This totally milquetoast-looking dude is director William Friedkin. Friedkin is considered a genius filmmaker in many quarters, having directed such classics as The Exorcist, The French Connection, Rules of Engagement, and on and on – you can see his IMDB here. Friedkin turned 80 years old this year, which means he’s pretty much representative of the Motion Picture Academy these days: old, white, male, with his best work several decades past. The reason we’re talking about Friedkin is because he gave an interview to Cinephilia Beyond this week which has raised a few hackles. In between some blunt assessments about the state of filmmaking today, the proliferation of comic-book movies and the rise of streaming services, Friedkin offered his take on the issue of gender and racial diversity in Hollywood, specifically for directors. He went on and on and it’s like a case study of a dude mansplaining meritocracy for white dudes.
I’ve been in Hollywood for fifty years and I have never met an executive of a television or movie company, or a talent agency, that was prejudiced against people of different colors or against women. I’ve never met anyone. Now, why there are more men directing films than women, I can’t answer that. But it’s not because of prejudice. I think the very best director of action and other films is a woman named Kathryn Bigelow. She’s a great filmmaker, period. It’s a question like why there are more white basketball or football players in America. Most of them are black, or from another country. Why is that? The only answer to that is that they compete and that they’re better! Wherever women can compete, they get the jobs. I don’t know anyone who’s prejudiced against African-Americans or women, I’ve just never seen it. Why is that there are more black athletes? Because they’re better. So what should we do? Should we get some legislation or pass some rules that there have to be more white players? No, you can’t do that! Why are the greatest painters that ever lived mostly white men? I don’t know! Women are free to paint. But you cannot pass diversity laws in an art form.
…I’m not a woman, or an African-American, so I can’t speak to that experience except to say that I know it’s an open playing field. And today there are many, many women in the entertainment business here who are in charge of everything. You know, my wife was the head of a studio thirty years ago, and ten years ago she ran two studios. Why? Not because she was a woman, but because of merit.
…I have never heard of a man running a studio, talent agency or a network saying, oh, I don’t want to hire a woman for that job. But women have to put themselves forward. I mean, just today, or yesterday, a law was passed in America saying that women will now be present in all areas of combat in the military. There will be women on the battlefield, if there is one, equal to men. So that, among many other things, means there has been progress for women… If you’re good enough, you’re gonna work. All this other stuff to me is just smoke screen.
…I had people work on my films who are African-American, who are women, and not because they are African-American or women, but based on what I thought was their merit. I don’t know anyone that wouldn’t do that. Anyone who would do that, anyone who would deny a talented woman, or a talented member of a racial minority, a job, is just an a–hole, and not fit to be in a position to hire. Are there assholes in every business in every industry, in every country? You bet. But that doesn’t mean it’s going to be cured by some kind of diversity rule.
First of all, I don’t know of anyone who is seriously asking for any kind of legislation to be passed to “force” studios to hire more women or more people of color. What we’ve been asking for is awareness of the problem and the promise to work towards creating a Hollywood that is more diverse across the board, with directors, writers, actors and producers coming from many different backgrounds and races, etc. As for the meritocracy argument… merit only works with access and opportunity, and we’ve seen time and time again, old white men are the keepers of 99% of the access and opportunity in Hollywood. They’ve created a self-sustaining bubble, a circular argument that says “art is merit-based, I know that from my years of working with mostly white men who do a good job, and if women or African-Americans could do a good job, I would have heard about it and they would have been hired, therefore there are no quality women or African-Americans to hire for this position.”
Just know, as we’re getting knee-deep into the Oscar season: this year’s prospective Best Director nominees are yet another example of the utter sausage party of the Directors Guild. There are no “serious” female contenders for any director awards this year, and the directors of color (like Spike Lee and Ryan Coogler) will likely not be considered for anything (Spike because people hate the message of Chi-raq and Coogler because people think he just made a really good Rocky remake). The only non-Caucasian director nominated this year will probably be Alejandro Innaritu. And last year, when the Academy and DGA had the chance to nominate Ava DuVernay BASED ON MERIT, they declined to do so. Why? Because many of those same old white men were pissed that she openly discussed her own experiences as an African-American woman in the industry, and she dared to talk about hot-button, modern racial issues.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
It really must be difficult to bend in such a way that your head is constantly so far up your a** that you can’t see anything. Well done Mr. Friedken
Well done, Snazzy.
Keep talking all you aging white men, about how you’re not bigots. We know the truth. The longer you talk the worse you sound.
Re Ava: Honestly, I saw that movie and it did NOT deserve a nom, it was good, but not great so I was glad it didn’t get nominated.
It was awesome and she deserved a nomination.
ita, it reminded me of a tv movie, pretty ordinary
now ordinary movies made by white men get nominated all the time, but i cant get behind the idea that she was robbed of a nom for something id never watch again
I couldnt even read the whole thing. His ignorance is astounding.
Lol. Yea, I can’t get too upset, he’s 80, and there’s a possibility he may have a cognitive problem. There we’re so many blatant contradictions.
But let me address a couple quotes of his: 1) “Wherever women (minorities)can compete, they get the jobs.”
That’s the problem Friedkin and that’s what Equal Opportunity Laws have tried to address. Equal opportunity policies exist to ‘even the playing field,’ and enable people to have just the opportunity to compete. Before the ‘diversity policies,’ that he is so opposed to, that was NOT taking place on any level. Even with the EEOC that doesn’t mean companies are obliged to hire, it only means qualified minority applicants should be interviewed and at least get a foot in the door. Before the EEOC, the applications were ignored, balled up and thrown out – much of the time.
He’s an idiot and speaking to the current lawsuit the ACLU has waged against Hollywood for having women occupy less than 10% of high level positions on set and in studios. He’s protecting the status quo. Saying “who, me?” Is not an answer when confronted with facts that prove racist and sexist hiring practices.
well said. lol
I agree about the BS that is meritocracy when many women and POC never get to set foot in the door to prove their worth. In addition, he’s talking about over prejudice; but what about latent bias? What about the conditioning all of us have received (through media, life experiences, families, etc.) that makes us subconsciously biased against people who are unlike us (thereby, in the case of wealthy, privileged white men, never giving “others” a proper chance)?
It’s true in Hollywood and elsewhere. Even in the absence of overt discrimination, you have situations where two people work just as hard, produce as much, but the powers that be only notice the one who “looks” like what a successful director (insert other professions here) looks like: a white guy. I work in a liberal, public sector environment, and it’s still true where I work. We applaud the white guy in meetings for basically repeating a point two other people already made.
So true. I work in a non-profit dedicated to helping the disenfranchised of NYC, and yet despite the diverse makeup of the employees and it’s mission, it’s still a good old boys club. If you aren’t straight, white or went to an Ivy League at my job, you don’t have a chance.
There was a study that submitted resumes for science interns that were the very same except in some cases the resume had a man’s name and in others a woman’s name. The women were less likely to be offered a job and when they were it was at a much lower salary. The people doing the hiring thought the male candidate was more competent despite the resumes being identical.
What was depressing though was that women making hiring decisions held the same biases men did. So, it probably isn’t even fair to blame old white men. Even women and people of color can hold biases against their own meaning white men can much more easily get a foot in the door because they’re seen as more capable. It’s more a problem with overall societal attitudes and biases that people often don’t even realize they hold.
Bettyrose – this totally. Or having been at a place for over a decade, telling the new white male boss that we’ve been through this version of the playbook before, only to be told THIS time it will be DIFFERENT. Or being patronized by some administrative type who wasn’t even born yet when I started there-
Exactly. Whenever I hear that crap I now point to Viola Davis’ speech instead of wasting my breath
What a load of crap. He has NEVER, not once in his little white man life, met a single solitary person who was prejudiced against women or people of color. Don’t bother to even say another word because your pants are on fire. Liar.
80 years, and never, not once have you seen prejudice against a person of another race and women? Yeeeah, there’s not enough side eyes in the world for his bullsh!t.
P.s. the 1950-60’s says hi, privileged white man.
+1
I literally bursted into laughter after reading his comments. The absurdity of it all is just mind-blowing.
I couldn’t read past the first few sentences. What a self-important, overweening asshole.
Reminds me of my trotskyist ex-boyfriend.
He lost me after his first two sentences. There was no point in reading more.
And all people are treated equally in “his world”.
Maybe he hasn’t… mostly because of the aforementioned condition mentioned by Snazzy on the first comment.
Also, is anyone else watching Master of None? The “Indians on TV” episode hit it right on the head. The show is amazingly funny while still providing strong commentary about society.
I totally binged on that one. Loved it!
Excellent show, and I love that it’s addressing some heavy topics like that.
He seems to be talking about hiring decisions for high level positions though. It really can seem like hiring decisions are made purely on merit. The few women and people of color who do find success become “evidence” that there isn’t a problem with prejudice. But that’s because the problem starts at the very bottom. There are barriers to entry for women and people of color that most people at the top don’t notice. But a woman or person of color who somehow manages to get past those barriers can find success. So he could be telling the truth. He just isn’t considering the fact that equal access to opportunities simply doesn’t exist.
Man, I’m surprised this guy didn’t just say Rosa Parks overreacted.
I know of at least 2 women who have been told outright that they would not get the promotion they deserve simply because they were women. These women were on a career path to become producers. Their boss knew that if the women complained, they would be black balled from the industry and knew these women desperately wanted to become producers and wouldnt complain. 1 of these women quit and went on to become a pretty successful producer somewhere else. The other woman left the industry to pursue something else. To say sexism or racism doesnt exist in the industry is to say tge moon is made of cheese
“No prejudice” says the privileged, wealthy, white man.
To quote Tina Fey’s Liz Lemon:
“I’d roll my eyes but my doctor told me if I kept doing that my ocular muscles could spasm and eject my eyeballs.”
lol
An open playing field? A meritocracy that consistently finds only white men worthy? I’d be laughing if I weren’t crying.
I know.
“…I have never heard of a man running a studio, talent agency or a network saying, oh, I don’t want to hire a woman for that job”
No they don’t say it, they just don’t hire them, same for different races.
” If you’re good enough, you’re gonna work. All this other stuff to me is just smoke screen.”
So it’s THEIR fault for not being good enough, gotcha, how convenient that all the good enough ones happen to 90% of the time be rich white men. How does that explain men getting paid more than female stars who had more screen time, is it because they had a penis and were therefore good enough?
This is so GET OFF MY LAWWWN! it’s almost a parody.
That entire comment made no sense. Like none.
Just wow, yep the problem is lack of talent not prejudice yeah ok.
William Friedkin, you’re an idiot. The lack of diversity is not because of prejudice? I hadn’t heard that one, before.
I’ve seen the Sony emails and if skin color doesn’t have anything to do with actors and actresses not being considered for roles, then, what was all that about?
A lot of time studios don’t want people of color or women in lead roles because there’s a perception moviegoers aren’t interested in their stories. White male leads are thought to be better for business. I’ve heard that for foreign export, white male leads are preferred. That seems to be a case of studios playing it safe from a business perspective. It’s the racism and sexism of moviegoers around the world that causes that to happen.
Hollywood has quite a lot to do with engineering social biases so to blame audiences is a copout by studio execs. Yes, racism exists everywhere, but instead of just accepting it for the status quo, Hollywood should work to change how people are represented in film. We are starting to see some of that change happening now (slowly but surely) and old farts like Friedkin won’t have a forum much longer to hear his very limited and idiotic defenses for old Hollywood prejudices.
The Walking Dead has a very diverse cast. It’s one of the most highly view televisions shows the past few years. The Fast and Furious film series is another example of success with a diverse cast. Saying people want only stories about white people (because money) is a very lazy analysis (looking at you Ridley Scott) and has been proven to be completely unfounded. Lets also look at the whitewashed movies of late that should have had diverse casts and actually bombed or did terrible at the box office: Aloha, Pan, and Exodus: Gods and Kings (and probably soon to be that terrible Gods of Egypt movie). Diversity does convert to actual profit, and hopefully we’ll see more and more of that. Also with films like Beasts of No Nation, and to claim there are not interesting stories to tell about other races is just so ignorant. This guy needs to retire and shut his trap.
This is OT, but also related. Last year, there was wall to wall outrage, on this forum and others, that there were no other ethnicities nominated in the directors’ category despite the presence of Alejandro Innaritu. When I pointed him out, I was schooled on the fact that he is the wrong type of ethnicity, being white and all, nevermind that he is Mexican.
Today you are writing a piece on diversity and bringing up Alejandro Innaritu as the sole example of an ethnic person with potential for nomination, and i’m completely confused again.
Why is he the example this year, but he wasn’t last year? This is a genuine question because I really don’t understand the difference. If he didn’t fit the discussion last year, why does he fit this year? Isn’t it the same problem all over again if it turns out that no one else is nominated except him?
I don’t remember that discussion last year. I’d say Innaritu is ethnic; as proven by his being “othered” by Sean Penn and his comment about getting a “green card” last year.
Every post on the lack of diversity (or Ava or SELMA) last year failed to mention Alejandro. It was wall to wall pointing out the lack of diversity.
I mentioned Alehandro in the comments section of one post, and was schooled. It was made very, VERY clear to me that a white Mexican couldn’t possibly be thought of as disadvantaged in the race. I was told the same thing when I brought up Alfonso Cuaron for GRAVITY.
I am commenting today because I thought I’d understood the nuace expressed, yet here we are invoking Alejandro Innaritu who wasn’t considered an ethnic minority in any discussions last year to point that people objected when I brought up his name.
BTW, when Sean Penn made that crass remark, many people came out for Alejandro, but it was still with a caveat of he is a white mexican and not someone who might be regarded as an ethnic person.
And so to today’s post where I’m confused all over again.
Actually LAK is right. I remember thinking the same thing last year when I was reading all the posts about the lack of diversity at the Oscars. eternal side eye – I’m confused by the end of your comment, so the achievements of priyanka and Robert are less noteworthy because you feel they’re too light?? Isn’t that In and of itself discriminating?
Yep, I definitely remember this.
@Akc7
I guess the question you have to ask and answer is if you have a group of 100 people and of those 100 only the people (even if they are different genders and ethnicities) who are the lightest are consistently rewarded is it discrimination to point that out?
I began my comment with the idea that the closest you are to white and male the better your success and exposure for a reason. Even when it comes to minorities we see over and over that the lightest skin minorities are favored. It doesn’t take away from their achievements because for a long time NO minorities were given accolades or certain positions of work, but we’re far enough in human history to see a very clear and consistent pattern that discriminates against darker skinned individuals.
I can’t speak for what happened last year but I will say when you hear people say or imply that someone is the wrong kind of ethnic it’s not an attempt to discredit someone but to be honest.
Let’s be real.
The closer in relation you are to white and male the better things are for you. Opportunity, exposure, etc. When you see people not impressed by someone’s achievements despite being a minority it’s because in every group there’s an ‘acceptable’ hue of minority that tends to get the few awards and attention distributed.
In the black community it’s Halle and Beyonce. For all that black women come in multitudes of skin tone, hair texture, and physical features we constantly find ourselves facing a media that praises a small percentage of women that represent an even smaller percentage of us. After a while you’re not impressed when another light skin, thin nosed, European featured black woman wins.
Conversely when I think of Latino directors I have to admit the two that come to immediate mind are him and Robert Rodriguez both of whom favor white. Likewise despite how happy I am for Priyanka Chopra I have to admit her getting a show with her looks isn’t quite as huge a stepping stone as if someone much darker (say Mindy Kaling (but that also comes with it’s own flaws)) was given the same job.
I think the issue with that argument is that it’s a really easy way to dismiss agency and achievement. Innaritu is a gifted director who deserves accolades. And he IS a person of color. Yes, he’s “light” (although he certainly couldn’t pass for white from the pictures I’ve seen). But I think the issue is that it’s not a zero sum game and it’s not tokenism. They don’t get to say, “Okay, we nominated Innaritu, we filled the POC quota for this year.” His inclusion doesn’t justify DuVernay’s exclusion. A lot of the critiques thrown at Selma were ridiculous. She was taken to task over “historical accuracy” while how many white, male directors are permitted to butcher history and not get criticized? That’s what I think many people took issue with – she was held to a different standard. Innaritu created a wonderful work of fiction that wasn’t held out as historical in the least (and, let’s be honest, it wasn’t a POC-centric film either). DuVernay created a historical piece that centered upon POC, so she was up against a much different set of standards.
@eternal side eye I understand the premise of your statement and agree with it to an extent. The issue I take with it is in a way you’re taking away accomplishment from someone based on how close to “white” they are. Should Priyanka Chopra feel less proud that she is an Indian woman headlining a major network prime time drama because she is considered beautiful and lighter than (your example) Mindy? Should she feel less Indian? Should Alejandro Innaritu feel less proud to be an Oscar winning Mexican man because you feel he is too acceptably white skinned despite his thick accent and Mexican pride? It’s almost like erasing their cultural identity because of their skin tone, which is entirely discriminating. We can’t get to a place where diversity is commonplace when the little bit of diversity finally happening is criticized for not being diverse to your standards. we should celebrate what is happening in order to positively reinforce the idea that diversity shouldn’t be something that is asked for, it should simply be commonplace
Eternal side-eye: I understand your point as far as shades of skin tone and how society treats them, but that wasn’t what I was getting at.
And to be clear, your comment was the explanation given to me as to why Alejandro couldn’t possibly qualify as an ethnic person in a conversation about diversity at the Oscars despite his coming from an ethnic background.
I suppose my confusion lies in the fact that he identifies strongly as a Mexican (why wouldn’t he?) and self identifies as such (again, why wouldn’t he?) as do other Mexican/South American directors.
So on that note, taking into consideration both points of view, why is he the example this year, but wasn’t last year?
Either he is from an ethnic background, no matter the shade of his skin, or he is not. Which means he is qualifies or not for a discussion on diversity in the modern era – drawing a line at historical criteria for ethnicities.
SAM: I really appreciate your comment, and I *did* understand that point.
What I didn’t and don’t understand is why in all the diversity discussions, any attempt to mention Alejandro’s achievement was shut down because he is a white (or light skinned). No matter how often I pointed out that as a Mexican he qualified for acknowledgement.
So today, I ask, why does he qualify this year?
I think much of the difference was that Innaritu, while he is a POC himself, did not create a POC-centric film. Let’s be real here: Birdman had a nearly all white cast and did not deal with any racial topics. Selma was not only directed by a POC, it was POC-centric, dealing in racial topics and ideas. I think that was what people meant. Innaritu made an excellent film, but I think people wanted to see not just a director of color, but the greater desire was to see a director win for a film that prioritized POC and their stories. At least, that’s how I read it. It’s a positive that a Latino man got up on that stage, and you won’t hear me dispute that. But I think people are frustrated that we still don’t have a POC winning for directing a film that speaks to POC. That’s the rub.
SAM: you miss my point though you make a very good one.
And i’m afraid your interpretation wasn’t the prevailing argument posited.
I was told in no uncertain terms that he didn’t qualify as POC.
As far as his achievement goes, irrespective of content of his productions, Mexican artsists aren’t rewarded by the academy.
IIRC, and I haven’t googled this, Alejandro and Alfonso were the first Mexicans to ever be nominated and or awarded by the academy in that category. I felt that needed to be celebrated, but apparently they didn’t qualify as POC and therefore their achievement didn’t qualify for a diversity discussion.
@LAK
Unfortunately I can only offer a general explanation of what people are saying when we discuss lighter skinned minority individuals and the disproportionate awards given to them. I can’t speak specifically for what any commenter had in mind when explaining last year or what Kaiser may consider the difference from this year to next.
@KC7
Priyanka should absolutely NOT feel less proud, but I also think it’s disingenious to not admit biases exist in society and they favor specific members of society. Just as multiple studies have been done to reveal society’s general bias towards white men we can also see a bias towards minority members of society that favor being white. I think it’d be more unrealistic to admit this doesn’t exist especially when changing an aspect of a person (say making a name more ethnic, hair natural rather than relaxed, skin tone darker) for scientific study has revealed how differently the SAME individual can be treated.
I just don’t see how it benefits us to not look at the majority of ethnic and minority individuals given awards and praise in Hollywood and not see a recurring and damaging pattern. How does it benefit diversity IF (and I say this to be blunt because I am actually really happy with our strides in having more diverse television, I love Quantico btw) if all our diversity favors only a small segment of our population consistently? If an Indian girl only sees women like Priyanka consistently praised and she does not have that skin tone then how is she actually helped?
The point of diversity is it should be DIVERSE. If you find all your ‘diverse’ individuals all have a strange habit of being light skin you might want to ask why. Priyanka should be proud but also realize there’s likely a bit of luck that benefits her that an equally talented and skilled actress won’t have if her skin tone doesn’t match. I think that not admitting that is much like the man in this post who just doesn’t believe there’s any discrimination and that everyone is absolutely equal even if for some strange reason women and POC don’t seem to get equal positions or work.
LAK: I went back to look over the threads, and truthfully, I think you may have oversimplified. I didn’t see anybody arguing that he is a white man. I think it’s clear to anybody with eyeballs that he’s Latino, although there is an excellent argument to made as to whether he’s “marginalized” given his wealth and status.
What I saw was people arguing that simply saying, “Well, a Latino man won, what more do you want?” is disingenuous. Diversity is not simply about giving the occasional POC an award. It’s about allowing them to be part of the process at every level – and frankly, Birdman and Gravity were both EXTREMELY white films. I don’t think you’ll find many people who consider either of those films victories for people of color.
Duvernay’s snub was upsetting because, not only was she a WOC, but she was directing a film that placed POC at the center and told their story from their perspective. Honestly, POC got more from Clint Eastwood – at least when he did films that had POC at the center, he tried to do it decently. It’s stupid to try to argue if somebody qualifies as a POC – as a Mexican person, he certainly does. But if you’re arguing that the Oscars last year were inclusive or diverse by any stretch, you’d be sorely mistaken. That is the disconnect here.
SAM: did you read all the threads BEFORE he won? It was months and months ahead of the Oscars of ‘there are no POC nominated at the Oscars. It was all about skin tone, nevermind the content of the films.
There was another, separate discussion about the content of the films, and that I understood, and that had nothing to do with Alejandro or Alfonso. Nor was I confused as to whether their films were diverse or not.
I remember these very specific comments to me on a par with Eternal side eye’s comments (BTW, not saying she wrote them) whereby I was told in no uncertain terms that in a discussion about skin tones within the context of a diversity post, light skinnned people like Alejandro or Alfonso or Walter Salles didn’t qualify AT ALL. There was no attendant caveat about the content of their films as you are projecting.
AFTER he won, there was a lot of latino/Mexican pride everywhere, including in the comments. Any discussions about the content of their films was held elsewhere, and by that time i’d come to accept the explanation given that if you are a POC who doesn’t look it, then you are disqualified from a discussion about diversity.
BTW: In my posts today, i’m using ‘white’ instead of ‘light skinned’ and that’s probably confusing the issue of my comments, so I apologise for that.
And I will say it again, you misunderstand what i’m getting at. This isn’t nor wasn’t a discussion about the content of the films though you make/made a very good points there. This was about POC where one such person didn’t qualify and wasn’t singled out until he won yet he qualifies this year as a POC. And if you are going to deflect to the content of his films, then we have the same problem as last year since THE REVENANT isn’t a story about POC or nor does it show a diverse cast. So the problem is the same as last year where by the very same rules of being a visibly light skinned POC, he can’t possibly qualify.
Hi @LAK
I’m very confused by your post. Kaiser is pointing Alejandro (Mexican) out and using him as an example of a minority non-anglo/non-‘white’ director who may be represented this year at the Oscars.
What one person posted in reference to him last year, is their opinion, but it has nothing to do with the consensus that he is an ethnic and perceived racial minority.
I’ve never heard of Alejandro or Cuaron referred to as ‘white Mexicans.’ Lol I have no idea where that’s coming from.
I assure you Mexicans no matter their skin tone, are discriminated against mightily, and face much bias in society, as evidenced by the bigoted Republican front runners in the primaries this year.
It’s coming from all the commenters last year who said he didn’t count as a minority in pretty much any shape or form. Last year, apparently, Mexican = white privilege. And for those feigning they can’t remember this, go to the archives. It’s there.
Candyburry: your last paragraph was my point last year, only to be shouted down that he was white (or light skinned) and therefore didn’t count.
And to repeat my point, last year, his inclusion in the Oscar lists wasn’t celebrated as part of the diversity conversations.
When I brought him up, I was told by many posters that he didn’t count.
ETA: what Sloaney says.
@LAK, I very much doubt that AI considers himself a POC. His heritage is Spanish. Also, the whole issue with this discussion is that being Mexican IS NOT A RACE.
The reality is that our census isn’t complicated enough to reflect the realities of Mexico’s population or Latin America in general.
In terms of “race” (i.e. physical characteristics, typically), there are black Mexicans, blond haired blue eyed Mexicans, shorter indigenous Mexicans with completely different facial features (like our indigenous “Native Americans”). And 100% the same discussions around skin color and privilege apply in Mexico as they do in the US. Alejandro is considered “white” in Mexico and Spain even if some people on this thread consider him “dark.”
As for discrimination of Mexicans, sure it exists, but it’s, as always, dependent on your class and status.
Just having a Mexican sounding name makes your resume way more likely to be rejected. A reason many people in my family have considered changing their names (but haven’t done so as of yet). Mexicans and all latinos are definitely highly discriminated against.
Oh. Dear. Lord.
He even brought up “Why are there more blacks in sports?” as some form of defense.
Oh Lord.
It’s like they went looking for who patented white mansplaining and found this guy for him to offer all these little turds of ignorance.
There’s NO prejudice, obviously, I mean duh you guys. He has black people who work for him. Like, sweeping floors and stuff. Pfft. Not major directors like him.
Btw, for all those who want to complain about ‘the BEST actor’ many of the highest rated and most popular shows are shows that were initiated because of intentional diversity efforts. You know, that thing that WASN’T happening before people started to raise hell.
“Why are there more blacks in sports?”
That was the bit that stood out to me, also!
As for different types of formal or informal affirmative action; I’m all for them. Let’s hurry it up. But Friedkin’s problem is that equality feels like oppression to the privileged. (Also see #alllivesmatter and “racism against white people exists”.) And the privileged can rarely see that. Instead, their brains go to “computer says no” mode and they lash out in narcissistic rage.
I can’t really judge the US industry as I don’t know it well enough and (like LAK above) I sometimes miss the cues of the complexities and interactions between US groups, while I understand what goes on the UK because I’m a Britisher. But in the UK, I feel that improved diversity seems to grow from the bottom up rather than the top down. The popular but lower brow TV shows (soaps, procedurals etc), films and theatre productions are more diverse than the up-market, higher brow productions. In the UK, at least, I identify the problem as with the elite in the industry mostly. Would that be similar in the US?
I can’t. I just can’t with this dude. I was having a good morning dammit. Now he has me wanting to fight air.
I think he’s in the mindset of “well, I don’t see any overt racism, so I guess there isn’t racism.” But racism doesn’t have to be overt. It’s the soft kind that keeps people back.
We still have an industry where white people can be given awards for playing people of color (even cases in which white people play an actual person who was decidedly NOT white). Heck, they gave Jennifer Connelly an Oscar for playing a Latina woman, and almost nobody said a peep. I’m sure the people who cast that didn’t think they were being racists – they probably just thought they were casting the best person. But that’s soft racism. And it’s actually harder to stamp that out, as opposed to overt racism in your face. That’s what he seems to be focusing on.
I totally agree!
He’s out and out lying. A man his age was around when Sammy Davis Jr. couldn’t stay in the same hotel as Dean Martin when they traveled together.
But that’s my point. He comes from a generation where overt racism was the norm. Today, that kind of obviousness is less tolerated. He sees that and probably thinks, “well, racism is over.” People of his generation tend to discount “soft” racism because it’s harder to see and less aggressive than what they were raised around. He thinks if nobody is using racial slurs or mistreating POC to their faces, racism is gone. Things like implicit bias or structural/institutional racism are beyond his understanding. That was kind of the point, which I think you might have missed.
If he comes from a generation where racism was the norm, how can he claim he has never seen racism in his life? That was my point. I think your analysis is probably correct, but I also think he could not possibly be telling the truth when he says that in his fifty years in the business, he has never seen prejudice.
Well, note that he said he’s never seen “prejudice in the industry.” He’s not talking about the overt racism of refusing to rent a room to a black man or segregated lunch counters. He’s saying he’s never seen prejudice (which he probably defines as overt racism) in the industry. That I could believe. Remember, he probably defines prejudice differently than you and I.
Could be. I still find that statement to be difficult to believe, but maybe you’re right and he’s dumb enough to believe it.
Northern racism versus Southern racism (liberal bigotry versus conservative bigotry). Ask any person of color which one they’d prefer. I’m gathering most would say Southern, ’cause at least one always knows where one stands.
Coming from the south…I have to say southern bigotry is strangely more bearable. People are racist but they can also sit and have a drink together. It’s really strange. You don’t get treated like aliens or a foreign race like you do in the north and midwest.
agreed. that is the universal truth that people can’t see
Men like him are the reason who women still struggles to get the basic respect in our chosen careers even after centuries.
If men are not even willing to acknowledge that there is an issue then how can we get them to change their mindset?
Female directors are rare and those who survives in that world are butchered by the media for whatever movie they directed/directs.
Male directors are given chances after chances even though they have directed major flops and vanity projects. But female directors are given very few chances and they are expected to direct a masterpiece every single time to survive.
This is the reason I support most female directors such as Kathryn Bigelow, Sofia Coppola, Angelina Jolie Pitt, Ava Duvernay, Amma Asante etc who are trying to survive in that ruthless male dominated world.
#womendirectors
He’s right it’s not because of prejudice it’s because of blatant racism and sexism.
Lmao. This hack wants to talk about merit?! This is the jackass that made Cruising, a movie so crappy and filled so much with overt and subliminal homophobia, that even the star Al Pacino has for decades refused to have it mentioned in his presence . Where was merit when Exorcist took home the award that belonged to American Graffitti? Have a seat boo!!! Frankly most of his filmography is just proof of a Hollywood white boys club. Shot after shot, because the studios will be damned if they’ll make the same gamble on a woman or POC.
“I don’t know anyone who’s prejudiced against African-Americans or women, I’ve just never seen it. Why is that there are more black athletes? Because they’re better.”
Stopped after that. Even my husband, a white guy who’s getting up there, says, “That whole generation needs to die out.”
Please don’t blame that whole generation for this man’s ignorance. I remember my father telling me when I was a child how wrong it was to judge someone by the color of their skin, and how someday, people would look back on that and find it hard to believe that something so insane existed, like we look back on burning women for being witches.
@Who It’s not the generation. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is about the same age yet she would never say that. She knows better.
He’s saying there are more African American NBA players because they are simply “better”. So does that mean he thinks there are more white men at the top of Hollywood because they are simply “better”? Oh please.
Yes he does.
Did you miss his “greatest painters in history are mostly white men even though Women are free to paint” ergo white men are obviously more talented painters ?
By the way, Mr Powerful-old-white-men-are-dumbass, in most of the times of those “greatest painters in history” painting was, in fact, a profession forbidden to women, by law or social convention.
And don’t forget “you have to put yourself out there,” so apparently, women and poc aren’t trying hard enough, either. Ugh.
@JaneFR
LOL his way of thinking is so f*cked up. There was a period in time where literally only White men were “allowed” to do anything. What competition did they have lol?
@GoodNamesAllTaken
Yes us women and poc are lazy bums in his eyes. We just don’t try as hard as white men do. F*ck him !
The comparison to basketball is dumb. That’s a sport which has a scoring system where you can determine who dunked the ball into the basket.
Ryan Coogler should get an Oscar nom for directing and screenwriting – along with every other person in Creed (cinematography, score, acting…everything). It was an EXCELLENT film. Rocky won Best Picture and was nominated for all the big categories and Creed should be too. It is not really a remake but a continuation of the first movie. The other sequels were cartoonish and money grabs (still entertaining as hell) but Creed takes the same serious, almost bleak tone as Rocky. In fact, I put my money on Stallone winning best supporting actor.
Friedkin hasn’t made a good movie since THE EXORCIST. I mean I love CRUISING, but it’s not a good film. I think he’s only been allowed to work because of his marriage to Sherry Lansing. When I think of his recent output the only film that comes to mind is JADE. Anybody remember that one?
“There’s no racism or sexism here,” says area white man. Blerg.
Lol
+one million
He should talk to his wife. I’m sure she could tell him some stories.
How condescending to bs like that. What a blatant, bald-faced lie.
Agreed – I’m assuming he’s talking about his current wife Sherry Lansing. She was the head of Paramount – and the FIRST female studio head. So he can toss it off like it’s common, hey my wife ran a studio, but she broke a hell of a glass ceiling to do so. And I bet she faced both subtle and blatant sexism the whole time.
I’ve brought this site up before, but Friedkin would do well to read some of the first hand experiences women still have in the industry today, and I would imagine people of color hear similar garbage all the time too:
http://shitpeoplesaytowomendirectors.tumblr.com/
He is a company man. The end.
I kind of hate him. But not for the obvious reasons (you know I’m black and a woman etc) but more so because I envy what it must be like to live such a privileged life that you can’t even fathom what it’s like not to be privileged. I mean I feel special when the guy at starbucks knows my order and makes it while I’m in line.
DAMN
Ok.
Much like CB had a discussion the other day about sex/gender, I think there also needs to be a distinction between race and ethnicity on this site.
Race is defined as a local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
Ethnicity is defined as a sizable group of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic or cultural heritage.
Now here’s the important point:
From Pew Research: “(US) Federal policy defines “Hispanic” not as a race, but as an ethnicity.”
Therefore, in the US, you’re Hispanic if you were born in Mexico. But if you are from a Mexican family, and born in Switzerland, you’re Swiss. It’s utterly stupid.
Anyway, do you see what the US did there? We are saying that someone who comes from Mexico is the same as someone who comes from Spain or the same as a Mexican person who has forebears from the indigenous Mexican natives. For example, Lupita was born in Mexico, therefore the US considers her Mexican, as Mexican as Innaritu. See the confusion?
Just like the United States has “Native Americans,” Mexico has “Native Mexicans.” Like the US, Mexico is also made up of a whole bunch of different ethnicities (German, Jewish, Lebanese (the richest man in the world is Lebanese Mexican), and you will struggle to define the Mexican Race physically-i.e. physical characteristics (height, skin color, hair color – yes, there are blond haired, blue eyed mexicans as well as Black Mexicans) just as much as you will struggle in the US to define who looks All-American (I don’t consider this Christie Brinkley looks anymore).
I’m guessing that in Mexico, Inarritu is not considered a POC because he has no indigenous ancestry; Inarritu is a SPANISH last name and believe it or not, Spaniards consider themselves “light-skinned” aka equivalent to what we consider “white” or “Caucasian” in the US. They are always surprised when they come to the US and we tell them, “No you are not Caucasian” or “yes, you are white, but you are Hispanic white and it’s different.”
And while Gonzalez is also a traditionally Mexican last name, unless he has indigenous ancestry (it’s possible, just as many Americans are purported to have “Native American” ancestry), he’s still likely part of the elite of Mexico by virtue of his skin color and therefore only counts as diversity if a white Spanish or French director counts as diverse, because, let’s face it – racially, he’s Spanish, even though ETHNICALLY, he’s Latino/Mexican/Hispanic.
Bottom line is that racially, males of mostly European descent were nominated this year. Not diverse, and there is a reason for that, and it’s not just about who interviews for these jobs but about the privilege these people were starting with, and the structures that stay in place to promote people based on their skin color, race, and gender and status.
Why does this guy not get that it starts waaaaay before you get the interview?
Awesome comment mp.
Part of the problem with understanding race and ethnicity is that race is a social construct created for a very specific reason. It was and still is used to dominate and oppress different groups of people. Certain physical traits were deemed superior while others were considered inferior simply as a strategy for European colonization. Spain was as big a player in this as was England and France.
It’s true that we humans have diverse appearance from region to region, but the value added to our appearance is very real and problematic.
Divisions based on ethnincity have been around everywhere and for a long time, but the idea of race is very much a part of European culture.
Isn’t it easy to talk about meritocracy when you’re sitting at the top of the heap surrounded by all your friends? Yes, William. You didn’t see any prejudice because you were given money by a bunch of other white men to make movies. Clearly, that was based solely on your merit, even back when you had no experience. That’s totally how it works.
This dude is EIGHTY and he’s never met anyone who is prejudiced, ever? I’m 44 and I meet racists and/or sexists all the damn time. He’s full of shit.
He needs to introduce HIMSELF to himself.
He’s never seen it because he’s never had to. I couldn’t finish this.
He may have been a great director once upon a time, but he clearly doesn’t understand statistics:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24661244
“With malice toward none and charity for some: ingroup favoritism enables discrimination.”
“Dramatic forms of discrimination, such as lynching, property destruction, and hate crimes, are widely understood to be consequences of prejudicial hostility. This article focuses on what has heretofore been only an infrequent countertheme in scientific work on discrimination – that favoritism toward ingroups can be responsible for much discrimination.
We extend this counterthesis to the strong conclusion that ingroup favoritism is plausibly more significant as a basis for discrimination in contemporary American society than is outgroup-directed hostility. This conclusion has implications for theory, research methods, and practical remedies.”
Even after all these years, virtually all the people getting the clutch jobs in Hollywood are STILL white males. Hiring the buddy who looks just like you while leaving everyone else in the applicant pool behind IS discrimination, even if according to you you’re a super nice guy and not prejudiced in the least.
this guy looks like he owns a van with no windows.
No, women were not free to paint. If you’re talking about the renaissance producing the “greatest painters that ever lived”, they’re all men. They’re all men because women were expected to marry and have children. They were not allowed to receive formal any formal art training.
This guy has lived in a quarantine of privilege and self-reinforcing ideals. The hubris of thinking that nobody can compete as an explanation of why you are at the top is arrogant and totally ignorant. WHAT. AN. ASSHAT.
This man may be an old fart but he has a point. World is open for everyone. As our teacher used to say “there’s no such thing as unemployment for a true professional”
please tell me you’re not being serious Gina, or are you as old as this guy?
Racism does exist, of course. But if there were as many racists as simply lazy and uneducated people claim (to justify their unsuccessful lives) Obama could never be a president and Oprah could never be a TV icon. But they are where they are because they are awesome
I was at a major university graduate program for six years. For various reasons, we had 3 music and arts departments. Yes, three.
Music and the performing arts tend to have lots of female professors. But each of the three department heads, and the Dean of the arts school, were all white men.
We all had PhDs.
Let me repeat that: We all had PhDs.
Don’t you dare tell me that all the women with PhDs were less qualified than the men and that women and people of color during that six year period could not have filled these four high level positions.
We all had PhDs: how much more qualified are we supposed to be???????
There are other qualifications needed to chair a department than having a Phd. A chair needs skills in written & verbal communication, organization, and leadership. The dept. heads must interact with Uni administration, donors, profs, and students, and sometimes the press. Not everyone with a PhD has strong skills in enough of the other areas to be a viable department head.
Speaking as an ethnic woman, I think Ava DuVernay is an awful director. She ruined Selma.
Wasn’t Selma not completed in time to send screeners to the Academy?
Don’t know if it’s been mentioned in the comments earlier but the book Easy Riders, Raging Bulls talks a lot about Friedkin in the 70s, and suffice to say, this is not a guy whose opinion is worth much. He’s an ass and a misogynist. To wit:
– he deliberately and permanently injured Ellen Burstyn’s spine during filming of The Exorcist, even when she begged him to tell the stunt guy to lighten up because she was being hurt
– he announced his engagement to (I think) Jeanne Moreau while still dating Burstyn
– he pursued Jennifer Nairn-Smith, a young promising dancer, and once he got her, she was basically a prisoner – he was so violently possessive she had to give up her career, and when she got pregnant he forced her to have an abortion
– he slapped an actor in the face because the guy wasn’t acting scared enough
– he routinely had screaming fits on set, fighting with everyone in sight, whether they were above or below him in the chain; he was renowned for being the kind of guy who would say Good Morning to a crewman, then turn round still smiling and order someone to fire the guy, just because he felt like it.
Screw him and his opinions.
Selma wasn’t a great or good movie. I didn’t even finish it and I LOVE movies. Also, I agree partly with what he says. I am extremely successful in a very male dominated field and rarely see women in any area of the field. My success relies on the fact that I am far superior than most male counterparts and can keep up with the men. I’ve always negotiated salaries, refused low-ball offers, and asked for higher positions, never hesitated to voice my opinions or share my ideas in meetings, and never felt scared to disagree with another’s idea or decision even if it was the CEO. And, guess what? My boldness, risk-taking, and strategic planning of my career is the reason that I have reached this level. Let’s be honest, not many women operate that way. If more did, they would rise faster in the ranks. This nonsense about women being held back is partly due to their own behaviors. Be bold, ladies! If it isn’t part of your personality, then you don’t deserve to succeed. You are where you belong. I have seen first hand that many women aren’t very career-motivated nor do they strategically plan their career path.
I think it is sad that women buy into the “other women just aren’t negotiating! other women just aren’t as ambitious!” trope. This has been researched to death, and even when women do these things men will still overwhelmingly fill the top positions. It is not a matter of “learning to emulate men” it comes down to, yes, if you are the best candidate you will be promoted. BUT if you are EQUALLY qualified, EQUALLY ambitious, as a man, it’s going to go to the man. To get ahead you have to be BETTER than your male colleagues. You don’t see the sexism in that?
he and his type have benefited off of what I call ‘White Confirmation’ or White Privilege then add a p*nis and damn…… he’s ruling everythang
now his dart about the legislation to force equality was in sooo poor form…. as his major gripe seems to be affirmative action…… BUT TO THAT, I would say…. We minorities will left that bag by the door…… as soon as Mr. Friedkin and his type WILL LEAVE THEIR White Confirmation/White Privilege heirloom luggage-set at baggage claims…. and really start being fair for all REGARDLESS of anything….
Mansplaining … LOL. Very good and obvious point of course.
Also Whitesplaining.
I think one other reason why there isn’t much diversity among writers/producers/actors/etc in this biz is that the SAME OLD executives, who still like their jobs while sitting on their ass, like doing business with their own ilk, race, etc. Some are like many congressional members (who REALLY need term limits lol) … and some execs barely have any solid experience as execs or producers at that. THIS is why movies like Sisters or Trainwreck are lauded as ‘hilarious’ and ‘awesome’ as they’re OVER marketed to death.
Maybe another reason has to do with American poverty and substandard wages that keep a lot of people struggling just to survive instead of really living up to their creative potential. I’ve lived on welfare and worked with other college educated people (many of them who are very young … many of them who are vibrant and funny as Hell) and I often wonder had they had better income, they could be in a better place creatively (or any other occupation, what have you). Course, not everyone is meant to work in the arts or media, but I believe if the US had a better wage standard, we might see more creative young folks emerge as a better creative/intelligent force out there. Hope this made sense, my grammar sucks when I’m on pain killers (was in a car accident recently :()
Cheers all … and very VERY awesome responses to this post!