To the Academy: Consider the Women
(via our friend Melissa Silverstein at Women in Hollywood)
We put together this video (it’s only a little over a minute) highlighting some of the women directed films from this past year that were passed over. We’re not trying to say that all of them should have been nominated (though we think a couple of them should have), what we are trying to say is that we have to find a way to get women directors into these conversations.
We are so tired of watching parade after parade of men being praised for their work. Last year at least we got to see Kathryn Bigelow up on the stage giving out the best director award, this year, the lack of women will be glaring.
Interesting stats, after the cut.
- In 2011, only 5% of the top grossing films in Hollywood were directed by Women. The number has decreased since 1998.
- In 84 years only 4 women — Lina Wertmuller, Jane Campion, Sofia Coppola and Kathryn Bigelow — have been nominated for best director. One 1 has won.
We want to acknowledge the women directed films nominated:
- Best Animated Feature: Jennifer Yuh Nelson for Kung Fu Panda 2;
- Documentary (Short Subject): The Barber of Birmingham: Foot Soldier of the Civil Rights Movement Robin Fryday and Gail Dolgin; God Is the Bigger Elvis Rebecca Cammisa and Julie Anderson; Saving Face Daniel Junge and Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy; The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom Lucy Walker and Kira Carstensen
- Foreign Language Film: Agnieszka Holland for In Darkness
Please feel free to send this video out far and wide, and on Sunday, remember that women directors voices and visions are missing from this very large cultural conversation. Telling people this is a cultural problem and not just a gender equity problem is a first step.
39 Comments
Leave a Comment
Tracker Pages
Recently on AD
Follow Us!
Tags
Gallery
Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory was directed by Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky, not Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs, the director-producer pair behind Inside Job, which won last year’s Best Documentary Oscar.
I think the length of this video highlights what the real problem is. It’s not really fair to criticize the Academy for not nominating women a lot when so few even get the chance to direct these films.
That said, a woman being nominated probably should have happened more than four times now.
One problem here is how, in the most general of terms, the industry (perhaps unconsciously?) pigeonholes women directors, thinking they can only do romance or light comedies or Lifetime Movie-type melodramas. Unfair, yes, but Hollywood is an inertly evolving beast that won’t initiate any change, unless, of course, that change rakes in billions of dollars of revenue. (Seriously, where were vampires five years ago?)
The fact that the phrase “woman director” is used is just demeaning and insulting to directors. It’ll take time for that mindset to change — who says “woman doctor” or “woman politician” anymore?. I remember there were some rumblings of Kathryn Bigelow’s win opening the door for more directors’ work to get better distribution/financing, but, granted it’s only two years later, the market is still seen as niche.
While there are some directors I enjoy and whose films I eagerly anticipate, I don’t really care who directed a movie. I won’t not see a movie because it’s directed by a woman or an ehtnic minority (in the U.S.). A good movie is a good movie whether helmed by Steven Spielberg, Nancy Myers, or Mini-Me.
All I want is a movie I can enjoy. You do that, I’ll see you’re next film, guarenteed.
I should stop drinking so early in the day… Sorry for the typos.
@Zach
That’s a good point as well. I got pretty frustrated reading some of the backlash that a woman was going to direct the next Thor movie (and now that’s not even happening). Women are most definitely thought of as only being able to direct certain genres.
similar arguments can also be made along racial lines as well. Ang Lee is the only non-white director to win, while only a handful of other racialized directors–all male, as well–have been nominated. John Singleton, Lee Daniels, and M. Night Shyamalan come immediately to mind (one could also add Kurosawa to the list, but some might read him more as “foreign” than “non-white”). Even Spike Lee, probably the most heralded African American director ever, has never been nominated
Man I gotta see “Pariah” and “Meek’s Cutoff”. Heard so much about those two films.
The problem is the population of Hollywood. It’s mostly white male which is why mostly white males get nominated/awarded etc. That, and the ticket buyers who don’t make these films hits for the studios to pay attention.
I hope that the Academy doesn’t start nominating or awarding films just because they are directed by women let’s say, and forgetting about quality.
Also, just putting this out there but We Need to Talk about Kevin is slightly overrated
“I hope that the Academy doesn’t start nominating or awarding films just because they are directed by women let’s say, and forgetting about quality.”
This is a murky territory you are threading, very complex and emotionally-charged. I mean I understand what you are saying but I can also argue that the Academy has an opportunity to promote women in film if they nominated/awarded more female filmmakers. These women might not be the best but by recognising them, the Academy is raising their profile, which in turn leads to more opportunities for them, which is turn opens more doors for women. A few deserving men might go home empty-handed but yeah, it’s for the greater good right?
The same theory can be applied to minority actors. I mean is Viola Davis really going to win the Oscar because she was the best actress of 2011? let’s get real. Her win is muddled in politics. Some might argue it is unfair to the deserving winners, others might say it is a chance to make history and open the door to more minority actors. Halle Berry’s win or Salma Hayek’s nomination did not change the status quo but hey! what do I know??? I’m just the wig of the fierce and fabulous Deena Jones.
We really need to stop pretending that these awards are anything the good old boys club recognizing their own.
Can you imagine if the “actress” categories didn’t exist and they simply nominated performances regardless of gender? It would once again be a bunch of (probably white) guys.
After the LA times article about the makeup of the Academy, I’m sorry I just don’t take it all as seriously as I used to.
It’s fun to watch the show and the red carpet and talk about performances, but that article was the nail in the coffin of me taking the Oscars seriously as some kind of arbiter of what is culturally relevant or significant.
Many, many, MANY wonderful films come out every year that are not recognized by this group because they are too “edgy” or “independent” or because they dare to have people of color as the focal point.
Movies like Pariah or Shame or Miss Bali or Young Adult or the countless others that are out there.
I’ll go see a few of them and let Middle America and the Hollywood Old Boy’s club argue over whether The Help is better than Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.
So, in summary:
1) If men were the directors of these movies, a couple of them would’ve gotten nominated, but since the Academy has a subconscious distaste for women, they weren’t? (the only one I would choose is Kevin, and that’s nowhere near the Academy’s alley anyway. The bigger problem seems to be the Academy’s distaste for edgy, innovative films)
2) Some woman director before Kathryn Bigelow has hands-down deserved a win, and since she didn’t, the Academy is old, sexist, and conservative? (I’d like to know who should’ve won. Kathryn Bigelow is the only one who comes to mind that has deserved it)
3) We should instill affirmative action into our appraisal of art, probably primarily because a bigger number of males show interest in filmmaking? (which seems to me more like an issue in socialization)
I don’t understand.
“We should instill affirmative action into our appraisal of art, probably primarily because a bigger number of males show interest in filmmaking?”
- Bobb
ABSOLUTELY wrong. Everyone shows interest in filmmaking. However, because of the status quo, men are more likely to succeed. How many people are going to finance a movie like Pariah? a movie by an unknown black female filmmaker about a black lesbian teen? how many people are going to finance a wise-cracking dramedy set in New York or LA and directed by a white male? compare the odds.
Affirmative action is what affirmative action does. In a perfect world, we wouldn’t need it but guess what? this is not a perfect world. Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not advocating for indiscriminate affirmative action. Yes! men and women are not on equal playing ground, hence all is not fair play. If any affirmative action measures are to be implemented, they should be directed at finding funding for female-oriented projects and actively seeking out female projects. Sundance, for example, could have a “best first time female director” award or something. This is how you use affirmative action to incite progress.
Giving Viola Davis best actress, however, does not change anything because the core of the problem has not been addressed. What happens after she wins? who is going to write more lead roles for her? she’ll go back to playing 1 minute roles like she’s been doing for the past decade or end up in another Tyler Perry movie to pay her bills. Tokenism in awards never solves the real issue.
To Deena Jones: Would you accept if you lost your promotion because your boss wanted to have more minorities in your workplace leading teams. I wouldn’t accept because I worked hard to be recognized. There’s a famous quote in my country: “Pepper in the others ass for me it’s soda”. Anyway, giving an award to woman just because she is a woman is insulting them. It’s like saying they need us to overrate their films because they’re so retarded to make a good movie. Just give them the same opportunity to make movie. Awards will come after.
Vitor
of course I wouldn’t. I have worked hard my entire life and I’ll be damned if I lost my job because I wasn’t the right skin colour. However, someone can argue that have minorities not historically lost jobs because of skin colour? I mean take American history for example. From independence to the civil rights movement, how many generations of minorities have lost opportunities in life simply because they were brown? One can argue that affirmative action is basically trying to even out the field and by doing so, some white people will have to pay the consequence. Once again, I understand both sides of the argument but this is a harsh reality who have to deal it. It is a consequence of human wickedness and we must deal with it.
Which women directors should have won an Oscar? Let’s see:
Jane Campion
Agnes Varda
Claire Denis
Kelly Reichardt
Sofia Coppola
Lina Wertmuller
Ida Lupino
Just to name a few.
Jane Campion – i agree wholeheartedly. Would i have expected all the others to win a Directing Oscar? Probably not. But these and many others (Gillian Armstrong, Randa Haines, Penny Marshall, Barbra Streisand, Agnieska Holland, Kimberley Pearce, Patty Jenkins, Valerie Faris, Lisa Cholodenko, Debra Granik) should have been NOMINATED for their work.
Beth Stevens
and not one Oscar nomination for Mira Nair?
The Golden Globes and the BAFTAs both do a better job honoring a diversity of achievement.
I really believe that the problem is not the Academy needs to nominated more female directors, because, I’m sorry, out of that montage the only women who would deserve to be up there is Lynne Ramsay. Nominating women for Oscars that they don’t deserve is no different from nominating men for Oscars that they don’t deserve. The quality of the film and the work is what matters, not the gender.
With that said, what has to change is that Hollywood needs to give women more opportunities to direct fantastic films. Talent is completely devoid of gender and there’s no reason why any of the nominated films this year couldn’t have been directed just as well by women.
In other words, don’t just give female directors more oscar noms. Give female directors the opportunity to get more Oscar noms, which Hollywood does not do enough.
Ryan – While I’m not a Mira Nair fan, she’s certainly as good as many of the men who’ve been nominated (and won).
“Talent is completely devoid of gender and there’s no reason why any of the nominated films this year couldn’t have been directed just as well by women.”
or, perhaps in a couple of cases, better directed.
Deena Jone’s wig: compensations doesn’t mean equality. Compensation is putting the young generations paying for the mistakes of older generations. None of the films in the video would be nominated even if they were directed by men. Take an example: imagine if Orson Welles have lost the oscar for Citizen Kane to a woman because academy wanted to give an oscar to her because they never gave one to a female director. Today she would be bashed and her film will be reduced to the film that won over Citizen Kane. She would be in the same place “How Green Is My Valley” is.
The problem is in the opportunity Hollywood gives to woman to make films and not in the awards. Oscars are for the films that were made and not for the films that should have been made.
“In 2011, only 5% of the top grossing films in Hollywood were directed by Women. The number has decreased since 1998.”
That’s a really disappointing and somewhat surprising statistic. But then Nora Ephron (who struck gold in 1998 with You’ve Got Mail) and Nancy Meyers (who directed The Parent Trap in 1998) are getting on. We need more female filmmakers altogether, but just having more rom-coms directed by women would be a start.
Pariah, Blood & Honey & Kevin stand out in that they’re difficult, edgier material than what the Academy is comfortable with but in my mind, they were all least as well directed as The Descendants and certainly better than War Horse or Extremely Loud.
“The problem is in the opportunity Hollywood gives to woman to make films and not in the awards. Oscars are for the films that were made and not for the films that should have been made.”
I concur completely. To clarify my opinion on this matter, I do believe in affirmative action but only in affirmative action that helps women to tell their stories, not affirmative action that awards undeserving films by women for the sake of diversity. As evidenced by minority actors, tokenism in the awards system does not change anything. Change does not occur by awarding a black actress simply because she is black. No! change occurs behind the lens. So in essence, we are in agreement.
Tricky topic for this year – no women were really even in the conversation, which wasn’t true in 2010. (If they couldn’t find room for Nolan, though, I honestly had no desire to see Granik or Cholodenko.) This year there weren’t too many likelies, BUT a lot of these ladies would make for great additions to the Directors’ Branch. More than anyone else that comes to mind this year, Dee Rees needs to be added for her fantastic job on Pariah.
Spike Lee should have won in 1992, but the Academy didn’t like being told they should vote for him in ’89. I think the Academy is finally realizing it’s important to really strive for diversity, because what they do affects the industry. I may not want Rees to take Director this year, but I want her voice among those who decide it next year. They need to get interesting new voices in the door. As we learned recently it’s not just overwhelmingly white males (which we knew, but I didn’t realize how bad), it’s a median age of 62! No wonder Extremely Loud is up there and Drive/Dragon Tattoo are not.
Why did they not mention Madonna in the video, I wonder?
@ Deena Jone’s wig:
To claim that everyone shows interest in film is a blanket statement. In my experience of growing up in a community of filmmakers, film is regarded as a physical, hands-on activity that boys/men tend to show more interest in. That’s ridiculous of course, but in my opinion, the core problem is cultural influence. Just as mostly men are encouraged to be engineers, mostly men are encouraged to be filmmakers.
And whether or not you think affirmative action should be implemented in the film industry (which would be a tangential political argument), ranking/awarding art based on gender is insulting to the artists. But you seem to have already cleared that up.
@ Beth Stevens:
Those seem to be your personal favorites–if I had my way, Herzog, Bergman, Lynch, PT Anderson, and Tarkovsky would have a room full of the stupid little statues. I don’t recall any of those female directors making a movie that the world lauded as the best film of the year.
What needs to change is where audiences lay their dollar. Hollywood will follow if those dollars are placed on films made by female directors. Hollywood will always follow the money. Those who want change should boycott films made by men and only support those made by women. Say you would normally see 25 movies a year and only one of them is made by a women. Instead of seeing 25 different movies, see that movie made by a woman 25 times. If enough people believe in the cause to do so they’ll be able to sit back and watch the change happen before their eyes. Maybe in a perfect world directorial jobs would be distributed equally between the sexes regardless of skill and niche, but that world isn’t this one. We have to speak with our money.
@ Bobb – I would agree with you about the men, especially Bergman and Tarkovsky. But these seven women directors aren’t just my personal favorites – each has achieved an auteurist mastery of film that ought to be recognized by the Academy, and has been recognized in most other parts of the world, from critics to film festivals, from BAFTA to the European Film Awards to the Globes and the NBR.
Agnes Varda:
Cleo from 5 to 7 (1962) – nom Palme d’Or
Le Bonheur (1965) – won Berlin Silver Bear
Vagabond (1985) – won LAFCA foreign film, won Venice Golden Lion, nom Cesar
The Gleaners & I (2000) – won EFA doc, won LAFCA doc
The Beaches of Agnes (2008) – won DGA doc, nom EFA doc, won Cesar doc
Jane Campion:
Sweetie (1989) – won Indie Spirit foreign film, nom Palme d’Or, won AFI screenplay
An Angel at My Table (1990) – won Indie Spirit foreign film, won 5 awards at Venice, won TIFF International Critics’ Award
The Piano (1993) – won screenplay Oscar, nom director Oscar, won BAFTA, won Palme d’Or, won Cesar, nom DGA, nom GG, won Indie Spirit foreign film, won LAFCA dir & screenplay, won NSFC screenplay, won NYFCC dir & screenplay, won WGA, won AFI dir & screenplay
The Portrait of a Lady (1996) – won Venice Pasinetti
Holy Smoke (1999) – nom Venice Golden Lion, won Venice Elvira Notari
Bright Star (2009) – nom Cesar foreign film, nom Evening Standard, nom Palme d’Or, nom BIFA, nom AFI dir & screenplay
Claire Denis:
Chocolate (1988) – nom Palme d’Or
Beau Travail (1999) – won Rotterdam KNF, nom Chlotrudis dir & screenplay, nom CFCA foreign film, won Berlin Reader
White Material (2009) – nom Venice Golden Lion
Kelly Reichardt:
River of Grass (1994) – nom Sundance Grand Jury, nom 3 Indie Spirit awards
Old Joy (2006) – won Rotterdam Tiger, won LAFCA Indie film, nom Indie Spirit Cassavetes award, nom Gotham
Wendy & Lucy (2008) – won Toronto Film Critics’ Award, nom Chlotrudis dir
Meek’s Cutoff (2010) – won Venice SIGNIS, nom Venice Golden Lion, nom Gotham, won Gijon dir
Lina Wertmuller:
Mimi metallurgico ferito nell’onore (1972) – nom Palme d’Or
Love and Anarchy (1973) – nom Palme d’Or
Swept Away (1974) – won NBR foreign film
Seven Beauties (1975) – nom screenplay Oscar, nom director Oscar, nom DGA
A Night Full of Rain (1978) – nom Berlin Golden Bear
Un complicato intrigo di donne, vicoli e delitti (1985) – won 2 Berlin awards, nom Berlin Golden Bear
Sofia Coppola:
The Virgin Suicides (1999) – nom Chlotrudis screenplay, nom Empire Debut Award, nom LVFC dir, screenplay, newcomer
Lost in Translation (2003) – won screenplay Oscar, nom director & BP Oscars, nom BAFTA screenplay, director & BP, won Boston Film Critics dir, nom BFCA dir & writer, won CFCA screenplay, nom CFCA dir, won Chlotrudis dir & screenplay, won Cesar foreign film, nom DGA, nom EFA, won GG screenplay, nom GG dir, won Indie Spirits director, BP, screenplay, won NBR Special Achievement, won NYFCC director, won Seattle Film Critics dir & screenplay, won Venice Mangiacapre, won WGA
Marie Antoinette (2006) – nom Gotham, won Cannes Cinema Prize, nom Palme d’Or
Somewhere (2010) – won Venice Golden Lion, won NBR Special Achievement
Ida Lupino:
The Hitch-Hiker (1953) – won National Film Registry preservation award 1998
According to film historian Wheeler Winston Dixon:
As I wrote in my profile of director Ida Lupino in issue 50 of the web journal Senses of Cinema,
“One of the most important auteurs in 1950s cinema is one of the most marginal: Ida Lupino. Even today, only two of her feature films, The Hitch-Hiker (1953) and The Trouble With Angels (1966), are available on DVD, and, although her feature films Not Wanted (1949), Never Fear (1949) and The Bigamist (1953) were once available on VHS, they are now long out of print. [Lupino's Hard, Fast and Beautiful (1951), I am happy to say, has just been released on a Warner Archive DVD.]
But if anyone deserves a box set of DVDs covering their entire lifespan of work, Lupino does. Because of the sexism which formerly riddled the film industry – and which, to a large degree, still prevails – Ida Lupino’s directorial career is an unusual case. At the time she was working she literally had no close competition. Although she often made light of her directorial accomplishments, Lupino was obviously driven by a very real need to direct.”
It’s still true today; in the 1950s, the only woman directing in Hollywood was Ida Lupino – in the sound era, “the mother of us all.”
I’m such a yutz. I’ve only seen 5 films that Beth mentioned. I thought Somewhere was wonderful, but 2010 was stacked with great films. As for Wendy and Lucy, it hit the right notes but it was SO small-scale that I couldn’t find any greatness in it. Any defenders want to explain their love for it or point out a link? I’m planning on watching Meek’s Cutoff this weekend so I’m curious…
Real World ———————————————- Ideal World
In the real world, women are expected to take care of their children and, in some cases, juggle a career too. Making a film is very much like having a baby – it’s very difficult and it will weed out the women who care for the gender expectations or the very small amount of women who can juggle both. As Derek said, money dictates everything. No one saw Meek’s Cutoff, Pariah, Higher Ground, or Circumstance. I don’t know why – maybe a sociologist could find you the reason that the majority of people are more interested in films that reflect their conservative gender expectations and perspectives. That’s not to say that women are limited to making women films, but I believe that the women who write/direct are in a limited worldview that isn’t broad enough. Name any of the films in the video. How many made 50+ million?
There should be a lot more female directors who aren’t writers, but again, that’s an ideal world. Directing is still very much a boy’s club and that’s probably not going to change until a woman can prove herself that she’s just as good (or better) at directing a male demographic non animated Hollywood action blockbuster film than a male counterpart. But aside from Bigelow, I don’t think there are many female directors who are interested in breaking that glass ceiling. And if there are, they probably don’t get much of a chance to attain the job anyways. I was very excited when I heard that Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was going to be directed by Mira Nair for this very reason. Sigh.
Beau Travail – great adaptation of Melville’s Billy Budd. Claire Denis captured it perfectly.
Lina Wertmuller got a well-deserved nom for Seven Beauties, one of the strongest films that year. I liked it better than Cuckoo’s Nest and almost as much as Nashville.
Oh, no doubt they’re great artists–when I say personal favorites, I don’t mean you are alone. But even if they secretly labeled themselves as men in the credits, they wouldn’t have gotten the Academy Award. None of those movies, regardless of the gender of the director, are movies the Academy would have voted top dog. The day the Academy votes for a movie like Gleaners & I is the day the Academy grows several pairs of balls (pun intended).
I guess I’m not sure if you’re claiming that the voters are inherently sexist, or that the Academy should vote especially for women in activism for women filmmakers.
I’m not claiming that the Academy should vote especially for women (although many of them are inherently sexist). I think The Gleaners & I could and should have won Best Documentary, but it wasn’t even nominated. Same for Beaches of Agnes. I think Sofia Coppola could and should have won Best Director for Lost in Translation, but since they failed to give Peter Jackson his due for Fellowship (preferring Ron Howard), they had to award him for ROTK. I think Jane Campion could and should have won Best Director for The Piano, but they preferred Spielberg (not a miscarriage of justice, in that case). But their failure to ever nominate Campion again was a huge miscarriage of justice. I think Reichardt just came into her full potential this year with Meek’s Cutoff, which of course was totally ignored by the Academy. And I think Ida Lupino could and should have received an Honorary Oscar for her remarkable, pioneering work as a film director, writer and actress. Are you getting my drift?
I took a gender and globalization class and did my final presentation on Katherine Bigelow’s win. I think the problem is not that the academy hates female directors, it’s that there are so few women who are fostered into becoming directors in the first place.
I do, however, think that the make-up of the academy being so male, white and old(fashioned), I think that they have a bias against the kinds of stories that will be told by women. What old white man is going to be an advocate for Pariah? Maybe a few but not enough to get it a nomination or even a sideways glance really.
Women’s stories aren’t told in Hollywood, not proportionally. The people with the money and the power think they won’t sell because they don’t personally find them interesting. And there’s this perception that women’s stories could never be interesting to men, and that women just want crappy romance formulas anyway.
It will get better. More little girls will grow up to want to be filmmakers. But if we dismiss the problem as not worth focusing on, then it will not get better. I’m not saying we need to affirmative action awards, but programs that teach young girls that they can make movies about things they care about would not be out of line. The more women succeed at film making, the more women will believe they can succeed at film making.
It’s about opportunities in the US I think…the only movies that seem to get made and do well are made by actors. There are others of course but they seem to have the upper hand. In my part of the world there are probably more recognised female directors than male working today. Most of our films or all are primarily financed by the state…and therefore ROI is not crucial.
(OT – the neighbor over the fence is playing the song Neverending Story really loud – he’s about 80 so that’s a bit cute or weird or disturbing)
This thread, and thank you Beth for mentioning some absolute masterpieces. “Vagabond, Sweetie, Seven Beauties…has hopefully inspired some readers to seek out gems of the past.
Near Dark is a perfect film, but I’m a realist. Piano is perfect, and to me, should have won. Seven Beauties, probably not a win but better than the winner – by a mile. An Angel at my Table – not even there. Travesty!!!
Bottom line – if Jane Campion, Gillian Armstrong, Sofia Coppola, Sarah Watt, Nadia Tass, Jocelyn Moorhouse make a movie I’m there opening night. If Asia Argento makes a movie – I’m at Blockbuster renting the fucker.
Beth, those directors who mentioned didn’t win because they’re woman but because they were too edgy for academy tastes. AMPAS would give the award to Spielberg over Campion or any other director. David Lynch is the best american director of nowadays an he never won an oscar even if he is a white male director.
Vitor – I don’t think these women are edgier than, say, the Coen Brothers. In an adventurous year (and the Academy does have them), any of these women could have won. Kurosawa was nominated for Ran the same year that they snubbed Varda for Vagabond. Campion’s Bright Star isn’t particularly edgy – a costume drama/love story about the great poet Keats, widely praised by critics. A perfect opportunity to nominate her again. But women get only one shot at a director nom – good thing Bigelow won hers on the first try.
The fact is, out of the 420+ director nominees, 4 have been women. Out of the 80+ winners, 1 was a woman. Out of the 110+ recipients of individual Honorary Oscars, less than 20% were women. Even given the gender disparity in the business, that’s a truly shameful record.
Saying that women directors don’t make good enough films to win is obviously untrue. Saying that women directors don’t make baity enough films to win is also untrue. The truth is, women aren’t respected enough by the Academy to win, or even to be nominated, 99% of the time.
The fact is, out of the 420+ director nominees, 4 have been women. Out of the 80+ winners, 1 was a woman.
Interesting to note, the percentage of gay directors awarded recognition by the Academy is greater than the numbers for women.
I’d like to assume that’s because there are more gay male Academy members than there are women — out, closeted, bi, flamboyant, on the down-low, and every other degree of the Kinsey Scale.
I’d like to assume that’s true — so I’ll just go right ahead and say, yes, I feel confident the percentage of gay Academy members is at least twice that of the general population.
George Cukor, Vincent Minnelli, Jerome Robbins, John Schlesinger — why can’t women just learn to be more discrete about their sexuality?