“Not true. Ever tried being the only male in an all female aerobics class?” – Mark
Yeah, I’m sure it was really damaging. No one’s talking about “lowering standards” or whatever you went on about, no one mention prodding, no one said anything about giving special privileges. You’re really reading into it in a very biased way and no one’s trying to steal anyone else’s rights. I mean, you’re really talking about things that are just beyond this thread entirely. Take a deep breath.
-^^can you explain how? Beyond them all being kinds of action films?-
Tough to quickly summarize in words, but I’ll try.
It’s partly her general interest in action, and in using the genre by tweaking it to acheive certain effects, using it so that it becomes self-interrogating . . . but more specifically the way that the action is constructed—the choreography of camera and figures in the scene, editing rhythms, momentum vs. suspension, location shooting, etc.—-and what the action “means” , which is intellectually indebted to the French writer Georges Bataille.
>> I believe men are more visual than women in some aspects<<
There’s not much to say about this. I understand you were not trying to or meaning to come off as sexist, but it’s a ridiculous statement that seems to have no reason behind it. Also, if pornography has anything to do with this argument, I feel safe in saying that watching gangbang videos entitled “ANAL ENDS IN TEARS” hardly helps the male visual capabilities—it probably fails to enhance anyone’s visual capabilities.
>> 1. knowledge about equipment or computers that creative women don’t always have because in some cases they find technology boring and find that it slows your creativity down + 2.not necessarily wanting to get into the hellish stages related to preparing or directing a film. <<
Applying this unwilling attitude to learn about technology solely to women is extremely offensive. I’m not doubting that this problem exists, but to claim that it exists for one gender rather than the other by any disproportionate means is ridiculous. Everybody deals with this issue of constantly delayed artistic gratification—some (the people who make films, in most cases) better than others (those too lazy to put up with it). You can see this in almost any cinema production course at your local college. People who thought filmmaking was all fun and games without any thought or hard work are disappointed immediately once their myth of the filmmaking process has been crushed and destroyed. Many of these people drop the class soon afterwards, and in my experience this occurs WITHIN MALES AND FEMALES. As a matter of fact, thinking back to a Cinematography course I took, more men dropped than women.
>> 98.7% of the girls I know are still watching movies like The notebook and A walk to remember just because they make them cry since they are so desperate about finding a perfect man. I have asked to some of my girlfriends if they enjoyed The Hurt Locker, they all said no. <<
We have something in common—about 98.7% of the women I know like to watch anal-relapse-inducing mOvIeZ like The Notebook and the like, while also apparently not showing any sort of appreciation towards decently crafted films that are void of any commercial or financial intent. But:
1. I certainly would not use the 98.7% of those women to make a broad generalization about every other member of the female race on the planet.
2. 99% of the men I know are even worse in their cinematic tastes. DOES THIS MEAN THAT THE ENTIRE MALE GENDER ARE INCAPABLE OF MAKING FILMS? omg wat r we going 2 do?!?!1
I apologize if my reprimanding seems harsh or makes you feel bad. Whether or not you meant to come off as offensive, this kind of thinking is what is deterring female filmmakers. Inane statements claiming women aren’t as visual as men, that they would rather be “painting outside, or dancing” (!!!!!!!!!!!!!) are disgusting, and this type of thinking prevents many women from opportunities they very well deserve. Is it any wonder why female filmmakers aren’t given the same opportunities?
Angelo – Thank you for your response. You passion about the subject is appreciated.
For those interested, we have extended the X-Factor Filmmakers Short Film Contest on Vimeo until May 17. Whether you need more time for people to vote for your video or if you still need time to enter, you can. We are enjoying seeing a community gather around your films and will be happy to see that grow within the next month.
See the X-Factor Film Contest entries.
I can tell you, being a woman, that this has NOTHING to do with any possible pschological/biological differences between men amd women. First off, I am myself an aspiring filmmaker and I am definitely very visual and I have a good spatial sense. Also, this idea of women not wanting to compromise their health is extremely funny because that is not true at all, at least it is most definitely not my case (sorry for ranting, but these stereotypes drive me mad and make me wish I were born a man). I think the main problem is that men in the film industry have difficulty trusting women filmmakers because of the common old stereotypes (such as: women are weak, women are emotionally fragile, etc) and they do not want to be bossed around by a women. As a result of this rather hostile attitude, women are hesitant to go into this field, though I think this will change in time.
I’ll add a few bits to an interesting topic, since I work with female directors.
The first thing I say is get the artsy tag out of your system, for gender has NOTHING to do with how good your work is, or not. My best experiences have been worked for Female directors, there is certainly a point of view to this but I don’t go “Female Director” like it’s some kind of decease, and this is what needs to change.
Just like Spike Lee’s career has been a subtext to black progress in Film, Bigelow winning an Oscar means nothing if the opportunities don’t flood the gates. I liken it to same with minorities, as a sense of balance doesn’t exist in this business.
I agree with Fiona in theory that psychologically it means no difference your gender, but technically the barometer swings to point of view. Most technical categories (Editing, Cinematography) are dominated by men, as production roles / administrative are dominated by women. There is a parallel here, in the roles gender play. I work with a director, Alex de Campi, whom everyone thinks is a dude because of her name. It is also that she shoots the way the boys would, and her insight is commenting on traditional notion of what women play. This develops into respect because first of all, man or woman, integrity as a Filmmaker is a must. I’ve learned more from her than dudes, and have no qualms about it.
Bigelow’s got it, she makes movies boys would make. It’s part of her success. The downside to this, and I’ll cover it briefly, is directors like Catherine Breilat and well as Feminists quote unquote. If Filmmakers rise above gender trappings and tell stories divorced from these preoccupations, the level playing field will turn. I’m talking about commercial work, like Transformers or Franchises. If gender is not an issue, that is up to the person. The world will keep living.
Hostility, sexism, and discrimination are hallmarks of any industry. I don’t tell people where I’m from because frankly, it has nothing to do with my work. There is no agenda. But some people want to change the world, using the perceived burden of being a woman as an artistic license. That’s fine, if that’s your aim.
It’s all about communication, with an audience. Having a vision. Most of all having talent. I’m not getting in trouble to say that tech inclination is important for a filmmaker, man or woman. Your shit’s gotta be polished, have focus, and most of all tell a good story. Theoretically women have to fight much harder than men to get their voice heard, be twice as loud perhaps. But so is a minority, the real enemy’s the industry’s lack of diversity.
I’m out. Machete!
Here’s one. Hi everybody!
I just wanted to say that Angelo is spot-on and awesome.
Now BRB while I go smell flowers and watch A Walk to Remember.
I was under the impression that the vast majority of female directors were filming television episodes.
Tim Burton was asked this question recently in a Cannes press conference. He claimed that a significant number, possibly even a majority of his films were ok’d by women (and several film companies are supposedly run by women now).
Why aren’t these women ok’ing films by female directors?
(Should we rename this topic to “Chick, where are the Chicks?”)
Reading through this thread, I became totally overwhelmed by the ignorant ideas of biological differences making men better filmmakers than women! It’s insane. But I do have a less ludicrous answer to the question. When you look at a ratio of big name or famous directors who are male to those who are female, because of historical sexism in the industry, obviously the males trump the females in numbers. This ratio is moving toward equality, but it’s a slow movement. This means that there are very few visible women who direct for young women and girls to look up to. We all grow up hearing about Steven Spielberg, Alfred Hitchcock, and Stanley Kubrick. We’re all taught to look up to people of our own sex when we’re young. In a very broad sense, boys have director role models and girls don’t. well, they didn’t until this year’s oscars and Kathryn Bigelow. The problem is slowly disintegrating, and I greatly respect this thread’s original author for her efforts to help in this process!
-the ignorant ideas of biological differences making men better filmmakers than women!-
Yes, it’s one thing for there to be observable differences between female and male brains in very large amounts of data, but quite another to try to make certain broad generalizations about men being better potential filmmakers.
Personally, while I agree that differences in brain functions between men and women doesn’t make one group “better” at being filmmakers than the other, I also see a long standing tendency to prefer a more male oriented view of the world which provides an illusion that men are better. In a general sense, women seem to be more drawn to making certain types of films, usually more literary, relationship or emotion directed which leads them into genres that have been typically misunderstood or devalued in comparison to men. This tendency towards devaluation wasn’t helped by the auteur theory which sought deeper “meaning” in genre pictures such as westerns and film noir, genres that are much more “masculine” than those many women have been making films in recently.
If one peruses a videostore’s shelves one can find a lot of films directed by women nowadays, but they receive far less attention than those directed by men. I believe, this is in large part due to the types of movies women are interested in making compared to the types of films critics are reviewing or finding value in. I suggest that a reevaluation of certain long standing ways of viewing films and in understanding what they’re trying to “say” would be a more useful line of inquiry than who is better at making them.
Good point, Greg—it’s not just an issue of making the films, but also in learning to see them, as a culture in a different, more inclusive way.
huh……. men are sexist then?
Ally, I’m not sure how you mean that question/statement, but what I’m suggesting is that there is a cultural bias towards a certain type of evaluation that may prevent the films of some women from being evaluated on their own merits rather than on an inappropriate model that will not “unlock” the meaning in certain works. In this sort of cultural blindness men are certainly at “fault” to a large extent, but so are many women in that they accept the culture of which they are a part and seek to acheive or succeed based on a limited way of seeing. Certainly there are quite a few critics at the higher levels that don’t accept this ideological tunnel vision and these critics are often men so it isn’t a condemnation of all men or a limitation for all women, just a way of looking at some general tendencies that might keep certain points of view from being accepted whether those points of view are promoted by women or by men.
Arguments like these always bring up perennial accusations of industry sexism. Someone else will list 20 great female directors, forgetting the fact that someone could easily list 200 male directors who are just as good.
What few acknowledge is something right in front of our eyes – and you don’t have to be anti-feminist or misogynist to accept it.
It’s gender socialisation.
Any sociologist will tell you that gender socialisation is rife in any human society. Sure, we’ve had movements that have narrowed the gender gap, but socialisation is still playing a huge role in how members of different genders are developing.
Males, it is universally acknowledged, are generally brought up to be ambitious, creative, powerful, etc, while many females are brought up to be submissive, maternal, non-career-focused. It’s not some wild conspiracy theory, or the result of poor parenting – it’s simply the weight of societal observation, advertising, media (including film) and everything else. Parents who have tried to bring their children up in neutral settings have mentioned how difficult it is to do. Gender socialisation is ubiquitous.
This, of course, has never stopped some women from becoming great artists, company directors or political leaders, but they remain in the minority for the same reasons that they always have. The odds are stacked against them from day one.
Things are getting better, but it’s a tortuous process. True gender equality, if it can (or even should) actually be achieved, is generations away from being realised. Until then, you’re going to continue to get discrepancies like these.