The filmmaking industry has historically been a male-centric one, and though the scales have started to tip back toward equal representation in recent years, the disparity is still very much real. This interesting videos examines the data, causes, and consequences of the current state of affairs.
Simon Cade of DSLRguide posted this interesting and well researched video on gender equality and representation in the film industry. While there's no denying an imbalance in the male-to-female ratio in the filmmaking industry and in films themselves versus that of the general population, the reasons for that imbalance are hotly debated. Namely, on one hand, many argue that men simply have more of an interest in the industry, which itself generates male-centric scripts and casting, while research by Five Thirty Eight shows that films that past the Bechdel test for representation of female characters of appreciable depth are the most financially viable and research by the University of Southern California shows that despite major film schools having roughly equal enrollment between genders, the prevalence and financial success of women in the industry decreases continually as one moves to higher echelons. The disparity even prompted the ACLU to launch an investigation in 2015. Cade makes some very interesting points based on hard numerical evidence, and the video is well worth watching.
Interesting video and I've noticed the same thing. The problem is, does it matter? In the case of interesting female characters, absolutely! In the case of directors and other behind-the-scene roles, would movies be dramatically different with females, rather than males?
I love action/adventure novels and am always disappointed by the limited roles women have. I love the male leads but they are so much better with strong female characters as well. In Katherine Neville's book, The Eight, there is a mix of male and female protagonists and it's a great book. I can't recommend it highly enough. But another book I read, by a female author, pretty much sucked! The problem was the females acted like stereotypical women and didn't fit the storyline. This was clearly due to the author being overly biased by her own gender.
So...would it help, hinder, or make no difference. If it doesn't help, who cares beyond the individuals involved and, sorry but that's their problem.
I see your point, but I do think it would matter for directors and other roles. I really believe that artistic expression is the sum of life experiences, and I think that women have experienced different lives than men and that would come out in the directorial choices they make, etc. But yes, I love action/adventure movies too and would love to see more frequent and stronger roles for women. Overall, I do truly believe it would help the industry in every sense of the verb (and the financial analysis does seem to agree).
I have to mark this on my calendar. It's as close to agreement as we've ever come! ;-)
Look at us go! :)
But that's completely ignoring the fact that the best depictions of strong women in film were written or directed by men (Joss Whedon. JJ Abrahms. James Cameron. And others with J names). And also most of the best female characters were created by men.
You claim to want more strong women in film, but Wonder Woman (2017) was NOT the first strong female heroine. Black Widow has been doing this for 4 movies already. Furiosa stole the show from Mad Max. Hit Girl and X-23 were killer little girls. Super girl is on Season 3. And of course, every character Sigourney Weaver ever played.
More female directors and characters is great. But to pretend that women can understand women and men can understand men completely dismantled the centuries of progress made in equality. So I see the real problem to be articles like this that feed into this blogger driven trend of manipulating groups to "feel" discrimination where there isn't any.
(Note. I'm not white and I intentionally kept all race stuff out of this because I feel our culture WAS moving forward and all this "white guilt" stuff is the thing that's making it roll back. We can progress without white people feeling bad about things that their great grandparents did so if there's a role to be filled then it should be done on qualifications rather than checkboxes).
[ ...if there's a role to be filled then it should be done on qualifications rather than checkboxes]
Please, someone gives this man a medal :D
Jokes aside, let me be a bit thought provoking for a second and argue with your initial statement by saying that since 99% of famous scientists are men, then men must be smarter than women. This just to point out that if you don't give equal opportunities to both sides, then it's difficult to establish if men are actually best suited for the job or it's just that women never had a chance to prove otherwise.
And yes, strong female characters were a thing way before WW (2017), the big deal here seems to be the production size and the box office sales that is unusual for a movie with main female character directed by a woman.
What really bothers me is that we're in 2017 and it's still a problem. Can we just enjoy a damn movie regardless of genders involved? Who cares if Wonder Woman was directed by a man, a woman or an alien, I enjoyed the hell out of it
A handful of strong women created decades ago doesn't really say a lot though does it? If Ripley (debuted in 1979) and Buffy (debuted in 1997) are your benchmarks then yes: there is a problem. Yes: Black Widow has been doing it for 4 movies now, but she still can't get her own feature film, and Furiosa did "steal the show on a movie called "Mad Max" where the guy got top billing and the bigger paycheck. And Miller credits the editor Margaret Sixel for a heck of a lot of the success of that movie, and she also won an oscar for her work on it.
There have been over 400 people nominated for the Academy Award for Directing. Do you know how many women have been nominated? 4. Do you know how many have won? Just 1. Lets stop pretending things are on a relatively even keel. Things aren't even on the same playing field. In any other industry these figures would be a disgrace.
Some of the "best female characters" were created for the screen by men because men get the opportunity and the budget to create those characters. Imagine what could happen if things changed, just a little bit.
It's the way things work for now. It emulates our culture and where we spend money is where we put value. As that changes, so will the acceptance of rolls being led by female characters, but it won't equal.
>but it won't equal
Well, not with that attitude Ken. :)
If we (men in positions to impact this balance - which is all of us) do take a moment and be more considerate in who we hire, promote, patronize, etc, then the needle will definitely move. Maybe not to equal as fast as we like, but hot damn much faster if we don't do anything!