Women and Hollywood: "Why do we care about women’s presence in the awards race? Specifically, why do we care so much about a woman getting nominated for best director? That is a great question raised in an very well-written piece by a young woman director named Lindsay on the website Canonball. One thing she asks is if we have been left out of the awards for so long, why should we as women change what we do in order to fit in?
Monday, January 31, 2011
The Bigelow Effect - Why We Care
Women and Hollywood: "Why do we care about women’s presence in the awards race? Specifically, why do we care so much about a woman getting nominated for best director? That is a great question raised in an very well-written piece by a young woman director named Lindsay on the website Canonball. One thing she asks is if we have been left out of the awards for so long, why should we as women change what we do in order to fit in?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Female director's . . . as far as i am concerned a director is a director and the sex of the person really shouldn't be evaluated as it is not applicable to the abilities the director beholds. we spend far to much time categorizing artists and ourselves (whether it be in Sexual Orientation,Race,Sex) it's not really that important when it comes down to it. now with that aside, their is allot to say at what many female directors have accomplished. but in the long run it's that individual as an artist thats commendable, not that there a women.
Though focused on directors, I find this to be an issue across the entertainment industry. Female role models in the entertainment industry are few and far between, and generally have made massive personal sacrifice to achieve any level of status. It's quite dispiriting as a young woman in computer science and entertainment to find myself not quite fitting into the surrounding culture, and to be unable to find a woman to look up to. The path is different, especially regarding personal/family life. The industry isn't structured for women.
The reason the gender matters is because, when you look at the gender, you see discrepancy not just in the awards, but, as one commenter pointed out, "Women have inequitable access to training, funding, mentoring and directing opportunities" - When THAT is true, gender becomes an issue.
I think the industry is very aware of this fact, and is trying to do something about it on some level. Of course the Academy is not nominating women directors and is especially not nominating women directors who directed a film about women. This is an issue, but I don't really know how to solve or if it can be solved.
I have heard through the grape vine that the film industry as a whole is trying to bring in more women for jobs. I am currently applying for the DGA Training Program and I have heard repeatedly that if you are women you have a higher chance of getting in. Even though I would like to be accepted I don't want it to be just because I am a women, but because I qualify for the job. I think it is wrong for people to solve these gender problems by accepting the minority into the group just to shut people up. Women should be nominated because they directed a good film. Again I don't know the answer to this, and I don't know if there is one.
Success and Likeability are positively correlated for men and negatively for women. (http://tinyurl.com/4m4z7ju)
There are so many reasons why the top directors aren't women and most of them have absolutely nothing to do with how well they do the job. That's the problem. And people who are unwilling to learn the value in seeing the talent through the socialization are the other problem.
First of all, the author's claim that Christopher Nolan was "the prognosticator's front runner to win the award" is just flat-out wrong; I follow these prognosticators closely, and no one was picking Nolan to win, so this immediately discredited her entire article to me. Instead of focusing on the fact that this year there is no female Best Director nominee (and, honestly, I don't think Cholodenko or Granik deserved a nomination over the 5 men nominated), the author could have chosen to focus on the fact that this is one of the strongest Best Actress fields the Academy has seen in years, and is much stronger than the male counterpart category. Or we could choose to focus on the fact that a movie about a lesbian couple directed by a woman managed 4 Oscar nominations, which is no small feat. I don't think this year is any step back from Bigelow's win last year.
This issue of women not begin recognized for their work goes across every industry and field really in the world. One thing that should become uniform throughout all these fields is that gender shouldn't matter. It's a shame how much gender can get in the way of people seeing hard work or real talent. You would think in the 21st century that we would have finally gotten past all these sexist views but just a few still linger and that few are holding us back. It's a real shame that female directors aren't getting the spot light they deserve. Hopefully this won't always be an issue and one day we will see many women nominated for oscars across the board.
I often wonder when people say women are not getting the same opportunities as men if that is actually true or if they aren't producing good enough work to be nominated, as in this case. I'm all for women's right and I'm definitely a feminist who believes we deserve all the same rights and opportunities. But sometimes I think women don't go after their dreams and do what they really want to because they're afraid "the man" will put them down, so they end up blaming men for not getting what they want when really they just didn't go after it.
I just read a similar article in the LA Times this morning. Apparently, female directors make up 7% of the main stream industry, female directors make up 24%, and cinematographers make up a mere 2%. The journalist then went on to talk about how 9 out of 10 times we go to the movies we are watching a film by a male director and how that affects our culture. Film, whether we admit it or not, affect our society and culture, in a negative or positive light or a big or small way. He explains that we need more female heads in order to create some sort of balance in the influence of film. For me, this is somewhat good news because now when I apply for a position not only am I highly qualified but I add to diversity. However, what is the point of giving a position to someone simply for diversity? If a man is better than me, he should get the job. If I am better than a man, I should get the job. Talent should be based on the individual and what they have experienced and what skills they have. Sex, race, or nationality should not necessarily influence that. So, are there not enough woman in Hollywood because it hasn't been actively pursued by woman, like how stage management has changed over from a male domination to a female domination, or have there simply been not enough female applicants with compelling credentials? I agree, it would be great to have more diversity in Hollywood to help diversify the selections of movies that are released but that could not only means the sex or gender of the people but where they come from and what their background was because that is what truly influences work in the long run. Being a woman in NYC in the 1980s can be completely different being a woman in New Orleans in the 1980s. Diversity is more than just race and sex.
Very interesting. Of course as a strong proponent of women's equality I generally find topics of this nature interesting.
It is really a shame that in this day and age (2011!!) we are still struggling with this problem. It is unacceptable, and equality is way past due.
One of the commenters on the article itself said something to the effect of "women are smart enough NOT to go into entertainment." This is ridiculous. We experience the same drive, desire, and determination as any man in the business, and our skills can match theirs (and vice versa) in every way. I think this comes down to an issue of opportunity--sexism and gender discrimination in the industry. Men have ruled the industry for a century, and have set the precedent in many areas for no other reason than because they are male. I believe that Ms. Bigelow won her Oscar because she deserved it, not because she was the "other option" to James Cameron.
I agree with Jared. A director is a director. While I'm sure there could be some bias against female directors, I find it hard to believe that the nominating committee chooses to exclude female directors simply because they are female.
It's the same thing as the race card. Is racism still around? Sure. But general society has moved on. There are always extremists for every issue, but I seriously doubt that a female winning best director has been corrupted due to sexism.
On top of this: a woman's role model has to be a woman? That is certainly not true. It does not matter what sex someone is, you should look up to someone because of the great work they've done, not that they did great work and are of a certain sex. We're all people. The "but women have the odds against them card" doesn't count either. Everyone has some odd against them. Everyone deals with struggle. Let the fact that someone succeeded honestly be what makes them your role model, not that they defied a gender struggle.
Post a Comment