Click here for Done Deal Pro home page

Done Deal Pro Home Page

Loading

Go Back   Done Deal Pro Forums > Business > Producers, Production Companies, Studios & Networks
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-24-2013, 11:01 PM   #41
CthulhuRises
Member
 
CthulhuRises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,098
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmcthomas View Post
Two posts ago you were arguing that women are biologically hardwired to prioritze babies and now you're Rosie the Riveter. Now that is progress.

I wish you the best of luck in all your future endeavors.

You've yet to make a single post where you haven't taken what she has said and contorted it to an extreme to fit your argument. Bravo.
CthulhuRises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:15 PM   #42
decarbe
User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 34
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

I think Emily, BMC, and a few others have summed-up (nicely) how I feel. I like this idea that more avenues are opening for women. The more women who succeed the more doors will open for them. I don't think it means they're any less talented. For me this is a response to the current climate and conditions. There needs to be more of everything in Hollywood and I don't think it sets a bad example if some reach-out/offer exclusive opportunies to help the underrepresented.

On a side note: The word "females" grates my nerves for some reason. I feel like it should only be used in scientific writing and or when talking about animals, but this is a personal thing. I just found myself getting progressively annoyed as I read this thread and each time I saw that word.
decarbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:57 PM   #43
DirtyDays
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 53
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by emily blake View Post
When I heard that, I suspected the lack of sex was one of the elements she was talking about.
According to this article, sex was definitely not lacking for her:

http://perezhilton.com/2013-01-24-je...y#.UQIpymdbU3c


I say bring it on. Having a vagina doesn't give them any magical powers. If they accomplish anything, it will be because they stand out as individuals not women.
DirtyDays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 12:38 AM   #44
WaitForIt
Regular
 
WaitForIt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 437
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmcthomas View Post
Two posts ago you were arguing that women are biologically hardwired to prioritze babies and now you're Rosie the Riveter. Now that is progress.

I wish you the best of luck in all your future endeavors.
I'm saying it's biologically, physically more difficult for a mother to leave her 2-month-old baby for twelve hours a day than for a father to do same.

It is biologically, physically more difficult for an 8-month-pregnant woman to put in long, stressful hours than for a 35-year-old man who is not growing another brain inside his body to do the same.

Facts. Not insurmountable, plenty of women do it, and it is noble, but just plain facts, and facts that a lot of women might (I like that word) take into account when they think about what they want to do with the next 15-20 years of their lives.

I am saying that many women will avoid or at least put off anything that might send them down certain roads because they want certain things more than they want other things and because, due to the nature of things, their end of the bargain is different. Mother and baby are a dyad. It bothers me when other women try to play down their amazing differences. We do some things that men can't do, but by age 35 we're officially "Advanced Maternal Age" and statistically higher-risk. 21st century medicine doesn't change the biology and physiology of it all. It just raises survival rates.

And I am saying that if we keep all of that in mind when we look at the fact that there are simply fewer women directing films, and that if we hypothesize that perhaps maybe it might not only or even mostly be because they're being held back by The Man, and that for a whole host of reasons cinema as a whole would undoubtedly be better off with more women at the helm, we can then choose to work on other angles to change things for the better. [We could start with film schools. Quick glance at USC shows fewer women than men for undergrad (59/41) and graduate (63/37).]

If we don't solve the right underlying problem, we're not going to get the solution we're hoping for. And my impression prior to ever opening this thread was that there were simply fewer women attempting to enter the field. Please feel free to disabuse me of that notion. I don't mean to say that fewer women WANT to, or that fewer women are good enough to, but that fewer women actually do it.

And hey, it could also just be because fewer women *think* it's an option because they keep hearing that the doors are closed to them by The Man, and so they don't even try. Which goes back to my original question. Does this production company exist because females are being shut out or could it be that females are simply less interested? Is that not a worthwhile thing to ponder? Wouldn't the answer have an impact on what we do about the problem?

Really, either way, it couldn't hurt, could it? To encourage more girls to try, or to encourage them to think they can do anything they want to do no matter what's standing in their way? (Where DID that slogan run off to, anyway?)

Also, on a personal level, since you asked, I want something that I have determined won't put me in a position to make sacrifices I'm not comfortable making, whereas I have contemplated but decided against other avenues in life because they didn't mesh with the vision I have of how I would like to live my life and/or because the sacrifices don't work for me in a cost/benefit analysis. Same as any other person, regardless of my gender or the nature of my goals.
WaitForIt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 02:31 AM   #45
CJ Walley
Member
 
CJ Walley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 458
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaitForIt View Post
Isn't it interesting that women fought and fought and continue to fight to exist in a way that does not ultimately serve men by default, and yet here we are in the 21st century and it's a big deal that a woman does not have consequence-free sex on screen. Make of that what you will.
Sorry but you're going to have to explain it to me, not because I'm being flippant, but because I genuinely want to understand.

I'm not sure what to make of that.

When I see a man and a woman having sex in a movie I don't necessarily see it as the woman serving the man.
CJ Walley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 02:36 AM   #46
CJ Walley
Member
 
CJ Walley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 458
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by emily blake View Post
I have been told straight up that if I want to have a male and female working together to solve a case, they must be romantically involved. They are not allowed to simply respect each other as colleagues; they have to be intimate.

A beautiful, smart woman who is interested in doing her best work and not in sleeping around? It's nice to see.
Isn't there two parties at play here? Why would the woman have to be sleeping around to have a romantic relationship?

I agree that a relationship shouldn't be crowbarred into a story for the sake of it, but it seems odd (to me) to suggest that would always be detrimental to the woman.
CJ Walley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 05:04 AM   #47
MoviePen
Regular
 
MoviePen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 337
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaitForIt View Post
If we don't solve the right underlying problem, we're not going to get the solution we're hoping for. And my impression prior to ever opening this thread was that there were simply fewer women attempting to enter the field. Please feel free to disabuse me of that notion. I don't mean to say that fewer women WANT to, or that fewer women are good enough to, but that fewer women actually do it.

And hey, it could also just be because fewer women *think* it's an option because they keep hearing that the doors are closed to them by The Man, and so they don't even try. Which goes back to my original question. Does this production company exist because females are being shut out or could it be that females are simply less interested? Is that not a worthwhile thing to ponder? Wouldn't the answer have an impact on what we do about the problem?
When I was still doing such things, about 10 years ago, the beginning screenwriting meetings I went to were well attended by both genders. I can't say for sure if it was 50/50, but the spread was fairly even.

The WGA reports that women screenwriters (film) were 17% of the total (this was from 2009, I couldn't find recent reports after a quick search).

I honestly don't think you can accurately get a number of "interested" for either writing or directing. It's so easy to pick up a camera and shoot in your spare time, or to write a script in your off-work-hours, that more people are trying to get in and flying under any metrics currently measured.

The problem is the same in this industry as it has been for nearly every other industry where women want to make a career at. I don't think there are *conscious* bias in play (most of the time), which makes it even harder to overcome.
MoviePen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 06:30 AM   #48
sc111
Member
 
sc111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,284
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaitForIt View Post
I'm saying it's biologically, physically more difficult for a mother to leave her 2-month-old baby for twelve hours a day than for a father to do same.

It is biologically, physically more difficult for an 8-month-pregnant woman to put in long, stressful hours than for a 35-year-old man who is not growing another brain inside his body to do the same.

Facts. Not insurmountable, plenty of women do it, and it is noble, but just plain facts, and facts that a lot of women might (I like that word) take into account when they think about what they want to do with the next 15-20 years of their lives.

I am saying that many women will avoid or at least put off anything that might send them down certain roads because they want certain things more than they want other things and because, due to the nature of things, their end of the bargain is different. Mother and baby are a dyad. It bothers me when other women try to play down their amazing differences. We do some things that men can't do, but by age 35 we're officially "Advanced Maternal Age" and statistically higher-risk. 21st century medicine doesn't change the biology and physiology of it all. It just raises survival rates.

And I am saying that if we keep all of that in mind when we look at the fact that there are simply fewer women directing films, and that if we hypothesize that perhaps maybe it might not only or even mostly be because they're being held back by The Man, and that for a whole host of reasons cinema as a whole would undoubtedly be better off with more women at the helm, we can then choose to work on other angles to change things for the better. [We could start with film schools. Quick glance at USC shows fewer women than men for undergrad (59/41) and graduate (63/37).]

If we don't solve the right underlying problem, we're not going to get the solution we're hoping for. And my impression prior to ever opening this thread was that there were simply fewer women attempting to enter the field. Please feel free to disabuse me of that notion. I don't mean to say that fewer women WANT to, or that fewer women are good enough to, but that fewer women actually do it.

And hey, it could also just be because fewer women *think* it's an option because they keep hearing that the doors are closed to them by The Man, and so they don't even try. Which goes back to my original question. Does this production company exist because females are being shut out or could it be that females are simply less interested? Is that not a worthwhile thing to ponder? Wouldn't the answer have an impact on what we do about the problem?

Really, either way, it couldn't hurt, could it? To encourage more girls to try, or to encourage them to think they can do anything they want to do no matter what's standing in their way? (Where DID that slogan run off to, anyway?)

Also, on a personal level, since you asked, I want something that I have determined won't put me in a position to make sacrifices I'm not comfortable making, whereas I have contemplated but decided against other avenues in life because they didn't mesh with the vision I have of how I would like to live my life and/or because the sacrifices don't work for me in a cost/benefit analysis. Same as any other person, regardless of my gender or the nature of my goals.
The underlying issue is choice. I know men who have quit corporate jobs and vowed to never wear a suit to work again. I know men who have chosen to work from home -- and lose promotions as a result -- to spend more time with their kids. I know men who have chosen to be entrepreneurs to have control over the hours they work.

However, if all of these men decided to be screenwriters or directors, the fact is -- as the industry is organized today -- there are more opportunities for them in this male-dominated industry which produces far more films starring men in stories written from the POV of men.

As a result -- even those women who choose to forego having children in their 20s and 30s for a career as a writer or director will find they're hired less often.

With this said, I agree with Emily -- the article you cited is really tangential to this discussion.
__________________
Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. “Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.”
sc111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 06:42 AM   #49
sc111
Member
 
sc111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,284
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by emily blake View Post
I have been told straight up that if I want to have a male and female working together to solve a case, they must be romantically involved. They are not allowed to simply respect each other as colleagues; they have to be intimate.

That's interesting, Emily. Yet, in the real world when co-workers get it on it rarely works out and the woman is usually thought less of when it all falls apart. My momma always told me, 'Don't poop where you eat."
__________________
Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. “Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.”
sc111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 06:46 AM   #50
LauriD
Member
 
LauriD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: the navel of the world
Posts: 1,884
Default Re: New prodco to focus on female directors and "strong roles for women"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levenger View Post
But it still failed the Bechdel Test.
I just watched it last night and I think it passes. Unless talking about OBL counts as "talking about a man."
LauriD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Done Deal Pro

eXTReMe Tracker