tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35146681398477828512024-03-20T23:02:41.580-07:00Ruth Consumes Some MediaGender, Race, and Class in the MediaRuth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-80982419441830748842015-02-20T18:27:00.000-08:002015-02-20T18:27:05.404-08:00Music of the Spheres: An experiment in interactive storytelling<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.wheresangela.com/Kickstarter" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8KF26_pU3mw/VOfsPPd98pI/AAAAAAAAAD0/dSqaLig3ooU/s1600/MOTS%2BTitle%2BCard.jpg" height="241" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.wheresangela.com/Kickstarter" target="_blank"><br /></a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
A pious woman who cuts out people's tongues; a mysterious man who has
aligned with the enemy to save his wife; a frustrated professor who is
looking to capture real power at any cost; a desperate father with a
death wish who is stuck in a time loop; and a replica who is as loving
as she is brutally cruel. They are all standing in the way of Angela as
she searches for the 9 blades that make up the mystical ancient weapon
developed by Pythagoras called the Music of the Spheres; a weapon, that
when fully assembled, can completely alter space and time.<br />
<br />
All that and the viewer has control over the story.<br />
<br />
Award-winning
filmmaker Ruth Gregory has launched a Kickstarter campaign for “Music
of the Spheres” an interactive, female-centered, sci-fi web series to be
shot this summer in Washington state.<br />
<br />
“I decided that after
producing ‘Maikaru’ [which one best documentary short at the Seattle
International Film Festival making it Oscar-eligible] that it was time
for a new challenge,” Gregory said, “I’m a huge sci-fi fan and have
always wanted to take the plunge in that direction as a filmmaker. This
just seemed like the right time.”<br />
<br />
But an interactive web series? How does that work?<br />
<br />
“The
net is a great communication tool so why not invite your audience into
the creative process instead of just presenting your show like we’ve
done for years on network television,” Gregory states. “I was thinking
about it in a very formalist manner – as mediamakers no one has really
tried to maximize what you could do with media on the a platform like
the internet and I wanted to explore the possibilities.”<br />
<br />
The
“Music of the Spheres” episodes will be freely available on the web, but
the pay community that surrounds the show – the Order of the Spheres –
will financially and creatively support the show as it moves forward.
“We wanted to give our pay fans the opportunity to be a part of the show
in a unique way. And you can’t get much more intimate that becoming a
part of the creative process!”<br />
<br />
The cast includes a bevy of
Washington talent including actors who’ve been on television shows like
Syfy’s “Z Nation” and NBC’s “Grimm” as well as high-profile movies like <em>Wild</em> and <em>Safety Not Guaranteed</em>.
Rosalie Miller is attached to play the main character, Angela. The
primary cast also includes Wonder Russell (Betty), Tony Doupe (Dan),
Lowell Deo (Scott), Jennifer True (Petra), and Jodie Harwood (Pam).<br />
<br />
<br />
The “Music of the Spheres” Kickstarter campaign is live until 10pm on March 1at <a href="http://www.wheresangela.com/Kickstarter">www.WheresAngela.com/Kickstarter</a>.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-42247261957424142482011-12-17T09:47:00.000-08:002011-12-17T09:48:58.856-08:00Progressive Masculinity in "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows"<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i8iv4T-cArI/TuzVk1OkplI/AAAAAAAAACo/UnxI9P36LG4/s1600/holmes7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="167" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i8iv4T-cArI/TuzVk1OkplI/AAAAAAAAACo/UnxI9P36LG4/s320/holmes7.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
I am always intrigued when a sequel is able to rise above the 60% mark on <a href="http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sherlock_holmes_a_game_of_shadows/" target="_blank">Rotten Tomatoes</a>. Thus, with <i>Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows</i> hovering in the low 60th percentiles and, therefore, acquiring the status of "certified fresh" I figured I would give it a go. I must say that I wasn't disappointed either. But, as I tell my students, just because I liked the film doesn't mean that I can't critique it. So let the fun and spoilers begin.<br />
<br />
In this installment of the continuing sagas of Sherlock Holmes the detective is manic about a professor named Moriarty... or is it really something else that has got Holmes all in a huff? At the beginning of the film Watson stops by Holmes' apartment to find the detective in a manic state. True, Holmes is on the trail of Professor James Moriarty, but Watson is there to celebrate his stag night before he weds and cares little for Holmes' new venture. With Watson's marriage looming Holmes' manic state seems to be worsening; as Holmes' housekeeper, Mrs. Hudson, points out he's been recently subsiding on coffee, tobacco, and cocoa leaves. Now it is nothing new to say that the Guy Ritchie versions of the Sherlock Holmes saga are full of innuendo between Robert Downey, Jr.'s Holmes and Jude Law's Watson. There are so many different critics and bloggers that have commented on this:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
[Holmes]... more or less sabotages Watson's bachelor party, makes something of a
comedy out of the marriage ceremony itself, then invades the couple's
honeymoon train-compartment dressed as a woman. He tosses Mary off the
train, and -- in torn dress and smeared lipstick -- falls
bare-chested to the berth, commanding, 'Lie down with me, Watson.' -<a href="http://blogs.commercialappeal.com/the_bloodshot_eye/2011/12/sherlock-holmes-a-game-of-shadows---a-review.html#more" target="_blank"> John Beifuss</a></blockquote>
<br />
And I am not here to argue with them. The bromance between Watson and Holmes is alive and well in the second installment of the series. My interest in how the latent love between Watson and Holmes, coupled with the surprising attributes of the other male characters, makes for a stunningly progressive take on masculinity in an action film. These men aren't your what-is-bigger-my-pecs-my-gun-or-my-ahem-masculinity sort of men. These men are smart, they cry, they are crafty, they have strange phobias, they love women, and they love other men. They have, in some ways, broken out of the box of stereotypical masculinity and they've done so in an action film. This is no small feat.<br />
<br />
First, let's look at Holmes nemesis, Professor James Moriarty, played by Jared Hess. Moriarty is ruthless and uses his intellect to devise a plan to make money by selling weaponry after igniting a world war. Moriarty is smart, cunning, and uninterested in women in the film. In most action films he would be made to seem effeminate and exude homosexual vibes since real men, well, penetrate in all aspects of their life. However, if you contrast Moriarty with Holmes, there isn't much of a difference between the two. Holmes is smart, cunning, and more interested in Watson then women. The one thing that divides Moriarty from Holmes is that he wants to profit off his wits and, to do so, he's ruthless and cunning. The differences between the men is so slight that it opens up new possibilities for the cinematic other -- they can be evil because they choose to be evil, not because there are anything but white, heterosexual, and male like our protagonist (see my <a href="http://ruthconsumessomemedia.blogspot.com/2010/01/cinematic-other-dominatrix.html" target="_blank">other blogs</a> on the cinematic other to see what I'm talking about).<br />
<br />
Also, interesting in this film is Mycroft Holmes, Sherlock's brother, played by Stephen Fry. Mycroft is your stereotypical latent homosexual character. He is effeminate, clean, and has a man servant with him at all times. He is a committed bachelor who wonders around his house naked while telling the newly-minted and decidedly perturbed Mrs. Watson that he "might grow to enjoy the company of a person of your gender." In your typical action film Mycroft Holmes would be the antagonist, he's everything a real-man is not. But he's not the antagonist of this film. In fact, he has a lot of power working in a unspecified job in the higher levels of the English government. It is extremely unusual to see a character like Mycroft be so integral to the success of the main character in an action film and, also, live to see the end credits roll.<br />
<br />
Allowing men to show compassion for another man (Watson and Holmes hold hands) and a series of personality quirks (Holmes hates horses and Mycroft doesn't like to touch other people) are newer contributions to the acceptable characteristic given to male characters in the action genre. This expansion of the masculine box is the type of progress I am happy to report. Now if only there were good things to say about the female characters in the film... Oh well, one step forward, one step back.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
</div>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-91039600604197985692011-11-13T04:47:00.001-08:002012-01-19T10:33:46.401-08:00Social Justice, Technology & The Humanities: THATCamp Pacific Northwest StyleI had no idea what THATCamp was all about when I signed up to go. The description of what would be going on was a little cryptic:<br />
<a href="http://thatcamp.org/" target="new"></a><br />
<blockquote>
<a href="http://thatcamp.org/" target="new">THATCamp</a> stands for “The Humanities and Technology Camp”, where “camp” implies a participant-driven “unconference.” Check your papers and suits at the door, and just be ready to talk about the work you’re doing, the work you want to do, how you might collaborate with others, and how you can help and be helped by a community dedicated to the intersection of the humanities and technologies. THATCamp was created by the <a href="http://chnm.gmu.edu/" target="_blank" title="http://chnm.gmu.edu/">Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media</a> at <a href="http://www.gmu.edu/" target="_blank" title="http://www.gmu.edu/">George Mason University</a>. You might also know CHNM as the institution behind <a href="http://www.zotero.org/" target="new">Zotero</a> and <a href="http://omeka.org/" target="new">Omeka</a>. CHNM supports this and other regional THATCamps.</blockquote>
I figured as someone who primarily teaches in a Digital Filmmaking department, has a higher degrees in Cultural Studies and Film and is dabbling in new media that there might be something of interest to me at this "un-conference" especially since the Pacific Northwest THATCamp was focused on technology and social justice. Going in my hope was that I would come out of THATCamp with some new technological tools and platforms for getting my students psyched about the possibilities of digital domains in my more history/theory centered classrooms. I was also hoping that these tools would be relatively easily to implement so that I wouldn't have to devote lots of class time to get students to a relatively basic level of competency (which I feel obligated to do when I have students make video projects).<br />
<br />
I wasn't disappointed either - THATCamp delivered. I find out about a whole litany of technological tools that other professors and grad students were using in their classrooms: <a href="http://www.techsmith.com/jing.html">Jing</a> (screen-capture software), <a href="https://digitalresearchtools.pbworks.com/w/page/17801672/FrontPage" target="_blank">DiRT</a> (standing for Digital Research Tools), and <a href="http://storify.com/">Storify</a> (a way to create stories using social media posts), etc. I attended workshops on how one professor used <a href="http://omeka.org/">Omeka</a> (a digital archiving platform) to chronicle the DIY music movement and how the University of Washington - Bothell is creating a Facebook game to educate the wider community about their wetlands restoration project (a beta version can be accessed <a href="https://apps.facebook.com/uwb-wetlands/" target="_blank">here</a> and I am already totally addicted to it).<br />
<br />
However, the thing that was most interesting to me was not the sharing of the techie tools, but rather a conversation that erupted around the acceptance of the digital in the teaching of humanities in an "un-conference" session about Curriculum Development. Since I primarily teach at a community college, the push to teach students employable skills is forcible and consistent. But to some of my colleagues in graduate school and those teaching at the university level, there is less of a concern pedagogically regarding the real-world applicability of their classes. This brought up a lot of questions for me, ones that weren't necessarily answered during the day I spent at the PNW THATCamp, but things I will definitely be thinking about for awhile:<br />
<ul>
<li>Can we teach Humanities and <span style="font-style: italic;">not</span> teach it in a digital fashion and expect our students to be employable when they exit the academy?</li>
<li>Why is teaching digital "trade skills" in the Humanities frowned upon? Especially since there are disciplines like engineering and computer science that do teach how to use technology in their curriculum.</li>
<li>With <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/19/business/economy/19grads.html" target="_blank">newly-graduated college students</a> accounting for some of the highest numbers of unemployed and underemployed in our faltering economy is is prudent for those of us who teach Humanities to turn a blind eye to teaching them to be as technologically proficient as they will be theoretically?</li>
</ul>
My point is not to dramatically shift the conversation away from the initial purpose of a liberal arts education - to create informed and well-rounded citizens. I believe this is an important component to the philosophical underpinnings of our higher education system and for society in general. I would rather like to tweak the Enlightenment principles behind this philosophy slightly. Many students expect to get a job after earning a higher degree. Most of us (including professors like me) are not independently wealthy and we need to work to survive. So why are we continuing to be elitest about what we teach at the collegiate level and how we teach it? Why are we privileging certain types of trade-centered knowledge (like computer programming) over others (graphic design)? Does this help or hurt our students as they attempt to step out into the working world in the worst economy since the Great Depression? Ultimately, I do not see why being taught to be technologically savvy and acquiring critical thinking skills are considered mutually exclusive in classes and colleges where the focus is more on the historical and theoretical considerations of knowledge. <br />
<br />
The most interesting thing to me is that when you dissect the concept of Digital Humanities there is an obvious privileging of the Humanities side of the phrase over the Digital. As someone who primarily teaches technical "trade" skills - video production and editing - at a community college I would like to see more discussion at future THATCamps about incorporating the wealth of what Humanities has to offer into the Digital-based classroom not just what those of us who work and create in the Digital trades can do for the Humanities.<br />
<br />
For more information about THATCamp check out:<br />
<ul>
<li>http://pnw2011.thatcamp.org/about/</li>
<li>http://thatcamp.org/</li>
</ul>
<br />
<blockquote>
</blockquote>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-59564175933478964732011-01-02T08:36:00.000-08:002011-11-13T08:07:51.024-08:00Tiny Furniture<embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" flashvars="file=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tinyfurniture.com%2Fassets%2Ftrailer%2Ftiny-furniture-trailer.flv&image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tinyfurniture.com%2Fassets%2Ftrailer%2Fifc-films.jpg&stretching=fill&plugins=viral-1d" height="355" src="http://www.ifcfilms.com/mediaplayer/player-licensed-viral.swf" width="596"></embed>
<span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">Tiny Furniture</span> is an independently made film directed by and starring Lena Durham about a young woman named Aura who is dealing with life after college while staying in her Mom's Tribeca loft. She's just been dumped by her long-term boyfriend and graduated from a unnamed college in Ohio with a degree in film theory.<br />
<br />
The film has made a deep impression on me and not just because Aura's journey is much like my own (substituting the hip Tribeca loft with the not-so-hip rural Washington digs). The way that the film really stood out to me was that it didn't pass the reverse of The Bechdel Test; it had two men in it with names, but they never spoke to each other. Almost all of the primary case of characters in the film are women. I was completely struck by the lack of male presence in the film and the large amount of fully fleshed out female characters. After getting over my initial shock I was saddened to think that I was surprised at the amount of women in one film at all. Is it really so rare that there are large casts of women in a film? I would sadly say "yes." So I started thinking about how many films I could name that I've seen in the past couple of years that had more than two women in the main character cast:<br />
<ul>
<li><i>Bridesmaids</i></li>
<li><i>The Help</i></li>
<li><i>Thor</i><i> </i></li>
<li><i>Tiny Furniture</i></li>
<li><i> Burlesque</i></li>
<li><i>Black Swan </i></li>
</ul>
And that's it. Can anyone else think of films with more than two women in the main character cast that have come out recently? This list is pathetically short.<br />
<i> </i><br />
<br />
More info about <i>Tiny Furniture</i> is <a href="http://tinyfurniture.com/" target="_blank">here</a>.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-12419407861820801492010-11-23T10:09:00.000-08:002010-11-24T09:17:45.595-08:00White Men Are the Best at Everything: Mapping the Birthplaces of the Directors of American Film Institute’s 100 Greatest Films of All Time<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cLJEm_jHacY/TOwLhO2KgjI/AAAAAAAAACQ/JbN-gUi4F6s/s1600/AFI%2BMap.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 300px; height: 158px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cLJEm_jHacY/TOwLhO2KgjI/AAAAAAAAACQ/JbN-gUi4F6s/s200/AFI%2BMap.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542817906935104050" border="0" /></a>My original map is on Google. You can link to it by clicking <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Oak+Park,+Cook,+Illinois&msa=0&msid=100296741997271554920.000495479d98421ac51ce&z=2">here</a>.<br /><br /><!--[if !mso]> <style> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:browserlevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults ext="edit" spidmax="1029"> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout ext="edit"> <o:idmap ext="edit" data="1"> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->In 1997 the American Film Institute issued its first list of the top 100 films of all time entitled “100 years… 100 movies.”<span style=""> </span>This was to commemorate the first 100 years of the existence of motion pictures – 1896 – 1996 (Why these dates, I am unsure. Most scholars go back and forth between 1894 and 1895 for the start of the motion pictures). <a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=";font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ></span></span></span></span></a><span style=""></span>In 2007 this list was revised and republished.<span style=""> </span>Both lists were created from the input of 1,500 “…leaders from the film community (me, not being one of them).<a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style=";font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ></span></span></span></span></a>”<span style=""> </span>Gone from the second list were films like <i style="">The Birth of a Nation</i> and <i style="">The Jazz Singer</i> which had characters performing in blackface and, though, technically significant to the history of cinema, were wrought with controversy surrounding their content.<span style=""> </span>Added were films like <i style="">Do The Right Thing</i> and <i style="">The</i> <i style="">Sixth Sense</i> which seemingly added diversity to the list due to the fact that their directors – Spike Lee and M. Night Shaymalan – are men of color.<span style=""> </span>The purpose in mapping where the directors of AFI’s 100 greatest films of all time were born along with a poster of their acclaimed film(s) is an attempt to show that while the new top 100 list attempted to expand the range of films and filmmakers incorporated into it, that the perception of excellence in motion picture production is still from a very white European-American male perspective.<span style=""> </span>Thus, the list reinforces the idea that American films are the best films in the world and the only visual stories that matter to the cinema canon are feature-length fictional narratives.<br /><br />This is not to say that mapping the locales of the director’s births did not provide any surprises.<span style=""> </span>I was surprised that so many of the directors were European by birth.<span style=""> </span>I was also surprised to find that legendary Hollywood directors Billy Wilder and Frank Capra were not born in America, but rather Italy and Poland.<span style=""> </span>Capra immigrated to the United States around the age of four while Wilder came to the United States after Adolf Hitler rose to power in Germany and took over the film studio where he was working.<span style=""> </span>When clicking through the map the juxtaposition of images of these very iconic American stories – like Capra’s <i style="">It’s a Wonderful Life</i> – with Europe is interesting and jarring at the same time.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cLJEm_jHacY/TO1F7vZfkrI/AAAAAAAAACY/5JlOmNRjO_o/s1600/Its%2Ba%2BWonderful%2BLife.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 252px; height: 133px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cLJEm_jHacY/TO1F7vZfkrI/AAAAAAAAACY/5JlOmNRjO_o/s200/Its%2Ba%2BWonderful%2BLife.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5543163609000940210" border="0" /></a><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;">Also surprising was that John Ford, who is so well known for his Westerns, was originally from Maine.<span style=""> </span>Spike Lee, who is known so much for his urban stories set in New York City, was actually born in Atlanta.<span style=""> </span>What this showed me is that you do not need to be from a certain place or necessarily embody a positionality similar to the characters in your film to tell stories that resonate with audiences and critics alike.<br /><br />However, with that revelation came the issues of all the things that are missing from the list and from the map.<span style=""> </span>First, there are no female directors on the list.<span style=""> </span>There are no documentaries or experimental films.<span style=""> </span>None of the films are non-feature length.<span style=""> </span>None of the films are foreign produced or in a language beside English.<span style=""> </span>All were made within the studio system in Hollywood.<span style=""> </span>This seemed quite odd to me until I looked at the voting criteria on Wikipedia:</div> <ul style="margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Feature length:</b> Narrative format typically over 60 minutes long</li><li class="MsoNormal"><b style="">American film:</b> English language, with significant creative and/or financial production from the United States</li><li class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Critical Recognition:</b> Formal commendation in print, television, and digital media</li><li class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Major Award Winner:</b> Recognition from competitive events including awards from peer groups, critics, guilds, and major film festivals</li><li class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Popularity Over Time:</b> Includes success at the box office, television and cable airings, and DVD/VHS sales and rentals</li><li class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Historical Significance:</b> A film's mark on the history of the moving image through visionary narrative devices, technical innovation or other groundbreaking achievements</li><li class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Cultural Impact:</b> A film's mark on American society in matters of style and substance</li></ul><div style="text-align: left;">The reason why I used Wikipedia as a source was that this information was not available on the American Film Institute’s websit<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span>e. Buried in the text on the AFI website is the fact that they were only considering the top 100 American films, but the tagline on the webpage simply says “AFI reveals the 100 greatest movies of all time<a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" title=""></a>” which continues the deception that this list might encompass more than just American fare.<span style=""> </span>Also not mentioned is the fact that the leaders of the film community were only given a list of 400 nominated films to choose from.<span style=""> </span>Who chose those films and if they used the same criteria listed above in their selection process is unknown<a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5" title=""></a>.<span style=""> </span><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />This exploration and visualization really helped me to think about the naturalization process that is such a big part of the cinema history canon.<span style=""> </span>The fact that AFI failed to prominently mention that they were only considering American feature narratives for their top 100 list is telling of the different ways in which other modes of cinematic production are othered in critical discourse.<span style=""> </span>For instance, at the Oscars there are categories for Best Documentary and Best Foreign Language Film, but the grand prize – Best Picture – lacks any qualifiers.<span style=""> </span>A more appropriate name for the award might be Best English-Language Fictional Feature.<span style=""> </span>Additionally, the inclusion of the work of several European born directors – Charlie Chaplin, Alfred Hitchcock, Elia Kazan, etc. – shows whose creative input we value in the American studio system.<span style=""> </span>In fact, only four directors on the list – M. Night Shyamalan (India), Peter Jackson (New Zealand), James Cameron (Canada), and Norman Jewison (Canada) – were born outside of the United States or Europe.<br /><br />Primarily, I think the map brings up fascinating points about immigration; who we allow into our country to pursue the "American Dream."<span style=""> </span>Aside from Capra and Wilder there were several other directors on the list that immigrated to the United States. While the rhetoric surrounding immigration is very anti-Latin America at the moment, because they will "steal our jobs," it is telling that we've allowed multiple white European film directors to immigrate and to hold one the most exclusive jobs in the country and then revered their work as the crowning achievement of what can be achieved in their profession. It says a lot about what we value in American society.<br /></div><div style=""><div style="" id="ftn1"><p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" title=""></a></p> </div> <div style="" id="ftn2"> <p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" title=""></a></p> </div> <div style="" id="ftn3"> <p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" title=""></a></p> </div> <div style="" id="ftn4"> <p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4" title=""></a></p> </div> <div style="" id="ftn5"> <p class="MsoFootnoteText"><a style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3514668139847782851&postID=1241940786182080149#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5" title=""></a></p> </div> </div></div>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-75913040298697265292010-11-10T19:49:00.000-08:002014-06-10T09:26:14.018-07:00Battle: Outsourced the Movie versus Outsourced the TV Show<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_lfGP14LgFGM/R1BlKo-ruYI/AAAAAAAAAV4/eJefz1cIwVI/s1600-R/Soundtrack+Art.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_lfGP14LgFGM/R1BlKo-ruYI/AAAAAAAAAV4/eJefz1cIwVI/s1600-R/Soundtrack+Art.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 200px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 225px;" /></a>I love Thursday nights. Sadly, it is because almost every show that I regularly follow is on on Thursday nights - <span style="font-style: italic;">Bones</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">30 Rock, The Office</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">Community</span>, and <span style="font-style: italic;">Project Runway</span>. I watch enough TV on Thursday nights to almost last me a week (Aside from <span style="font-style: italic;">How I Met Your Mother</span> on Mondays. I love that too). So I was interested to see a new television show this season in my NBC Thursday night line-up that, on the surface, seemed very out of the ordinary for American television - <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span>.<br />
<br />
In <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> Todd, a mid-level manager for an American novelty outfitter, finds out that his job has been outsourced to India and he must go and train the new workers and his future replacement if he ever wants to move up high enough in the company that he can return to America and the safety of corporate headquarters. The premise for the show wasn't new to me. I had seen <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the movie several years prior. However, the more I watch <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the television show, the more I can see the subtle differences between its depiction of the friction between Indian culture and American culture and the culture clash in the movie version.<br />
<br />
Anita, from <a href="http://www.feministfrequency.com/"><span style="font-style: italic;">Feminist Frequency</span></a>, once told me that she liked the television show <span style="font-style: italic;">Farscape</span> because the main character, John Crichton, an American astronaut, magically tumbles through the galaxy into an unknown world and instead of going by the tried and true formula of white-men-are-the-best-at-everything and letting John show the aliens how to run their section of the universe, John Crichton quickly realizes that he knows nothing. Everyday is a learning experience and every episode let the different characters rotate who would "know best" - not just letting Daddy John take the credit all the time for continuously saving the day.<br />
<br />
The same idea is true of <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the movie. Movie Todd finds himself in the middle of nowhere India (specifically, Gharapuri) trying to navigate local customs. He unknowingly offends most of the Indians he meets - including a particularly memorable sequence where he discovers why Indians think it is dirty to eat with you left hand. However, like many journeys, Movie Todd comes to learn more about himself as he learns more about the customs and traditions of India. Over the course of the movie he finds himself more estranged from the person he was and, vicariously, America; since the person that he was also sold gaudy American trinkets.<br />
<br />
Instead of the sticks, TV Todd is stuck in the middle of Mumbai, a bustling metropolis. He too is middle management for an American novelties corporation. However, unlike Movie Todd who learns about himself through experiencing India, TV Todd is constantly correcting and instructing the people that work for him about American culture. Changing the journey that Movie Todd went through into more of a story of how white-men-are-the-best-at-everything and American culture is the best culture.<br />
<br />
The shift from focusing on Indian culture in the movie to American culture and customs in the television show sounds small, but is actually quite profound. For instance, in <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the movie Todd accidentally walks into the middle of the annual Holi celebration without knowing what it is.<br />
<br />
At the end of this scene Purohit, Movie Todd's replacement manager, discusses how much he loved Holi as a child. While Movie Todd reminisces about how much he loved Halloween as a child. However, the emphasis in this scene is on the celebration of Holi, not an insistence that Movie Todd expose Purohit and his other workers to American customs like Halloween.<br />
<br />
TV Todd has no problem prioritizing American customs over Indian ones. In the "Balloween" episode TV Todd throws a traditional American Halloween party. In it all the Indian characters are ridiculed in one way or another - Manmeet, the wannabe ladies man, dresses as a chick magnet, but is too afraid to talk to the hot Australian girl who finds his costume appealing. Gupta dresses as a "respectable US businessman" not realizing that he's dressed as a pimp. Asha comes dressed as Cleopatra only to be scolded for revealing too much skin when she's in the process of arraigning her marriage. Holi is never mentioned. And all the characters on the show embrace Halloween as if it was the latest and greatest thing. They even choose to dress up as American icons like Michael Jackson and Native Americans.<br />
<br />
Not to say that <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the television show is completely without its moments of hope. For instance, at the Halloween party Rajiv, the TV manager-in-training, dresses up as TV Todd and momentarily gets to mock him and, vicariously, Americans: "Is this safe to eat? Where's football? Where can I get that toilet paper with the lotion in it?" Thus, for a split second, we, the audience, are able to see what Indians find strange about our culture.<br />
<br />
In the episode "Truly, Madly, Pradeeply" several of the characters, including fellow American, Charlie, become momentarily addicted to paan - an Indian version of chewing tobacco. This exchange also seemed less about the domination of American culture over Indian culture. I was happy to see a little but of screen time devoted to a non-American custom even if the storyline involved one of the other white American characters on the show. But these moments are fleeting. The paan aspect of the episode was a subplot and the Rajiv mockery of TV Todd was even shorter.<br />
<br />
This is not to say that <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the movie isn't without its problems as well. In both the film and the television show there is an attraction between Todd and the character of Asha. In both cases Asha is in the process of an arraigned marriage. Both versions of Todd still fall for Asha and pursue her to different degrees. It is as if because Asha's marriage is going to be arraigned by her parents that it does not carry the same weight as a "love match" marriage (the term used in the movie for a non-arraigned marriage). Therefore making her still single in the eyes of her lovelorn American boss Todd.<br />
<br />
It will be interesting to see in the coming months if <span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the television show is able to gain speed and expand its moments of cultural sensitivity. As a viewer, the most interesting interactions to me are the ones that are completely foreign - the paan subplot for instance - and the ones that are the least interesting are the the cliched moments that I've seen over and over again in media. For instance, when the truly pathetic character of Tonya, a white Australian call center manager, throws herself at TV Todd in lewd and uninteresting ways. I can only hope that the television show continues to develop away from tried and true formulas and shows us something interesting. After all, it is a television show starring mostly an Indian/Indian-American cast on prime time network television. It is already revolutionary on paper. Now let's see it become revolutionary in content.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced </span>the television show airs on NBC on Thursdays at 9:30pm.<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">Outsourced</span> the movie is available to stream on Netflix.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com57tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-1554427133462006312010-04-24T15:25:00.000-07:002014-06-10T09:03:23.361-07:00Things I Love: Seth Aaron Henderson<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FW86_jO7k_A/S0IngMwasTI/AAAAAAABXuc/aqrKMF1g3pg/s1600/Project%2BRunway%2BSeason%2B7%2BDesigner%2BSeth%2BAaron%2BHenderson.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FW86_jO7k_A/S0IngMwasTI/AAAAAAABXuc/aqrKMF1g3pg/s1600/Project%2BRunway%2BSeason%2B7%2BDesigner%2BSeth%2BAaron%2BHenderson.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 578px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><br />
<a href="http://www.mamapop.com/.a/6a00d8341c5d9653ef0120a75d0ad2970b-800wi" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><br /></a>
I am lucky lady. My job revolves around being creative. I make movies. However, regardless of how lucky I feel to be a filmmaker, sometimes I need to do something else. Thus, I sew. I am not a good seamstress by any means; the tool that I use most is probably my seam ripper. Therefore I am easily fascinated by those who have more skill than I. Thus, I love <span style="font-style: italic;">Project Runway</span>. In season seven this love was focused on one designer in particular - Seth Aaron Henderson.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p29/annebocci/seth-aaron-henderson03.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p29/annebocci/seth-aaron-henderson03.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 526px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 361px;" /></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_FW86_jO7k_A/S1IDf2WlPDI/AAAAAAABZC4/dt0-GyWPA8s/s1600/Project%2BRunway%2BSeason%2B7%2BSeth%2BAaron%2BHenderson%2BRunway%2BLook%2B2.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_FW86_jO7k_A/S1IDf2WlPDI/AAAAAAABZC4/dt0-GyWPA8s/s1600/Project%2BRunway%2BSeason%2B7%2BSeth%2BAaron%2BHenderson%2BRunway%2BLook%2B2.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 612px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><br />
The funny thing is that it had little to do with his work. Truthfully, I would never wear most of clothes. They just aren't me. Grunge rock star I am not.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">The reason why I love Seath Aaron Henderson is that he is a straight, married man with teenage kids who still wants to be a fashion designer.</span><br />
<br />
In <span style="font-style: italic;">Tough Guise</span> Jackson Katz talks about how masculinity (and femininity to a point) are all about fitting into these really rigid boxes that do nothing but to keep us confined and from fully actualizing as human beings.<br />
<br />
Truth be told I don't know many men who can sew even though sewing is an important life skill. I don't mean that you have to be able to churn out couture, but everyone puts premature holes in clothes from time to time and it is a great skill to be able to fix those. Thus, I applaud Seth Aaron Henderson for not only rocking the runway with his punk/military/goth look, but being a straight man who is living outside the gender conforming box.<br />
<br />
However, there is a flip side to this sew-tastic story. We live in a culture that is male dominated, male identified, and male centered. Does having a straight man win at a reality contest in a traditionally female-centered discipline really help to break down our rigid gender constructions? Or is is just another example of how white (straight) men are the best at everything... including sewing? It is an interesting dichotomy. Is this really progress? Or is it just another male takeover? I, personally, can't decide. So I put this quagmire out to the masses. I am going to go back to ripping out seams.<br />
<br />
Pictures from:<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.mylifetime.com/shows/project-runway/project-runway-designers/seth-aaron-henderson">The Project Runway Website</a></li>
</ul>
Also mentioned:<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=211"><span style="font-style: italic;">Tough Guise</span>. Dir: Sut Jhally. 1999.</a></li>
</ul>
Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-69400097679235107302010-04-06T13:18:00.000-07:002010-04-06T13:51:27.388-07:00Men: If You Change Your Name, Your Wife Will CheatWhen I got married I told my husband I loved him, but I wasn't really into changing my name. Why? There are lots of reasons - Ruth Gregory is the name that I have always been called; Ruth Gregory is my grandmother's (married) name and she is who I am named after; Ruth Gregory is what I am professionally known as; Ruth Gregory is who I am. And while changing my last name doesn't mean that I cease to exist and have to start over personally and professionally, it felt like that, and that was enough for me to stick with my maiden name despite all the flack I have gotten and continue to get for it.<br /><br />Last weekend I finally gave in and went to see <span style="font-style: italic;">Hot Tub Time Machine</span>. I gave in because multiple people had told me that the film had a soul beneath the silliness and that it was worth the price of admission. And so I went. And it was fun. But there was one thing that irked me deeply about the film and it wasn't even central to the story. Thus, I feel the need to blog about it. <span style="font-style: italic;">This will have spoilers.</span><br /><br />In <span style="font-style: italic;">Hot Tub Time Machine</span> one of the friends Nick Webber, played by Craig Robinson of "The Office", is a happily married, but totally emasculated, man. He has, essentially, given up everything to be with the woman that he loves; his music career and his friends (to an extent). He has also at the beginning of the film, duh, dun, duh! hyphenated his last name. And boy, do his "friends" give him crap for that.<br /><br />On top of it all, he's found out that the love of his life, his wife, Courtney, has cheated on him. So all his sacrifice seems to be for nothing.<br /><br />Through the magic of hot tub time travel Nick is able to change his present by altering the past. In this new present, he is a man in charge of his life. He has his friends back, he is a successful music producer, he is still married to the woman he loves, Courtney, and his name is no longer hyphenated. He is just Nick Webber.<br /><br />Now, I don't judge women or men who hyphenate or change their names for whatever reason, but <span style="font-style: italic;">Hot Tub Time Machine</span> sure as heck does. See in the new and improved future Nick's wife has not cheated on him. She is still madly in love with him and his re-asserted masculinity. Also, the guy she cheated on him with in the alternate reality is now his secretary. Take that!<br /><br />Thus, the writers and director of <span style="font-style: italic;">Hot Tub Time Machine</span> are judging the Courtney's of the world (and I feel, me, by extension) by putting out the message to the men of the world that if you love a strong woman who wants you to change your name, that this will lead to totally emasculation that she will eventually tire of, and, thus, she will eventually sleep with a "Tyrese-looking fella" who, I can only assume, dominated her in the way that men are supposed to dominate women.<br /><br />So men, be aware. If you change your name, your wife will cheat.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-55170248250973748032010-04-02T13:59:00.001-07:002014-06-10T09:05:10.371-07:00Seriously? A "Red Dawn" Remake?<a href="http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs51/f/2009/275/d/e/Red_Dawn_2010_Propaganda_Art__by_CapDoodleMcPhotoshop.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs51/f/2009/275/d/e/Red_Dawn_2010_Propaganda_Art__by_CapDoodleMcPhotoshop.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 380px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 300px;" /></a><br />
<br />
In the years I call "Grad School Part 1" I wrote a paper about how the teen films of the 1980s were full of anti-communist propaganda. My point was based off Susan Jefford's book <span style="font-style: italic;"><a href="http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Hard-Bodies/Susan-Jeffords/e/9780813520032">Hard Bodies: Hollywood Masculinity in the Reagan Era</a></span>. In her piece Jeffords talks about how masculinity in Hollywood films of the 1980s was unusually macho - think Rambo, Rocky, Arnold Schwarzenegger's work, the <span style="font-style: italic;">Die Hard</span> franchise, <span style="font-style: italic;">Top Gun</span>, etc. - and that these films were a direct response to the political climate of the time. In the 1980s there was a cultural backlash going on against what was seen as the "soft" 1970s; where president Jimmy Carter was seen praying with the families of hostage victims in Iran instead of kicking some ass. Ronald Reagan himself was seen as somewhat of a cowboy figure, riding in on his horse to save the day. Sounds familiar...<br />
<br />
<a href="http://raymondpronk.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/reagan_cowboy.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://raymondpronk.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/reagan_cowboy.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 449px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<br />
In the midst of all this macho manliness came the ultimate Boy Scout wet dream of a film <span style="font-style: italic;">Red Dawn</span> (1984). In it every communist nation (beside China) invades the U.S. and it is up to a bunch of high schoolers who have magically escaped to the mountains in the nick of time to save us. They fight using the skills they have inherited from fishing and camping with their fathers against the evil commie invaders. The Wolverines, as they call themselves, pissed off at the invasion of their country launch guerrilla warfare on their invaders; including creating <span style="font-weight: bold;">improvised explosive devices (I.E.D.s) and going on suicide bombing missions when it looks like there is no hope</span>. Sound familiar....<br />
<br />
While there are some interesting real-world parallels going on here, the end result was one heck of a cheesy teen flick.<br />
<br />
So why we feel to re-make <span style="font-style: italic;">Red Dawn</span> is beyond me. And why Hollywood has decided that China is now the <span style="font-weight: bold;">only</span> invading country is way, way beyond me. In the first <span style="font-style: italic;">Red Dawn</span> China is the <span style="font-weight: bold;">only</span> country that doesn't participate in the massive US takeover. It is because in the real 1980s we had good trade relations with China. Interestingly, we still have good trade relations with China. So what would motivate them to invade us now? Even in a fictional sense? Well, as my colleague Kris stated, "Maybe they want all their money back." It is possible. <span style="font-weight: bold;">We do owe them more than 770 billion dollars.</span> So, in some ways, I hope that the new <span style="font-style: italic;">Red Dawn</span> addresses this issue. Otherwise, it will just be another 1980s remake that should have never been rehashed.<br />
<br />
Although I am not a fan of Rob Schneider, I would much rather see the film based on this fake film preview from <a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/">Funnyordie.com</a>!<br />
<br />
<iframe src="http://www.funnyordie.com/embed/77caf038b8" width="640" height="400" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen></iframe><div style="text-align:left;font-size:x-small;margin-top:0;width:640px;"><a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/77caf038b8/naked-dawn" title="from Big Stan, Rob Schneider, Chad Carter, Jake Szymanski, and Brad Schulz">"Naked Dawn" Trailer (w/ Rob Schneider, Mena Suvari and Vinnie Jones) Re-Uploaded and Safer-For-Work</a> from <a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/rob_schneider">Rob Schneider</a> <iframe src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=138711277798&href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.funnyordie.com%2Fvideos%2F77caf038b8%2Fnaked-dawn&send=false&layout=button_count&width=150&show_faces=false&action=like&height=21" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none; overflow:hidden; width:90px; height:21px; vertical-align:middle;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>
</div>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-59581854709813024032010-03-28T07:40:00.001-07:002014-06-10T09:15:43.099-07:00Multi-Facial<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Gf4Ydp8CGk8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<br />
I have always been interested in Vin Diesel. This is despite hating (with a passion) <span style="font-style: italic;">The Fast and the Furious</span>... all of them. And wondering why anyone would ever think that the script to <span style="font-style: italic;">xXx</span> was anything more than a waste of paper. I think underneath the bad one-liners I could see that he could act and after watching his debut film, <span style="font-style: italic;">Multi-Facial</span>, I am now certain that <span style="font-style: italic;">Boiler Room</span> wasn't just a fluke.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">Multi-Facial</span> is about a multi-racial actor auditioning for parts in New York City. The film was based upon Vin Diesel's own experiences as a multi-racial actor going to casting calls. In it casting director after casting director tells Vin he's talented, but he isn't right for the part. However, you can see that he has a deep dedication to his craft through the variety of parts he can play convincingly... everything from a chauvinistic Italian Guido to a rapper. And yes, he raps in it.<br />
<br />
The film accepted into the Cannes Film Festival in 1995. Eventually, it caught the eye of Steven Spielberg who cast Vin in <span style="font-style: italic;">Saving Private Ryan</span>. There is some blissful irony that a short film about how multi-racial actors can't seem to get parts since they don't fit into anyone's racial preconceptions was the film that got Vin Diesel his big break.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-42737079152517178762010-03-16T07:48:00.000-07:002010-03-17T08:26:15.142-07:00Fat ActressesRe: <span style="font-style:italic;"><a href="http://wonderwall.msn.com/movies/just-wondering-can-we-please-give-the-gabourey-sidibe-body-scrutiny-a-rest-1542838.story?GT1=28135">Just Wondering: Can we please give the Gabourey Sidibe body scrutiny a rest?</a></span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.1800gospel.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/gabourey-sidibe.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 400px;" src="http://www.1800gospel.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/gabourey-sidibe.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br />During the 2010 Oscars I was preoccupied with the possibility that Kathryn Bigelow would be the first woman to win Best Director. However, a close second on my radar was Gabourey Sidibe. I love her persona and unabashed self-confidence. When asked by <span style="font-style:italic;">E!</span> how she felt in her dress she said: "Hot!" And not in a please get me a fan sort of way; no she thought she looked good. In a sea of Hollywood starlets who are trying to stay in the 0 - 2 size range, she still felt smokin'. Gabourey rules.<br /><br />Now the article linked to above discusses how the scrutiny of Gabourey's size is the sole reason why she won't be a success in Hollywood according to the media. And how the media needs to tone it down. True. Howard Stern needs to stuff a sock in it, but the article is horribly short-sighted on the issue of women and weight in Hollywood.<br /><br />In the early '00s I did my stint as a page at a major Hollywood studio. My outfit made me look a lot like Kenneth from <span style="font-style:italic;">30 Rock</span> and was 99% polyester; lots of fun to wear in the Southern California sun. One of the best parts of being the lowliest of the low on a studio lot is that you can go almost anywhere and no one will care that you are there. Hence, how I was able to survive working minimum wage in Los Angeles, by helping myself to every craft service table I was near. When I wasn't liberating Luna bars I was checking out the celebrities who were working on the lot. The one thing that startled me about actors and actresses in person is that their heads looked abnormally large in comparison to their bodies. We called them lollipops and they were <span style="font-weight:bold;">everywhere</span>. Aside from having abnormally large heads, it wasn't hard to see that the ladies of the silver screen are way too skinny. I also saw more protruding collar bones in my 8 months in Los Angeles than I've seen in the time since.<br /><br />In recent years we've been trying to tell ourselves that a new type of woman is becoming more successful in mainstream media; a bigger woman, a <span style="font-style:italic;">real-looking</span> woman. However, I don't believe that it is true. I am not saying this because I love to look at the scary skinny Hollywood actresses or models who subside on water and cigarettes, but because we are fooling ourselves into believing that there has been a massive cultural shift away from the super-skinny actress. For instance, Gabourey's story is so similar to another actress who burst onto the scene a couple of years ago - Nikki Blonsky - but then faded into oblivion.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070711/070711_hairspray_vmed_1p.widec.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 298px; height: 447px;" src="http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070711/070711_hairspray_vmed_1p.widec.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br /><blockquote>"I'm not saying it's correct, but it's a simple fact that [Gabourey] will have to lose a lot of weight if she wants to keep getting parts," a casting director told Popeater. "The same thing happened to Nikki Blonsky from 'Hairspray.' Everyone said how great she was, and she hasn't worked since."</blockquote><br /><br />Ouch.<br /><br />While some critics of the critics have said that Gabourey has already gotten her revenge by landing a reoccurring part on an upcoming <span style="font-style:italic;">Showtime</span> series, I have to disagree that this indicates any sort of equity or larger cultural shift. For a comparison, let's look at the Best Actress nominees from last couple of years and see what they are up to:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">2007</span> <br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Marion Cotillard</span> – co-starred in <span style="font-style:italic;">Nine</span> with Oscar-nominated Best Supporting Actress Penelope Cruz. Has several forthcoming pictures including a new Woody Allen project.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Cate Blanchett</span> – multiple high-profile film projects coming up including <span style="font-style:italic;">Robin Hood</span> and the <span style="font-style:italic;">Hobbit</span>.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Julie Christie</span> – Hollywood legend who just starred in <span style="font-style:italic;">New York, I Love You</span>. However, has no projects in development (according to IMDB).<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Laura Linney</span> – Has a couple of films in production. Also starred post-Oscar nomination as Abigail Adams in the acclaimed mini-series <span style="font-style:italic;">John Adams</span>.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Ellen Page</span> – couldn't be busier. Has several film projects in the works. Also starred in one of my favorite 2009 films - <span style="font-style:italic;">Whip It</span>.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">2008</span> <br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Kate Winslet</span> – has several projects in the works including a t.v. version of the <span style="font-style:italic;">film noir</span> classic <span style="font-style:italic;">Mildred Pierce</span>. <span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Anne Hathaway</span> – has 7! films in development and two in post-production.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Angelina Jolie</span> – multiple film projects on their way including <span style="font-style:italic;">Salt</span>. A film where she replaced Tom Cruise(!) as the lead character.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Melissa Leo</span> – has worked on several high-profile independent films since her nomination. Will also be working on <span style="font-style:italic;">Mildred Pierce</span> with Kate Winslet.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Meryl Streep</span> – has received the most Academy Award nominations of any person ever when she was nominated once again in 2010 for the 16th time!<br /><br />While cable T.V. has been churning out some interesting shows in the past decade and half, it still doesn't have the luster that high-profile film gigs do. To prove point about how we have a long way to go to reach size equity in media let's look at the forthcoming projects of Carey Mulligan, who is newer to the Hollywood scene and was also nominated for a Best Actress Oscar in 2010 for her role in <span style="font-style:italic;">An Education</span>. Forthcoming she is co-starring in <span style="font-style:italic;">Wall Street 2</span> which is directed by Oliver Stone. Also in the works is a re-make of <span style="font-style:italic;">My Fair Lady</span> where she gets to play the role of Eliza Dolittle. Aside from those two projects she has two others in development. <br /><br />If culturally we'd really reach a point of equity in Hollywood then Gabourey Sidibe and Nikki Blonsky would be co-starring in a film where their weight is not an issue and they still get to live happily ever after or, at least, go on a crazy adventure where men are not the focus of their mission. I hate to be the pessimist, but we have a long way to go before we reach that level of equity. For some intangible reason there is a belief that no one would watch this movie. However, I would like to say that I would put my $10 down to watch a film like this opening night. I look forward to finally seeing something a little different on opening night than the same ol' lollipop kid.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-38793179724475830302010-03-07T22:55:00.000-08:002010-03-08T07:44:38.240-08:00Kathryn Bigelow Becomes the First Woman to Win the Best Director Oscar!<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cLJEm_jHacY/S5ShBL7eZpI/AAAAAAAAACA/tHftyQV5v1s/s1600-h/Katryn+Bigelow.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 150px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cLJEm_jHacY/S5ShBL7eZpI/AAAAAAAAACA/tHftyQV5v1s/s200/Katryn+Bigelow.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5446154891151959698" /></a><br /><br />And it only took 82 years.<br /><br />I cried like I had won an Oscar when Barbara Streisand simply said, "It is time..." and Kathryn Bigelow was announced as the first female to ever win the Best Director Oscar. I can only hope that this is the beginning of a larger female presence behind the camera in Hollywood. May the <a href="http://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/files/2009_Celluloid_Ceiling.pdf">"Celluloid Ceiling"</a> continue to crack to allow space for a wider variety of voices behind the camera. Lots of love going out to all my female filmmaking sisters on this glorious evening!<br /><br />Kathryn Bigelow speaks backstage about winning the Best Director Oscar and, yes, she finally addresses the gender question. I must say I totally agree with her answer!<br /><br /><object width="416" height="374" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" id="ep"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="movie" value="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_416x234_embed.swf?context=embed&videoId=showbiz/2010/03/08/sot.oscars.bckstage.locker.bigelow.cnn" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /><embed src="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_416x234_embed.swf?context=embed&videoId=showbiz/2010/03/08/sot.oscars.bckstage.locker.bigelow.cnn" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" bgcolor="#000000" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="416" wmode="transparent" height="374"></embed></object>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-45285175698474492972010-02-10T15:41:00.000-08:002010-02-11T14:38:16.075-08:00Sex, Abelism, and the 80s: "Children of a Lesser God"<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/children-of-a-lesser-god.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 475px;" src="http://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/children-of-a-lesser-god.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br /><br />The 1980s were awesome in America. Or, at least, that is how I remember them. Granted, my vision of life and media was pretty narrow at the time. I was focused on how I could be more like She-Ra and Wonder Women and why the Skeksis in Jim Henson's film <span style="font-style:italic;">The Dark Crystal</span> (1982) were so scary. Yep. I am a child of the 80s.<br /><br />Recently I decided to watch <span style="font-style:italic;">Children of a Lesser God</span> (1986). It was too adult for me when it came out in the mid-1980s and, realistically, I wouldn't have enjoyed it any way since I would have been totally grossed out by all the sex. Like. Totally. As an adult who doesn't believe in cooties any longer (most days) must admit that I found the film really interesting in terms of how it attempted to transform the image of the disabled from their usual villainous position as the cinematic other to something that is much more empathetic. Emmanuel Levy commented about <span style="font-style:italic;">Children of a Lesser God</span>:<br /><br /><blockquote>Not only Matlin benefited exposure-wise from the film: it did a lot of good for deaf actors and actresses in general. The hope of deaf actors and actresses at that time was that they could start getting parts in films that were not necessarily about being deaf people. The triumph of Marlee Matlin at that time, as well as others like Phyllis Frelich (who won a Tony award in the original play of <span style="font-style:italic;">Children of a Lesser God</span>) and Howie Seagro were boosts for the National Theater for the Deaf, which had been fighting many years for such a breakthrough. <span style="font-style:italic;">Children of a Lesser God</span> marked a breakthrough time for deaf actors.</blockquote><br /><br /> However, that does not mean that the film was still not problematic.<br /><br />Roger Ebert had an interesting comment about the way in which <span style="font-style:italic;">Children of a Lesser God</span> was constructed to get around the fact that one of the characters, the deaf woman Sarah (played by Marlee Matlin), does not speak for most of the film:<br /><br /><blockquote>The movie uses a strategy that works well - if you accept the basic premise, which is that everything said on the screen must be heard on the soundtrack. Marlee Matlin, who plays the deaf woman, signs all of her dialogue, and William Hurt, who plays the teacher, then repeats it aloud, as if to himself. "I like to hear the sound of my own voice," he says at one point, and indeed he does such a smooth and natural job of translation that the strategy works.<br /><br />But think for a minute: Hurt can hear and can read sign language; Marlin's cannot hear or (she claims) read lips, and can only communicate by signing. In many movies about two major characters, there are scenes from two points of view. In "Children of a Lesser God," the scenes between the two of them are from Hurt's point of view, and none of them are played without sound.<br /><br />I'm not suggesting silent scenes where we have to guess what the sign language means. But how about a few silent scenes in which the signs are translated by subtitles, giving us something of the same experience that deaf people have (they see the signs, and then the subtitles, so to speak, are supplied by their intelligence).<br /><br />The feeling of seeing Hurt and not hearing him, of looking out at him from a silent world, would have underlined the true subject of this movie, which is communication between two people who speak differently.<br /><br />By telling the whole story from Hurt's point of view, the movie makes the woman into the stubborn object, the challenge, the problem, which is the very process it wants to object to.</blockquote><br /><br />Regardless of how the film is remember - as a "breakthrough" for deaf actors or just another example of how women are perceived as stubborn - it is interesting to note that deaf characters in main roles have all but disappeared from popular cinema. <span style="font-style:italic;">Mr. Holland's Opus</span> (1995) and <span style="font-style:italic;">The Family Stone</span> (2005) featured secondary characters who were deaf, but aside from that there has not been much in the way of Hollywood films that feature deaf main characters. Even Marlee Matlin, who is deaf, has been relegated to mostly TV guest spots after her Oscar-winning turn as Sara in <span style="font-style:italic;">Children of a Lesser God</span>. It as if the inclusion of hearing-impaired character has fallen on the deaf ears of Hollywood producers.<br /><br />* <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19861003/REVIEWS/610030301/1023">Ebert, Roger. "Children of a Lesser God"</a><br /><br />* <a href="http://www.emanuellevy.com/search/details.cfm?id=1595">Levy, Emanuel. "Children of a Lesser God" </a>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-77428885987999337642010-02-06T21:47:00.000-08:002014-06-10T09:20:50.806-07:00Things I Love: Mae West<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.movieactors.com/photos-30/mae27.jpeg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 390px;" src="http://www.movieactors.com/photos-30/mae27.jpeg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br /><br />I love Mae West. She says all the things I could never say and does it with such panache I can't help but swell with admiration. <br /><br />Mae West started out on in vaudeville and eventually moved to Broadway and where she became notorious for her raunchy style. She even wrote and starred in a play simply titled "SEX!" which also landed her in jail for obscenity in 1920s New York. However, it was the controversy that she created as a part of her sexy persona that peaked interest in her from the Hollywood studios. She eventually signed a contract to make films for Paramount Pictures. It was the 1930s, the Depression, and Paramount was facing bankruptcy. However, Mae's box office draw almost single-handily (partial credit also goes to the Marx Brothers) saved the studio from complete collapse.<br /><br />Aside from being an actress, Mae West wrote most of her own stuff and was proud of it. Director George Raft commented that "She stole everything but the cameras." In honor of her witty dialogue I have copied and pasted some of her more memorable one-liners here. Oh, may I only be this witty one day! <br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">A dame that knows the ropes isn't likely to get tied up.<br /><br />A hard man is good to find.<br /><br />A man in the house is worth two in the street.<br /><br />Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly.<br /><br />Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before.<br /><br />Cultivate your curves - they may be dangerous but they won't be avoided.<br /><br />Every man I meet wants to protect me. I can't figure out what from.<br /><br />He's the kind of man a woman would have to marry to get rid of.<br /><br />I believe in censorship. I made a fortune out of it.<br /><br />I believe that it's better to be looked over than it is to be overlooked.<br /><br />I didn't discover curves; I only uncovered them.<br /><br />I enjoyed the courtroom as just another stage but not so amusing as Broadway.<br /><br />I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number you get in a diamond.<br /><br />I only have 'yes' men around me. Who needs 'no' men?<br /><br />I only like two kinds of men, domestic and imported.<br /><br />I'll try anything once, twice if I like it, three times to make sure.<br /><br />I'm a woman of very few words, but lots of action.<br /><br />I'm no model lady. A model's just an imitation of the real thing.<br /><br />I've been in more laps than a napkin.<br /><br />It's not the men in my life that count, it's the life in my men.<br /><br />Those who are easily shocked should be shocked more often.<br /><br />To err is human, but it feels divine.<br /><br />Virtue has its own reward, but no sale at the box office.<br /><br />When I'm good I'm very, very good, but when I'm bad, I'm better.<br /><br />When women go wrong, men go right after them.<br /><br />You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.</span><br /><br />Eventually the Hollywood Production Code censors ran Mae out of town with their puritan ideals. However, she made a comeback at the age of 85 in a film called <span style="font-style:italic;">Sextette</span> (1978). In it she sways and sasses a host of men including Ringo Starr, George Hamilton, Tony Curtis, Timothy Dalton, and Alice Cooper(!). May we all be as lucky as Mae one day!Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-50788159061288131732010-02-06T19:12:00.000-08:002010-02-06T21:02:20.939-08:00Oops... I Didn't Know We Couldn't Talk About Gender, Kathryn BigelowWith the Oscars just mere weeks away I finally just got the chance to watch <span style="font-style:italic;">The Hurt Locker</span> (2009). Shameful, I know. But it was released with a squeak last summer and I wasn't listening. And let me say that it is so powerful I had to pause and take a break before the climax because I was too into the story and was feeling ill as a result. That, my friends, is powerful filmmaking. It literally made my gut wrench.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.atomicpopcorn.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ap_bigelow.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 300px;" src="http://www.atomicpopcorn.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ap_bigelow.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br />Despite Katheryn Bigelow being just the fourth woman in the history of the Oscars to just be nominated for Best Director she is reluctant, at best, to talk about her status as a woman in a man's world.<br /><br /><blockquote>"I've spent a fair amount of time thinking about what my aptitude is, and I really think it's to explore and push the medium," Bigelow says. "It's not about breaking gender roles or genre traditions."</blockquote><br /><br />It is hard for me to sit back as a fellow female director (albeit on a much, much smaller scale) and listen to her <span style="font-style:italic;">not</span> talk about the possibility that she could be the first woman to ever take home the Best Director Oscar. I want her to join up with the feminist army and laud her accomplishments. However, then I read about instances like this:<br /><br /><blockquote>At the Q & A after a screening of <span style="font-style:italic;">The Hurt Locker</span> at AFI Dallas, moderator Gary Cogill commented that his favorite book about the Iraq war was written by a woman (<span style="font-style:italic;">The Long Road Home</span> by Martha Raddatz) and then asked Bigelow a question that essentially amounted to, “Isn’t weird that <span style="font-style:italic;">The Hurt Locker</span> is so good, since you’re a girl?” Bigelow deflected the question, but the issue came up again when an audience member who introduced herself as a member of Women in Film gushed that it’s “almost miraculous” that Bigelow has “embedded” herself in the making of “big boys movies.” This is when I decided it was time to leave; as I made my way out, I heard Bigelow respond that he choice of material is chiefly “instinctual” and not motivated by a desire to step where she supposedly doesn’t belong by virtue of chromosomal difference.</blockquote><br /><br />Ah. Audience Q and A sessions. I swear - the bigger the director, the stupider the questions get. With queries like these no wonder Bigelow is deflecting the comments and queries about her gender.<br /><br />However, issues of her gender abound in the way the the film and her directorial skills are reported upon in other ways:<br /><br /><blockquote>Just before dawn one July morning, Kathryn Bigelow was setting up a shot for <span style="font-style:italic;">The Hurt Locker</span> in the Jordanian desert. The movie follows an Explosive Ordnance Disposal bomb technician, one of the hundred or so soldiers in Iraq who dismantle roadside IEDs planted by insurgents. For the scene, the tech and two of his co--workers would detonate a bomb in the middle of the desert, and Bigelow wanted to shoot them from atop a high sand dune. This meant that the crew had to tote all their gear to the top of a hill in the brutal summer heat. "There were a lot of macho guys on the set, British SAS, not to mention all these young, studly actors, and all those guys were falling by the wayside," says Mark Boal, who wrote and co-produced <span style="font-style:italic;">The Hurt Locker</span>. "I'm not walking this hill, no way in hell. I drive past one of the crew who's literally puking on the side of the road. People are dying on this hill. I drive up, and Kathryn is already at the top. She's beaten everyone up there."</blockquote><br /><br /><blockquote>In the great tradition of tough-guy filmmakers like Howard Hawks, Don Siegel and Samuel Fuller, Kathryn Bigelow is one of the finest living crafters of male-bonding genre films. It may seem an odd fit, as the beautiful, elegant, highly intelligent 57 year-old woman was educated at the San Francisco Art Institute with a background in painting; she's hardly the eye-patch-wearing, cigar-chomping type like her Hollywood predecessors.</blockquote><br /><br /><blockquote>Critics can't seem to get over the idea that a female director could devote herself to making adrenaline-charged films that owe more to Ridley Scott than Nora Ephron. They rhapsodize, in high academic prose, about the role of guns as phallic symbols in <span style="font-style:italic;">Blue Steel</span>, a thriller about a female cop; or the homoeroticism of <span style="font-style:italic;">Point Break</span>; or the androgynous female figures in Near Dark, a hybrid Western/vampire movie. At the same time, it's hard to believe that Bigelow would dedicate her oeuvre to genres that are typically made by, for and about men, and not have a few thoughts on the subject.</blockquote><br /><br />True. And while I want to hear Kathryn Bigelow acknowledge that she is a woman in no woman's land I completely understand her reluctance. After all, her directing skills are the result of years of working hard on her craft and have nothing to do with what is between her legs.<br /><br />It is also interesting to note that the same rhetoric is not applied to male directors who have made careers making "women's films". In fact, Douglas Sirk, the man credited with initiating the "women's picture" genre was never seen as subversive or treading where he didn't belong when he made such classics as <span style="font-style:italic;">Imitation of Life</span> (1959) and <span style="font-style:italic;">All that Heaven Allows</span> (1955). In <span style="font-style:italic;">Bright Lights Film Journal</span> Sirk's place as a male director of women's pictures is only questioned due to the questionable nature of the genre:<br /><br /><blockquote>While the "action" movie had long had its defenders as poor man's Hemingway, most of Sirk's best-known films were "woman's pictures," a genre regarded by male critics as the domain of that mythical incarnation of bad taste, the "shop girl," and even (especially?) disowned by feminists.</blockquote><br /><br />As a feminist, I disagree. I thoroughly enjoy Douglas Sirk's body of work. But I digress...<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://kingdomofstyle.typepad.co.uk/my_weblog/images/2007/09/15/all_that_heaven_allows.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 250px; height: 400px;" src="http://kingdomofstyle.typepad.co.uk/my_weblog/images/2007/09/15/all_that_heaven_allows.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br />George Cukor, another man who directed "women's pictures" was called:<br /><br /><blockquote>...legendary 'women's director'; noted for <span style="font-style:italic;">The Women</span> (1939) - a melodramatic comedy based on the hit play by Clare Boothe Luce with an all-female cast (Norma Shearer, Joan Crawford, Rosalind Russell, Mary Boland, Paulette Goddard, and Joan Fontaine, among others) - a group of catty, back-biting, competitive, and richly-spoiled high-society women, although its tagline tauts: "It's All About Men!"; while seeking divorces in Reno, women learn of other affairs and infidelities and are forced to make tough decisions.</blockquote><br /><br />Despite my decrees that Kathryn Bigelow should flaunt her femaleness all over Hollywood I hope that when all is said and done and she becomes the first woman to ever win the Best Director Oscar (Pretty please!) that she is remember much like the quote above of George Cukor - legendary. After all, she is a director with an impressive resume that spans genre and decades. For heaven's sake - she directed Keanu Reeves to the point of believability in <span style="font-style:italic;">Point Break</span> and I am pretty sure that most would agree that isn't easy! As a proud feminist filmmaker I channel Aretha Franklin when I say that all I want is R-E-S-P-E-C-T for my work and I get the feeling that is what Kathryn Bigelow wants too. At the end of the day we just want to be remembered as "legendary" for mastering our craft, not just because we were women. Oooooohhhhh. A little respect.<br /><br />Quotes from:<br />* <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/202730">Kathryn Bigelow: Road Warrior</a><br />* <a href="http://blog.spout.com/2009/06/26/the-hurt-locker-kathryn-bigelows-girl-problem/">"THE HURT LOCKER & Kathryn Bigelow's Girl Problem"</a><br />* <a href="https://www.greencine.com/central/kbigelow">Interview: Kathryn Bigelow on THE HURT LOCKER</a><br />* <a href="http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/18/18_lana.html">Imitations of Lifelessness: Sirk's Ironic Tearjearker</a><br />* <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/melodramafilms.html">Melodrama Films</a>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-63075306520242218412010-02-02T06:59:00.000-08:002010-02-02T07:40:02.985-08:00CONGRATULATIONS TO KATHRYN BIGELOW!This morning Kathryn Bigelow became the fourth woman in the history of the Academy Awards to be nominated for the Best Director Oscar for her work on the film <span style="font-style:italic;"><a href="http://www.apple.com/trailers/summit/thehurtlocker/large.html">The Hurt Locker</a></span>. <br /><br />Over the weekend she was the first woman to win the Director's Guild of America (DGA) award for directing. This award is seen as highly indicative of who will will the Oscar. I can only hope.<br /><br />I wish her luck on her journey. I will be rooting for her from my Oscar party in Seattle with a whole bunch of other female filmmakers!Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-77251470435175486992010-01-26T08:40:00.000-08:002014-06-10T09:22:00.830-07:00The Cinematic Other: DominatrixFor the past couple of days my husband and I have been watching the mini-series <span style="font-style: italic;">Tin Man</span> which originally aired on Syfy. It is a retelling of the classic <span style="font-style: italic;">Wizard of Oz</span>. Many of the players are the same, Dorothy, Toto, the Tin Man, Scarecrow, the Cowardly Lion, and wizard. However, each has been retooled to appeal to a modern audience; including the wicked witch, now known simply as "sorceress".<br />
<br />
In the original film version of the<span style="font-style: italic;"> Wizard of Oz</span> the Wicked Witch of the West looked like this:<br />
<a href="http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/02_04/Witch_468x359.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/02_04/Witch_468x359.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 283px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 368px;" /></a>She represented many of the things that I feared as a child - old people, ugly women, long fingernails, warts, disfigurement, and aliens (who are also green). And that is exactly what the cinematic other is supposed to be. The cinematic other is a concept by which we inscribe our cultural fears onto the evil or othered characters in film. These attributes shift with time, but are always from a white, heterosexual, middle-class/upper-class, male position since they are the ones who control American (and global) media. Thus, women, children, homosexuals, foriegners, old people, immigrants, people of color, etc. etc. are generally cast as the "other" or villain in Hollywood films.<br />
<br />
Now the sorceress in <span style="font-style: italic;">Tin Man</span> looks a little different from her predecessor:<a href="http://images.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/20071204/425.robertson.tinman.120407.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://images.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/20071204/425.robertson.tinman.120407.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 315px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 425px;" /></a>Yep. She's been dominatrixed up for the 21st century. Indeed, even <span style="font-style: italic;">E</span>'s Kristen Dos Santos picked up on it in her write-up "<a href="http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/watch_with_kristin/b4008_tin_man_welcome_oz_bitch.html"><span style="font-style: italic;">Tin Man</span>: Welcome to the O.Z., Bitch!</a>" (C'mon Kristen, do you have to use the B-word?):<br />
<blockquote>
Kathleen Robertson's Azkadellia manages to be exquisitely beautiful without sacrificing any of the terrifying that Margaret Hamilton pulled off so well. Think Darth Vader in an S&M corset. Seriously—keep an eye on her cleavage, because this miniseries has some majorly good boob acting.</blockquote>
And it is true Kathleen Robertson's boobs do get to act in this incantation of the <span style="font-style: italic;">Wizard</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> of Oz</span>. Seriously, I wish I was joking.<br />
<br />
Aside from <span style="font-style: italic;">Tin Man,</span> the dominatrix as the evil character has been popping up all over the place the last couple of years.<br />
<br />
Sienna Miller got to don the vinyl and heels in <span style="font-style: italic;">G.I. Joe</span> to play the villainous Baroness.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4OjmmufAeFA/TuzWquGiXTI/AAAAAAAAACw/9cjszN7acCs/s1600/baroness.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="315" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4OjmmufAeFA/TuzWquGiXTI/AAAAAAAAACw/9cjszN7acCs/s320/baroness.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />Cate Blanchett's character in <span style="font-style: italic;">Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull</span> is a Russian dominatrix (she is caring a crop whip on her hip, but never rides a horse in the film). Her stereotypical depiction of Russian womanhood actually offended the <a href="http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,,23750097-5006346,00.html">communist party</a> so much they tried to have the film banned in Russia.<a href="http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080307/indiana-jones/cate-blanchett_l.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080307/indiana-jones/cate-blanchett_l.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 256px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 192px;" /></a>Then there is the Disney version of the dominatrix from <span style="font-style: italic;">Enchanted</span>.
Now while I can watch <span style="font-style: italic;">Tin Man</span> as an adult and roll my eyes every time I see Kathleen Robertston strapped into another corset, <span style="font-style: italic;">Enchanted</span> was made by Disney for a youthful audience who probably have not studied how film reflects, but more importantly, influences our culture. Thus, they begin to absorb the message that sexual deviance (meaning anything but missionary, monogamous sex with your husband or wife) is evil. Undoubtedly, children's films are usually the most evil when it comes to how they code their villains with all the attributes that are culturally unacceptable to the conservative white men who dominate film production. I will go into this in more in another post since there is so much more to be discussed, but in the meantime think about all the Disney villains you've ever seen and who they culturally represent. Crazy, isn't it.<br />
<br />
It is easy to see that with the return of the dominatrix as the cinematic other in recent Hollywood films and television shows that patriarchal fear of kinky sex and powerful women has not diminished one bit (I must confess that I actually have a lot of respect for anyone who can don high heels, wear an outfit completely made out of vinyl and do anything but sweat). Male fear is also now heightened in <span style="font-style: italic;">Tin Man </span>to show how mystical, magical, and confusing boobs are to the male population. So I conclude this post with this ominous message - don't make us mad otherwise we ladies will unleash the full power of our cleavage on society and it won't be pretty. Just think Fembots from <span style="font-style: italic;">Austin Powers</span>.<br />
<a href="http://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/files/fembot2.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/files/fembot2.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 300px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-56257286964752869292010-01-25T16:04:00.000-08:002014-06-10T09:23:48.555-07:00Race, Social Responsibility, and D.W. Griffith's "Broken Blossoms"This week my colleague Kris (aka WonderYak) and I are talking about D.W. Griffith's <span style="font-style:italic;">Broken Blossoms</span> (1918) and its interesting and, possibly, progressive portrayal of race.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.filmsite.org/posters/brok.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 430px; height: 600px;" src="http://www.filmsite.org/posters/brok.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br /><br />R: I wasn't really sure what to expect before I sat down to watch this movie. <span style="font-style:italic;">Birth of a Nation</span> is so racist in its portrayal of "savage" African-Americans that prowled the South after the Civil War looking for young white women to corrupt. It really bugs me. However, in <span style="font-style:italic;">Broken Blossoms</span>, I thought that D.W. Griffith's portrayal of Chinese immigrants was much more sympathetic. Still problematic, but nothing like <span style="font-style:italic;">Birth...</span> <br /><br />K: I completely agree! In fact, so did many of my students -- almost all who wrote about <span style="font-style:italic;">Broken Blossoms</span> (their other choice was Chaplin's <span style="font-style:italic;">Gold Rush</span>) commented on how it felt like Griffith's penance for <span style="font-style:italic;">Birth...</span> The fact that the villain is a white male, and that almost all white people are portrayed as conniving or cruel or boorish, nearly makes up for the stereotypes that Richard Barthelmess perpetrates as the "Yellow-Faced" Cheng Huan (overly squinted eyes, hunched back, shuffled walk, etc.). <br /><br />Even Huan's one vice, opium addiction, is portrayed not as something of his own fault, but something forced upon him by Western civilization.<br /><br />Then there's the fact that the entire narrative is designed to lampoon Western values in general -- "The Orient" is an entirely peaceful, beautiful place in Griffith's recreation; the West is vile and dank. The "chink" comes to spread peace, but even in his earliest attempts (with the "Jackies" at port) he is trampled, both literally and figuratively.<br /><br />Is Griffith himself trying to claim that he is merely a product of his own broken society? <br /><br />R: That is an interesting point. D.W. Griffith is from the South and had relatives that fought for the South in the Civil War. Does this excuse his stereotyping of newly-freed African-Americans in <span style="font-style:italic;">Birth...</span> then? And do you think that he could have made a <span style="font-style:italic;">Broken Blossoms</span>-esc film with the same amount of cultural empathy based around the story of an African immigrant?<br /><br />K: This is all speculative, of course, but I feel Griffith could have made any film he wanted, really. His cinematic creativity was only bound by the narratives he chose to film.<br /><br />We discussed the idea of "excusing" artists in class. The two main questions I posed were, "can one separate an artist from his or her work?" and "does a filmmaker have a responsibility to be socially conscientious?"<br /><br />I'd personally say "yes" to the former and "no" to the latter. While I deplore the racism that Griffith perpetrated in his work, I can safely say that I admire his skill and respect his additions to cinematic language. I'd also come to his general defense and say that he had a right to express whatever views he wanted. I think I mentioned this to you, but I am thankful that, for instance, The Westboro Baptist Church exists. What they say makes me want to vomit; but if they weren't allowed to say it, how long would it be before I weren't allowed to say what I felt?<br /><br />"Does a filmmaker have a responsibility to be socially conscientious?"<br /><br />A discussion cropped up today w/r/t Buster Keaton's <span style="font-style:italic;">The General</span>. One student was terribly offended by the fact that Keaton used the Civil War as a backdrop for what is essentially a slapstick comedy. "Why," he argued, "use such a terrible event in our history as a playground for antics?" I rebutted that it is because of the shared history, the almost culturally universal understanding of events like War, that they are ripe fodder for art: there is no need for a backstory. It's just there. And then, with Comedy, you get the wonderful underline of tragedy. As love stories are best told against the specter of death, great Comedy is best told in the shallow waters of tragedy.<br /><br />The same goes for Tarantino's <span style="font-style:italic;">Inglorious Basterds</span> -- yes, he makes light of WWII, but it's only because he used WWII that the film functions. Or Benigni's <span style="font-style:italic;">Life is Beautifu</span>l, another film that came up today, with equally contentious debate.<br /><br />Did Keaton or Tarantino or Benigni act irresponsibly?<br /><br />Filmmakers, and artists in general, only have a few responsibilities (if one can call them that): to entertain (in the classical, escapist definition of the word); to push boundaries; and/or to inform.<br /><br />And by push boundaries, I don't mean be purposefully offensive...I just mean try to create something new (or, more specifically, tell us something in a new way). Make it funnier, or more exciting, or sexier, or more scintillating, or more pornographic, or more violent, or emotional, or beautiful, etc., than the last work.<br /><br />And by entertain, I really just mean create a world the audience can escape to. It might be terribly unpleasant (ala <span style="font-style:italic;">Mysterious Skin</span>) or wondrous (ala <span style="font-style:italic;">Avatar</span>), as long as it's compelling.<br /><br />So, long midnight ramble made short, Griffith does all of those three things with <span style="font-style:italic;">Birth...</span> therefore, can he really be blamed for the work he created? Does he need to be excused?<br /><br />And he also did those three things in <span style="font-style:italic;">Broken Blossoms</span>, but with the added bonus of being significantly less offensive (though not entirely).<br /><br />R: I agree and disagree. I don't believe that artists should censor themselves, but I do believe that they should be conscious of the art that they produce and its impact on society. For instance, if we take <span style="font-style:italic;">Birth of Nation</span>, D.W. Griffith may have just wanted to show a sympathetic portrayal of what happened in the South after the Civil War because he had family that lived through that time and it was, by all accounts, a very difficult period in American history. However, his valorous portrayal of the Ku Klux Klan at that point in history inspired the actual Klan in the 1910s to use the film as a recruitment tool. They used the film to sway new members up until the 1990s by some accounts. His intentions for <span style="font-style:italic;">Birth...</span> may have been very different from the impact that it had on the public, but its impact was widespread and devastating to African-Americans in this country. The film inspired people to commit heinous hate crimes in the name of racial purity.<br /><br />The other thing that we do in Cultural Studies is look for systematic representations. It is interesting that your student brought up how the backdrop of <span style="font-style:italic;">The General</span> is the South during the Civil War. While there were two sides fighting during the actual war we don't have a lot of filmic representations of the North, but we have a fair amount of the South, epic films at that: <span style="font-style:italic;">Cold Mountain</span>, <span style="font-style:italic;">Gone With the Wind</span>, <span style="font-style:italic;">Raintree County</span>, etc. In fact, going from memory I couldn't think of any film that was from the perspective of the North, but then was reminded that <span style="font-style:italic;">Glory</span> was about the first African-American unit in combat. So if we think about how much we want to empathize with the South in film there is something there that says a lot about our culture and what we value. If you compare this to films about World War II you do not have empathetic portrayals of the Nazi's, unless, like in <span style="font-style:italic;">Valkyre</span>, they are trying to kill Hitler.<br /><br />On the other hand, if we look at <span style="font-style:italic;">Broken Blossoms</span> and its portrayal of a completely high "Yellow Man", it is harder for me to think of other celluloid characters that are Chinese drug addicts. Now if he magically knew some sort of martial arts then he might fit into a cliched representation that is actively working to warp the popular consciousness of the film-going public. Singularly, "bad" representations of people are not harmful. It is when they are systematic that you have this cultural absorption of grains of "truth" from their repetition. And this isn't on a conscious level. I could go on and on about this, but if interested readers might want to check out my posts on "The Cinematic Other: Dominatrix" and "'Avatar' and How White Men Are the Best at Everything". <br /><br />The one thing that is systematic about his character is that he is actually a white actor in "Yellowface". This is systematic: Katherine Hepburn did it in <span style="font-style:italic;">Dragon Seed</span> (1944) and Mickey Rooney did it (horribly) in <span style="font-style:italic;">Breakfast at Tiffany's</span> (1961) amongst others. This also fits into the idea that White Men (and women) Are the Best at Everything, even playing cultural minorities. There is a really great article about this on <a href="http://www.racebending.com/v3/background/history-of-yellowface/">Racebending.com</a>.<br /><br />Since there is no way we could ever wrap up this conversation I figured that we might put on our teacher hats and maybe list what questions we would pose to students regarding <span style="font-style:italic;">Broken Blossoms</span>, race, and the social responsibility of artists/filmmakers:<br />• Do filmmakers/artists have a responsibility to make socially conscious work?<br />• Can you separate the intent of a film/filmmaker versus the impact of that film on society?<br />• Can you separate an artist's personal ideology/life from his or her work? (Think Roman Polanski.)<br />• Is it ever appropriate to use Yellowface/Blackface in a film?<br />* Is there a "caste" system in film? Meaning do darker colored minorities get treated worse than their lighter-skinned peers?<br /><br />Other Resources:<br />• <span style="font-style:italic;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0262772/">Slaying the Dragon</span>. Dir: Deborah Gee. 1988.</a><br />• <a href="http://www.racebending.com/v3/background/history-of-yellowface/">"Yellowface: A Story in Pictures" from Racebending.com</a>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-14221460236599697352010-01-23T17:45:00.000-08:002014-06-10T09:25:16.389-07:00Things I Love: "Female Agents"<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/uofMvIh2AUk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br />I love <span style="font-style: italic;">Les Femmes de L'Ombre (Female Agents)</span>. I saw it at the <a href="http://www.siff.net/index.aspx">Seattle International Film Festival</a> several years ago and cried my way through the opening sequence; war films tend to get the better of me as I think about the real life death and destruction that they are based upon. However, this particular sequence made me tear up for completely different reasons - it was a series of still images from World War II showing women in uniform serving their countries. Yep, I cry when I see images of women in power. It is so unusual on celluloid that it brings out a lot of emotion in me. Strange, I know. But we all have the things that make us descend into waterworks without control.<br /><br />In <span style="font-style: italic;">Female Agents</span> Sophie Marceau plays Louise Defontaines. The character of Louise is based on the real life of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lis%C3%A9_de_Baissac">Lisé Marie Jeanette de Baissac Villaneur</a>, a French female agent in the French resistance during World War II. While the screenplay has been sauced up for dramatic effect, Lisé had a dramatic effect on the success of the resistance and Allies before the D-Day invasion. In the film she is <span style="font-weight: bold;">the </span>reason for Allied success at Normandy beach as she races with other female spies to keep information about the D-Day invasion a secret from the Germans. In the film she and her crew get to shoot machine guns (cool), blow up buildings (cooler), work in a team of women without getting catty (seriously, it is possible), and generally make the German commander on their tail miserable. At the same time, the women show compassion for one another and fear in the face of danger ultimately making the film a fabulous mix of action and true emotion. The film also stars Julie Depardieu, the daughter of Gérard Depardieu, so it passes the requirement that all French films are held to - that they contain at least one Depardieu.<br /><br />Now, unlike <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar</span>, where women ultimately bow to the power that the white male main character has over them, the women in <span style="font-style: italic;">Female Agents</span> do no such thing. When things get rough they band together. When things get even rougher they think of a new plan. There are men in the story, including Louise's brother Claude, but the women and men stand on equal ground and, ultimately, <span style="font-weight: bold;">it is up to the women and just the women to save the day</span>.<br /><br />While I worry that even with my vagueness has given too many spoilers away, I know that not many of you in the U.S. will ever even see this movie. I am not trying to say there is some sort of conspiracy, but there is - <span style="font-style: italic;">Female Agents</span> is only available on PAL (European format) DVDs. However, those of you with the ability to play PAL in the Seattle area (aka you have a computer with a DVD-ROM) can pick it up at Scarecrow video and watch it in all its glory. Its unavailability everywhere else does make me wonder why? why?! WHY! Why is it not available in the U.S.? Do distributors think we do not want war films based on real life events and people? There are so many of those - <span style="font-style: italic;">Saving Private Ryan</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">Schindler's List</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">Band of Brothers</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">The Great Escape</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">Pearl Harbor</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">The English Patient</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">Patton,</span> etc. etc. Do distributors think that we do not want films that re-invision World War II? Can't be that - the masses turned out for <span style="font-style: italic;">Inglorious Basterds</span> this past summer. Hey, but I see a trend in these films! They are all about men and their forays into the field during war. The women, at best, get to be strangled by psychopathic German officers who are based on real people, but most of the time they are just nurses. While nurses do play a vital part in wartime situations isn't it about time that we show images of women in combat gettin' it done. And not like <span style="font-style: italic;">Courage Under Fire</span> where Meg Ryan fights and, just like so many films with women with any sort of agency in them, dies. I mean really gettin' it done. Like being in the mix and living to tell the tale, exerting their full emotional and physical power, and doin' it like we know we can. Seriously. Someone make this film.<br /><i></i>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-89238084861518914482010-01-17T22:59:00.000-08:002010-01-18T12:02:20.456-08:00Plato is So Gay<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/2739487608_a78ebddeb2_b.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 427px; height: 533px;" src="http://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/2739487608_a78ebddeb2_b.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />"Wow. Those are some gay undertones," states my husband, Geoff, during the first planetarium scene in <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without A Cause</span>. Geoff is not a filmmaker, has never taken a film class, and generally avoids reading too much into media. However, even he is not convinced that Plato is, as he is described by others, just "the youthful innocent."<br /><br />Quickly Googling for Plato+Gay+"Rebel Without A Cause" produces a myriad of results. Seems Geoff isn't the only one picking up on Plato's vibes. <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050619/REVIEWS08/506190301/1023">Roger Ebert</a> had this to say about Plato's reaction to the planetarium presentation in <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without A Cause</span>:<br /><blockquote>"What does he know about man alone?" It is clear now but may have been less visible in 1955 that Plato is gay and has a crush on Jim; at the planetarium, he touches his shoulder caressingly. After Buzz dies when his car hurtles over the cliff, the students all seem curiously -- well, composed. Jim gives Plato a lift home and Plato asks him, "Hey, you want to come home with me? I mean, there's nobody home at my house, and heck, I'm not tired. Are you?" But Jim glances in the direction of Judy's house, and then so does Plato, ruefully.</blockquote><br />No one brought up the question of Plato's sexuality at "An Afternoon with Stewart Stern" where I, and several lucky others, got to listen to stories of old Hollywood and talk with the screenwriter of <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without A Cause</span> - Stewart Stern. However, Stern did elude to Nicholas Ray having an interest in men. And that Stern was "so naive" about these things when he first started working in the film industry. Indeed, <a href="http://theselvedgeyard.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/the-rebel-without-a-cause-cast-of-characters/">one blogger</a> even went farther with the suggestive sexuality in the film stating:<br /><blockquote>Sal Mineo—so affecting as the essentially fatherless outcast Plato—later commented that he had portrayed the first gay teenager on film. There are little clues: the photograph of Alan Ladd taped to his locker door, his longing looks at Jim Stark, his disguised declaration of love in the abandoned mansion. Ray was aware of Dean’s bisexuality and encouraged the actor to use it in certain scenes. Dean instructed Mineo, “Look at me the way I look at Natalie,” for their intimate scene in the Getty mansion. It had to be subtle. A Production Code officer had written in a memo to Jack L. Warner on March 22, “It is of course vital that there be no inference of a questionable or homosexual relationship between Plato and Jim.” In real life Mineo was gay, and it is even rumored that he and Ray (who was bisexual) also had a tryst while filming <em>Rebel</em>.</blockquote>While those of us who have seen the documentary or read the book <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112651/"><span style="font-style: italic;">The Celluloid Closet</span></a> don't find any of this particularly shocking, the thing that still bothers me about homosexuality in mainstream film, latent or "out", is how much we like to punish the characters for their alleged transgressions. Here is a quick synopsis of mainstream Hollywood films that have come out in the last twenty years, been acclaimed by the masses and critics, featuring gay, bisexual, transgendered or otherwise "out" main characters and their celluloid fates:<br /><ul><li><span style="font-style: italic;">The Crying Game.</span> Dir: Neil Jordan. 1992. This one is hard to explain, but trust me when I say that this one does not end on a complete happy note. <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Dead <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">and</span> <span style="color: rgb(51, 255, 255);">d</span></span><span style="color: rgb(51, 255, 255);">epressed</span>.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"></span></li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">Philadelphia</span>. Dir: Jonathan Demme. 1993. Tom Hanks plays a gay attorney with AIDS who eventually succumbs to his disease. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Dead.</span><br /></li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">Boys Don't Cry</span>. Dir: Kimberly Pierce. 1999. Hillary Swank won an Oscar for playing a transgendered man who is shot and killed by his former friends once they learn his secret. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Dead.</span><br /></li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">Far From Heaven</span>. Dir: Todd Haynes. 2002. Dennis Qauid finally leaves his wife after revealing that he is gay only to be isolated, alone, and depressed in this contemporary re-make of Douglas Sirk's <span style="font-style: italic;">All That Heaven Allows. </span><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"><span style="color: rgb(51, 255, 255);">Depressed</span>.</span><br /></li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">The Hours.</span> Dir: Stephen Daldry. 2002. This film featured several contemporary "out" characters. One was stuck in a loveless relationship. The other threw himself to his death instead of allowing AIDS to take him. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Dead</span> and <span style="color: rgb(51, 255, 255);">depressed</span>.<br /></li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">Monster</span>. Dir: Patty Jenkins. 2003. Charlize Theron won an Oscar for her portrayal of Aileen Wournos, a real-life lesbian/prostitute/serial killer, who is eventually tried and convicted for her crimes and sentence to death by lethal injection. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Dead</span>.<br /></li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">Brokeback Mountain</span>. Dir: Ang Lee. 2005. Jake Gyllenhaal uttered the classic line "I can't quit you" to Heath Ledger in this story of two cowboys who fall in love with each other. However, eventually Jake Gyllenhaal is viciously murdered by men who learn his secret. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Dead</span> and <span style="color: rgb(51, 255, 255);">depressed</span>.</li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">Transamerica</span>. Dir: Duncan Tucker 2005. Felicity Huffman was robbed of the Oscar for her portrayal of a man transitioning to become a woman and the complications it brings with the discovery that she fathered a child. <span style="color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Alive and pretty much happy</span><span style="color: rgb(255, 153, 102);">!</span><br /></li><li><span style="font-style: italic;">Milk</span>. Dir: Gus Van Sant. 2008. Based on the real story of Harvey Milk who, like his fictional and real peers, is assassinated. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Dead</span><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">.</span><br /></li></ul>While there are cult favorites and independent films like <span style="font-style: italic;">But I am a Cheerleader </span>(Dir: Jaime Babbit. 1999) and <span style="font-style: italic;">Kissing Jessica Stein </span>(Dir: Charles Herman-Wurmfeld. 2001) that break taboos and allow for more positive gay, bisexual, and transgendered main characters it is almost unheard of in a mainstream or co-opted (small film that gets a lot of Oscar attention) Hollywood films. In fact, the only film that I could think of that has come out in the last twenty years, received mainstream critical and audience acceptance, and featured a character that did not die or end up completely emotionally devastated by the end of the film was <span style="font-style: italic;">Transamerica</span>. This, to me, very clearly articulates an issue with how we feel culturally about LGBTQ men and women in our society - that they do not deserve happiness and acceptance like the heterosexual population. And while their presence has increased and "come out of the closet" since <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without A Cause</span> was released in 1955 they are still meeting the same fate as Plato time and time again - death. This is troubling. I challenge filmmakers large and small to think of better ways to deal with sexualities that break the heteronormativity mold than this disturbing trend of death, depression, and/or emotional destruction. In the meantime I will revel in the campy brilliance of <span style="font-style: italic;">But I am a Cheerleader</span>.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1c/ButI%27mACheerleader.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 290px; height: 430px;" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1c/ButI%27mACheerleader.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />Mad love to Lane, who, one night on a slow film set, helped to create the list of modern films and the fates of their main LGBTQ characters while simultaneously doing a handstand.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-29724265937359803122010-01-17T17:50:00.000-08:002010-01-17T22:59:42.744-08:00Rebel Without A Father<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.virginmedia.com/images/Rebel-Without-a-Cause-431.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 431px; height: 300px;" src="http://www.virginmedia.com/images/Rebel-Without-a-Cause-431.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />Stewart Stern is full of stories of old Hollywood. He is the nephew of Adolf Zukor, one of the pioneers of Paramount pictures, and cousins with the Loews family that used to control MGM. He told one story about sitting down on a couch at a party in Los Angeles and chatting up a bored Marilyn Monroe then told us about how after "Jimmy" Dean died he (and others close to him) felt haunted by his ghost. He described the Tiffany arboretum that was a part of the Loews mansion in Long Island that also served as inspiration for the mansion at the end of <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without a Cause.</span> He spoke of how his house guest, Beatrice Lillie, was so funny that he had to fake taking a trip to Palm Springs to escape her company because her jokes were so distracting to his work. Where did end up? The Chateau Marmot where he hung out with Dennis Hopper and eventually wrote the script for <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel</span> after meeting director Nicholas Ray. At 88 he is one of the few people left with such strong ties to old Hollywood. So when I raised my hand to ask my one question at the Northwest Film Forum presentation of "An Afternoon with Stewart Stern" screening I just really hoped that he didn't hit me with his cane, because it would have been like Marlon Brando (who he traveled through Asia with) and the rest of old Hollywood popping me one for making trouble and that would have been a little hard to handle for this film buff.<br /><br />In <span style="font-style: italic;">America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies</span> the authors use <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without a Cause</span> as an example of how film in the 1950s was full of images of masculinity in crisis: "The lingering effects of World War II and the new corporate economics of the 1950s were changing the social understanding of masculinity" (274). I had heard other readings of this film, but never that it was about a crisis in masculinity that was spurned by the effects of World War II. So, when spending an afternoon with the writer of the film I had to ask the question: "Do you believe that <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without A Cause</span> represents a 'crisis in masculinity' that was culturally present in 1950s America?"<br /><br />After taking a long pause he replied, "Well, before World War II you always brought women corsages if you were taking them out on a date. After the war you didn't do that any more."<br /><br />I have never heard someone describe shifting gender roles in such an eloquent way.<br /><br />Stern stated said that the fathers in the film were influenced by the monotony that the 1950s man encountered as working life and gender roles shifted in the wake of World War II. He said, "They felt like drones. They went to work. They might play cards once a week. But that was it." One audience member put the blame on the masculine crisis on the Rosie-the-Riveter women who, after working the factories while the men were off fighting, continued to challenge gender roles after the end of the war. However, Stern was not so quick to judge stating that after World War II, "Fathers were loosing ground." He also admitted that there was little emotional support for the men returning from combat and that Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was a part of society, but not dealt with in a public forum. This undercurrent of emotion from wartime experiences were causing men to display feelings that, before the war, were traditionally "bottled up" and masculinity started to crack under the psychological pressure.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://filmfanatic.org/reviews/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/rebel-backus.png"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 498px; height: 280px;" src="http://filmfanatic.org/reviews/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/rebel-backus.png" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />The display of masculinity in crisis embodied in <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel</span> in the character of Jim's father Frank Stark, played by Jim Backus. In one scene Frank drops a tray of food that he is taking his wife as Jim, James Dean's character, walks up the stairs. Frank is dressed in a gray suit with a flowery apron on which allegedly belongs to his wife. Jim is horrified to see his father on the floor and yells at him "Don't!" When Frank looks confused as to what Jim is referring to, Jim slinks off to his room upset at his father's emasculation at the hands of his overbearing mother. In fact, Stern hinted that the cold bottle of milk that Jim drinks throughout the film upon returning home is supposed to represent his mother - cold, ineffectual.<br /><br />In fact, Jim's entire rebellion can be traced back to his feelings towards his "inadequate" father. Indeed, at the beginning of the film, Jim tells the juvenile detective that "She eats him alive and he just takes it." And later: "If he had guts to knock Mom cold once, then maybe she'd be happy, and she'd stop picking on him." Hinting that want he wants out of his father is the traditional role model of violent patriarchy and, in fact, that his mother might like that. In fact, the detective puts Jim into his place after he takes a swing, asserting his own place as an appropriate male role model through physical combat. Towards the end of the film, since Jim does not respect his father as a role model, he returns to the police station to try and find the detective to share his problems with. However, he is let down when he finds out that the detective is not there.<br /><br />Stern said that to do background research to write the film, he spent several months shadowing a real juvenile detective. Much of the background for the main characters - Jim, Judy, and Plato - came out of this experience. In fact, Stern actually noted in his journal that one of the real-life inspirations was "In his mind searching for a father image..." But it was something that he could not find. True, neither Jim, Judy, or Plato could find the type of father figure that they wanted so they created their own family briefly in the abandoned mansion. So while the film is called <span style="font-style: italic;">Rebel Without A Cause</span>, the truth is that the characters are actually rebelling against the oldest reason in the book - their fathers - and the fear of changing masculinity that they represent to 1950s America.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-420890964562870912010-01-11T15:24:00.000-08:002014-06-10T09:29:56.909-07:00"Avatar" and How White Men Are the Best at Everything<div>Re: <a href="http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=451073&GT1=28101">Some See Racist Theme in 'Avatar'</a> - Movies.msn.com</div><br /><div>The director of <em>Avatar,</em> James Cameron, has made a living out of making films with paper-thin narratives, cliched characters, but with lots of pretty things to look at. <em>Avatar</em> is no different. I must admit that I enjoyed the thrill-ride while I was on it, but looking back on the film now just makes me ever so sad.</div><br /><div> </div>The story goes that the Na'vi, the indigenous population (read: Native Americans) in the way of the progress of a greedy corporation (read: white Europeans), live on a remote world called Pandora (read: pre-colonial America). To try and convince them that they should move so that we can take over their land and cultivate the precious metal that lies beneath their sacred tree-home, we send Avatar Na'vi to integrate with the locals. The "dreamwalkers," as the Na'vi call them, are humans who, through the power of technology, can put themselves into the bodies of laboratory-grown half-Na'vi half-human beings. And thus, the futuristic reenactment of Manifest Destiny begins. However, this time the Avatars side with the Na'vi as the greedy corporation tries to plow down their sacred tree in order to mine the precious metal below and win in the face of interstellar corporate greed.<br /><br />Now, there have been a lot of comments about how Sully, the protagonist/dreamwalker/Avatar, is highly reminiscent of the character that Tom Cruise played in <em>The Last Samurai</em> and Kevin Costner played in <em>Dances with Wolves.</em> <span style="font-weight: bold;"> Sully is, in effect, the white man who abandons "his" people to become the best damn minority ever. This is, because, white men are the best at everything. </span>He gets to ride the toughest beast in the sky, he gets the village "prize" in the form of the highest ranking spiritual lady in waiting, and he hatches the plan that defeats the evil corporation that is trying to destroy Pandora's beauty. He proves that white men are really awesome at everything; including being an alien racial minority.<br /><br /><div> </div>Truth be told, this plot device is not really new, but neither is the one that really bothered me about the film. Admittedly, being female I tend to judge films on the basis of what they let or don't let the women in the film do. The human women in the film, played by Sigourney Weaver and Michelle Rodruigez, represent two generations of actresses that have been allowed to kick butt and take names on celluloid. Sigourney Weaver totally blew them away in the <em>Alien</em> series (even with James Cameron at the helm!) and Michelle Rodruigez's break-through performance was in a film aptly titled <em>Girlfight</em>.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Spoiler alert in the paragraphs ahead.</span> You may want to stop here if you have not seen and wish to view <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar</span>.<br /><br />Michelle Rodruigez, once again, plays the hot-tempered Latina who is a military pilot with a soft spot for the blue Na'vi. Sigourney is relegated to the head maternal scientist role. She really wants to be a Na'vi and enjoys her forays into their world in her Avatar body. This bit of typecasting is not what bothers me (older woman as mother, Latina as "spicy"). It is the fact that for all their agency in the film that they are eventually killed off. Frequently, maybe more so than the white men as the best damn racial minority trope, female characters that embody some sort of power physically or mentally, are killed off because they are threatening to typical notions of white, male patriarchy.<br /><br />Meeting their untimely doom, does not generally affect male characters who challenge authority in film. <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar</span> proves no different. Norm (Joel Moore), the other lovable scientist/Avatar survives the battle at the end. Not even the baddie head of corporate (Giovanni Ribisi) croaks. Nope. Once the human ladies decide to fight and challenge authority it is curtains for them and their sense of empowerment.<br /><br />The only other main female character is also the only one who survives the climactic battle: the Na'vi princess, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana). And this is because Neytiri conforms to stereotypical notions of femininity. For instance, although she is a Na'vi warrior/spiritual leader, she bows down to the power and influence of the white male outsider, Sully. She is, in effect, tamed by him when she chooses him as her partner and, in a really strange scene, copulates with him in the glowing woods. She literally defends him and his authority during the climactic battle and delivers him to the glowing tree at the end so he can be permanently fused with his Na'vi body and take his place as chief of the tribe. She exhibits a lot of physical, mental, and spiritual authority, but once she meets Sully it is all in service of him and his mission. Lame.<br /><br />Undoubtedly, <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar</span> broke new ground technologically with its combination of human actors and computer generated effects. However, I wish that more time had been taken to think about how the story perpetuates very old notions of gender and race that are deeply troubling to those of us who do not identify with the white, male majority. I want to see a movie where women get to kick butt (mentally or physically), take names, don't lament over their relationships with men and survive to tell their tale.<br /><br />To see Sigourney Weaver talk about her character in <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar</span> click <a href="http://www.hulu.com/watch/116020/in-character-with-sigourney-weaver-as-dr-grace-augustine-in-avatar">here</a>.<br />To see Zoe Saldana talk about her character in <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar</span> click <a href="http://www.hulu.com/watch/116023/in-character-with-zo%C3%AB-saldana-as-neytiri-in-avatar">here</a>.Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-82138264597486683502010-01-10T09:20:00.001-08:002010-01-10T09:25:32.751-08:00Reproductive Rights and Athletics: The Curious Tale of Female Ski Jumpers<a href="http://contexts.org/sexuality/2010/01/09/reproductive-rights-and-athletics-the-curious-tale-of-female-ski-jumpers/">Reproductive Rights and Athletics: The Curious Tale of Female Ski Jumpers</a><br /><br />From 2002 - 2005 I made a film about female ski jumpers trying to get their sport included in the Winter Olympics. With the 2010 Vancouver Games right around the corner and the women still being excluded I wrote this piece for Contexts.org, an <span style="font-weight: bold;">awesome</span> sociology scholarly blog, about the fight of women ski jumpers to get their sport included in the Winter Olympics. It is a strange tale of sports and reproduction. Yeah, I know. I would have never put those two together before my journey as well!<a href="http://sharethis.com/"><br /></a>Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-18571206084145323922010-01-09T09:26:00.000-08:002010-01-09T12:59:12.537-08:00Sunshine Cleaning Passes The Bechdel Test for Women in Movies!<embed src="http://blip.tv/play/AYG09T8C" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="300"></embed><br />Over the holidays I met Anita at a party and we were discussing our love/hate relationship with media. We both love <span style="font-style: italic;">Buffy</span>. We are both a little sad at what Joss Whedon has done since then. She told me I should watch <span style="font-style: italic;">Farscape</span>. I admitted to liking the new <span style="font-style: italic;">Star Trek</span> even though it falls into some serious cliches. For instance, we can update the ship and make it look all flashy, but we can't let women wear pants?! To say the least, we hit it off.<br /><br />I had never heard of The Bechdel Test until I checked out her <a href="http://www.feministfrequency.com/">vlog</a> yesterday. It was developed in the 1980s to test whether or not there are substantial female characters in a film. The test is simple:<br /><ol><li>Are there at least two female characters in the film?</li><li>Do they have names?<br /></li><li>Do they talk to each other?</li><li>Do they talk about something other than men?</li></ol>If you are like me then you are immediately racking your brain to try and think of films that pass the test. It isn't easy. If you watch Anita's vlog clip then you can see an extensive list of films that do not pass; a lot of which are modern classics that I grew up on and loved without even thinking about how there was little for me, as a young girl, to identify with.<br /><br />At the party, Anita and I both admitted that we tend to, as academics, feminists, and media lovers, attack and criticize things without talking enough about there are things out there that we love. So, last night, since it was difficult for me to think of a film off the top of my head that would pass The Bechdel Test, I took my research to my Netflix cue. And I low and behold I found a film that passed - <span style="font-style: italic;">Sunshine Clean</span><span style="font-style: italic;">ing</span>. And I liked it immensely.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.sonoma.edu/pubs/newsrelease/sunshine-cleaning-trailer.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 364px; height: 318px;" src="http://www.sonoma.edu/pubs/newsrelease/sunshine-cleaning-trailer.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The story revolves around Rose (Amy Adams) who is a struggling single mother in Albuquerque. Through connections that Rose has at the local police department (re: married cop whom she has regular relations with) she transitions from being a maid to operating her own business cleaning up crime scenes with the help of her younger sister Norah (Emily Blunt). Even though the work is disgusting Rose finds happiness in helping people at moments in their lives when something horrible has happened.<br /><br />I am purposely leaving out details here, because there are many very tried and true ways that the characters in this movie could change and grow. However, <span style="font-style: italic;">Sunshine Cleaning</span> at almost every turn refuses to take the easy way out. This makes the main characters, the sister duo of Norah and Rose, more complex and interesting than female characters in the vast majority of films. Additionally, if you were to look at them through the critique of The Bechdel Test, that they are also unique in the fact that <span style="font-weight: bold;">most</span> of their interactions have little to do with the men in their lives even though their romantic entanglements are also complex.<br /><br />I am not saying that the film is superior to all others, but it is touching and a great example of how to follow a classic, plot-driven, screenplay structure that media makers who've been through scriptwriting 101 have had drilled into their head and still come out with female characters who are well developed. It is, in effect, a ray of sunshine in regards to its inclusion and development of multiple, interesting female characters. Also interesting to note, is that the film was written and directed by two women, Megan Holley and Christin Jeffs, as well!Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3514668139847782851.post-87763155142624928572010-01-08T19:04:00.000-08:002014-06-10T09:32:58.337-07:00Regarding: For Your Consideration: Is Kathryn Bigelow a Female Director? - indieWIRE<br />
<a href="http://www.indiewire.com/article/for_your_consideration_is_kathryn_bigelow_a_female_director/">For Your Consideration: Is Kathryn Bigelow a Female Director? - indieWIRE</a><br />
<br />
Wow. Not even 24 hours later there are as Bill and Ted would say, "Strange things afloat at the Circle K" known as the internet regarding Kathryn Bigelow's chance at being the first woman to win an Oscar for Best Director.<br />
<br />
However, the article is not as controversial as the title suggests, but rather out there to controversially draw viewers into a discussion of the importance of gender in regards to the Best Director Oscar. Here is a snipit:<br />
<blockquote>
“The Hurt Locker” is an action film, a genre typically the preserve of male directors. Many critics have expressed delight that Bigelow is receiving such acclaim for a film that is so atypical to the type of films women are usually allowed to direct. Yet there are two sides to the story - film critic Caryn James recently suggested that “the many nominations for Bigelow play into the old idea that women get ahead by behaving like men, in this case making a movie voters might expect a man to have made”.</blockquote>
Undoubtedly, this person is not very familiar with Bigelow's history as a director. She has actually made a career out of directing non-chick flicks. She is one of the few female directors who regularly directs action films that star male protagonists. Her directorial resume includes: <span style="font-style: italic;">Point Break</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">K-19: The Widowmaker</span>, and <span style="font-style: italic;">Strange Days</span>. And why should she have to conform to the gendered norm that in film women direct comedies and "women's pictures" in order to be acceptable?<br />
<br />
I take issue with the idea that her gender isn't important in regards to her possibly winning an Oscar for her work on <span style="font-style: italic;">The Hurt Locker </span>because it is not a chick flick. While it is a film about men and therefore follows the tradition that to get ahead women "behave like men", <span style="font-weight: bold;">there have been three women in the history of the Oscars to ever have been nominated for Best Director.</span> Three. That. Is. It. If Katheryn Bigelow were to be the fourth and if she were to win that would be a <span style="font-weight: bold;">huge</span> deal for women in film industry.<br />
<br />
But let us not loose site of the fact that the Oscars are a very prestigious award in the film industry, but they are also very biased in what they believe is a film worthy of acclaim. Generally, the major awards (Best Director, Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress) go the works from the US that are in English. We can also get more specific and say that these films are usually feature-length narrative (non-documentary) dramas that are directed by a white American male and the main protagonist is usually a white male. Narrative shorts, comedies, documentaries long and short do not generally garner nominations for the "big" awards. Experimental films? Ha. They don't even have a category on the big night.<br />
<br />
The truth is that the academy occasionally acknowledges great films, performers, and film craftsmen and women. However, there is this whole world of film and filmmakers that they also annually ignore, because they are a self-serving and conservative bunch. And, quite truthfully, there is a lot of great work out there past and present that has been snubbed by the academy just because it doesn't fall into their unwritten criteria of what is "Oscar" worthy. There have also been instances of blatant discrimination for films and performance that were nominated that were a little "out of the box". For instance, in 2006 <span style="font-style: italic;">Brokeback Mountain</span> lost the Best Picture Oscar competition to <span style="font-style: italic;">Crash</span>, because some academy members wouldn't even watch the film due to the fact that the story centered around two "straight" cowboys falling in love with one another. Tony Curtis and Ernest Borgnine, Academy members, even boasted publicly that they were proud of the fact that they <span style="font-weight: bold;">did not</span> watch <span style="font-style: italic;">Brokeback Mountain</span>, because the content of the film "disgusted" them.<br />
<br />
The topic of Oscar's tendency to discriminate against large sects of the filmmaking world based on content, form, and genre choice has, ironically, also been brought up at Oscar awards themselves. So I leave you with a link to the brilliant performance from Jack Black, Will Ferrell, and John C. Reilly from the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5JAPkvnyso">79th Academy Awards</a> as I look forward to the very possibility of seeing just one more woman nominated for Best Director. February 2nd cannot come any faster!<br />
<br />
P.S. In case you didn't know, the first three women to be nominated for the Best Director Oscar were Lina Wertmeuller for <span style="font-style: italic;">Seven Beauties</span> in 1976, Jane Campion for <span style="font-style: italic;">The Piano</span> in 1993, and Sofia Coppola in 2003 for <span style="font-style: italic;">Lost in Translation</span>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Ruth Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05347899112727882947noreply@blogger.com0