718 Votes in Poll
Lol yah it was sarcasm..
I didn't know whether to say anything. Frankly, I'm scared of engaging in these discussions. I find them upsetting. But also, reading these comments is already upsetting and grim enough. And I hate just reading them and not doing what I can, however ineffective it will be.
Firstly, this shouldn't need saying but I know people often get defensive because they feel they are being accused of sexism regarding things like this, no, I am of course not accusing anyone of sexism.
OK, "Why does it have to be female? Why can't it just be the best director for the job, regardless of gender?"
Because that's not how Hollywood works. This image might help:
If you're just looking for "a director" for a major film, there is, by the current statistics, an 88% chance of choosing a male director and a 12% chance of choosing a female director. And that's up from a staggering 96% : 4% chance in 2018.
Clearly, the people on here who are not happy about looking for a female director are unhappy because they want equality. 88% male, 12% female is not equal.
There is a bias in Hollywood hiring, as with most industries, towards men, and "just hiring on merit" does not fix that, because that's supposedly been the ethos for decades. It's just not a change. And it's not effective enough to just say "Well, make sure the people hiring aren't biased".
Even if you did somehow miraculously fix things so that hirers have lost their unconscious (or conscious) bias, you're still not fixing things, because as things stand the pool of top directors is 78% men and 12% women, so picking "based purely on merit" is still going to favour men massively, because plenty of female directors have not actually been given the chance to prove their merit. If you "just hire on merit", you're not going to in any way level the field, and are still oppressing female directors.
Plus, you never get new blood, or take any risky new choices. If you hired "based purely on merit", you wouldn't get the directors of Community episodes making four of the best superhero films ever. Plus, it's not like you can just get the best person for everything anyway.
No, you want to hire based on a mix of proven merit, talent, vision, pitch, and creativity, and perhaps take a risk on some people sometimes.
So, that all said, after Marvel have had Jon Favreau, Louis Leterrier, Kenneth Branagh, Joe Johnston, Joss Whedon, Shane Black, Alan Taylor, Anthony Russo, Joe Russo, James Gunn, Peyton Reed, Scott Derrickson, Jon Watts, Taika Waititi, Ryan Coogler, and Ryan Fleck on the male side, and just Anna Boden on the female side - 16 to 1 - making an effort to make sure one of their endless stream of films has a female director to edge that score just the tiniest bit closer to anything anywhere near fair does not exactly seem, well, unfair.
Female directors are at a massive disadvantage. If, as shown in that image, you just give everyone the same level now, that disparity will never change. Giving female directors the occasional tiny leg up helps a tiny, tiny bit in the strive for equality.
It is not in some way oppressing male directors to add an opportunity for a female director. You have not taken something from men. They have 700 other coming Marvel films to run to.
All of that aside anyway, a woman telling a woman's story tends to be more effective and connect better. Wonder Woman would not have worked as well with most male directors, because it has the eye of a woman behind it. Someone who has a more personal connection with the character, the themes, the story they want to tell, the perspective of a woman which they want to capture. That's not to say a man can't get it right.
And you're really not losing anything. The best female directors, given the opportunity, are of course just as good as the best male directors.
Next, this whole "audiences don't want wokeness", "get woke, go broke" thing is, sorry, ridiculous. There is this bizarre perception by some that when films and shows are telling the stories of women and/or people of colour it is somehow "bringing politics into our media". Fictional media tells stories with messages, and those usually have some level of politics behind them, regardless. It seems like people just look out for it to complain about when there's been a decision to focus on a woman and/or person of colour. That choice in the first place is somehow presumed to be "political", and there's this presupposition then that the film itself will be "political" and an immediate predisposition to hate anything resembling a message in the film or show. Also, this assertion that these things somehow spread a message that "men are bad" or "white people are bad" is ridiculous and completely unfounded.
All you are doing is affording more opportunities to underrepresented people. And the $822m box office of Wonder Woman, the $1.35bn box office of Black Panther, the highest views in 9 years for Doctor Who: Series 11, the $1.1bn box office for Captain Marvel, the renewal for second, third, and fourth seasons of Star Trek: Discovery, Watchmen being HBO's most-viewed first season for a show in almost 3 years, etc. would suggest that... yeah, maybe there's a massive swathe of people out there who are excited to be represented on-screen. If you feel you can't engage with that sort of lead character, and that it turns you off, that's a shame. But I would argue that it's better to go from enjoying three Marvel films out of three a year to enjoying three Marvel films a year, just now out of four (as they add another one extra year) and meanwhile huge numbers of people who get no representation finally get to see themselves represented on-screen.
And clearly, it's not destroying your audience. If it really is turning people off, then clearly it's bringing in even more people in return.
Finally, on a more personal note, I cannot stand the vitriol in the Marvel fanbase for the last year. The Marvel fanbase had been one of care and acceptance, and then Captain Marvel happened and it erupted into people being unnecessarily horrible, constantly.
Look, I'm someone who really enjoys the first film, so sure, maybe you can see it as me being biased, not wanting to see people who disagree with me or something. And sure, ideally, I don't. But that's not what I'm talking about here.
I'm referring to the fact that any time anything anywhere in the proximity of the character of Captain Marvel is mentioned anywhere, there are people who leap onto the discussion and feel the need to tell everyone about how Captain Marvel is the worst character ever made and the worst film ever made.
It's incredibly depressing seeing the constant unnecessary attacks in the fanbase, and ruining the experience of being an MCU fan. It's OK to not like something, it's OK to not like Captain Marvel. But when it comes to Captain Marvel, there is far more than the amount you would expect for any other Marvel film of the same level of critical and audience reception.
Criticism and discussion is great and important, when it's criticism and discussion. There's a difference between posting on a discussion about a character or film and saying, "I don't really like this one. Personally, I think the arc is lacking in...", and posting on something like a post about how Captain Marvel was one of seven Disney films this year to make over $1bn with "Captain Marvel was a trash dumpster fire, everyone hates it and she's a horrible character, no personality, no emotions", unprompted.
Right, I've said my piece.
Of these options I'd say Deborah Chow, but I think Olivia Wilde could be good, or just someone less known who needs their shot.
BEJT... I get it totally. But I don't want to live in a world that gives jobs to less qualified people out of pity essentially... You give it to a woman not because she is a good director but just because of the body parts she has... I would feel as a woman I didn't totally earn it. I know it's hard to balance things out by saying we are only hiring based on experience and talent.
I could get all upset because I a man have a hard time getting a serving job making crazy tips compare to a young lady ... But instead i go get it somewhere else understanding that 90% of servers are attractive woman...
I know that's different but the topic can be related to worldwide.
