British cinema: shockingly white and male
Sept 20, 2017 20:51:47 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2017 20:51:47 GMT -5
Good morning to everyone reading 'The Third' today! I trust that all is well with all of you! 'The Guardian' leads with some editorial comment arguing that British cinema: shockingly white and male.
'The Guardian' concludes that The UK film industry is full of talent – but the figures show its stories and perspectives are limited. It’s time for change, Uncle Henry! Due to unprecedented demand from around the world, everyone reading 'The Third' is cordially invited to BFI Southbank (NFT1) promptly at 13:50 on Saturday 23 September 2017 to see a screening of Lawrence of Arabia. Join us all for a drink and a meal afterwards!
"Given the brilliance of female British talent in film, it is sometimes possible to imagine that the British film industry is well on its way to a state of gender parity. There are actors too numerous to mention, and, though fewer in number, directors too of the likes of Gurinder Chadha, Sophie Fiennes, Andrea Arnold, Lynne Ramsay and Clio Barnard. But the numbers, for the first time rigorously crunched by a team at the British Film Institute (BFI), tell a different story. British film, the figures show, is in a parlous state when it comes to representing the stories of women, to drawing on the perspectives of women, and to harnessing the talents of women behind and in front of the camera.
Female actors, for example, account for only 30% of the casts of the British films made so far this year. When the BFI looked at the overall proportion since 1913, it found the figure was virtually the same, at 32%: no progress, then, and possibly even a backsliding. The figures for women in crews are even grimmer. Only 5% of those working in music are women; only 6% of those working in photography or sound are women. It is true that the overall proportion of women behind the camera is gradually rising (34% in 2017 as opposed to 16% over the years 1913 to 2017). But progress is still painfully slow and women are more often found in what the prime minister might call “girl jobs” (hair, makeup, costumes, publicity) than “boy jobs” (director, director of photography).
Film is important precisely because it is such a powerful and compelling medium; because it is an immersive mass artform that invades our dreams and captivates our imaginations like no other. The stories told on the cinematic screen become the storylines of our inner lives: and so it matters to all of us, and to society in general, if those stories reflect the perspectives and bias of only a limited part of that society. Cinema, like the novel, gives us the chance to step into another’s shoes for a while, to understand lives different from our own: it gives us the opportunity for empathy. But it also offers us the chance to write the scripts of our own futures. In this context, even apparently trivial decisions about casting are important. In British films between 1985 and the present, only 15% of actors cast as unnamed doctors have been women (who have, on the other hand, accounted for 94% of actors cast as unnamed prostitutes).
The BFI’s stark enumeration of the facts provides an unassailable evidence base – both of the problem itself, and of the problem’s stubborn persistence over time. Now must come action. The BFI itself must be ever more vigorous in setting benchmarks for diversity in its portfolio of supported films. It should look to the powerful example of the Swedish Film Institute, which set gender parity as an institutional goal – and saw the proportion of its supported movies directed by women rise from 29% in 2006 to 49% in 2016, with similar uplifts seen among writers and producers.
The BFI, in short, must lead by example, showing the purely commercial sector that passivity in the face of such obvious and extreme inequality is unacceptable. As the actor and producer David Oyelowo said in a powerful oration at the BFI last year, the solution to the problem of diversity is for individuals – those who have reached the point in their careers when they have the power to make decisions – to exercise choices that make a difference to the status quo. He himself has made a series of decisions to work with women directors, very often women directors of colour – including Mira Nair, Amma Asante and Ava DuVernay.
Film companies, similarly, must look to their staff, and understand that if they want to tell brilliant, fresh stories they must draw on all parts of British society. Diversity must be “baked into the foundation of where the ideas come from”, as Oyelowo has said. Now that the facts have been laid out, vague protestations that the situation is gradually improving are insufficient. Changes must be made. We will have a better cinema for it."
Female actors, for example, account for only 30% of the casts of the British films made so far this year. When the BFI looked at the overall proportion since 1913, it found the figure was virtually the same, at 32%: no progress, then, and possibly even a backsliding. The figures for women in crews are even grimmer. Only 5% of those working in music are women; only 6% of those working in photography or sound are women. It is true that the overall proportion of women behind the camera is gradually rising (34% in 2017 as opposed to 16% over the years 1913 to 2017). But progress is still painfully slow and women are more often found in what the prime minister might call “girl jobs” (hair, makeup, costumes, publicity) than “boy jobs” (director, director of photography).
Film is important precisely because it is such a powerful and compelling medium; because it is an immersive mass artform that invades our dreams and captivates our imaginations like no other. The stories told on the cinematic screen become the storylines of our inner lives: and so it matters to all of us, and to society in general, if those stories reflect the perspectives and bias of only a limited part of that society. Cinema, like the novel, gives us the chance to step into another’s shoes for a while, to understand lives different from our own: it gives us the opportunity for empathy. But it also offers us the chance to write the scripts of our own futures. In this context, even apparently trivial decisions about casting are important. In British films between 1985 and the present, only 15% of actors cast as unnamed doctors have been women (who have, on the other hand, accounted for 94% of actors cast as unnamed prostitutes).
The BFI’s stark enumeration of the facts provides an unassailable evidence base – both of the problem itself, and of the problem’s stubborn persistence over time. Now must come action. The BFI itself must be ever more vigorous in setting benchmarks for diversity in its portfolio of supported films. It should look to the powerful example of the Swedish Film Institute, which set gender parity as an institutional goal – and saw the proportion of its supported movies directed by women rise from 29% in 2006 to 49% in 2016, with similar uplifts seen among writers and producers.
The BFI, in short, must lead by example, showing the purely commercial sector that passivity in the face of such obvious and extreme inequality is unacceptable. As the actor and producer David Oyelowo said in a powerful oration at the BFI last year, the solution to the problem of diversity is for individuals – those who have reached the point in their careers when they have the power to make decisions – to exercise choices that make a difference to the status quo. He himself has made a series of decisions to work with women directors, very often women directors of colour – including Mira Nair, Amma Asante and Ava DuVernay.
Film companies, similarly, must look to their staff, and understand that if they want to tell brilliant, fresh stories they must draw on all parts of British society. Diversity must be “baked into the foundation of where the ideas come from”, as Oyelowo has said. Now that the facts have been laid out, vague protestations that the situation is gradually improving are insufficient. Changes must be made. We will have a better cinema for it."
'The Guardian' concludes that The UK film industry is full of talent – but the figures show its stories and perspectives are limited. It’s time for change, Uncle Henry! Due to unprecedented demand from around the world, everyone reading 'The Third' is cordially invited to BFI Southbank (NFT1) promptly at 13:50 on Saturday 23 September 2017 to see a screening of Lawrence of Arabia. Join us all for a drink and a meal afterwards!