Never known for her demure nature, Michelle Rodriguez spoke her mind during the Battle: Los Angeles panel when asked if she’d ever take on some lighter roles to contrast the “macho badass” ones she usually plays.
“What do you mean? Get raped and win an Oscar?” the actress responded, perhaps taking a swipe at actresses like The Accused‘s Jodie Foster and Boys Don’t Cry‘s Hilary Swank.
She continued, commenting that most male screenwriters in Hollywood don’t understand the balance between femininity and masculinity. She said she hopes Salt will prove a game-changer, and more women will start writing strong roles for themselves.
“There are lots of strong, independent women out there,” she said. “They don’t have to be butch like the characters I play.”
you go girl!!!
Good for her for saying that! But the apology will be out in 3…2…
Even though she’s accurate, well said, W. And so true. Studios own actors and they know it.
haha!! that is an awesome response!!
I have no problem with Michelle Rodriguez or with what she said … just want to point out … maybe there’s a REASON why she’s playing the same types of roles over and over and not getting those Oscar-caliber roles.
She is speaking with immense hyperbole but she could be trying to say that Hollywood and/or awards give more attention to rolls where women are broken, fragile or confused as to what makes them happy. She could have said it just a bit smoother..
Wow. I’m really impressed by her. Don’t hear that kind of honesty often in Hollywood. I hope Salt is a game-changer as well.
LOL. I only really know her as the annoying Ana Lucia, but I love her for that answer. It’s nice to see a woman stick with what she likes doing and not give a damn what other people think she ought to do.
Let me get this straight: Michelle Rodriguez wants to be raped and win an Oscar???
No, the point is that she doesn’t.
Salt was written as a man…just pointing it out.
Exactly, and by changing the character to a woman (just by changing the name and other small technicalities) it might show that women can be badasses, but not butch at the same time.
I love her answer. The Academy does have a habit of giving nominations and awards to actresses who play damaged, fragile, and sometimes mentally-unstable women. You can add Halle Berry to the list Rodriguez already started. You hardly ever see nominations for films like Kill Bill. I am amazed that Pam Grier got one for Jackie Brown. But again she did not win. Kate Winslet played a strong character in Titanic. But what did she win the Oscar for? Playing an illiterate, child molesting, former Nazi. Morgan Freeman can win for Million Dollar Baby, but Cate Blanchette can’t win for Elizabeth. I think Ms. Rodriguez has a very legitimate point.
I agree with your overall point – that The Academy likes to award those who take on extreme roles like you mentioned. But some of your supporting arguments are poor and make no sense. Are you trying to say that Kate Winslet gave a better performance in Titanic than The Reader? No way. Her role in The Reader was far better written and worthy of awards recognition than any character that James Cameron wrote.
And so what if Morgan Freeman won for Million Dollar Baby but Cate Blanchett didn’t win for Elizabeth. Are those two roles supposed to have anything to do with each other? Cate Blanchett ended up winning an Oscar for her role as Katharine Hepburn in The Aviator. And Julia Roberts won her first Oscar for playing a very strong and independent woman in Erin Brockovich, but I don’t see you mentioning that.
I absolutely agree with your argument Dave. I, also, think that the Academy awards people who take on extreme and emotionally powerful roles. What do you think is harder to act? An ”illiterate Nazi child molester” or a CIA agent who has to fight to prove her innocence. It takes a lot more talent and skill to play the nazi role.
um, pam grier never got an Oscar nomination for Jackie Brown–only Robert Forster did.
If she want’s to play a bad ass in ever movie let her!
Jodie Foster gave a brave and wonderful performance over 20 years in ‘The Accused’ back when rape was rarely depicted on film, and Hillary Swank became a trailblazing actress overnight by playing a transgender teen in ‘Boys Don’t Cry’. Shame on Michelle Rodriguez if this is indeed a swipe at those actresses. Just because a woman is raped, does not mean she is not a “strong, independent” individual.
I don’t take the comment as a swipe against those actresses, but more as commentary against an industry which doesn’t reward strong displays of femininity. I take the comment to mean that roles for women are either submissive/weak/powerless (and the struggle to come back from that position of weakness) or strong when losing their feminine selves and appropriating a masculine demeanor (and never feeling as though they’ve lost anything by losing their softness). Perhaps I am explaining myself badly but the comment was a sound one.
Very well said. But Salt bothers me a bit since the writers felt the need to alter the husband-wife story from the original script just because they didn’t want to emasculate Salt’s husband (as said in an EW article); the same thing happens with Jolie in The Tourists: the bad guys have to be after her husband, not her.
But I definitely agree with your assessment.
Angelina Jolie is someone who can be awesome in action films and also put out Oscar-worthy work in other kinds of films. Michelle Rodriguez, in my opinion, is not.
God, I love her.