es all had a familiar ring to them. In some cases, in fact, it was hard to tell the difference. Top Hat, for example, "appears to bear a striking resemblance to the first film in which Astaire and Rogers got dual star billing, The Gay Divorcee (1934)...[and] the two are very similar, especially with both plots hinging on a case of mistaken identity" (Nixon). As a matter of fact, "Top Hat could almost be considered a remake-one year later!" (Nixon). Other than the sets and costumes, Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire played essentially the same roles in each of their movies. Their felicitous chemistry engaged the American viewing public to such a degree that this string of copycat films brought Hollywood studios substantial profits.
Another reason for the mask-like persona of women in film was that women were-and probably always have been-feared by men. In most of the decades since Hollywood culture began, directors were always male; it is only in the past two to three decades that women directors and producers have become commonplace. Since, as John Gray suggests, women seem to be from Mars and men from Venus, the movie moguls at the heads of Hollywood studios were as perplexed and intimidated by the feminine psyche as they have always been. The classic male response to fear and intimidation is to control and overpower what they are afraid of, and this is what male producers and directors did to actresses. Women were poured into a role, and the woman herself was never allowed to peek out from behind it.
Third, it must be acknowledged that many of the directors and producers were then, as many are today, homosexual. This sexual proclivity puts a different spin on women than might be sought by heterosexual men. A man who does not experience or truly understand the attraction of a man to a woman is bound to introduce some distortions to the portrayal of a sexy woman in a film. Moreover, there has been at times...