Have you read this interview with New York Times' film critic Manohla Dargis on Jezebel.com?
In it, Dargis has some strong words for and about the Hollywood men’s club.
The entire interview is worth reading and forwarding, but here’s an excerpt that struck me:
On whether there's an essential difference between male-made and female-made movies: Flaubert wrote Madame Bovary. That's all we need to say about that. But I do think as 51 percent of the population we should be given a chance… It's very boring to watch the same people coming from a certain kind of background make the same kinds of movies.
That last sentence is why I don’t see many recent releases. Honestly, I don’t care if a film is directed by a man or a woman, black, white, or other. What I care about is if the director has some kind of vision.
The problem is, when the bulk of the films that get a wide release (and big marketing budgets) are made and distributed and exhibited by a group of straight, white, American men from middle class backgrounds, that vision is going to be wearisome. (And yes, I'm a straight, white, American man from a middle class background.)
This is not to say I’m for celebrating something just because it’s a novelty. I’m not. I want the film to stand up as a film. I've seen too many awful films at festivals that are screened because the filmmaker is part of an underrepresented demographic. I don't want to sit through those films. Just let me see something made by a good cinematic storyteller with a unique perspective. They're out there, I know they are. I even know some of them.
That is what cinema needs if it hopes to avoid boring its audience to death. Put the CGI down for a minute, boys, and let other people tell their stories.
