List of female directors TSPDT/S&S?

Tools    





You can't win an argument just by being right!
The way it was entangled into the narrative. The director was inspired by 70s Hammer horror and gialli (and even Hitchcock), but tried to twist them so that she can fit her feminist worldview into it. The problem is these two are like chalk and cheese. The eponymous Love Witch is a dominant female who dominates the patriarchy and denudes men's "weaknesses". She's okay with leaving a guy for death or even killing him. This is pretty okayish, but throughout the film there were these sitcom-level feminist remarks/cues in dialogues (and some parts felt like Sabrina, the Teenage Witch-level fare) that I sadly cannot remember anymore that felt really cringy. All in all, the witch turns out to be a monster, an unfulfilled woman that feels like taking revenge of all men - perhaps an accurate depiction of radical feminists. :P
Many thanks for your gentlemanly reply!

I have one query - the director tried to twist in her worldview. Ummm, is this not something artists do?



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
I have one query - the director tried to twist in her worldview. Ummm, is this not something artists do?
Yes, they mostly do it, and I imagine it's as subjective as possible and depends on the viewer, but generally I'm not into blunt displays of filmmaker's agenda, political views, and such, especially when served in such way, although I realize there are such films amongst my favourites too, but these kind of escape with being, say, poetic, allegorical or something, you know.

But truly great artists ask questions instead of providing answers. They do not impose their views. They might merely suggest them by talking in the language of poets, or in allegories. Godard's cinema is awfully political, but I love his skill of making even the most political and tedious topics inevitably poetic (Disclaimer: I haven't seen any of his Dziga Vertov Group output yet). There is a lot of politics in the movies of Bela Tarr, or Apichatpong Weerasethakul, but these are non-invasive, allegorical etc.
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
I have to have some shut eye time but thanks again Min. On a final note - what has chris rock done to his face, My goodness. Good night/morning.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
That says loads right there. It would have been interesting if there had been one or two females and what they would say if you asked them why do you want to be a director. But you didn’t even have the opportunity to do that so that left you with only (what to you seemed perfectly logical) assumptions.



Its interesting you say that because the bias in the industry is not strictly overt in its discrimination. It’s a culture that’s in place. And it extends to women too. I’ll note the example of producer Kathleen Kennedy who so many love to bash for seemingly going out of her way to promote a feminist agenda in the recent Star Wars movies. Well even she said something sort of dispiriting when asked whether a female director would have the chance to direct any of the Star Wars movies (before they had released any). She said she’d love to have a female director but “We need to not go to a filmmaker who’s done one movie and expect them to come in and do something the size of Star Wars without having an opportunity to find other movies they can do along the way.”

The irony here is that male directors frequently take the reins of a giant Hollywood blockbuster after making just one small budget film. In fact, Kennedy hired Gareth Edwards to direct Star Wars: Rogue One after he made the microbudget indie Monsters and the fairly unimpressive Godzilla. Can you imagine if Kennedy had hired a woman to direct Last Jedi how much more vitriolic the reaction would have been from the anti "female agenda" folks? They would have been screaming about how hiring an "inexperienced woman" was the sign of a clear agenda even if they had made the exact same movie as Rian Johnson. But a lot less people called Johnson an unqualified hack then they called Kennedy a dictator pushing her own agenda. I wonder why that is...

Kennedy’s own husband, Frank Marshall, picked Colin Trevorrow to make the $150 million Jurassic World after having made just one little indie film for significantly less than $1 million. So even among other women theres an assumption that women have to keep proving themselves over and over when a man can make one movie and hit the jackpot. That’s what I meant when I said women need to have pages of qualifications while men just need to have “a feel” for the material in many cases.
Oh okay interesting. When you say a man can make one movie and hit the jackpot, by hitting the jackpot, do you mean go on to direct a Hollywood blockbuster, or have a successful debut indie film?

One of the film school professors also said that because the film industry is into hiring women now, it's much more difficult than ever for newcomer male directors to be recognized. Do you think it's true though, in him saying that?

It seems however, that there a lot more female producers than directors, such as James Bond movies, having a female producer, or Star Wars having one as well. Why is it that the film industry doesn't have a problem with a woman being a producer, but they do with being a director? However, producer is a higher rank in making a film than director. So women are still occupying the highest rank (producer), but still female directors are not recognized as much.



You all brush over the fact that all of Woody’s movies are about an older men with a young girl. All of them played by him. Then the allegations against him... yet a feminist making a feminist movie is a bad thing?



mattiasflgrtll6's Avatar
The truth is in here
One of the film school professors also said that because the film industry is into hiring women now, it's much more difficult than ever for newcomer male directors to be recognized. Do you think it's true though, in him saying that?
No. Absolutely not.

Vera Chytilová is a great shout-out, by the way. I love Fruit Of Paradise and Traps.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay maybe that professor was thinking too much of it then or being paranoid of it.

As for their being no women students in my class, I thought it was because women were just not interested enough to take it, as oppose to being denied by the industry. It's not like the school is denying female applicants in the name of the film industry, unless they are and none of us are aware.



Oh okay interesting. When you say a man can make one movie and hit the jackpot, by hitting the jackpot, do you mean go on to direct a Hollywood blockbuster, or have a successful debut indie film?
I mean get to direct a Hollywood blockbuster. Like Godzilla or Jurassic World.

One of the film school professors also said that because the film industry is into hiring women now, it's much more difficult than ever for newcomer male directors to be recognized. Do you think it's true though, in him saying that?
I think you better ask him to check his numbers. In 2016, women comprised 7% of all directors of top earning films (top 250). And that was actually a DROP of 2% from the previous year. And even if it ticked up a few percentage points in 2017 (couldnt find the numbers), I dont see any sign of it being "much more difficult than ever". At least not because of women. Maybe a lot more men have become interested in directing in which case you have only yourselves to blame for the extra competition. Not women.

It seems however, that there a lot more female producers than directors, such as James Bond movies, having a female producer, or Star Wars having one as well. Why is it that the film industry doesn't have a problem with a woman being a producer, but they do with being a director?
There are more female producers than directors. More than 3 times as many in fact. But 24% is still a lot less than 50% last time I checked so it hardly disproves the notion that ALL women have an uphill climb when it comes to making it behind the camera in Hollywood. My thinking is that its a little easier for male industry leaders to accept a female executive (which is what a producer is) than a female creator. Movies really pass or fail on the shoulders of the director not the producer for the most part (Last Jedi aspersions aside). Sure the producer has a lot of pull in how things run but movies really reflect the signature of the director not the producer. So I dont think its too surprising that director numbers trail producer numbers in the industry.
__________________
Farewell and adieu to you fair Spanish ladies...



My personal experience, going to arguably the best film school in the country as a production major (meaning making movies, not just studying them), is that women are just as interested in directing as men. My school was roughly 50/50 male/female, as were all of my film classes, and it seemed like at least a plurality of people wanted to direct. There were certain positions that tended to be filled much more by men than women, as well as the other way around. Many more men were cinematographers and many more women did production design, for example, but that's not necessarily indicative of a lack of interest amongst women to shoot movies, nor a lack of interest amongst men to PD them, because the makeup of a single film school classroom is too small a sample size to extrapolate about the larger culture.

Admittedly, I think my school made a concerted effort to be more inclusive in its admissions process, not only regarding gender, but race as well, in an effort to combat the difficulties women and people of color tend to face in finding opportunities in the industry as compared to white men. Even given that, I did notice that a lot more men were given the opportunity to direct thesis films while I was there than women, and I don't think it was because women weren't applying (because I know a number who did, including myself).

It also seems to me unhealthy to think that more women getting jobs would be taking something away from men. That's a mentality that believes that men are inherently more deserving of those positions than women, so frankly, ironpony, I think your professor is full of sh*t.



It also seems to me unhealthy to think that more women getting jobs would be taking something away from men. That's a mentality that believes that men are inherently more deserving of those positions than women, so frankly, ironpony, I think your professor is full of sh*t.
I kind of agree with this but to me the main message of feminism is exactly the opposite: they're saying that women deserve things just because they're women. My main gripe with feminism today is its hypocrisy; how it demands rights, positions and quotas where it sees fit but is happily silent about areas that don't seem prestigious enough.

Like in Finland we have compulsory military service which only applies to men (women have been able to volunteer for some time). Feminist don't demand equality to this (I'm pretty sure that some of them have actually been strongly against it in the past) because it doesn't benefit them. Same goes to many dominantly male jobs that are dirty and physical - nope, no demands for quota on those but company boards, ministers and all the other well paid and tidy indoor jobs the demand for equality is strong. Also the demand for quotas is usually 50/50 regardless of the amount of possible candidates which will obviously lead to worse people getting the job (unless you're like a feminist and believe that women are superior to men) and benefits no one in the long run.

Another thing is that the modern feminists are usually the same people who preach about the gender fluidity. Anyone can be anything they want and gender is just a social construct... except when it comes to what women deserve and what men have unjustly denied them since time immemorial. Then it's suddenly men and women again (or at least heterosexual white cis males and others).

And yeah, feminism is kind of a touchy subject for me



I kind of agree with this but to me the main message of feminism is exactly the opposite: they're saying that women deserve things just because they're women. My main gripe with feminism today is its hypocrisy; how it demands rights, positions and quotas where it sees fit but is happily silent about areas that don't seem prestigious enough.
I think you don't understand what feminism is. Anyone who argues that women deserve things solely because they're women or believes in female superiority is not a feminist. Feminists believe in equal opportunity for everyone. If someone is claiming they're feminist and is advocating for something else, then they're lying about being feminist.



I think you don't understand what feminism is. Anyone who argues that women deserve things solely because they're women or believes in female superiority is not a feminist. Feminists believe in equal opportunity for everyone. If someone is claiming they're feminist and is advocating for something else, then they're lying about being feminist.
Yeah, well I don't really care about the original 1st wave definition of the word when it comes to evaluating the present. In practice the hypocrisy is rampant and the greatest goal is to take away from white male (in Sweden some feminist organization did announce that they'd rather be raped by an immigrant than being saved by a "racist" white man - racist obviously being anyone who doesn't believe in uncontrolled mass immigration; #killallwhitemen; every vaginal penetration is rape; etc. ad nauseam).

Also there's lots of talk in this thread how we're still very far from 50/50 split on directors and producers. Equal opportunity does not mean equal quota - it means that regardless of sex the best candidate is chosen. There are very good reasons to expect that biological differences between sexes make one or the other more suitable for certain jobs so 50/50 split as a goal is almost guaranteed to be against equal opportunity. All forms of positive discrimination are working against equal opportunities.

I don't really want to fight over these matters in here (I've already done it on other places so I know that the arguments from either side don't chance the opinion of the other) so I try to stay away from this thread. Unfortunately I just couldn't stop myself from posting in the first place.

Peace & love



mattiasflgrtll6's Avatar
The truth is in here
My God, I can't frickin' stand whenever people talk about Sweden like it's some kind of wasteland. Whatever group it was that said that, I'm sure that it's not very popular anyway. There's nothing feminist about that statement whatsoever, so if they really call themselves a feminist group they have no right to do so.



Yeah, you're not doing anything to further your case that you have any idea what feminism is. I'm not talking about "the original 1st wave" of feminism. I'm talking about the present. And I don't think there's any feminist who truly believes all jobs should have a 50/50 gender split, which is why I said "equal opportunity," not "50/50 split." The problem is that too often women are not judged on their qualifications or abilities, but for the fact that they're a woman, which is why getting close to gender parity among directors, which is a job that is not inherently better suited to men, nor is it a job that significantly more men want or are more qualified to hold than women, is a fine goal. I truly believe that if hiring were done solely based on merit, we would naturally have a lot closer to (though obviously not exactly) a 50/50 gender split in the film industry (as well as a lot of others).



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
What film school did you attend?
Well now that I have talked about the school being all male and the professor saying things that not be true, I don't know if I should say what school I went too now...

I mean get to direct a Hollywood blockbuster. Like Godzilla or Jurassic World.



I think you better ask him to check his numbers. In 2016, women comprised 7% of all directors of top earning films (top 250). And that was actually a DROP of 2% from the previous year. And even if it ticked up a few percentage points in 2017 (couldnt find the numbers), I dont see any sign of it being "much more difficult than ever". At least not because of women. Maybe a lot more men have become interested in directing in which case you have only yourselves to blame for the extra competition. Not women.



There are more female producers than directors. More than 3 times as many in fact. But 24% is still a lot less than 50% last time I checked so it hardly disproves the notion that ALL women have an uphill climb when it comes to making it behind the camera in Hollywood. My thinking is that its a little easier for male industry leaders to accept a female executive (which is what a producer is) than a female creator. Movies really pass or fail on the shoulders of the director not the producer for the most part (Last Jedi aspersions aside). Sure the producer has a lot of pull in how things run but movies really reflect the signature of the director not the producer. So I dont think its too surprising that director numbers trail producer numbers in the industry.
Oh okay, interesting. My professor said more women are being hired when it comes to newcomer directors compared to people already in the business with feature films under their belts.



Oh my giddy aunt and clutch my pearls. You're actually asking me why it's a hunch?

I'm convinced you are the little annoying nephew always carrying on with Why is that, Why is it so, Why Why Why, and driving auntie completely up the wall. Tiny teacup humans do that.

*Cue next question.

Not to but in too much here, but this sounds really, really condescending.