Women directors just can’t catch a break these days, with social media crusaders raising pitchforks and torches every time a new film of theirs hits cinemas. It is an absurd level of criticism they are subjected to that we do not see to the same extent towards their male counterparts. Whether it is emotionally manipulative, technically lacking or just plain boring, there is always an element of discontentment channelled towards them.
The scrutiny heightens when women direct features based on books, plays, or existing intellectual property, often labelled as unfaithful adaptations. With Chloé Zhao experiencing multiple hit pieces from Variety and Vulture with her Oscar-nominated Hamnet (2025), and now with Emerald Fennell receiving heavy criticism for the newly released “Wuthering Heights” (2026), audiences and critics alike seem to have a problem with women adapting stories. But where has this stemmed from? And are we really happy to accept this as the new norm?
MCU Throws Women Directors to the Wolves
Comic-book movie culture is partly to blame for allowing this behavior to slide without consequence, as it is known to have the most passionate fans in terms of source material loyalty and preset expectations. While there have been instances where superhero films directed by men have received criticism, like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022), the treatment of women directors has seen attacks on their characters and individual talent.
The first clear instance of this backlash occurred with Captain Marvel (2019), starring Brie Larson. There is categorical agreement that the hate towards Larson during the rollout of the film and thereafter was appalling. However, directors Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck also did not get off so lightly, with this intense, often teetering towards sexist treatment.
Whether it was described as “faceless” compared to the distinctive styles of Taika Waititi and James Gunn, or as falling into the trap of being too formulaic for its genre, audiences were picking apart the film in droves. While I, as a fan of the superhero from the comics, can understand where these opinions are coming from, the rampant hate trains and review bombings are simply not seen for other MCU films that I can offer the same criticism to, like Thor: The Dark World (2013) and Man of Steel (2013).
The film was the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s first female-led superhero outing, so the pressure was inevitable, yet the studio took no accountability to support or defend its talent, which indirectly allowed this behavior to be accepted. This meant that the precedent was set for future directors to be subjected to this, and that is exactly what happened.
Zhao’s Eternals (2021) was next in line to receive this onslaught of hate, becoming one of the lowest-rated MCU films on Rotten Tomatoes. This time, people were unreceptive to the move away from the formulaic superhero film structure that they demanded from Captain Marvel, calling it “insipid” and lacking the “breezy wit” of previous films in the franchise.
Nia DaCosta took a stab at The Marvels (2023), which, surprise, surprise, was subjected to ridicule and ill will, citing that the film relied heavily on doing your “homework” on other MCU projects and lacked “coherence and urgency”. Women directors are put in an impossible position where they cannot win, no matter what angle they choose to take.
Fans and critics alike have the right to voice their dissatisfaction with movies in their beloved franchise, but where exactly does the blame lie in such cases? Marvel is known to lead with a tight fist when it comes to artistic oversight, with DaCosta going on the record to describe the harsh constraints she was under whilst creating the feature, and Zhao opening up about being the only one passionate about her film. Yet producers like Kevin Feige are not vilified; it is the directors who, once again, have no defence provided by the studio to their filmmakers. That does not sit right with me.
A rare example of a well-received female-led and directed superhero film comes from DC, Patty Jenkins’ Wonder Woman (2017), which was the first of its kind. It garnered a rapturous response both critically and at the box office, with many claiming it to be the “best DC film since The Dark Knight“. Though it becomes quite rare when you realize that women in the industry have to go above and beyond just to receive the same level of respect and praise men do for less.
Women-led Adaptations Always Turn Heads
Taking a step back, these sour habits are spreading out of the superhero subgenre and more generally to any adapted piece of media. Either critics attack the film hard, audiences review bomb or a combination of both, there is an overinflated reaction to their work. Within the last year alone, there have been cases where female-led adaptations of novels have made this kind of a splash.
Let’s address the Hamnet-shaped elephant in the room. Adapted from the 2020 novel of the same name by Maggie O’Farrell, Zhao’s interpretation of the story has sent waves across the film space since its world premiere in August at the 52nd Telluride Film Festival. Critics have been struggling to keep its name out of their mouths, calling everything from “grief porn” to “Oscar bait”. The biggest criticism lay with the creative liberties taken with Shakespeare rather than O’Farrell’s book itself, taking issue with “indulging English mysticism merely to tout Agnes as a prophetess” and the historical improbability that Shakespeare’s wife would not understand what a play is.
We are missing the point of the word adaptation here. Yes, while both the novel and film draw direct inspiration from the bard’s life, this is not a recounting of the events that actually occurred but rather a sensationalized what-could-have-been. People walked into the film expecting something that this film never promised to be, and subsequently is being judged for it. Fictional feature-length films do not have to be completely historically accurate or a 1:1 adaptation of their source material; where is the creativity in that?
In a similar vein, audiences and critics alike are proclaiming Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” to be an adaptation with far too many deviations from the iconic Emily Brontë novel. There are absolutely countless fair criticisms of this film regarding its whitewashing of Heathcliff and its lack of commitment to embrace its hornier side, but people are using it as an excuse to discredit Fennell’s talent altogether, particularly her two previous films, Saltburn (2023) and Promising Young Woman (2020).
Although you may not like her or always resonate with her work, you cannot deny the meticulous craft that goes into making her films and her consistent commitment to making something provocative for audiences to chew on. Female directors should be encouraged to take bold swings regardless of whether they pay off or not; that is the beauty of filmmaking — taking risks. She does not play it safe by any means, and that is why she will always be a director that I am interested in.
Whispers When Adaptations Are Lauded
Though it may seem like it, I am not a complete cynic, as there are plenty of examples where receptions of female-led adaptations have been overwhelmingly positive. Plays, books, franchises and even toys have all had the pleasure of being reinvented in the film format.
DaCosta has had an incredible past six months with her films Hedda (2025) and 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple (2026), releasing both in theaters and on streaming. Hedda boasts a refreshing modernization of a classic play, and 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple boldly pushes the boundaries of an already ambitious franchise. DaCosta does what few filmmakers can do with ease — sprinkle their own unique flair in their film, whilst remaining true to the original material it is based on. With only five feature-length films to her name, she has already proven she is a formidable filmmaker to watch.
It is unfortunate, then, when the films underperform in areas you would expect them to excel. Tessa Thompson and Nina Hoss, who were both widely praised for their performances in Hedda, garnered smaller traction than you would have hoped this awards season. Following Danny Boyle’s 28 Years Later (2025), the sequel bombed on its opening weekend at the box office despite gaining higher critical scores than the first, making $15 million domestically. There are a number of factors that could have contributed to this: lack of awards campaigning, not enough marketing, poorly selected release windows — but there is an argument to be made that studios need to invest more in this and make these conscious decisions to platform women’s stories.
In contrast, a lightning-in-a-bottle director who has achieved box-office success as well as critical acclaim is none other than Greta Gerwig. Her adaptation of Little Women (2019) was a commercial hit with incredibly strong Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic scores — though its snub for Best Picture is often spoken about under the lens of gender bias. Her colossal triumph, Barbie (2023), was the highest-grossing film of 2023 and holds the largest box office opening for a female director ever.
Success like this should not be a rarity for women, and I am imploring studios, producers and journalists, yet again, to invest in this space as there is clearly a demand for it. However, the editor of Gerwig’s Narnia (2026) has alluded that the adaptation veers away from the novels, which could mean backlash from loyal fans of the series.
Adaptations like Oppenheimer (2023) and One Battle After Another (2025) have taken immense creative liberties when it comes to historical inaccuracies and deviations from source material, yet were not given the same treatment. We will continue to see adaptations directed by men into this year, like The Odyssey (2026) and Project Hail Mary (2026), that are already highly anticipated, and I predict will continue this trend.
We Need a Culture Shift, and We Need It Now
No filmmaker is above criticism. Regardless of whether we are looking at women or men in the director’s seat. Not all films here have exclusively secured only negative and only positive receptions — it is all on a spectrum, which is what makes film criticism a beautiful space. However, what is glaringly obvious is the disparaging way that films helmed by women are discussed and critiqued.
What I am asking is that we, as movie watchers and film journalists, look inward at our biases and the weight of our words. The only way we can make this environment safer for marginalized voices is if we constantly reflect and check ourselves before voicing our opinions out there for all to see.
I want to live in a world where it is not surprising to have multiple female nominees in categories like Best Picture or Best Director at the Oscars. I want to live in a world where we can call a film directed by a living female director a masterpiece without extreme backlash. From the top down, there is still so much we can do to both create opportunities and embrace female filmmakers with honesty, not mean-spiritedness.
Opinion Courtesy of Nandita Joshi
Feature Image Designed by Sol Coltman