LUCASFILM In Talks With 4 Female Directors For Future STAR WARS Films

[Horhey]

You don't care....and yet you started a thread to discuss it and started the discussion with a smilie that rolls it's eyes at the mere idea of women being considered for directing positions. yeah, I see how much you don't care.

Enough posturing! I already said my peace.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No, because the best person for the job may actually be a female director or writer. This is getting silly.

But not based solely on qualifications as you mentioned. Because they rarely if ever get these jobs. Which is why it is important to open the door by giving a female director the job. You literally eat your own argument with every post.

You don't care....and yet you started a thread to discuss it and started the discussion with a smilie that rolls it's eyes at the mere idea of women being considered for directing positions. yeah, I see how much you don't care.

Doth protest too much.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Enough posturing! I already said my peace.

Yep and your point was so clear, even C. Lee came in here to point out how you are clearly speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

 

[Sithborg]

No, because the best person for the job may actually be a female director or writer. This is getting silly.

Yet, if it was reported that they were meeting with 4 men, would you have had the same reaction. Would you have posted the exact same thing you did in your opening post.

 

[Horhey]

But not based solely on qualifications as you mentioned. Because they rarely if ever get these jobs. Which is why it is important to open the door by giving a female director the job. You literally eat your own argument with every post.

You want me to take political stand as you have. That is "it is important to open the door by giving a female director the job."

That is a political stand. The difference between your view and mine are priorities. My priority is what is best for the film. Yours is giving a woman the job for the cause of "progress". That is where our views differ. Priorities.

Here is where I would object. If a woman director is clearly the better choice but a man gets the job instead, which does happen often.

I started this thread, in part, to take an apolitical stand for a change because I needed break from http://www.politicalforum.com/ where I'm frequently labeled "anti American" or "communist" for being critical of how the justice system treats black people and other issues, such as foreign policy. Then I come here, take an apolitical position on something and I'm essentially labeled a reactionary. The irony.

If we had this discussion at http://www.politicalforum.com/ we would be on the same page. Do you understand what I'm saying?

 

[Horhey]

You don't care....and yet you started a thread to discuss it and started the discussion with a smilie that rolls it's eyes at the mere idea of women being considered for directing positions. yeah, I see how much you don't care what their gender is.

^^
Fixed. That is what I meant.

 

[Kelly]

I don't give **** either way, actually. Whoever is best is what should matter, not their gender. If only you knew my political views. wow.

The difference is their gender wasn't part of the issue, at least overtly. Really, I don't care.

You're missing the point. The only question should be, who is best for the job, regardless of their gender. I would've said the same if the roles were reversed.

I'm not doing with this with you. You're talking to leftist. I don't vote because both parties are to the right of where the country is. If you knew who I was we wouldn't be having this conversation. All you can do is read words and interpret from that.

I rolled my eyes because them being woman was at issue at all.

Thou doth protest too much....

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You want me to take political stand as you have. That is "it is important to open the door by giving a female director the job."

That is a political stand. The difference between your view and mine are priorities. My priority is what is best for the film. Yours is giving a woman the job for the cause of "progress". That is where our views differ. Priorities.

Here is where I would object. If a woman director is clearly the better choice but a man gets the job instead, which does happen often.

I started this thread, in part, to take an apolitical stand for a change because I needed break from http://www.politicalforum.com/ where I'm frequently labeled "anti American" or "communist" for being critical of how the justice system treats black people and other issues, such as foreign policy. Then I come here, take an apolitical position on something and I'm essentially labeled a reactionary. The irony.

If we had this discussion at http://www.politicalforum.com/ we would be on the same page. Do you understand what I'm saying?

Do you understand where you are? Did you think you got to set the agenda for complaining about women because you started the thread? No, that isn't how it works here. Those that want to talk on such topics and then disregard the obvious situation usually do so because they want an excuse for showing their prejudice without being called out for it.

You aren't clever, you aren't sly, you aren't fooling anyone. We all get it. You have had three rather mellow mods come in here and point it out. You say if a woman is qualified and the best person for the job, of course she should get it. But then you set the bar in a way where the field of women directors and male directors leads to one inevitable outcome.

 

[Horhey]

Do you understand where you are? Did you think you got to set the agenda for complaining about women because you started the thread? No, that isn't how it works here. Those that want to talk on such topics and then disregard the obvious situation usually do so because they want an excuse for showing their prejudice without being called out for it.

You aren't clever, you aren't sly, you aren't fooling anyone. We all get it. You have had three rather mellow mods come in here and point it out. You say if a woman is qualified and the best person for the job, of course she should get it. But then you set the bar in a way where the field of women directors and male directors leads to one inevitable outcome.

The bar being that gender should not be considered when choosing a director. There's definitely a whiff of fascism there.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The bar being that gender should not be considered when choosing a director. There's definitely a whiff of fascism there.

And yet it has been for over a 100 years in Hollywood. But I am sure you have been complaining about that for years. Oh no it was only when they wanted a woman to do a Star Wars movie.

 

[Horhey]

And yet it has been for over a 100 years in Hollywood. But I am sure you have been complaining about that for years. Oh no it was only when they wanted a woman to do a Star Wars movie.

I thought we just met like a few days ago. I've been arguing for social justice since 2002.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I thought we just met like a few days ago. I've been arguing for social justice since 2002.

And yet this is the first thread you have made on this site about it. I wonder what drove you to that need. Heck, the topic brought you back from the Hype! dead. You were gone for 6 years according to your post history.

 

[Horhey]

And yet this is the first thread you have made on this site about it. I wonder what drove you to that need. Heck, the topic brought you back from the Hype! dead. You were gone for 6 years according to your post history.

Actually, TFA brought me back: http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?searchid=21865297

You may need to chill.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I am perfectly fine. I wasn't the one who made a thread to complain about the potential of a woman directing a Star Wars movie.

 

[Horhey]

I am perfectly fine. I wasn't the one who made a thread to complain about the potential of a woman directing a Star Wars movie.

The complaint was that gender in addition to resume may determine who the next director is. Again, only the resume should matter. You are clearly incapable of being objective. You should try editing Wikipedia. You may learn that skill there or you'll get banned if you can't.

 

[Sithborg]

So, you want to just ignore Kennedy's statements about providing opportunities for young film makers? Resume isn't going to be their greatest assets, especially for women filmmakers.

And really, your argument will always circle back to the question. It wouldn't be political if they met with all men, or a mix. But why is it suddenly a political move when it is all women?

 

[danoyse]

The complaint was that gender in addition to resume may determine who the next director is. Again, only the resume should matter. You are clearly incapable of being objective. You should try editing Wikipedia. You may learn that skill there or you'll get banned if you can't.

And if the resume is spectacular, what's the problem?

You're the one freaking about this, and you keep burying yourself the more you try to make an issue out of it.

 

[Kelly]

The problem I see, is that the article was written in the first place.

Why should it matter? It doesn't....

 

[danoyse]

It shouldn't. Although this being the first time they've ever done it is likely the reason. Hopefully it won't be necessary from here on out.

 

[Horhey]

So, you want to just ignore Kennedy's statements about providing opportunities for young film makers? Resume isn't going to be their greatest assets, especially for women filmmakers.

And really, your argument will always circle back to the question. It wouldn't be political if they met with all men, or a mix. But why is it suddenly a political move when it is all women?

Because their gender was explicitly stated as the reason for meeting with them. In other words, 'we are considering hiring them or her because we need more woman directors'. Instead the reason should be, 'we are considering hiring her because we liked her films'. If the roles were reversed it would be no different.

 

[Snow Queen]

Because their gender was explicitly stated as the reason for meeting with them. In other words, 'we are considering hiring them or her because we need more woman directors'. Instead the reason should be, 'we are considering hiring her because we liked her films'. If the roles were reversed it would be no different.

Except for that part where it wasn't. The AGENT, not someone associated with LucasFilm, pointed out the obvious lack of female directors getting chances and said studios were wanting to get more behind the camera (the latter I'll believe when I see). And if you can't see the obvious benefit for more diverse film makers, namely that it means different voices, different perspectives and likely more diverse casts, I don't know what to tell you. And that's not even counting the whole job discrimination issue.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The complaint was that gender in addition to resume may determine who the next director is. Again, only the resume should matter. You are clearly incapable of being objective. You should try editing Wikipedia. You may learn that skill there or you'll get banned if you can't.

Yes, the general reaction to you in this thread suggest I am the problem here.

It shouldn't. Although this being the first time they've ever done it is likely the reason. Hopefully it won't be necessary from here on out.

True. But this is good PR, as it shows Kathy Kennedy is putting LF's money where's it mouth is. I am sure there are some others like Horhey freaking out, but they are the few.

When you see stuff like the young kid asking about diversity at Comic-Con you realize how it important these things can be for even the little ones who watch them. What does it mean to young aspiring female directors to see another female director taking on a Star Wars movie. Have to think it is only a good thing.

 

[Horhey]

Never mind. I figured people here would care about who the next director and writer may be and how they were going about selecting them, but people seem to care more about posturing, perceiving it to be the politically correct thing to do.

 

[Snow Queen]

Never mind. I figured people here would care about who the next director may be and how they were going about selecting them, but people seem to care more about posturing, perceiving it to be the politically correct thing to do.

How they're selecting them? By an agent getting them meetings and then deciding based on those meetings if they want to work with them like every other time directors are picked? Shocking.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Never mind. I figured people here would care about who the next director and writer may be and how they were going about selecting them, but people seem to care more about posturing, perceiving it to be the politically correct thing to do.

Oh I care. Like I have cared about every single director so far. But it also has become clear that you came here with an agenda. And shame on the posters here for getting behind a good idea.