanor has faced the daunting task of co-producing one of the most talked-about movies in Hollywood: “Charlie’s Angels.”

The film industry is eagerly waiting to see if young Barrymore can pull off what many veteran filmmakers have rarely accomplished over the years--create a hit action movie starring women.

When Sony Pictures Entertainment put out a casting call for a third young actress to join Barrymore as tough-girl Dylan and Cameron Diaz as bookworm Natalie--it quickly became one of the hottest competitions in years, with the list of hopefuls eager to land the coveted role of Alex ranging from Minnie Driver and Halle Berry to Hilary Swank and Thandie Newton. Even Oscar winner Gwyneth Paltrow stunned the studio hierarchy when she expressed interest in the role, which ultimately went to “Ally McBeal’s” Lucy Liu.

“It blew my mind--it still blows my mind,” Barrymore said of the flood of actresses who saw potential in playing the classy, karate-kicking Alex in the film, which began shooting in Los Angeles this month..

Why the intense interest in “Charlie’s Angels”--an updated remake of the old 1970s TV series--among the best and brightest of Hollywood’s young actresses? Barrymore thinks she knows the answer.

“There aren’t a lot of roles for women to be strong and capable and funny, to really like women and have great camaraderie with them without being feminist, and loving boys and getting to do what boys do, but not trying to be a man about it,” Barrymore observed.

While male stars such as Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford, Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger established themselves as international superstars commanding $20 million to $25 million a picture, largely on the strength of the popularity of their action films overseas, actresses have not exhibited such box-office strength with any regularity.

With the exception of Julia Roberts, no female star has the ability to pull in $100 million in domestic ticket sales in movie after movie--and Roberts excels in romantic comedy, not action-oriented films.

The lack of box-office clout is only one of the problems facing today’s film actresses. From a paucity of true box-office superstars, to the studios’ reluctance to green-light female-driven action films, to persistent age discrimination that narrows their opportunities once they reach 40, actresses are struggling with issues many believed should have been overcome long before the dawn of the 21st century.

There was a time when actresses were a powerful presence on the big screen. They not only captivated the public, but their appeal also often equaled or surpassed those of their male counterparts--women such as Mary Pickford, Jean Harlow, Katharine Hepburn, Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, Greta Garbo, Barbara Stanwyck, Loretta Young, Elizabeth Taylor, Audrey Hepburn, Marilyn Monroe and Sophia Loren.

But where are the towering female stars today?

“Meryl Streep is a tigress at the gates, she is a formidable presence in any film and will humanize any role she is in, but there aren’t many like her,” said Tony Macklin, a film historian at the University of Dayton. “Isn’t it ironic that we are still talking about women making inroads, and yet, they are secondary citizens in film?”

Their struggle comes at a time when women working behind the camera in Hollywood remain underrepresented in such key filmmaking roles as producer, director, writer, cinematographer and editor, and, despite the fact women hold top production positions at Paramount Pictures, Universal Pictures and Sony Pictures Entertainment.

San Diego State communications professor Martha L. Lauzen culled the credits of 221 Hollywood films released in 1998 and found that, in general, women were more likely to be employed behind the scenes on romantic comedies, romantic dramas and animated features than on action-adventure, sci-fi and horror-slasher films. She also found that while the number of female producers working on those films showed a substantial increase over the previous year’s movies, the number of female writers and editors decreased.

The Directors Guild of America, meanwhile, recently issued a report showing that in 1998, female directors worked 10.2% of the total days worked by guild directors--the lowest employment level for DGA female directors since 1990 and the third consecutive year that employment levels for female directors have declined.

*

For actresses, the question is not so much why aren’t there more of them, but why aren’t they as dominant a force as men?

When Entertainment Weekly compiled its annual “Power List” of Hollywood heavyweights last year, using “salary, business deals, style and other factors” to determine the rankings, the highest-ranked actress was Roberts at No. 8. Far down the list were Jodie Foster (59), Helen Hunt (88), Paltrow (89) Barrymore (91), Diaz (92) and Ashley Judd (99).

In terms of box-office clout, Roberts stands head-and-shoulders above the rest. Seven of her films have grossed more than $100 million in North America alone--including last year’s “Notting Hill” and “Runaway Bride”--while three others have earned between $75 million and $100 million. In all, 20 of her top-grossing pictures have amassed a combined $1.4 billion in domestic box office, and her appeal is also profound overseas.

Establishing her rank among the big boys, Roberts is reportedly being paid $20 million to star in “Erin Brockovich,” a pulled-from-the-headlines story about a twice-divorced mother who takes on a major public utility and wins.

“She is so far ahead of other women that she is able to compete on the same level as men,” said Paul Dergarabedian, president of the box-office tracking firm Exhibitor Relations Co., who believes that a key factor in Roberts’ soaring popularity is that she appeals equally to male and female audiences.

“In order to be a huge star,” he explained, “it is imperative for a female star to have appeal to women because if they cannot capture that part of the audience, there is no way they will ever be a reigning box-office champ.”

But even Roberts stumbles when she strays outside romantic comedy. Although she has parlayed that full head of hair and wide smile into such blockbusters as “My Best Friend’s Wedding,” cast her in a ponderous chamber drama like “Mary Reilly” and her magic dissipates like smoke.

While not the box-office juggernaut of Roberts, Jodie Foster demonstrated star power in such films as “The Silence of the Lambs” ($130.7 million), “Maverick” with Mel Gibson ($101.6 million) and the space thriller “Contact” ($100.8 million). Foster’s box-office clout, however, recently took a hit with “Anna and the King,” which is not expected to break $50 million in domestic ticket sales.

Assessing the box-office power of today’s major female stars is tricky because some have achieved their biggest hits when paired with established male superstars, or because they were cast in a film in which the special effects were really the stars, like the tornadoes in “Twister.” (The same can hold true for many male actors. Bill Paxton, for example, had less to do with the box-office success of “Twister” than the computer-generated tornadoes rampaging across the screen.)

Consider the box-office figures for these actresses:

* Meg Ryan’s films have grossed $1 billion in North America, but that includes $176.8 million for “Top Gun,” in which she played a minor role. Her next two biggest-grossing movies paired her with Tom Hanks--”Sleepless in Seattle” ($126 million) and “You’ve Got Mail” (115.7 million).

* Rene Russo’s films have generated $912.5 million in box office, but her biggest hits came in three Mel Gibson movies--”Lethal Weapon 3” ($144.7 million), “Ransom” ($136.5 million) and “Lethal Weapon 4” ($129.7 million)--and one Clint Eastwood film, “In the Line of Fire” ($102.2 million).

* Demi Moore’s 21 top-grossing films have earned $973 million domestically, including $217 million for the supernatural love story “Ghost.” But her star power withered when she tried to carry movies herself; witness “G.I. Jane” ($48 million) and “Striptease” ($33.2 million).

As for other top female stars, the figures break down this way: Sigourney Weaver’s films have grossed a combined $848.6 million; Michelle Pfeiffer, $759.8 million; Sharon Stone, $752.7 million; Meryl Streep, $713.2 million; Susan Sarandon, $651.2 million; Kim Basinger, $550.2 million; Jamie Lee Curtis, $545.5 million; and Annette Bening, $385.8 million.

Meanwhile, Whoopi Goldberg’s films have amassed $1.3 billion, but $312 million of that came in the animated Disney film “The Lion King.” Carrie Fisher’s films have grossed $1.4 billion domestically, although her top three films all involved “Star Wars.” And Glenn Close’s films generated U.S. box office of $980.3 million, although Disney’s animated movie “Tarzan” accounted for $169 million.

The jury is still out on whether Paltrow, Diaz, Barrymore, Berry, Nicole Kidman, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Hunt, Jennifer Lopez, Judd, Winona Ryder, Charlize Theron and Salma Hayek can one day fill Roberts’ shoes.

Dergarabedian said that of all these up-and-coming actresses, Judd has shown similar qualities to Roberts.

“I think the success of ‘Double Jeopardy’ proved she has appeal to both men and women,” he said. “That film was able to do well, in large part, because of her presence in the film. Like Julia Roberts, she appeals to women.” Judd’s films have grossed $420 million.

Among younger actresses, Barrymore has shown strong appeal with teens. “Ever After,” a retelling of the Cinderella story, made $65.7 million, while the loopy comedy “Never Been Kissed” made $55.5 million. Overall, her films have made $1.1 billion, although $400 million of that came from “E.T. The Extraterrestrial,” when she was a child, and $184 million resulted from the Warner Bros. franchise “Batman Forever.”

*

Hollywood observers say that a key reason why today’s actresses have been unable to establish themselves as box-office superstars on a par with men is that they rarely get the chance to headline big action films.

With such notable exceptions as Weaver (the “Alien” series) and Linda Hamilton (the “Terminator” films), actresses rarely succeed in action films.

Geena Davis tried unsuccessfully to become an action star in “The Long Kiss Goodnight” and the disastrous “Cutthroat Island.” Sandra Bullock discovered she couldn’t recapture the success of “Speed” when she starred (sans Keanu Reeves) in the big-budget bomb “Speed 2: Cruise Control.” And audiences never accepted Claire Danes as a high-kicking, karate-chopping babe in a 1999 version of “The Mod Squad.”

While the stylish “La Femme Nikita” drew an avid cult following, its American remake “Point of No Return” and other female-driven action films like “Supergirl,” “Tank Girl” and “Bad Girls,” only gave studios pause. Last fall, Sony also took a financial drubbing at the box office when director Luc Besson’s “The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc,” which featured Milla Jovovich as a strong-willed woman leading French troops into battle, grossed only $14.1 million.

Tom Pollock, a former chief of Universal Pictures, said the economics of today’s global film industry have worked against women.

“It’s more difficult for actresses than actors--there is no question that is true,” Pollock said. “I think the reasons are that film today is more of an international medium than it has ever been before, and I think that there are many countries where the male-dominated movie simply performs better than the female-dominated movie.

“With foreign theatrical revenues now accounting for over 50% of total worldwide theatrical revenues, that translates into what you can afford to pay Arnold Schwarzenegger or Jim Carrey versus what you can afford to pay someone else.”

Pollock said there is no question that “the quality of acting is as good today as yesterday,” but that today’s actresses face a “chicken-and-egg” question.

“I think that as there are fewer opportunities for actresses to show what they can do; that, in turn, creates fewer roles,” he said. “I don’t think you’ll find that true in television, and I also think you won’t find that true in the music business. Look at Alanis Morissette and Janet Jackson. Shania Twain sells more records than men.”

Veteran talent manager Joan Hyler contends that the globalization of the film industry has, in a strange way, hurt actresses.

“Because of the economic necessities of the movie business, where multinational conglomerates are trying to capture the biggest prize, women have not been able to compete,” she said. “However, I think there is going to be a rebirth in female-driven films, led by Gwyneth Paltrow, Cameron Diaz and Drew Barrymore.”

Hyler noted that to succeed on their own terms, top film actresses are branching out into producing and directing films or crisscrossing between movies and television.

Ryan, for instance, has her own production company, Prufrock Pictures, which recently completed its first feature film called “Lost Souls,” starring Ryder, which New Line Cinema will release.

“If Meg wanted to do nothing but star in romantic comedies, she could,” said one Hollywood source. “But she wanted to do some other kind of stuff. I say, ‘Good for her.’ ”

Ryder recently executive-produced and starred in “Girl, Interrupted,” a searing account of troubled girls coping in an institutionalized environment. Ryder spent years trying to get the project off the ground.

Bullock’s production company, Fortis Films, produced “Hope Floats” and “Practical Magic,” two movies that starred Bullock herself. She is also producing the upcoming Hollywood Pictures’ release “Gun Shy,” co-starring with Liam Neeson and Oliver Platt.

And, later this year, Jodie Foster will direct and produce “Flora Plum,” a film about a 1930s circus performer.

Other actresses such as Streep, Sally Field, Close, Kathy Bates and Barbara Hershey have become involved with various television projects in recent years. Meanwhile, Field, Diane Keaton and Christine Lahti are directing movies.

Jeff Arch, who wrote “Sleepless in Seattle,” said studios may say they believe in green-lighting big female-driven movies, but those are usually aberrations.

He pointed out that “First Wives Club,” starring three middle-aged women--Goldie Hawn, Bette Midler and Keaton--took in $105 million at the box office.

“Why was a sequel not made?” Arch wondered.

“Thelma & Louise,” starring Sarandon and Davis, was trumpeted in the media as a trendsetter when it debuted in 1991, yet, Arch asked, “How many female buddy movies have there been since?

“Even when they work, studios are suspicious because movies that feature women and women only don’t make as much money,” the screenwriter said. “Once in awhile, something comes along that is so powerful they break the rules, but I think they would be scared to do that twice.”

But studios may be getting the message.

Hollywood, like the rest of the nation, took notice last year when the U.S. women’s soccer team galvanized the nation by winning the World Cup.

Sony officials believe that just as with the soccer team, movie audiences might finally be willing to accept women in big action roles.

“The franchise is all about women who are incredibly capable, incredibly brilliant, who are great fighters and are beautiful to boot,” said Columbia Pictures Chairwoman Amy Pascal. “It kind of says, ‘You can be a girl and be a superhero at the same time.’ ”

The “Charlie’s Angels” project had been in development at the studio for a long time, Pascal explained. “We went to Drew and she loved the idea and understood, intrinsically, what the movie needed to be about. She has been a real magnet for the movie.”

Barrymore said that from the start, “Charlie’s Angels” was a lightning rod for attention as the film industry took note of every twist and turn in the project’s development. The attention had an impact on Barrymore’s psyche.

“I spent a lot of 1999 being full of fear,” she recalled. “Everything, I thought, could physically hurt me, whether it was a flight of steps or being on an airplane. I was just very scared. I wasn’t doing any characters. I was just sort of producing this movie the whole time and being in the office . . . and I just found myself so scared. But now that we’re [filming], I feel so liberated and it’s so exciting.”

Barrymore knows there are huge risks attached to making a female action movie. In 1994, she co-starred with Madeleine Stowe, Mary Stuart Masterson and Andie MacDowell in the western “Bad Girls,” which proved a major critical and box-office disappointment. She’s trying to follow different role models for “Charlie’s Angels.”

“I like women who are strong, and I like women who are androgynous,” she said. “I think that is why Linda Hamilton and Sigourney Weaver were good examples of great women [in films]. They were completely capable of living in a man’s world. I think that women making no apology for being women is very refreshing.”

To make “Charlie’s Angels” a box-office success, Barrymore knows the film will have to appeal to men as much as women.

“I don’t know if it’s an androgyny I have inside of myself, but I am obsessed with what men will think of the movies that I make,” she said. “I never want to disinclude them. I love working with women, and I love appealing to men’s sensibility. . . . I really like what the male psyche and eye see. I’m really drawn to that. I really want to make something that empowers women but makes men really enjoy it.”

“Charlie’s Angels” has pumped up interest in other female action projects. The Hollywood trade publication Daily Variety has reported that among the female action films being developed at various studios are “Tomb Raider,” based on a video game of the same name; a remake of “Barbarella” (with Barrymore to star); a rumored Joel Silver big-screen version of “Wonder Woman” (possibly starring Bullock); and, “Sugar and Spice,” a film about a group of teen-girl bank robbers.

Barrymore, who spent weeks practicing martial arts for “Charlie’s Angels,” said she can’t wait to play the street-tough Dylan.

“I totally get to be like a street person, someone who, you know, really would jump off anything not knowing what they will land on,” Barrymore said excitedly.

If she lands on pay dirt, actresses everywhere will applaud.