Helen Mirren blasts H’wood: ‘I’ve always sensed a misogynist & sexist attitude’

Here are some new photos of Helen Mirren and Anthony Hopkins at the UK premiere of Hitchcock. Hopkins has been largely absent from the promotion of this film, I guess because he doesn’t want to participate in the Hollywood thing or the Oscar race or whatever. All I know is that it’s nice to see him, and he looks pretty good. As for Helen… well, you know I love Helen Mirren. You should probably also know that I think Helen is kind of crazy. In Helen’s defense, she’s 67 years old, and some of her notions about sex, rape, prostitution, gender equality and sexism are kind of dated, plus… I think we as a society tend to give older people a pass when they say crazy stuff. We roll our eyes and say, “Yeah. What are you going to do? Crazy old person.” Does Helen’s history of sometimes crazy/wacky statements take away from her talent? Do we give Helen a pass because she’s older and because we love her films? Perhaps. So, what is Helen talking about this week? Hollywood sexism and feminism. And… it’s not that bad!

Dame Helen Mirren has slammed “misogynist and sexist” Hollywood.

The 67-year-old actress has never been interested in starring in major blockbuster movies because of the attitudes of studio bosses, so she can understand why it appears she suddenly got famous after her 2007 role in ‘The Queen’.

Asked about her sudden surge in popularity, she said: “Well, that’s how it looks from the outside. My success grew slowly but constantly. I’ve been working every year since I started acting and I got many awards before I won the Oscar for ‘The Queen’. Maybe it’s because I’ve never been interested in big Hollywood flicks and I’ve only been in a few recently. I’ve always sensed a misogynist and sexist attitude, even in the 60’s and 70’s. Can I say that [1970 movie] ‘Five Easy Pieces’ sucks?”

The ‘Hitchcock’ star thinks it is important to maintain her feminist stance within her career.

She said: “You need to be a feminist. It’s about equality and rights.”

Helen – who is married to director Taylor Hackford – admitted she always expresses her plans to retire when she completes each of her films – but can’t help but accept “interesting” parts.

She said: “I can’t say no to an interesting role. I always tell my husband, ‘That’s it, I quit, I’ve done all I wanted’ and he’s just like, ‘Yeah, yeah. Sure.’ ”

[From The List]

I’m fine with Helen saying “You need to be a feminist. It’s about equality and rights.” It IS about equality. I have no problem with that. But I do think her statement about Hollywood sexism and misogyny is… oddly worded? Is she saying that Hollywood never recognized her talent before The Queen because Hollywood was sexist and misogynist? Was she saying that she never cared to do Hollywood films because of the general, pervasive sexism in Hollywood? Do you see what I mean? It’s oddly worded. Also, I think she’s kind of wrong about her whole career – I was just looking through her IMDB, and while most of her most celebrated roles were outside of Hollywood (in British films and British television), Helen has worked steadily in Hollywood for the past two decades too. So… bizarre, I guess.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

20 Responses to “Helen Mirren blasts H’wood: ‘I’ve always sensed a misogynist & sexist attitude’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. bea says:

    Sandals and pantyhose.

  2. Hautie says:

    Those look like velvet booties and hose… to me.

    But Helen has always been mouthy. Which is what makes her interesting. She is not one to kiss ass. Or try to be politically correct in order to get a job.

  3. Guesto says:

    Not seeing anything odd or contradictory here. She takes on roles that interest her – that some are Hwood productions is just the nature of the acting beast, and doesn’t contradict her perception about Hwood’s pervasive sexism and general unpleasantness. Is pointing that out ‘slamming’? I think not, just stating a fact.

    She is and has been at the top of the tree in acting terms in the UK and Europe for decades so she’s absolutely spot on when she says that this ‘sudden surge in popularity’ is only how it looks from the outside – referring presumably to America.

    • Izzy says:

      ITA. A number of non-American actors have achieved success in their home countries’ entertainment industries. Both the UK and Australia have very robust industries where working actors can actually make a good living doing what they love.

  4. Riana says:

    I just love the photos. There’s something wonderful about seeing two well-aged human beings who have seen and done so mch career wise and haven resorted to jumping on every single role just to make sure their face is seem every few months.

  5. Jo says:

    I think I get where she’s coming from and even if her phrasing is a bit convoluted, she’s basically right. Tinsel Town has always been a toxic place for women and unfortunately, since the ’70s and ’80s, things have gotten to be more and more tougher for them. They’re just making the same types of exploitation movies but they’re just labeling as artsy-farsty now.

    I mean while the guys get to mess around with all sort of scrips and strong parts beginning with their 30s and up, up, up till even in their 80s, the gals arduously fight for them while in the 20s and early 30s (remember Girl with the Dragon Tattoo?). But when they hit 35, the good parts vanish and this continues in their 40s and 50s – with the exception of the occasional secondary roles, mother roles or real life people type of role. Then the parts reappear in their 60s.

    Cuz it’s all about young and fresh so with criticize them for being shallow and superficial and sure there are the exceptions like Chastain and Adams who brokeout late. But they aren’t relevant on the long haul. Two out fifteen is a horrible ratio.

    So yeah, she has a point cuz there just aren’t good scripts out there and not for lack of trying. I exclude the Oscar baits cuz the Oscar is a popularity contest and it’s not relevant for me, it’s not about the best, it’s about the best, it’s about the one who campaigns the hardest and kisses the most asses (see try-hard Anne Hathaway or Natalie Portman). And this is a general problem, even the guys who have it easier, go through hard times movie wise and they have from out to choose. But the actresses have it far worse in my opinion unless your name is Streep, Sarandon or Dench. But please, Streep made memorable movies in her time that’s why she’s still relevant now: Kramer vs Kramer, Sophia’s choice – these are everlasting movies. I doubt Jeniffer Lawrence or Emma Stone will be this successful when they’re in their 60s. They’re just 24 hours news cicle actresses… and when they’ll be another It girl, will be all over her as well and forget all about the Weinsten’s gals.

  6. MrsBPitt says:

    I think she is referring to the fact that there are not that many roles in which women are depicted as smart and strong. That there are far too many roles in which women are only the victims, or the sexy bimbo, or being saved by some “wonderful man”…and I totally agree!

  7. e.non says:

    she’s absolutely right… what do you think drives these women to mutilate themselves in their neverending quest to stay ‘young’.. cause they know there’s a younger version readily available.

  8. CTgirl says:

    Helen Mirren is great. But it is a little disingenuous for Helen Mirren, an actress who has made her bread and butter from sexy roles since the beginning of her career, to complain about sexism in Hollywood. Really? Because I don’t remember ever reading that someone else picked her roles for her 🙂

    • cynicalsmirk says:

      But there is a difference between “sexy” roles and “sexually objectifying” roles, and I believe that is what Ms. Mirren is commenting about. In far too many big-budget films, all the female lead really has to do is look good in clothes, wear low cut tops (or none), push her breasts together and pout at the camera. And I believe someone has already commented on the fact that far, far too many Hollywood actresses have thoroughly destroyed their faces trying desperately to remain young-looking enough to do the above, since all they’re really supposed to be is window-dressing with no intrinsic necessity to the advancement of the film’s plot. Whereas, if a film’s female lead is actually important to the story arc, is shown to be intelligent, of independant thought and “sexy” too…then that character is a person, and not just an animated blow-up doll.

      • CTgirl says:

        Of course that there is a difference between sexy and sexually objectifying. However, Ms. Mirren chose roles in sexually objectifying roles such as Age of Consent, Hussy, and Caligula. I personally think that her best roles have been her least sexual such as Prime Suspect and The Queen. But for someone who built her career on being the sexy English actress of the 1960’s and 1970’s is a wee bit hypocritical. Just my opinion and not earth shattering.

  9. bettyrose says:

    I love HM, but I don’t think of 67 as quite old enough to get a free pass on being old. Still, she’s not really saying anything that she needs a free pass on. Everyone knows that Hollywood is a boys club and women’s roles are not nearly equal to men’s roles. But it wasn’t until I started following this site regularly that I learned about the ways women compete with each other and play manipulative games to land a-list husbands in Hollywood. That probably bugs me more because that’s women making anti-feminist choices in their real life, not just their movie roles.

  10. flotsamrose says:

    I can’t speak to Mirren’s past roles, but I take her statements here to mean that the reason it took her so long to get major name recognition in Hollywood/America was because roles for younger women are so sexed up and the hiring dynamics behind them are generally exploitive. If her first major starring role in Hollywood was as an aged queen (as she suggests), then by her reasoning she had to wait for it.

    Of course, this is some major reading between the lines… Makes me think of how nonsensical most of my navel-gazings probably are–can’t imagine having them published and parsed.

  11. flor says:

    What I do not understand about her is that she was kind of pushing her sexuality when she was younger and you can tell that she still does but of course in a very classy and age-apporpiate way (which I love and respect) but still, she used to did what she is criticizing.

  12. dcypher1 says:

    I luv helen shes a hot old lady and classy too and she can act.

  13. KellyinSeattle says:

    Love Helen!

  14. Issa says:

    Hollywood is filled with ‘isms. Agism, sizeism, racism, sexism, etc…Bet most of Hollywood has been rejected at one point because of a bias view.

  15. Jayna says:

    I agree. Most of the roles for women these days are rom-com lead actress, playing a wife in a big budget movie, sexy young thing – rarely any substantial character-driven leading actress roles. Look back at the era with Betty Davis, Katherine Hepburn, Joan Crawford, etc. How can we have gone so backwards and you hear all actresses now talk about the lack of good roles.

    I think Hollywood has always been misogynist, though.

  16. d b says:

    Love Helen Mirren! I took her comment to mean that she’d have got further along in her career had she gone the casting couch route. Her career is decades long now, but I think she didn’t really hit her stride until fairly recently, last 10-15 years especially. Although she’ll always be an awesome Morgana to me!

  17. muppet_barbershop says:

    The way she said it is clunky, but I think she’s saying that Hollywood’s misogyny and sexism has been an issue for her personally, such that she’s steered clearer of Hollywood than she would have done otherwise. Also I love that outfit. The length is a breath of fresh air, and the cut keeps it from stumpifying her. I love those wacky shoes too.