Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Male Privilege Watch: Man With No Directing Experience to Direct Film With Robert Redford and Cate Blanchett

by Melissa Silverstein
August 29, 2014 12:00 PM
  • |
cate blanchett

Women and Hollywood is on vacation this week. While our lights are out, we'll be reposting our most popular posts of the summer.

I was going to tweet this up, but then I paused, because I think it is important to have these examples written out in more than 140 characters.

Robert Redford and Cate Blanchett are set to star in Truth based on the book Truth And Duty: The Press, The President, And The Privilege Of Power written by former CBS producer Mary Mapes. The book is based CBS scandal regarding whether George W. Bush received special privileges to get out of Vietnam and into the national guard. The upshot is that Dan Rather who was CBS' lead anchor at the time was disgraced, and Mary Mapes who was his producer, lost her job. Blanchett will play Mapes and Redford will play Rather.

Writer James Vanderbilt will be making his directorial debut on the film. He will also adapt Mapes' memoir. Vanderbilt has written The Amazing Spiderman 1 and 2 as well as White House Down and Zodiac. HE HAS NO DIRECTING EXPERIENCE. (See earlier piece - The Unbelievable Privilege of Being a Male Director.)

To say that this will be a high profile film is an understatement. Deadline reports that they are eyeing a fall start, and with such high profile actors like Redford and Blanchett attached, the film will undoubtedly get awards attention.

The question this raises is, would a female writer be given this kind of opportunity? 

  • |

More: Cate Blanchett

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    


  • Daniel | July 12, 2014 11:17 PMReply

    Ms. Silverstein, first name a woman writer with that much history and box-office draw, then ask the question that need not be asked.

  • jmac | July 11, 2014 6:12 PMReply

    A man is doing something! Quick, sound the sexist alarm! I, for one, am so against men doing things. Sometimes I do things and I'm like, "Why? A woman is so much more suited for this task." Well no more!

  • Fat Connie | July 11, 2014 2:56 PMReply

    the whole premise of this piece steps over (or more likely is ignorant of) how projects come together in Hollywood. Not saying male privelige doesn't exist in different forms but working screenwriters w/ strings of produced films - bonus if they're hits- make the leap to directing, irrespective of gener - all the effing time

  • JC | July 11, 2014 2:15 PMReply

    I'll make a bet that the DP on this film has three initials after his/her name and a host of producers and experienced ADs breathing down his neck on every setup. This guy is more likely walking into something of a meat grinder than a ticket to the Oscars. That said, it's a great issue to raise.

  • SAMI | July 11, 2014 1:44 PMReply

    Would a female writer be "given" this opportunity? No one in Hollywood is "given" anything. You earn your opportunities, take them or create them. As a woman and a lifelong feminist, I am appalled by this assumption that James Vanderbilt got bumped up to director due only to his penis, and not any semblance of talent. Do women get these opportunities to transition from writer to director? Yes, women transition from screenwriter to director all the time, and do so with no experience, usually by *creating* that opportunity for themselves. And, if you are a women in this business, you should know them by heart.

    Did someone "give" Gillian Robespierre OBVIOUS CHILD? Was Sarah Polley begging on a street corner for a directing gig? Kimberly Peirce? Nicole Holofcener? Diablo Cody? Lena Dunham? Let's go back to Nora Ephron, whose first film flopped. And yet, her second was a huge hit with big stars who were made huge stars after that. Were any of these women "given" anything? No. Like everyone else in this industry, they worked for it. What people are complaining about here is that a smart writer created a smart deal for himself. He didn't get a woman director fired from the project to steal this is as his directorial debut. He wrote, and produced, successful films and made a smart business move. Bravo to him, for making a big step that will hopefully open doors to more writers. And that includes women.

    What about Cate Blanchett? After her being vocal about female-driven movies being bankable, she chose to work with *gasp* a male director. Which is her absolute right to do. I'm not bashing her for that, I'm trying to illustrate a point. We aren't talking about women making a conscious choice to work with more women, and the very real way we could work together to get more films made. What we are talking about here is men getting the jobs. It seems a little futile, if you ask me.

    Yes, there is a gender gap in Hollywood. There's no doubt about that. But, if you think Hollywood is unfair to women, name me any industry that does treat women as equals, that hires as many or more women as men and also pays them an equal wage. It's tough to be a gal anywhere. But, we work hard and we succeed. And, when we succeed, we need to help another lady into the ranks.

    No one gives anyone anything in Hollywood. Our job, as filmmakers, is to create. And, if we want, I'm sure we can create an opportunity that will put many women to work.

  • Rachel Feldman | July 11, 2014 12:30 PMReply

    The question this raises is, would a female writer be given this kind of opportunity?

    While I'm sure Mr. Vanderbilt is a highly skilled filmmaker, waiting to but out of his seams to direct, and that he'll deliver great dailies, your question is a great one.

    NO WAY. Not only that, no female DIRECTOR would be given this opportunity unless she had already directed a boxoffice blockbuster or two. Good luck, Mr. V and all power to you. But yes, terribly unfair and a great story to illuminate the persistence of gender bias. ARG!!!!!

  • Adam | July 11, 2014 1:32 PM

    To some extent you're right. But here is the logical problem I have with this article.

    First of all, a cursory glance at the project itself suggests this project isn't a "blockbuster" or even, in the grand scheme of things, a major film. It still to my knowledge has no studio attached. It does not have a huge mainstream audience. It's what you might describe (to be crass) as potential "award fodder" - two well-respected actors playing meaty roles. I would be surprised if it has a budget of over $30 million, if indeed it does go ahead. Somehow suggesting he's made a huge leap up the chain isn't really fair.

    It has been developed by Vanderbilt's production company. Incidentally one of his key partners in these affairs is Laete Kalogridis. She's well respected and a highly talented filmmaker who recently co-wrote the new Terminator film, as well as being involved in The Avatar and Shutter Island and is a big presence in the industry.

    We know gender bias exists; anybody who refutes that is kidding themselves. The problem is, does James Vanderbilt developing a relatively small, smart film for himself to direct after a successful, decade long career as a screenwriter really smack of gender bias? The answer is no.

    You're right that a woman would probably have a harder time setting such a project up as a directing vehicle for themselves but, the frank truth is, that's common knowledge and unrelated to this event - which is for some reason labeled as 'Male Privilege Watch' as if examples of overt sexism are being weeded out of the industry fields.

    Look at it another way. Chris Pratt's Hollywood career is about to take off. I could write an article lamenting the lack of opportunities for black actors in lead roles. There is a problem with a lack of opportunities for black actors in major roles, but it has absolutely zilch to do with Chris Pratt getting cast in a few major films.

    That's my concern with this article. As I say, I respect the intention, it's just not well thought through. If we want to illuminate gender bias we have to be smart and do our research, not turn a 140-character tweet into an article with end product.

  • @coldmilk | July 11, 2014 10:33 AMReply


    Jennifer Lee came on to Frozen as a screenwriter for a couple of weeks between her contract and finishing up her work on Wreck-It Ralph. Disney was so impressed with her story contributions they picked her up to co-direct.

  • Peter Machen | July 11, 2014 9:30 AMReply

    A woman absolutely would not be given the same chance. Proven by the inequality in the industry!

  • Kathy | July 10, 2014 11:32 PMReply

    As soon as I saw that most of the commentaries were trying to veil and silence Melissa Silverstein, I stopped reading them. I don't have time for misogynistic rants. Keep speaking out, Melissa.

  • JCAUSEY | July 11, 2014 9:35 AM

    As soon as I saw that most of the commentaries were trying to veil and silence Melissa Silverstein,

    More like you lack the analytical mind to truly differentiate criticism from "being mean". You truly are lacking in intelligence if the above comment is in fact how you feel.

  • Adam | July 11, 2014 5:05 AM

    I don't think it's fair to call virtually every comment rant or accuse people or trying to 'silence' the author. Yes there has been a few of the usual flippant mysogonistic retorts but I'd suggest most people are making a very serious and fair point that this article isn't providing the level of journalism it claims to on the tin.

    If you're going to write an article called 'Male Privilege Watch' and present it almost like part of a series looking at sexism in the industry, you've simply got to do better than pick an arbitrary observation out of the hat and ask, 'Would a woman get treated the same?'.

    This problem demands more robust and insightful, investigative journalism. It demands a much deeper analysis of the faulty power structure Hollywood is run by. This is a complex issue and this article does nothing to drive important debate or offer a progressive strategy forward. Granted, it's not the author's responsibility to fix the problem - but if you make an arbitrary observation and then ask a loosely connected question at the end of it, you have to be prepared for some critical analysis into the weakness of your supposition.

    I believe most of the comments on here are driven not by a desire to 'silence' the author - an accusation that seems absurd. Instead they're simply critical of the way the article has been constructed - a bold, powerful headline followed by what is essentially a rather benign observation.

    I'm with the author - draw attention to this issue. But listen honestly to the criticism. Weed out the misogynist crap and read the constructive advice and criticism from what are a lot of very good comments. Use them to go deeper into the issue and generate better insights into this issue.

  • Mike | July 10, 2014 11:07 PMReply

    I read this with interest until I could out you were talking about James Vanderbilt. The guy is an established, successful screenwriter who has well and truly paid his dues in the industry. Its a common thing to have writers make the jump to directing. Good on him.

  • aoigscrja | July 10, 2014 10:25 PMReply

    How about Nora Ephron having five years of screenwriting credit before directing When Harry Met Sally? How about Sophia Coppola going from zero to working with Kirsten Dunst in her first directorial effort? How about you scratch the feminism from the menu and look a little more objectively and reasonably before making unfounded statements that this guy was hired strictly on the basis of his gender?

  • John | July 13, 2014 9:45 AM


    Kirsten Dunst was in The Virgin Suicides... as was Kathleen Turner and James Woods.


    Okay, she didn't direct When Harry Met Sally, but she did direct a film about 2 years after that. She'd still had "only" 9 years of writing experience.

  • cy | July 12, 2014 11:36 PM

    "How about Sophia Coppola going from zero to working with Kirsten Dunst in her first directorial effort?"

    You are mistaken about Sofia Coppola's film career also.
    Sofia Coppola's film "Marie Antoinette", starring Kirsten Dunst in 2006, is the third feature film that she directed. She had already directed "The Virgin Suicides" (1999) and "Lost in Translation" (2003). She also directed a short film "Lick the Star" (1998).

  • RogerMD | July 11, 2014 12:58 AM

    "How about Nora Ephron having five years of screenwriting credit before directing When Harry Met Sally?"

    How about telling Rob Reiner he didn't direct it?

  • RD | July 10, 2014 8:02 PMReply

    I read the article and checked out his imdb credits. It is not uncommon for someone who direct a major production if they adapt the script and/or option/own the rights on the script. He alo has a strong producing background so I bet he probably optioned the rights to script and got Robert and Cate to sign on although he never directed anything. From a actors prospective he has a successful track record of being a good writer. From the studio prospective he has been successful not only as a writer but as a producer as well. Have I heard opportunities like this offered to women? Yes. The key is leverage. Owning what the studios want and having established talent attached to the project.

  • Onias | July 10, 2014 7:27 PMReply

    the problem is that he is man or that he's unprepared? if it were an unprepared woman would you be happy?

  • BLUE ANGEL | July 10, 2014 7:17 PMReply

    God the comments of the article are hilarious. I agree that this article is just poorly documented, and it's presented as info when is not, well I doubt indie wire has many real journalists working for them... everything works in the online world anyway... and damned! I read it! Stupid me! LOL

  • Blue Angel | July 10, 2014 7:09 PMReply

    I always say that you can put a monkey with a 40 people crew on a set and he'll make a great piece of crap looking good, and even the story might be fair, and the editing amazing.
    On the other hand, there are few people that can direct well, contrary to popular believe... The rest of them are kids with contacts and money that take credit (also the credit of brilliant actors' work with a poor direction)...
    Furthermore I agree that the article is made around the gender issue in an unnecessary way, for the main deal here is "How can the world work like this?" Right? Well, now the second problem has to pop up too, in my opinion, because if you are a woman... you won't even smell the pages of the draft...
    However, I think that Vanderbilt has been in this industry for a while and he must know about it more than the writer of the article thinks. Will he be a good director? We don't know it yet. Maybe, maybe not, though normally writers are not precisely good directors... just on TV, but TV writers are really creators with their crew of writers, not a writer in the literal sense. Definitely this man has been persevering for some time now, and the opportunity came up.

    Anyway, that's too much of an explanation... but once again, the problem that the article talks about is... A writer is offered this... and no wonder they complain because that happens in Hollywood every day with people with family in the EI. So articles like this are written for that reason.
    So the deal to me is: "Not everybody can be a director in order to make it right, while at the same time, in those arenas that we are referring to, even a handicapped monkey with minimum communication capacities could do it (and a lot of patience and valium)". This is ridiculous...

    Blue Angel has said... Cheers!

  • Adam | July 10, 2014 3:45 PMReply

    I have to agree this is another ill-thought out article, albeit with a good heart at its core. Yes, gender-bias is an issue in the industry and more needs to be done to both raise awareness and change the underlying problem. Unfortunately, this article is doing nothing to actually draw attention to that issue and is instead taking a rather arbitrary observation and trying to turn it into something more profound.

    Everybody is a first time director at some point, so the whole observation is somewhat moot. Granted this film is quite an audacious first-time gig, but James Vanderbilt is not some precocious brat. He's been a professional Hollywood screenwriter for over a decade and has cut his teeth working alongside some of the biggest directors on some of the biggest productions of the last ten years. This article could have been written about Wally Pfister. It could have been written about Roberto Orci. It could have been written nearly a decade ago about James McTeigue or perhaps even about Barry Sonnenfeld. All have somewhat 'jumped the queue' in terms of getting to direct a feature film, if you want to think of it that way.

    As for whether women get the same opportunities, the problem answering that question is the very rocky foundations upon which the initial observation lie (namely that somebody - a male- who has limited directing is now directing a film). I mean, it's arguable that Sam Taylor-Wood was somewhat privileged with the opportunity to direct Nowhere Boy, she had been an artist and had perhaps dabbled in film, but it would be a stretch to have called her a director at the time and her 'industry' experience was far less than Vanderbilt's. She is now directing '50 Shades...'. It's a similar argument for Sofia Coppola. Both, I hasten to add, talented at what they do. But then so is Vanderbilt.

    My concern with this article is the unfair light it inadvertently casts on James Vanderbilt, and the arbitrary observation you've used to highlight a salient but ultimately different issue. Gender bias exists, and you're right to try and highlight it and generate debate. I just don't think this case study is really drawing attention to anything pertinent. The male privilege problem we face is not connected to James Vanderbilt getting this gig, and I think in a way trying to force the two together weakens what should be an inherently strong argument.

    This is not 'Male Privilege Watch' and it's a bit concerning that an article would be constructed that way, especially with so little substance or research at its core. Yes, we need people holding those who enforce male privilege upon the industry to account - but it needs to be done properly, or what is a very important issue will devour itself and become an easy target. If you want to hunt down male privilege in Hollywood you will have to dig a lot deeper into the power structure of Hollywood and put it into better context in order to really be illuminating. This kind of thing has happened literally countless times - producers, writers, 1st ADs, cinematographers moving sideways into substantial directing gigs. Pulling this one out of the hat, unfortunately, doesn't prove or highlight anything. I do appreciate the spirit of this article, but we need to be smarter about this issue if we're to get anywhere in solving it.

  • Lora | July 10, 2014 5:49 PM

    Thank you for this comment. It's precisely the kind of engagement we need around these issues (and, frankly, their abuse). #Notallwomen are using such an important topic as click bait.

  • Mike2Cents | July 10, 2014 4:37 PM

    Well said.

    As a post script, what the hell happened to indieWIRE? Who is the editor now? Why are the articles so bad? I used to trust indieWIRE as a source for decent coverage of the indie film world. Now they've become a second-rate click-bait site for film majors.

  • Yessss | July 10, 2014 4:20 PM

    Excellent, astute comment

  • jim | July 10, 2014 3:43 PMReply

    "The question this raises is, would a female writer be given this kind of opportunity?"

    YES.....we already have affirmative action for sub par journalists, (this article for instance) writers, artists, musicians, comedians, who invariably use their pussy pass and/or minority status and/or female privilege and/or faux manliness (lean-in/ you go girl-ism) and/or faux victimhood to get what they want.
    There is strength in being weak. That's what feminism has thought women. If a woman fails it is because of patriarchy. If a woman suceeeds it is because she is a strong independent woman. I fear we're only gonna see more male dominated positions in the future as women cannot be trusted with power if they blame their failings on men and attribute their successes to themselves. Confirmation bias en masse (aka krazy)

  • Jennifer Mayberry | July 11, 2014 1:44 AM

    I have nothing against this writer who is directing this film, but given the simple odds of male to female, directors, no, a female writer would probably not be given this opportunity. That's not is not based on pretend victim hood, that is just based on numbers. If so many of us use our "pussy pass", (this is something I really need to find out about, because I've clearly been missing out!), then why aren't there more female directors (I'm not a director btw)? Oh, of course...because we must be inferior, right? Because the good old boy network doesn't exist in every area of American society, especially not Hollywood! I could say more, but then they won't post my comment.

  • wbsull | July 10, 2014 3:18 PMReply

    this movie will bomb anyway so what difference does it make?

  • Good Lord | July 10, 2014 2:47 PMReply

    This could very well be the most ill-informed article to ever grace the pages of Indiewire. While there's no doubt that gender bias exists in the film industry, this article is clearly written by a report who has little-to-no understanding of how the industry works, the qualifications necessary to become a director, or the career of the director-to-be in question. Rather than exposing bias, you're compromising your own argument and exposing your own ineptitude. The fact that Indiewire would publish such nonsense brings their entire website and editorial staff into question.

  • arlan godthaab | July 10, 2014 1:58 PMReply

    My guess is that your reliance upon the phrase, "directing experience" is somewhat starved for experience, itself. A Director's job is to understand, establish and guide actors and crew through the labyrinth of: story, theme, character and performance, while working in a harmonious way with the collaborative production and post-production mechanism long in place for feature film production. A seasoned screenwriter's experiences on multiple major motion pictures constitutes an incredible body of production experience (ask Sophia Coppola), one that gratifies all of filmmaking's real requisites, especially its well established system for metriculation and advancement - one that's well understood and seriously regarded by the founder of Sundance, and not likely snuck-by the likes of an Academy Award-winning actress of Cate Blanchett's caliber, either. Relax. Breathe. Do the hard work of writing some successful screenplays, and you'll come to know what I mean. Gender-whining, alone, won't cut it.

  • shoshanna | July 10, 2014 2:54 PM

    Awesome! Everyone, you can be a director if your a screenwriter. I didn't know that! I'm sure with his knowledge directing short films, he'll be able to draw great performances from Cate and Rob. Oh wait, he hasn't directed any shorts either.

  • WithinWithout | July 10, 2014 1:50 PMReply

    I hope Ms. Silverstein and Indiewire do a series called 'Male Privilege Watch: Directors Without Experience' every time someone with experience in the industry (though not specifically in directing) and who happens to be a man gets to direct a film. Can they also, please, go back in time to include Tony Gilroy and the more recent Wally Pfister? Maybe even as far back as Hitchcock...'Hollywood would rather let a corpulent foreign Art Director with little non-art directing experience direct than...'

    Don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly think there's a dearth of non white male directors doing bigger projects in the industry which is incompatible with the 21st century and against our general development as a society / civilization. However, this article (if I can call it that) takes a justifiable and urgent sentiment and pushes it to a self-parodical limit. Choose your targets better Ms. Silverstein - indiscriminate fire will only hurt your valid cause.

  • Vernie | July 10, 2014 1:29 PMReply

    This guy's a Vanderbilt. If there *is*'s social pedigree.

    He's earned his chance...

    Besides, it's not a first for the Vanderbilt name to cross tracks with Sundance.

  • Melissa Silverstein | July 10, 2014 1:23 PMReply

    The reason why I wrote this piece is because this happens all the time. This is not a one time thing. Bottom line - Men are given opportunities that women are not.

  • greg | July 11, 2014 11:35 AM

    No your just a reactionary asshole

  • SIGH | July 11, 2014 1:40 AM

    If "this happens all the time" and "this is not a one time thing", then it should be easy for you to build up a body of evidence that is larger than a single screenwriter transitioning to directing. If we're going to simply cite one person as an entire trend, then female director Gia Coppola may as well stand in for a number of pernicious industry dealings.

    Please write a new article with multiple examples using your in-depth knowledge of the industry and cite the projects, female directors, and executives who turned them down for being too risky. Until then, this is just a poorly-researched piece showing great ignorance of how people invest in multimillion dollar films.

  • Women aren't worth much | July 10, 2014 10:42 PM

    If what you say is true and this happens that often for unexperienced men to jump ahead then the underlying understanding is that what a man can bring to the table is worth more. Women still have a long way to go and speaking up means being called a bitch by a man (who is probably white and wouldn't know sexism or racism if it occurred in front of him).

  • Chris | July 10, 2014 5:43 PM

    John - please don't say "bitchy." Your argument fails there.

  • John | July 10, 2014 5:22 PM

    You come off as bitchy - sorry.

    It's not the fault of male filmmakers if they pitched the best for the job, or if the studios can't find enough female talented directors who wanted to make this film.

    Also, have you thought that - maybe, just maybe - they picked the most talented person for the job, regardless of their gender? Not everything is about gender, so stop trying to make it that way.

    Oh, but if you want to - females are currently dominating the TV industry as showrunners. Scandal, 30 Rock, Private Practice, The Killing, Hot in Cleveland, Nurse Jackie and Grey's Anatomy are all run by female showrunners. Shouldn't MEN have been considered for that job too? It's soo sexist.

  • JCausey | July 10, 2014 1:35 PM

    Yes, and upper class women are given opportunities that lower class males within the same industry will never get. Want to write an article on that one? Sounds like a pretty sexist issue that is causing some real repression.

  • Sigh | July 10, 2014 1:23 PMReply

    Melissa Silverstein's articles are routinely poorly-written, reactionary, and ill-informed with no sense of journalistic curiosity whatsoever to find out anything beyond the headline. Despite being featured on a site called "Indiewire," she has a myopic obsession with Hollywood, where only the women directing multi-million dollar pictures actually count as directors. Shall we guess what type of privilege she has to continue at her current job?

  • ANTI-AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN ART | July 10, 2014 3:43 PM

    ENOUGH OF THE MADNESS! The film industry is the most difficult industry in the world. Making a film, raising the money, attaching the actors, finding distribution, is a juggling act so uncertain and random that is a miracle any film exists. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DOES NOT WORK WITH ART. Filmmakers are entrepreneurs, paving new roads, pioneers searching for gold. GOLD DOES NOT CARE IF A WOMAN OR MAN FINDS IT. It's gold. It's there to be found or not. This man obviously worked for years and wrote four major films. YES, IF A WOMAN HAD THAT TRACK RECORD SHE WOULD GET THIS CHANCE. This is not a business for the week or those that point fingers and blame others. Would you hire a person who blamed a race, sex, or religion for their failures in life? I would not. Nor should anyone. STOP WHINING OR GET OUT OF THE BUSINESS. FIND GOLD, NOT EXCUSES.

  • AGREED | July 10, 2014 1:50 PM

    And I speak as someone who really admires her dedication to the cause. But she's a terrible, terrible journalist.

  • K | July 10, 2014 1:18 PMReply

    Callie Khouri. But you got me to click, so job well done I guess.

  • JG | July 10, 2014 2:25 PM

    Not bad, you only had to go back a few decades to pull up an example.

  • Edogawa | July 10, 2014 1:57 PM

    Also, Nora Ephron, Nancy directing experience before their first features

  • Shaun | July 10, 2014 1:11 PMReply

    You're creating a mountain out of a molehill, putting a problem with no solution; in other words, talking absolute sh1t!

    Lazy, reactionary and feminist-for-hire journalism.

  • joe | July 10, 2014 1:10 PMReply

    Was he "given" the opportunity willy nilly or was he on the ground floor of developing the project etc. A lot of assumptions here...

  • Paulina | July 10, 2014 1:01 PMReply

    I won't comment on the article but on the sexist disturbing comments. Asking for equal opportunity is a fair argument people. It is disturbing that companies (in the film industry or any other industry) discriminate against a worker on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, race or disability. SO NO. We won't "get over it" because silence is compliance. This is not about male/ female, is about human, civil and equal rights. So you get over it. To say that women have to stop complaining because in other countries like Syria they would have it worst is truly despicable. This is America and unlike in those places women have a voice so it's our duty to use it. Here's to the cavemen below...

  • JCausey | July 10, 2014 1:32 PM

    You're being overly sensitive, extremely ignorantly, and a major hypocrite if you think the majority of these comments are "sexist disturbing" (I could only count 1 that could be taken that way). All anyone is trying to say is that the writer of this article is extremely out of touch if she thinks that...

    A. A man was hired for this job because woman aren't viewed as capable directors.
    B. and that the issue could possibly be this black and white in the industry.

    By her expressing those two views, she makes this industry out to be that of one ran by classless men with no understanding or empathy of women, whom therefore won't hire women because female's could never be as fit as their great male race. Fact is, the reality is far removed from that fantasy, and the problem is MUCH more deeper than that. The writer's opinion is so naive and cartoonish that it makes me wonder if she has ever stepped outside of her cushy comfort zone into the real world.

    The issue in Hollywood is that it's ran by elite and privileged men & women, I.E.: they only hire privileged men and women. Men and women alike whom are not white or privileged have little hope in the industry, and that is speaking from a the viewpoint of myself, whom is a privileged, white, female who works in the industry. On top of that, cinema is facing an artistic crisis because those very people are clueless to art and it's history, as they are privileged children who only chase materialistic success, and therefore treat the industry like a a business (okay I'm kind of getting off topic, but its part of the point).

  • Cato | July 10, 2014 12:57 PMReply

    The REAL problem here is that a self-serving book that attempts to exculpate a proven liar is getting the star treatment. This will undoubtedly turn into a glowing hagiography glorifying the legacy media which has failed the public so many times, it's now one of the least trusted and respected institutions in the world.

    As for James Vanderbilt's bona fides -- his Spider-Man movies are widely considered inferior to the Sam Raimi versions. The only reason they made money is due to the good will built up by decades of popular Spider-man comic books and the Raimi movies -- not Vanderbilt's mediocre scripts. And his White House Down, an unabashed valentine to Obama, is the worst of the two "White House takeover" movies released in 2013.

    But hey, Vanderbilt's a fan of leftist media fossil Dan Rather, and his new movie will smack that old, now-irrelevant punching bag Bush, so of course Hollywood will give him whatever he wants, including an Oscar for what is sure to be an unwatched but critically raved-about clunker.

  • CrazyXCrazy | July 10, 2014 12:39 PMReply

    Oh go and play with you're vagina #Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Same old crap, oh poor women so repressed in hollywood. try living in Syria, Palestine or Iran then you'll find out what f#cking repressed is.

  • you must has women | July 10, 2014 10:45 PM

    Did your mother hate you? What did your father do to make you this way?

  • Mr. Roberts | July 10, 2014 12:37 PMReply

    When a comment smacks with as much palpable resentment as yours do, JCausey, it is impossible to take seriously--or at least with a bowl of sodium. Funny you cautioning others to know the facts, when your diatribes supply none--just your angry, dare I say misogynist-tinged perspective.

  • JCausey | July 10, 2014 12:43 PM

    @ Mr. Roberts, It's pretty funny that you say that, because I'm a female in the industry, and I'm only speaking based off of what I have heard from all of the male friends of mine who are in the industry. I'm just sick of seeing fellow females without a clue making an embarrassment out of our gender. This writer is honestly making an issue out of something where there isn't. Yes, sexism is in the industry, but it is NOT an issue within the case of this director being hired. It makes our gender look like a bunch of spoiled, out of touch, whiney brats.

    But you know, I only replied because this article was smacked with a palpable resentment that I couldn't take seriously without a bowl of sodium, much like your comment.

  • John | July 10, 2014 12:32 PMReply

    Wait a minute, is this for real?

    You're complaining about a proven screenwriter being given a chance to direct a film based on his adaptation? What's the problem here? Oh, because the book was written by a woman, it should be directed by one? Bullshit.

    This annoys me so much - plenty of films are being directed by women, but it should be the best person for the job, not based on their gender. It's not the fault of male directors that there are more of them who are actually in the industry (it's a traditionally male industry, which can't be helped.) and therefore they're more likely to get the job.

    Seriously, female writers who live sheltered lives really grind my gears. Get into the industry and you'll realise that studios want someone who isn't a risk, and with Vanderbilt they're getting a great screenwriter and a director who has proven himself with short films, who's also worked with a lot of high-profile directors. He's hardly "untested" now, is he?

    Who would you suggest to direct it then? Kathryn Bigelow? Diablo Cody? Because if you're going to start making films based purely on gender then you're not going to be able to make many.

  • John | July 11, 2014 9:56 AM


    Best person for the job is always a white male? Funny how Spike Lee, Ang Lee, Jodie Foster, Kathryn Bigelow, Lee Daniels, Kimberley Peirce, Glenn Close, Steve McQueen, Tyler Perry, Tim Story, Antoine Fuqua and John Singleton can all get films made, isn't it?

    Antoine Fuqua is pretty much the go-to guy for action now and has about 10 projects in production, Kathryn Bigelow has about four Oscars and could get anything she wants made, Tyler Perry is a multi-millionaire with is own studio...

    I'd say that it's not just white men getting good opportunities to make films.

  • Long Live... | July 10, 2014 10:47 PM


    Thank you for standing up for sexism!!!

  • Chris | July 10, 2014 5:52 PM

    You're killing me, John.

    Plenty of films directed by women? Really? That's the hill you want to die on?

    "It should be the best person for the job." Yes, of course. Funny how "the best person for the job" just always happens to be a white male.

    Please kindly go back to The Red Pill and have all the fun you want.

  • John | July 10, 2014 5:19 PM

    No, it can't.

    100+ years of males going into the industry and choosing it is very hard to undo. If women really want to get into the industry then they should train in it, but at my University I'd say it was a 80/20 split between male and females, and even then the female members of our course preferred to produce or edit and not direct or operate cameras.

  • Goooooooood one | July 10, 2014 1:36 PM

    "it's a traditionally male industry, which can't be helped"

    Which can't be helped, huh?

  • Mealnie | July 10, 2014 12:01 PMReply

    A woman would very likely have not been given the opportunity. I see this shit all the time. I just wrote about how Michael Douglas's film company admitted to seeing women directors as a risk. The producer i spoke to tried to say that how directors get picked is based on their work history but that's bullshit. It's just a boys club.

  • never enough excuses | July 10, 2014 10:50 PM

    Naming two privileged white women speaks for every woman of every race and class not given those opportunities. Wow, you must live on another planet. Are you sure your not a man? You must be white because you speak as though no one is to blame and things just happen that way.

  • JCAUSEY | July 10, 2014 12:25 PM

    Yeah, and neither would anyone else be hired who wasn't privileged and white. Sounds like to me then that its not an issue of male vs. female. Quit making everything out like the issue is as clear cut as a boys club not wanting women. You ever think that a lower class white male film maker could get the opportunities that have been afforded to say Lena Dunham or Kathyrn Bigelow?

    Yeah, thats what I thought. Sounds like the issue is alot more complicated than you want to think. As much as you would like to think it, its not an issue of the mean ol boys club not wanting any girls allowed. Life is much more complicated than that.

  • JCausey | July 10, 2014 12:00 PMReply

    I am so sick of sheltered, privileged, out of touch female writers who live in a bubble wasting our time writing BS articles like this. Have you ever thought it might be a privilege issue, not a gender one? Oh wait...You're so cut off from the real world that you don't even realize that there are a TON Of male filmmakers who will never get this opportunity either, because they weren't born in white upper middle class/upper class families, and therefore they aren't put in positions like Vanderbilt.

    BUT NO WAIT! Its not a class issue, its a gender one! Get off your high horse. Its almost like you're life has been so easy that you find problems where they're aren't ones and make it about yourself (or should I say the female gender) because you have no idea what real problems are in the real world. Ever think that male's in the film industry get more opportunities because there are actually MORE MALES in the industry going for these positions?

    Seriously, get a check with reality.

  • JCAUSEY | July 11, 2014 9:33 AM

    "You must also be of a certain age because if you were young you would know that almost half of all film school graduates (in America) are women."

    That means nothing, because...
    A. Alot of people in the film industry don't even have a film degree
    B. Of course 50 percent of graduates have been females. That means nothing when 90 percent of applicants were male, and 10 percent were female, but they had to accept an equal rate.

    You must be one of those women who disparage other women when their "not nice".

  • Class Envy | July 10, 2014 10:55 PM

    Some is suffering from class envy. You must also be of a certain age because if you were young you would know that almost half of all film school graduates (in America) are women. To say that there aren't enough to qualify for jobs is ridiculous, they're not being offered the same opportunities to even get to the level this guy is at.

    You must be one of those women who disparage other women.

  • Dal | July 10, 2014 12:24 PM

    Part of the issue here is that Vanderbilt isn't a novice or journeyman screenwriter. His blockbusters and Zodiac leave only a handful of female screenwriter/non-directors (someone like Diablo Cody) in his category, and her cast for Paradise wasn't shabby. Someone like Roberto Orci directing a huge film like Star Trek 3 is more surprising.

  • JCAUSEY | July 10, 2014 12:20 PM

    @BOB Yeah, when you grow up privileged, you are afforded the opportunity to work hard and diligently in that field on the level that Vanderbilt has. I never said he didn't work hard, but his CLASS privileged AFFORDED him those opportunities. You are out of touch. Learn to comprehend,

  • Bob | July 10, 2014 12:04 PM

    You are just as out of touch. Vanderbilt earned his position w hard work and diligence. This is his passion project that he's developed for years and he's a proven storyteller who has generated millions of dollars with scripts.

  • LeonRaymond | July 10, 2014 11:45 AMReply

    No Female would have been given this opportunity and due to Cate Blanchett absolutely NO Black Female or Male

  • Never | July 10, 2014 11:23 AMReply

    Ridiculous. Would never be given to a novice woman writer. Gillian Flynn anyone?

  • JG | July 10, 2014 2:28 PM

    Last I checked, she didn't direct Gone Girl.

Email Updates

Most "Liked"

  • Guest Post: Going Back to School with ...
  • Infographic: Women Directors in the ...
  • Male Privilege Watch: Man With No Directing ...
  • Some Links To Check Out From Vacation ...
  • Meet Outlander, the Anti-Game of Th ...
  • September 2014 Film Preview
  • UK Government Hires First Woman Head ...
  • Ellen Burstyn to Direct Her First Film, ...