Penny Marshall was one of the few women who helped break through barriers in place for decades. She, along with a handful of others, fought for validity at a time when the only way any director could be validated was if they could bring home box office successes.
Marshall began her work as an actress who transitioned to directing while starring in Laverne and Shirley. Her first film was Jumpin’ Jack Flash in 1986 with Whoopi Goldberg. She followed that up in 1988 with Big, which launched Tom Hanks into superstardom and netted him his first Oscar nomination. Big was such a huge hit that Marshall became a force to be reckoned with almost overnight. It was a conundrum — she was a woman and women weren’t supposed to make movies that were hits, but she did. She was part of a generation of women who made movies so successful they could not and were not ignored.
Two years later, Marshall would make Awakenings, which became just the second ever Best Picture nominee directed by a woman (Randa Haines became the first in 1986, directing Children of a Lesser God). However, she did not land in Best Director. In fact, after Marshall’s rise, women who made successful films were mostly excluded from the elitist club that was Best Director: Barbra Streisand, Amy Heckerling, Nora Ephron, Nancy Meyers. They were almost punished for turning out hits.
Penny Marshall should be remembered for rising and persevering in an industry that was designed to keep her pigeonholed in her designated box.
The list of films nominated for Best Picture that were directed by women is longer than the list of women directors who have been nominated for Best Director. Ava DuVernay remains the only woman of color to have a film nominated for Best Picture. And as you can see from the list below, in 2009 and 2010, with an even 10 nominees, it was possible to get two films in directed by women. This year no woman is expected to crack the top five.
RIP Penny.
As for female directors, I’m anticipating bigger things for them in the future. In fact at the Vancouver Film Festival, there were a healthy number of films that were directed by women.
I will always love “BIG” which is still my favourite Tom Hanks film. Marshall broke ceiling for women and current as well as future female filmmakers owe debt to her.
Big actually was released in 1988. Awakenings came out two years later, and remains an underrated gem. RIP, Ms. Marshall.
Robert DeNiro looks so sexycute there.
Her movies always reminded me of John Hughes’. Simmilar warmth, humor, sensibility. Especially Big, but also the forgotten Renaissance Man to me represent a simpler, nicer time in cinema.
Isn’t it? What happened to those types of film? There no longer great family films except animated and mostly Pixar films.
I thought Big was nominated for Best Picture. Too bad it wasn’t.
I remember laughing like an idiot to Jumpin’ Jack Flash, and being incredibly touched by Awakenings. I’m probably one of the few who liked Riding In Cars With Boys.
She was a gifted director.
I love A League of their Own. There are some cheesy moments and I really don’t LOVE Lori Petty in that movie but whatever. I still love it
RIP Damn, thats a shame.
Big was one of the main films I watched with my family growing up and I love it to this day.
RIP Penny Marshall. This is an informative article. However, while it focuses on women directors being nominated or not nominated for the Oscars, it neglected to mention Penny Marshall’s biggest female-empowerment film: A League of Their Own, from 1992. It was not an Oscar film, but it may have been her most entertaining.
RIP PM—I wish she had continued directing and acting.
Also, for your list of overlooked female directors, don’t forget to add Randa Haines, who was probably the first female director from the US to have a legitimate shot at a nod for Children of a Lesser God in 1986, when the film had received the other 4 of the Big 5 nominations (Film, Actor, Actress, Adapted Screenplay), yet was completely ignored despite the film’s other nominations and her win at Berlin a year earlier.
Alan,
Sasha originally had listed Haines, but I had replaced her with Heckerling while copyediting as Children of a Lesser God happened before Marshall’s ascendance with Big, Awakenings, and League of Her Own. That said, of course Haines should be recognized as well so I have put her back in the post acknowledging her as the first to direct a Best Picture nominee.
RIP Penny, thanks for entertaining me as a little boy in the late 70s with Laverne & Shirley. Then as a teenager with Big and Awakenings, I’ll never forget you.
RIP… she certainly SHOULD have been nominated for Awakenings, over Kevin Costner, the eventual winner. I still can’t get over the fact they didn’t nominate her, and gave the Oscar to Costner for an overlong sucession of postcards, and in front of Barbet Schroeder, Francis Ford Coppola – say what you want, but The Godfather Part III is my Best Picture of 1990 -, Marty and Stephen Frears. To add salt to the injury, they nominated Robert de Niro in an easy showy role and snubbed Robin Williams who was excellent opposite to him, and restrained. 1990 was a weird year at the Oscars… I think that the only award that I enjoyed, was Whoopi Goldberg’s win for Ghost, and mostly because it was giving her, late, her deserved win for The Color Purple.
Back to Marshall: yes, a pioneer with some good classics… Jumpin’ Jack Flash was pure 80’s camp, Big was a huge breakthrough for Hanks and Awakenings showed how big she could be if given a chance.
I love The Godfather: Part III and I love Awakenings even more… but I also love Dances with Wolves, and have ever since I was a kid. (Not sure whether that or Awakenings – which I first saw a lot later – would win for me.)
“To add salt to the injury, they nominated Robert de Niro in an easy showy role and snubbed Robin Williams who was excellent opposite to him, and restrained.”
Yeah, I agree there.
My rank of 1990 Best Picture nominees…
1. The Godfather, Part III
2. Goodfellas
3. Awakenings
4. Ghost
5. Dances with Wolves (it is interesting, but overlong and too pretentious).
For my nominations, I’d probably have nominated The Godfather Part III, Goodfellas, Awakenings, Total Recall and Misery… but with Ghost, The Grifters, Cyrano de Bergerac, Ju Dou, The Terrible Girl, Reversal of Fortune and Longtime Companion closing in to round a top 10.
Pretentious rarely bothers me too much. 🙂 As long as it’s not also annoying, and is at least interesting enough to make up for it. (Clearly, I think DWW qualifies, and more.)
You’ve probably seen way more 1989 movies than myself, but, in any case, the one I like the least of the nominees, and the only one I’d leave out, is actually Goodfellas. (I’ve rewatched it at least twice, over the years, and I just never get what people think is so brilliant about it.) Not at all sure what I’d put in its place, though – Reversal of Fortune and Cyrano de Bergerac would be two of the main candidates there… (Not a fan of Misery, either.)
funny… I read Misery – the book – before the film was released (probably even before the actors were cast!) and I remember reading it and thinking that the actor and actress who would star in a film adaptation would be SO winning the Oscars… when the cast was announced I though Cann was winning – overdueness – but Bates was too unknown… surprise, it happened the other way round in the end… she totally deserved it, and I am still not getting why anyone would call her win “surprising” unless they were judging for her physique, thinking a more traditional beauty would win over some overweight actress, unknown for the masses. So happy for her, and still in shock she only has ONE when she could have easily won for Fried Green Tomatoes, Primary Colors or About Schmidt, among others…
Oh yeah, the acting in it was great, for sure…
Huge fan of Fried Green Tomatoes, by the way.
You’re even more funny. You don’t like Scorsese masterpiece? Damn!
I’ve tried, like I said… 🙂 What to do?! If I don’t love it I don’t love it.
Well, what can I say? Sorry, about that.
Trust me, I’d much rather get it. 🙂 (What’s so great about it.) I just don’t…
I don’t get some great films either. Of the really absolute classics I have always struggle to get “The Wizard of Oz”. I watched it when I was young and loved some elements like the songs and friendship between Dorothy and her gang but I never really loved the story. I just never got it. I also never liked other remakes/sequels/adaptations either. However, I do understand why it’s popular, especially its critical appeal. I noticed a long time ago that it must be the most imitated or influential film ever because it seemed it’s ideas were the most wide spread of any film. I see it in most movies as its ideas are rehashed endlessly. Some of the most popular films and franchises are rehashing that film. And even though I am not sure when it was written but “The Lord of the Rings” seems to have some influences from that film. You might say none of those ideas were really original but I don’t think any film has captured as well as it. Almost all fantasy or sci-fi films seems to have elements of Oz. You might call it the Oz phenomenon. Another film whose influences are everywhere, especially films, is “Psycho”. But that one is specific to one genre.
Psycho, by the way, is another one I like way, way less than most people (it’s just too dated for me, for the most part, and I don’t even find it that interesting, even keeping in mind how much it’s been imitated, and attempting to be objective about that – although I’m generally a big fan of Hitchcock).
On The Lord of the Rings, the book (Wikipedia): “The story began as a sequel to Tolkien’s 1937 fantasy novel The Hobbit, but eventually developed into a much larger work. Written in stages between 1937 and 1949”
I remembered it was written (or, I see, begun) very shortly before WWII, but didn’t know the exact year(s).
The Wizard of Oz I like a lot, though – this, despite the fact that it, too, is most definitely at least a little dated.
My tastes are very personal, I suppose. 🙂 Most of the time I don’t care HOW great a movie is, craft-wise, as long as I don’t connect with it. (Although with Goodfellas I don’t see the greatness in that aspect so clearly either – it’s very good, but I don’t see why it’s supposed to be great… but probably only because nobody’s ever tried to explain it to me in detail. I think I’ve read critics reviews that didn’t make it clear to me. Even then, I’d get it, at least, which would be nice, but I still wouldn’t love it just because of that.) Craft alone doesn’t do it for me (the reason Roma also isn’t one of my favorites, even though it’s obviously highly impressive) – probably because I’m not as passionate/curious as most of you folk at AD about that stuff (how movies are made). A certain lack of curiosity has always been an issue (if that’s the right word) for me, in many fields. The things I truly love (chess, literature, stats, watching great movies and series, snooker… there are many) I delve VERY deeply into, but everything else I just don’t care about almost at all. Not quite, but almost. Even so, I feel like I’m filling my head with WAY more useless information than I should, which clearly hinders me in certain ways, in life. But what can you do?! 🙂 Giving up (even just some of) the things I love would also be quite bad, I suspect. At least that’s how I’ve always looked at it…
Oh I get it. That’s what I thought it was. You need to connect with films to love it. I am sort of both. I highly appreciate how the film was made even if they story isn’t great or the characters aren’t relatable. In fact, that might be the most appealing thing about films. That’s why I have always Kubrick. I mean, people say it’s very difficult to connect with his films but they have always appealed to me. I watched his films when I was too young to watch and I was fascinated by his films more than any other director. “The Shining”. in particular tranced and held that film to be the greatest film ever. When I got a little older and widened my taste and I found out that it was not a universally shared opinion and that there are after better films. It’s not in my top ten anymore but I still think that it is the greatest ever made film if not the greatest film ever. I also still hold that Kubrick is the greatest director even though my personal favourite now is Billy Wilder. His films appeal to my sensibilities and the scripts are out of this world. Probably greatest screen writer. I do have a soft spot for those kind of writers. Coens and Wes Anderson are similar, I think. Oh, I must not forget Brad Bird who has made some of favourites of all time.
Either connection or a truly fascinating story/screenplay. I’m talking near-mind-blowing on the latter… One of those two, indeed, needs to be there. Preferably both. 🙂
Kubrick I’m a fan of (his style is unbelievable), although I do, indeed, not connect with his movies much. The only one I really love is Dr. Strangelove. 2001 I think is tremendous, but I can’t say I love it. But it’s about as good as I can think a movie is without loving it. I also think Barry Lyndon and The Shining are great. All of his movies are very, very interesting, verging on fascinating. He’s not my favorite director, but he’s clearly one of the very best ever.
And I obviously also love Billy Wilder. 🙂 A lot of his movies I love (The Apartment, The Lost Weekend, Witness for the Prosecution, even Irma La Douce), and the others I’ve seen are all also great.
I was talking about 1990, of course. Don’t know why I said 1989. 🙂 I’m pretty tired, so that might have something to do with it…
You’re funny. You’re a funny guy. “Goodfellass” is not first? Scorsese masterpiece? You’re so effing funny.
Well, maybe it is I have an opinion on my own, and I am not some sheep afraid to speak out differently… and I value more the operatic structure and tone that Coppola used to close his trilogy…
“Goodfellas” is one of the most beautiful shot films and I prefer some aspects of it to “The Godfather”. It so good that Scorsese mafia is now the mafia-type. It’s more street and local than TG.