"There are not many roles where women are really active"
About this Quote
A blunt industry diagnosis, the line points to a long-standing gap between visibility and agency. Kathleen Quinlan, a veteran American actor whose career has spanned studio films and television, is not lamenting scarcity of parts per se but the shortage of roles that let women drive the plot rather than orbit it. Active does not simply mean tough or competent; it means a character whose choices set events in motion, whose desires, mistakes, and transformations determine the story’s direction. Too often, women on screen have been written as catalysts for a man’s arc, trophies to be won, or moral compasses that stabilize a hero. They may be present in the frame yet confined to reaction, commentary, or sacrifice.
The remark exposes how power behind the camera shapes power within the narrative. Writers rooms and director chairs historically dominated by men produced templates centered on male quests, leaving women as function rather than subject. Risk-averse financing reinforced the pattern by rewarding familiar formulas and misreading audience appetite for complex female protagonists. Even when women lead a film, they can be yoked to male-defined stakes: a daughter to be saved, a partner to be redeemed, a world built by men to be navigated. The result is a culture where female interiority is flattened, and the range of ambition, desire, and failure afforded to women stays narrow.
Change is real but uneven. Television’s longer arcs have opened space for layered heroines, and more women writing and directing has expanded the palette of agency. Independent and international cinema often goes further, proving demand for stories centered on women who act, err, and evolve. Yet ageism, intersectional blind spots, and the franchise machine keep many roles reactive. Quinlan’s observation still functions as a test: Who makes the decisive choices, pays the cost, and reshapes the world of the story? Until the answer regularly includes women across ages and identities, the industry has not fully solved the problem she names.
The remark exposes how power behind the camera shapes power within the narrative. Writers rooms and director chairs historically dominated by men produced templates centered on male quests, leaving women as function rather than subject. Risk-averse financing reinforced the pattern by rewarding familiar formulas and misreading audience appetite for complex female protagonists. Even when women lead a film, they can be yoked to male-defined stakes: a daughter to be saved, a partner to be redeemed, a world built by men to be navigated. The result is a culture where female interiority is flattened, and the range of ambition, desire, and failure afforded to women stays narrow.
Change is real but uneven. Television’s longer arcs have opened space for layered heroines, and more women writing and directing has expanded the palette of agency. Independent and international cinema often goes further, proving demand for stories centered on women who act, err, and evolve. Yet ageism, intersectional blind spots, and the franchise machine keep many roles reactive. Quinlan’s observation still functions as a test: Who makes the decisive choices, pays the cost, and reshapes the world of the story? Until the answer regularly includes women across ages and identities, the industry has not fully solved the problem she names.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|
More Quotes by Kathleen
Add to List

