criterionforum.org

swo17 wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:33 am All else being equal, if women make 15% of all films, then random lists of 5 directors will include zero women about 44% of the time, one woman 39% of the time, two women 14% of the time, three women 2% of the time, and four or five women less than 1% of the time.

So roughly that's one woman nominated every other year?

Starting this year, since the previous figure was allegedly 4% per year

If they maintain that level of performance assuming things stay static (you don't actually get heads and tails switching off every round). Historically as she says though female output has been less than 5% which drops things significantly.

NEW YORK TIMES: The 10 Best Actors of 2019

ADAM DRIVER
‘MARRIAGE STORY’

LUPITA NYONG’O
‘US’

JULIANNE MOORE
‘GLORIA BELL’

BRAD PITT
‘ONCE UPON A TIME … IN HOLLYWOOD’ AND ‘AD ASTRA’

ANTONIO BANDERAS
‘PAIN AND GLORY’

JENNIFER LOPEZ
‘HUSTLERS’

SCARLETT JOHANSSON
‘MARRIAGE STORY’

ROBERT DE NIRO
‘THE IRISHMAN’

ELISABETH MOSS
‘HER SMELL’

LEONARDO DICAPRIO
‘ONCE UPON A TIME … IN HOLLYWOOD’

knives wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:12 am If they maintain that level of performance assuming things stay static (you don't actually get heads and tails switching off every round). Historically as she says though female output has been less than 5% which drops things significantly.

At 4%, that would be 1 woman nominated every 5 years. But not even that, right?

felipe wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:07 am

swo17 wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:33 am All else being equal, if women make 15% of all films, then random lists of 5 directors will include zero women about 44% of the time, one woman 39% of the time, two women 14% of the time, three women 2% of the time, and four or five women less than 1% of the time.

So roughly that's one woman nominated every other year?

Actually for any given four-year period the expectation is that you would have three female nominees (the expectation every year is .15 x 5 = .75, and chance of zero in one year is [1-15%]^5)

Seems like this is a pretty bizarre conversation for a bunch of men to be having, using math to try to justify obvious institutional sexism as though it's some kind of game to the people who deserve more recognition for their work, but I'll be polite enough to leave it there

Which is your point? 1) You disagree with the math 2) You think the 15% figure itself is indicative of an institutional bias 3) You just find the focus on numbers insensitive

1) If 15% were considered a fair representation for women to show that we had overcome this institutional bias, I am merely demonstrating that there would still be a lot of years with no female nominees, and it's scientifically flawed to paint a single observation like that as proving that the awards aren't keeping up with representation, and also socially irresponsible to rile people up without an understanding of how simple probability theory works

2) I might agree, though I have no idea what the ideal percentage would be (I doubt it's 51%)

3) Fair point

I'd say 3, mixed with an unmentioned element of there being plenty more female directed films with a bent toward recognition in this arena than in the general field of all films being made within the studio system, etc - including a few this year that are in contention for recognition. In other words - it's less about letting a long printout come out of a computer telling you when to let the gals have one, and more about reading the room and understanding how important representation is when there is work that is worthy of it, which there is this year, which is what was being commented on. If it wasn't important to people, it wouldn't be so noticeable and so bemoaned when something like this happens.

And if awards season were all about merit and rewarding the very best work, it would look very different to begin with, so it's not as though there's no wiggle room. It's just a matter of having a fair shot, which things are moving quickly in the direction of but clearly not quite quickly enough. Wasn't a personal attack on anybody, more surprise that the immediate interpretation of that quote was "Oh yeah?? Then make more movies and you're bound to get one past the goalie!" when it's already clear that the vast majority of films made each year across the board have no chance at this sort of recognition, so those sorts of statistics don't necessarily factor into some analysis of why this would occur. I thought Joker was swell, but man, Todd Phillips got nominated

mfunk9786 wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:00 am I thought Joker was swell, but man, Todd Phillips got nominated

Like with the Golden Lion, I'm totally okay with the Globes using their meager influence to spit in the eye of Film Twitter. I saw one critic (someone verified and writing for a decently visible website) wondering how Phillips could have been nominated over "Tom motherfuckin' Hooper," which just says it all. (Plus, you know, Phillips' movie is better than those of half the directors in that tweet.) To me, the biggest sin of this Globes round is neglecting to throw anything Euphoria's way, and I expected that.

Honestly given the Globes' history are any of the female artists mentioned by the article likely to have been nominated? I mean from a pure politics standpoint. We don't want to mistake the Globes with caring about quality.

I'm surprised Hustlers isn't getting more recognition. I have yet to see it, but a female-empowerment story written, directed, produced and starred by women that managed to be both a hit with critics and at the box office, I thought that would be a shoe-in in 2019.

As a regular defender of caring about the nominations and results of the Academy Awards against the annual wave of “Who gives a shit?” takes, let me just say: who gives a shit about the Golden Globes?

felipe wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:01 pm I'm surprised Hustlers isn't getting more recognition. I have yet to see it, but a female-empowerment story written, directed, produced and starred by women that managed to be both a hit with critics and at the box office, I thought that would be a shoe-in in 2019.

I thought it was merely OK, Jennifer Lopez is the only one around whom there is any awards buzz. A few reviews I’ve read rightly pointed out that last year’s Support the Girls did a similar thing better.

felipe wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:16 am NEW YORK TIMES: The 10 Best Actors of 2019

Just wanted to link to the Times feature, which is really well put together and features new interviews and quality writing from A.O. Scott and Wesley Morris on the selected actors.

The Curious Sofa wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:18 pm

felipe wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:01 pm I'm surprised Hustlers isn't getting more recognition. I have yet to see it, but a female-empowerment story written, directed, produced and starred by women that managed to be both a hit with critics and at the box office, I thought that would be a shoe-in in 2019.

I thought it was merely OK, Jennifer Lopez is the only one around whom there is any awards buzz. A few reviews I’ve read rightly pointed out that last year’s Support the Girls did a similar thing better.

Agreed here, but Lopez winning would be a-ok with me, she carries the film alongside some actors who aren't even close to being in her league, she's excellent in it.

DarkImbecile wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:39 pm

felipe wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:16 am NEW YORK TIMES: The 10 Best Actors of 2019

Just wanted to link to the Times feature, which is really well put together and features new interviews and quality writing from A.O. Scott and Wesley Morris on the selected actors.

Very glad to see Elisabeth Moss' performance in Her Smell recognized in this feature.

felipe wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:16 am NEW YORK TIMES: The 10 Best Actors of 2019

ADAM DRIVER
‘MARRIAGE STORY’

LUPITA NYONG’O
‘US’

JULIANNE MOORE
‘GLORIA BELL’

BRAD PITT
‘ONCE UPON A TIME … IN HOLLYWOOD’ AND ‘AD ASTRA’

ANTONIO BANDERAS
‘PAIN AND GLORY’

JENNIFER LOPEZ
‘HUSTLERS’

SCARLETT JOHANSSON
‘MARRIAGE STORY’

ROBERT DE NIRO
‘THE IRISHMAN’

ELISABETH MOSS
‘HER SMELL’

LEONARDO DICAPRIO
‘ONCE UPON A TIME … IN HOLLYWOOD’

Pardon me but having a single performance in a foreign language seems myopic to me. I would hope at least NYT should have a more inclusive view of cinema.

To be honest these are American awards and I don't think we should be dissapointed that most of them go to American made films. I mean technically if it were up to me the BP nominees would mostly just be Foreign films.
But that's like expecting the European Film Awards to nominate Tarantino.

A listicle by NYT is not an award. At least not to me, let alone an American one.

Nasir007 wrote: Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:35 am A listicle by NYT is not an award. At least not to me, let alone an American one.

Where do you think New York is? Also regardless of whether we are talking about an award or a list, American film culture (American culture in general) is by and large very isolationist. It's upsetting but it's easier to just ignore 90:% of the lists and awards that pop up this time of year. At least that's what ive been doing the past 20 years or so.

Film Comment Top 10

1. PARASITE (Bong Joon Ho)
2. THE IRISHMAN (Martin Scorsese)
3. ONCE UPON A TIME... IN HOLLYWOOD (Quentin Tarantino)
4. TRANSIT (Christian Petzold)
5. ATLANTICS (Mati Diop)
6. THE SOUVENIR (Joanna Hogg)
7. HIGH LIFE (Claire Denis)
8. ASH IS PUREST WHITE (Jia Zhangke)
9. PAIN AND GLORY (Pedro Almodóvar)
10. UNCUT GEMS (Safdies)

Good list. The Top 2 and even their order were a foregone conclusion. Even split between foreign language and english language films. 3 films directed by women. Portrait of a Lady on Fire missing is shocking! Maybe too late breaking but I can't imagine any of their voters had not seen it. Almodovar is a bit low as well. Petzold continues to be a new favorite - Barbar finished at 16, Phoenix at 8 and now Transit at 4. Next time he will be runner-up and then win the poll!
My top 10 shares 3 films with this top 10 out of the 6 I have seen. I should perhaps take that as a recommendation and catch up with the other 4.

Yes, good list, meets all the quotas

Nasir007 wrote: Wed Dec 11, 2019 5:30 am Portrait of a Lady on Fire missing is shocking! Maybe too late breaking but I can't imagine any of their voters had not seen it.

The Film Comment critics have definitely seen this movie and have been raving it about it on their podcast since Cannes. My guess is that it will turn up somewhere in slots 11-15, which will be revealed tomorrow, probably alongside Long Day's Journey Into Night and Marriage Story.

Screen Actors Guild nominees (the first nominating body with real overlap with the Academy):

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role:
Christian Bale (“Ford v Ferrari”)
Leonardo DiCaprio (“Once Upon a Time in Hollywood”)
Adam Driver (“Marriage Story”)
Taron Egerton (“Rocketman”)
Joaquin Phoenix (“Joker”)

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role:
Cynthia Erivo (“Harriet”)
Scarlett Johansson (“Marriage Story”)
Lupita Nyong’o (“Us”)
Charlize Theron (“Bombshell”)
Renée Zellweger (“Judy”)

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role:
Jamie Foxx (“Just Mercy”)
Tom Hanks (“A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood”)
Al Pacino (“The Irishman”)
Joe Pesci (“The Irishman”)
Brad Pitt (“Once Upon a Time in Hollywood”)

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role:
Laura Dern (“Marriage Story”)
Scarlett Johansson (“Jojo Rabbit”)
Nicole Kidman (“Bombshell”)
Jennifer Lopez (“Hustlers”)
Margot Robbie (“Bombshell”)

Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture:
“Bombshell” (Lionsgate)
“The Irishman” (Netflix)
“Jojo Rabbit” (Fox)
“Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” (Sony)
“Parasite” (Neon)

Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Motion Picture:
“Avengers: Endgame”
“Ford v Ferrari”
“The Irishman”
“Joker”
“Once Upon a Time in Hollywood”

Parasite is only the second foreign language film to be nominated for Best Ensemble, the first being La vita è bella