Diablo Cody article

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Diablo Cody article

    Originally posted by boudiccarules View Post
    I hope it's not. My ego needs that after Nicholls.
    Yes, because if female writers are getting ahead because of a bias, then you don't have to work to improve yourself at all. Everything you write is genius, but those judges can't see it because they're staring at boobies.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Diablo Cody article

      Originally posted by UnequalProductions View Post
      I'm not familiar with that reference.

      But saying that female writers are only getting ahead because of their looks is very condescending and destructive for a forum that's supposed to be supporting other writers.
      Do you seriously think that's what I said? Go back, re-read, try again.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Diablo Cody article

        Look, you guys, OBVIOUSLY this business is biased toward women. That's why there are so many more professional female screenwriters than male ones, and they get paid so much more on average.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Diablo Cody article

          For me, the takeaway quote was this:

          "I had no idea what I was doing directing," she said. "I'm not the most assertive person, and you have to be able to make demands to be an effective director. On 'Ricki,' people were like, 'You don't want to direct again?' And I was like, 'No, I'm out. I want to work with somebody who is incredibly capable and not go off and ... it up, which is what I would do."


          In all the 100,000 articles that have been published in the past year pushing the narrative of how biased Hollywood is against women (ie. why there are so few female directors) Diablo is the first person I've seen to actually just give an honest answer, free of gender politics, and I commend her for it.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Diablo Cody article

            Diablo Cody has astutely pointed out that Channing Tatum has hardly received any backlash or stigma from the fact that he was a stripper before gaining celebrity in large part because of that experience.

            It's interesting to see how Diablo Cody's distinct personality, and the way that informs her voice as a writer, has elevated her in a way that you normally only see from writers who also direct. But I think it's a mistake to try to frame Cody's successes and failures around one small (albeit provocative) facet of her young life that is nothing in comparison to the fact that she wrote a script as revelatory as JUNO.
            Last edited by TheKeenGuy; 08-13-2015, 12:43 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Diablo Cody article

              I can't remember which podcast she was interviewed on a while ago (maybe a year or two ago) - maybe Marc Maron?

              Anyhow, she separated the mythology of her career with what actually happened. Before JUNO, she had been writing spec screenplays (like many of us) for many, many years. It's her first sold script, but far from the first script she wrote. Basically when you strip away the mythology, she's essentially a hardworking writer who pumps out story ideas, scripts, etc. And she was surprisingly candid about her failures along the way.

              You can quibble with some of her produced scripts, but JUNO is a fantastic, original script (at that time). YOUNG ADULT also was a good script. Regardless of her past, male or female -- the output is pretty good compared to even the sea of WGA professionals out there.

              Look, when you get some renown - your (future) publicists will construct a narrative of your rise based (loosely) on your actual life story. There's as much storytelling of you the artist as there is the actual scripts themselves. The press is always looking for an angle, and if you and your publicity team can provide some interesting backstory about your life, you'll go with it. It's not about gender, age, etc but about separating yourself from the crowd. I mean, while there aren't as many women screenwriters out there as there are white Jewish males typing away at Starbucks anywhere in LA, Diablo Cody is where she is not because she's a woman - but because she's Diablo Cody.

              I mean, average white guys (which make up the majority it seems of aspiring screenwriters, and perhaps even this site) have personal stories that could serve as an angle for press should your script really go somewhere. You were a veteran. You were homeless once (for just a few days... but the time period is less relevant for storytelling - you were homeless). You lived in a yurt in Oregon. You grew up in an abused home. Or whatever.

              Speaking from limited experience being interviewed by the press as a filmmaker -- journalists want a story. Telling them "I worked hard. Got up everyday and worked. Repeat." is not what they want to hear, because it's not interesting for readers as a *news story*. Even if you do talk about the hard work and repetitiveness and drudgery of the everyday 10,000 hours thing, they want something they can hang onto - it could be a trivial but funny thing (developing odd or eccentric behaviors), or it can be stories of Hunter S Thompson benders, or whatever it is that you do to cope or deal with the drudgery of all that hard work (it can even be political, spiritual, etc - you became vegan, you ingest mushrooms, you meditate at a retreat in Oregon, you collect guns). There's a dance, and if you don't want to play, folks are less inclined to interview you again if you can't give them some juice.

              For the general press, no one really wants to hear about the everyday drudgery of the craft, whether you're a writer, filmmaker, performer, etc. It's only very specific outlets (certain niche podcasts, or very insidery/industry outlets) that may give you more room to talk about this.
              Last edited by redturtle; 08-13-2015, 01:02 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Diablo Cody article

                Originally posted by redturtle View Post
                I mean, average white guys (which make up the majority it seems of aspiring screenwriters, and perhaps even this site) have personal stories that could serve as an angle for press should your script really go somewhere. You were a veteran. You were homeless once (for just a few days... but the time period is less relevant for storytelling - you were homeless). You lived in a yurt in Oregon. You grew up in an abused home. Or whatever.
                There is a lot of validity to this.

                It really kind of bums me out that Diablo's partner on her new Amazon show, Tig Notaro, only broke through in a big way because of her illness.

                Not that she didn't earn it / deserve it, but the social media-obsessed world we live in now really feeds off of these personal hard-luck stories in a way that's kind of disturbing.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Diablo Cody article

                  Originally posted by kintnerboy View Post
                  There is a lot of validity to this.

                  It really kind of bums me out that Diablo's partner on her new Amazon show, Tig Notaro, only broke through in a big way because of her illness.

                  Not that she didn't earn it / deserve it, but the social media-obsessed world we live in now really feeds off of these personal hard-luck stories in a way that's kind of disturbing.
                  That's a tough one because Tig didn't necessarily break through because of her illness but due to her honesty about it. That set she did didn't explode because the media caught onto her hard-luck story. It all came from Louis CK posting that it was one of the most incredible stand up set he'd ever seen.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Diablo Cody article

                    Originally posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
                    Do you seriously think that's what I said? Go back, re-read, try again.
                    You're right. I apologize. You were just saying that it's more hip to hire female writers, and that's the bias that's letting them get ahead instead of you. Gotcha.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Diablo Cody article

                      Originally posted by UnequalProductions View Post
                      Yes, because if female writers are getting ahead because of a bias, then you don't have to work to improve yourself at all. Everything you write is genius, but those judges can't see it because they're staring at boobies.
                      Since I didn't pass the First Round, I obviously need to improve on the above mentioned attributes. Nice to know it wasn't because my writing sucks.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Diablo Cody article

                        Originally posted by UnequalProductions View Post
                        You're right. I apologize. You were just saying that it's more hip to hire female writers, and that's the bias that's letting them get ahead instead of you. Gotcha.
                        You know it's a real shame that your default is to engage in stereotypically bullshit internet behavior. I already told you that you are misunderstanding what I said. So, not knowing anything about me, you can ignore that I've told you that you are misinterpreting my statement and project your ridiculous assumptions on to me (I am a bitter screenwriter claiming that women are hired because of their looks and so my genius is ignored--wrong on all counts)) or you can do the human thing and ask for clarification.

                        I will be happy to provide that if you want to have a real conversation, if not then you can go **** yourself.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Diablo Cody article

                          Maybe you could provide the clarification yourself in order to support the claim of being misunderstood? I'm certainly willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but that probably would have helped you out a lot quicker. Because as-is, I read your comment pretty much the same way.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Diablo Cody article

                            Originally posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
                            You know it's a real shame that your default is to engage in stereotypically bullshit internet behavior. I already told you that you are misunderstanding what I said. So, not knowing anything about me, you can ignore that I've told you that you are misinterpreting my statement and project your ridiculous assumptions on to me (I am a bitter screenwriter claiming that women are hired because of their looks and so my genius is ignored--wrong on all counts)) or you can do the human thing and ask for clarification.

                            I will be happy to provide that if you want to have a real conversation, if not then you can go **** yourself.
                            My first comment was that I hoped what you said was a joke. I even admitted when I realized that I read your comment wrong. That it wasn't about looks. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you doubled down that there was the appearance of a bias. Instead of the fact that there are some incredible strong female writers out there today (the four listed in the Fempire article among them).

                            And it just backed up what I said earlier about writers eating their own.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Diablo Cody article

                              Originally posted by UnequalProductions View Post
                              My first comment was that I hoped what you said was a joke. I even admitted when I realized that I read your comment wrong. That it wasn't about looks. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you doubled down that there was the appearance of a bias. Instead of the fact that there are some incredible strong female writers out there today (the four listed in the Fempire article among them).

                              And it just backed up what I said earlier about writers eating their own.
                              Okay, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. My point is that there is the appearance of bias as I have met many male screenwriters and I have met many female screenwriters and by the way many male and female executives, many more than you, by the way, I am 99% certain.

                              I have noticed what, appears to me, to be a pattern--the female writers and executives appear to simply be in general much more attractive than their male counterparts.

                              This appears to me to demonstrate a bias towards hiring attractive women.

                              And here's where you totally misunderstand and accuse me of a bunch of bullshit.

                              I am not saying that the bias is to hire attractive women ahead of more or equally talented but unattractive men, I am saying that the bias is to hire attractive women over more or equally talented but not as attractive women.

                              But, oh, how could that be?!?!

                              It could be that the vast majority of female writers and development executives are being hired by straight men.

                              Now is it clear?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Diablo Cody article

                                Originally posted by omjs View Post
                                Maybe you could provide the clarification yourself in order to support the claim of being misunderstood? I'm certainly willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but that probably would have helped you out a lot quicker. Because as-is, I read your comment pretty much the same way.
                                Here's the thing--I don't need to justify or explain a comment when I make it, only when I am engaged in a discussion with someone asking reasonable questions indicating a desire to have a substantive conversation, which is not what UnequalProductions did or is doing.

                                Rather than that, UP immediately jumped to a bunch of assumptions, which by the way UP is still doing, assuming that I am a writer, which I am not.

                                Lazy thinking and bullshit internet message board snark is a waste of time.

                                If you had a question about what I said and care enough about the subject, then feel free to ask a real question. Or don't.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X