In the film of Audrey Niffenegger’s The Time Traveler’s Wife, the titular heroine Claire (played by Rachel McAdams) watches Bette Davis in an adaptation of the play Dark Victory. We don’t see her reaction, but her tiny reflection appears on the television screen next to Davis’ face, linking not only the characters in their heartbreaking futures but also the actresses in what feels like a passing of the torch.
Though she’s done everything from comedy (“Mean Girls”) to action-adventure (“Sherlock Holmes”), McAdams’ biggest roles have come in popular tearjerkers like “The Notebook” and “The Time Traveler’s Wife,” stories that follow in the tradition of the “woman’s picture,” melodramas centered on and aimed at women. While cinema has offered some memorably intense performances from actresses in recent years — think Kate Winslet in “Revolutionary Road,” Nicole Kidman and Julianne Moore in “The Hours,” Gabourey Sidibe and Mo’Nique in “Precious” — few of those dramas were made specifically for a female audience.
The classic studio period of Hollywood was a golden era for women’s pictures, drawing the industry’s major talents while commanding big box-office returns. Often adapted from middlebrow novels and plays popular with women, these films were melodramas about the family or a romance (or sometimes both) that ended tragically, offering unforgettable lead roles for actresses: Barbara Stanwyck in “Stella Dallas,” Claudette Colbert and Louise Beavers in “Imitation of Life,” Greta Garbo in “Camille,” Joan Crawford in “Mildred Pierce,” and, of course, Bette Davis in “Of Human Bondage,” “Dark Victory,” and “Jezebel.” Though the number of roles for actresses may be greater today, they lack the emotional and psychological complexity of these earlier heroines.
Fewer films are made for female audiences these days, particularly those that appeal to all ages, and most are standard romantic comedies. But with the commercial success of “The Notebook” in 2004, it seems as if the traditional woman’s drama may be undergoing a quiet revival, with acclaimed young actresses such as McAdams, Anne Hathaway (“Love and Other Drugs,” the upcoming romance “One Day” based on the book by David Nicholls), and Amanda Seyfried (“Letters to Juliet”) in these roles. Although they stick to the basic romantic or familial formula, the tragic nature of today’s films has evolved away from their forebears in a narrative development that goes back to popular tearjerkers of the 1980s (“Terms of Endearment,” “Beaches,” “Steel Magnolias”).
The classic tragic hero/ine, as defined by Aristotle, is a figure whose adversity arises from an error in judgment, rather than a quirk of fate. The female protagonists of these earlier productions clearly fit this archetype; the lives of the women in “Camille” and “Jezebel” turn forcefully on an instance of pride, for example, making them complicit in their own destiny. The modern tragic heroine, however, merely inherits, rather than determines, her heartbreaking ending, usually in the form of incurable disease or sudden death of a loved one. Though Claire, in “The Time Traveler’s Wife,” declares at one point, “I wanted to say it, to assert my own free will,” her future as the tragic wife is already cruelly set. Is it more tragic to bring your fate upon yourself or to have it irrevocably decided?
Whatever your perspective on these tearjerkers, there is no denying the emotional hold they have on audiences, who reach for these films as a catharsis and a comfort. As Debra Winger’s cancer-stricken character in “Terms of Endearment” says, “I want you to tell them it ain't so tragic! People do get better.”