I have been waiting for you to review this one. It’s too bad it didn’t hold up that well. It was an era where there was essentially no such thing as work/life balance. Your job defined you! It was also rare at that time to depict characters as more than one dimensional. Did that back-stabbing, manipulative, unfriendly co-worker actually have a heart of gold? Maybe not. It was also rare to show a woman as being defined as anything besides a housewife, teacher or secretary. Giving a woman (however flawed) an actual voice in a newsroom was groundbreaking. Consider this:
… a study in 1987 on network television news found that, out of 216 stories, males covered 191 of those stories and the remaining 25 went to females. During the same time period, males reported 369 stories regarding government officials, eight times as many stories as females on the same topic (Ziegler & White, 1990).
Believe me - my 1987 self was cheering for Holly Hunter (and that dress), cringing at William Hurt, and wishing Albert Brooks would man up! Wish it had been more fun for the two of you!
We always appreciate more context! Also, we can see our issues with it as an indicator of progress, even if it's not done yet. Did your 1987 self find William Hurt to be attractive though??
William Hurt, attractive? Not in a heart-throb kind of way, but I think he was an engaging actor - I’d consider watching a movie I wasn’t particularly interested in just because he was part of the cast.
I have been waiting for you to review this one. It’s too bad it didn’t hold up that well. It was an era where there was essentially no such thing as work/life balance. Your job defined you! It was also rare at that time to depict characters as more than one dimensional. Did that back-stabbing, manipulative, unfriendly co-worker actually have a heart of gold? Maybe not. It was also rare to show a woman as being defined as anything besides a housewife, teacher or secretary. Giving a woman (however flawed) an actual voice in a newsroom was groundbreaking. Consider this:
… a study in 1987 on network television news found that, out of 216 stories, males covered 191 of those stories and the remaining 25 went to females. During the same time period, males reported 369 stories regarding government officials, eight times as many stories as females on the same topic (Ziegler & White, 1990).
Believe me - my 1987 self was cheering for Holly Hunter (and that dress), cringing at William Hurt, and wishing Albert Brooks would man up! Wish it had been more fun for the two of you!
We always appreciate more context! Also, we can see our issues with it as an indicator of progress, even if it's not done yet. Did your 1987 self find William Hurt to be attractive though??
William Hurt, attractive? Not in a heart-throb kind of way, but I think he was an engaging actor - I’d consider watching a movie I wasn’t particularly interested in just because he was part of the cast.