“I’ll Have the Car Drive Faster Over the Cliff” and Other Lessons from the 2014 Athena Film Festival

My entry point to this area is my interest in creating media that highlights women of color, queer people, its intersection, and other types of characters not often seen on screen. People who aren’t lawyers or in advertising. People who wear the same sweater more than once. People who don’t fit into prefab boxes. My conviction about the need for more diverse content won’t ever falter, but hearing truths from women working in the field is, unfortunately, a downer. While representation of women remains a glaring issue, it’s in the creation of stories and characters where we continue to see problems.

The Panel
The Panel

 

This is a guest post by Emily U. Hashimoto.

To reveal how films are created is to lose faith in a medium many of us love so much; perhaps like laws and sausage, it’s best not to see how it’s made. Yet for those of us interested in being a part of that process, the fascination lingers, and to this end I made my way to the Athena Film Festival last weekend, a three day celebration of women and leadership. The three day event featured films – including Frozen, Farah Goes Bang, In A World, and Maidentrip – as well as panels and workshops with seasoned professionals that are creating and helping to create strong portrayals of women.

My entry point to this area is my interest in creating media that highlights women of color, queer people, its intersection, and other types of characters not often seen on screen. People who aren’t lawyers or in advertising. People who wear the same sweater more than once. People who don’t fit into prefab boxes. My conviction about the need for more diverse content won’t ever falter, but hearing truths from women working in the field is, unfortunately, a downer. While representation of women remains a glaring issue, it’s in the creation of stories and characters where we continue to see problems. For example, during a panel with producers, an entertainment lawyer, and others, one woman who works in production said that when a film is in its initial stages and agents have the opportunity to suggest writers and directors, they won’t mention any women because they know the studio won’t go for it. When studio executives get asked why women’s names aren’t put forward, they say that agents won’t support those choices. What we have here is a classic catch-22 clusterfuck that’s hard to escape, without a suitable conclusion that puts more women to work.

Nina Shaw
Nina Shaw

 

This inclusion issue exists at all levels. Executives that are women or people of color aren’t willing to step forward to support a script about women or people of color, lest they be seen as ‘pushing an agenda.’ So even when there is more representation of studio executives, a balm you’d think is a panacea, the willingness to stick to the predetermined rules is more of a draw for the people who select this kind of work.

It kind of continues to be bad news.

The statistics don’t support a woman’s endeavor into film. San Diego State University’s Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film’s research tells us that in 2013, only 16% of all directors, executive producers, producers, writers, cinematographers, and editors involved in top grossing films were women. In television and independent film, women are better represented, with these figures being closer to 30%, but we’re still a long way from parity.

Callie Khouri
Callie Khouri

 

If one does make it through to the exclusive group of filmmakers, it doesn’t guarantee work. Nina Shaw, a leading entertainment lawyer, said during the panel that when studios are working on a project, they’ll have “The List” of possible directors and writers, a list that is often devoid of even one woman’s name. When she brings up women creators, the response is often, “Well, we talked about her…” She said, “it’s almost always a guy talking to a guy,” though as mentioned above, even having more women executives isn’t a boon to more women creators. The problem is bankability; women are not seen as people who can make a large-scale film because of the way we are perceived – never mind the fact that films with a woman lead are less expensive to make and end up making more money.

But the perception persists that women are not leaders enough to take the helm of a huge project. Directors (read: men) are supposed to be powerful, tough, and wise, and the way women are perceived clashes with that. When a woman director does sneak in the door and she displays the traits that a director should, there can be a terrible clash. Shaw described an anonymous situation of a woman director who had an adversarial relationship with her male producer on a film. She behaved as any director would, but that behavior made the producer bad mouth her all over town. She didn’t work steadily for years until she fell in with a successful female TV creator and showrunner.

Anna Holmes
Anna Holmes

 

Whether you work within the lines or not, as a woman creator you must be overwhelmingly prepared and talented. Lena Waithe, a queer woman of color that writes and produces, says that for women of color especially, there’s no room for mediocrity because you’re already seen as a risky entity. You have to work the hardest you’ve ever worked, while a male peer can, as Shaw described, get into a fight and be put in jail the night before a film starts shooting, halting production until he’s bailed out – and not get fired. If a female director pulled a stunt like that, she’d end up in “director jail,” a term for not being able to get work that Shaw said was very real.

Perception of women feeds into the writing process, too. Callie Khouri, writer of Thelma and Louise and creator of Nashville, said during her master class that before Thelma and Louise was made, the first question she’d get in a meeting was: “How are you going to change the ending?” Not “are you?” but “how?” – because what kind of movie ends with the female leads doing something as traditionally masculine as thinking the only way out is down? Khouri’s answer in these meetings was, “I’ll have the car drive faster over the cliff,” and her non-compromise formed what’s become a deeply iconic symbol of female friendship and rebellion. But it doesn’t change the fact that she was asked to make changes, a change that’s hard to envision someone asking of a male writer.

So. You’ve made your film, and Roger Ebert hates it and writes a really sexist review, which is the place Khouri found herself in after co-writing and directing The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood. Reviews from Ebert and others tanked the film at the box office, which wasn’t so surprising to Khouri because “women’s films are denigrated” by critics, many of whom are men. Khouri went further, insinuating that the criticism came from a less than objective place, because the film “wasn’t made for him.” This kind of frustration seems to be part and parcel of the job, but after years in Hollywood, Khouri is able to distinguish who does what. It’s someone’s job to be critical. “Our part of the gig,” she said, “is to say, well, fuck you. It got made.”

It certainly got made. Which feels like the perfect time to segue over to good advice and bright spots that came from panels and workshops at the festival:

Khouri said try – to write, to direct – then finish. It’s simple advice, but many people are nervous to try their hand at something they’ve never done. Waithe attested to this, too: she offered to produce a friend’s film without even knowing what a producer does. This kind of go-with-it attitude sparks against the more gender-enforced norm of wanting to master something before starting up, as founder of Jezebel.com Anna Holmes said is a trait she can’t easily discard. Even more specific than try and finish, Waithe said start with a question that your viewers will engage with; it’ll make your work much more interactive and innovative.

Where you’re working and who you know are integral to making moves in film. Khouri said you have to go to the ballpark to play ball, whether it’s Los Angeles or New York or wherever your particular form of creativity is taking place. Once there, spend time with people who know more than you. Learn from the wisdom that others can offer, and then be willing to play that role once you’ve been around the block. Once you’re in the space, you may have to start as an assistant, then work your way up; that seems to be the route for most of the women who spoke during the festival. There’s something refreshing about such meritocracy, even as it feels like a challenging path with no guarantee.

Lena Waithe
Lena Waithe

 

Having said that, you can always buck the system entirely. During the panel with women experts, there was a lot of discussion about Kickstarter, Indiegogo, and how independent filmmaking are the way to truly run the show. Putting your work and intentions out into the world ahead of an actual film being produced can be a great way to find your audience, involving them ahead of time, but it needs to be done well to stand out. Working with a producer who can help with marketing was one suggestion on how to make this work.

Once your content is in motion, deciding how it’s presented is another important step. The panel discussed Orange is the New Black and how Jenji Kohan created the show with its white female lead as the “trojan horse” to hook mass audiences, then tell stories of a diversity of women characters – older women, queer women, women who are well off, women living on the streets, trans women. Likewise, Shonda Rhimes created Grey’s Anatomy and Meredith Grey with a similar set up, both shows displaying the success in employing these kinds of tactics. This method clearly works, but Waithe said that she prefers to be more straightforward – that her characters are people of color, that they’re queer, and there’s nothing to hide. Creators need to make these decisions, to decide how they want to represent their work.

So much of the representation of women in film feels inorganic to our lived experiences. Waithe attributed that to the phenomenon of men writing female characters, which leads to men “telling stories that are foreign to them.” Indeed, it’s undeniable that a woman directed and/or written film can often be truer than, for example, the way Woody Allen writes women, but more than anything, the statistics tell us that we simply need more women writing and directing more stories. As Holmes put it, it’s “important to mainstream women’s voices,” which will serve the women pushing to get their work produced and seen, and the audiences of women and men who will benefit from more inclusion, onscreen and off.

For more on the Athena Film Festival, read this terrific interview with co-founders Kathryn Kolbert and Melissa Silverstein.

 


Emily U. Hashimoto is a writer interested in pop culture, feminism, sexuality, and its intersections. She’s currently working on a memoir about her women’s studies study abroad trip and a screenplay that she hopes will cement her as the queer Nora Ephron. You can find her at books-feminism-everythingelse or @emilyhash.

 

RIP Roger Ebert

Written by Robin Hitchcock

Film critic Roger Ebert, 19422013
Roger Ebert died at age 70 yesterday, only days after announcing he would be taking a “leave of presence” from his career because his cancer had returned. Hearing the sad news of his passing, those words stand out in my mind: “leave of presence.” Even though Ebert has gone to that great movie theater in the sky, his presence will always be felt by movie lovers, cultural commentators, and writers of all stripes. As someone who not only loves movies and writing but writes about movies, I am feeling the loss of Roger Ebert to my very core.
Watching Siskel & Ebert At the Movies was a Sunday morning ritual in my house growing up. Other people went to church; my family watched a syndicated film review program. And I was indoctrinated as a movie lover. I remember that even as a child I was struck by Ebert’s joyful love of film. His job title may have been “film critic,” but he often seemed to be more of a “film appreciator.” Unlike pop culture’s caricature of critics, from Waldorf and Statler in the Muppets to Jay  Sherman on The Critic, Ebert wasn’t looking for things to complain about. He wanted to like movies. One of Ebert’s core principles of movie reviewing was to evaluate a movie in its own standing: he wouldn’t detract a kids’ movie for being childish or a broad comedy for failing to take on serious social issues. This guy gave four stars to The Karate Kid. He knew a great movie when he saw one. 
Nevertheless, Ebert may be better remembered for his negative reviews, because his biting wit was well-employed in take downs of the worst that the cinema had to offer. Ebert published two books compiling his harshest reviews, I Hated Hated Hated This Movie in 2000 and Your Movie Sucks in 2007. On his television program, many of Ebert’s “thumbs down” takes on film had the air of “I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed.” It took a lot to get Ebert to really let loose the vitriol, but when he did, it was priceless.  (Ebert also published several volumes on The Great Movies, well worth your time!)
While Ebert was able to fully enjoy and celebrate mainstream entertainment, he was still a great advocate for smaller and independent films. He’s hosted a film festival colloquially called EbertFest for the past 15 years, meant to champion “overlooked” films, in later years placing them alongside revisited classics. We here at Bitch Flicks know all to well that women-centric films can be overlooked by Hollywood, and EbertFest gave a select few of them, including Vera Farmiga’s Higher Ground and Lena Dunham’s Tiny Furniture, a second day in the spotlight. I also clearly remember Ebert selecting Eve’s Bayou as the best film of 1997, which is what brought me to watch it, and it is one of my favorite films of all time. 
As a champion of both low-brow but satisfying flicks and brilliant works outside of the mainstream, Roger Ebert’s pure love of movies brought an inclusiveness to his work that is exceptionally appealing to this feminist critic. He would never dismiss a rom-com for being a “chick flick,” and he was an advocate for the smaller women-centric films that so often go overlooked. Ebert’s incredible perspective on the cinematic landscape, his infectious love for movies, and his inimitable writing skills have shaped the last forty years of media criticism. His influence will live on, his memory will inspire and guide us, and film reviews and films themselves will be all the better for it. Thumbs up, Mr. Ebert.

The Legacy of Roger Ebert

By Myrna Waldron

Roger Ebert: 1942-2013
I have been unable to write for a while now. I have several health problems that make me exhausted and achy 24/7 (and have left me permanently disabled), and it’s been very difficult for me to keep up with the demands of blogging on a regular basis. And yet, here was a man who loved to write, and continued to write through three kinds of cancer – cancer that took away his ability to speak and to eat, but not to think and to write. And if he could find the inspiration and drive to write through all of that, then the least I can do is to write about what he meant to me.

When I was young, I had trouble deciding between several careers I wanted to pursue, but most revolved around my natural ability to write. Most of all, I wanted to be a movie critic. I’m so grateful to Bitch Flicks for giving me the opportunity to actually achieve one of my childhood dreams, and I’m also grateful that they’ve been so understanding about my disability. Since I was a kid, there were no Laura Mulveys or Francois Truffauts to influence my thinking yet. There was, instead, Siskel & Ebert. I wanted to write in a newspaper, and go on TV, and talk about movies and how they made me feel. And while Siskel was arguably the more academic of the pair, it was Ebert’s emotionally-based reviews that really touched me.

I loved it when he loved a movie. I loved it when he hated a movie. He was the master of the zinger, and had an incredible sarcastic wit that I have tried hard to emulate in my own movie reviews. I loved how he could analyze films – I have seen Casablanca a thousand times, but his DVD commentary made the film even better for me. I even loved his sheepish appreciation of well-endowed women – he was just a charming man in general.

He was born the exact same day as one of my other idols, Paul McCartney. And his passing today has made me realize how few of my idols I have gotten a chance to meet. Two years ago he was in Toronto and was doing a book signing for his recently published memoir. I wanted to go, but decided not to because I was physically incapable of standing in line for too long. You cannot imagine how I regret that now. He, like so many of my other idols, Jane Austen, Diana Norman, Fred Rogers, Chuck Jones, and Jim Henson, have all passed away before I had a chance to meet them and tell them what they meant to me. If I get a chance to meet another of my idols, I won’t pass it up next time.

I have a very dog-eared copy of his 2nd collection of scathing movie reviews, “Your Movie Sucks.” It has been well-loved, because even his utter scorn for a movie gave me a sorely needed emotional lift. I really should get around to buying his collections of other books. I even loved reading his Glossary of Movie Terms, which was kind of a proto-TV Tropes in that it affectionately documented and poked fun at all the cliches and archetypes we see in the movies way too many times.

I didn’t always agree with Roger Ebert’s reviews. It would be impossible to always agree with them. But they were almost always well-reasoned. I wish I knew if he ever revised his opinion of Dirty Dancing (which he gave a negative review to when it first came out). Hell, I wish I knew if he ever revised his opinion of Crash. His ability to reason out his opinions, even when I disagreed with them, has been a major influence on my approach to media analysis. If you can back up what you’re saying with evidence and reasoning, then any argument you can make is legitimate.

So, for you, Mr. Ebert, I will try to write again. I can’t let my fibromyalgia defeat me, when you didn’t let your cancers defeat you. Even to the very end, you were still writing, still planning, still hoping, still looking to the future. I hope you won’t mind this mostly emotionally-based tribute, as I am sobbing a bit too much to be able to look up relevant quotes right now. I suppose it’s silly that I’m crying over a man I never got a chance to meet. But because he showed us his incredible mind through his writing, I feel that I got to know him. So thank you for your reviews and analysis, Mr. Ebert. You have been an enduring influence on me, and you have left the greatest legacy on movie criticism possible. As you said in the final sentence of your final article: See you at the movies.

———-

Myrna Waldron is a feminist writer/blogger with a particular emphasis on all things nerdy. She lives in Toronto and has studied English and Film at York University. Myrna has a particular interest in the animation medium, having written extensively on American, Canadian and Japanese animation. She also has a passion for Sci-Fi & Fantasy literature, pop culture literature such as cartoons/comics, and the gaming subculture. She maintains a personal collection of blog posts, rants, essays and musings at The Soapboxing Geek, and tweets with reckless pottymouthed abandon at @SoapboxingGeek.